Sandor, Victor

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.

Abstract Abstract 5146 Background: Myelofibrosis (MF) is characterized by splenomegaly, debilitating symptoms, hematologic abnormalities, and shortened survival. COMFORT-I is a Phase III randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of the JAK1 and JAK2 inhibitor ruxolitinib in patients (pts) with MF. The placebo arm of this ongoing study provides a unique population in which to assess the clinical burden of MF in a controlled setting. Methods: 151 pts with intermediate-2 or high-risk primary-MF (PMF), post-polycythemia vera-MF (PPV-MF), or post-essential thombocythemia-MF (PET-MF) who were not candidates for other therapies were randomized to receive placebo in COMFORT-I after a 28-day washout of previous MF therapies. Assessments included MF symptoms measured daily using an electronic diary (modified Myelofibrosis Symptom Assessment Form [MFSAF] v2.0), spleen volume measured every 12 wks by blinded abdominal MRI or CT scans, and laboratory measures at least monthly through wk 24. The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement System (PROMISE) Fatigue and Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) questionnaires were administered at each visit. Pts with missing data (baseline or post-baseline assessment measured), or pts who withdrew or crossed over to active treatment before a study visit were not included in analyses. Results: 151 pts received 1 or more doses of placebo (median exposure 204 days). The study included 65% high-risk and 35% intermediate-2 risk pts, with a median of 2.5 years since diagnosis. 55% had PMF, 31% PPV-MF, and 14% PET-MF. Regardless of prior MF therapy (57% were on hydroxyurea), there was continual worsening of symptoms over time as assessed by the MFSAF Total Symptom Score (TSS, comprised of scores for night sweats, itching, abdominal pain and discomfort, early satiety and bone/muscle pain) (see Figure). At wk 24, mean/median spleen volume increased by +8.1%/+8.5%, and both intermediate-2 and high-risk pts demonstrated progressive disease over the course of the study. Mean/median PROMIS Fatigue score worsened by 9.1%/6.5%. Mean/median score for the PGIC (a 7-point scale ranging from 1 = very much improved to 7 = very much worse, with 4 = no change) was 4.2/4.0 at wk 24; 19.6% of pts reported feeling much worse or very much worse. Mean/median total body weight changed from 72.0 kg/72.2 kg to 70.1 kg/69.7 kg at wk 24. Hematology assessments (median, baseline vs wk 24) were as follows: hemoglobin, 105 vs 106 g/L; platelets, 233 vs 219 x109/L; neutrophils, 14.8 vs 16.0 x109/L; white blood cell count, 18.4 vs 20.1 x109/L. Two of 151 pts had new-onset (new or worsening) grade 3 or grade 4 thrombocytopenia, and 23/151 pts had new-onset grade 3 or grade 4 anemia. 16 pts met protocol-specified criteria for unblinding and crossover to active treatment before wk 24, which was a 25% increase in MRI-based spleen volume either with or without increased pain or weight loss; thus, mean and median values reported at wk 24 may represent an underestimate of the degree of worsening in disease parameters. Conclusion: The signs and symptoms of MF continued to worsen over a 6-month time frame in this placebo population. The data illustrate the progressive nature of MF and support the need for effective therapeutic interventions. Moreover, treatment benefit must be benchmarked against continual evolution of the disease in the absence of treatment. Early recognition of the debilitating symptoms of MF and intervention with effective therapy to prevent continual worsening of the disease should be strongly considered. 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:Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Telik: Research Funding; Alexion: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Research Funding. Vaddi:Incyte: Employment. Erickson-Viitanen:Incyte: Employment. Sun:Incyte: Employment. Sandor:Incyte: Employment. Kantarjian:Incyte: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 3842 Background: Dysregulated JAK-STAT signaling is a key feature in MF, which is characterized by splenomegaly, debilitating symptoms, poor quality of life (QoL), cytopenias, and shortened survival. Ruxolitinib is a selective JAK1 and JAK2 inhibitor with clinical activity in MF. COMFORT-I is a Phase III, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study of ruxolitinib in patients with MF. At wk 24, 41.9% of patients receiving ruxolitinib reached the protocol-defined threshold of a ≥35% reduction in spleen volume (SV) compared to 0.7% in the placebo group (p<0.0001). The objective of this analysis was to evaluate the relationship between SV reduction achieved with ruxolitinib treatment and changes in symptoms and QoL. Methods: 309 patients were randomized to receive ruxolitinib (n=155) or placebo (n=154). Initial dosing was based on baseline platelet counts: 15 mg BID for counts of 100–200 x109/L and 20 mg BID for >200 x109/L. SV was measured by blinded imaging (MRI or CT scan) every 12 wks. Via electronic diary, patients reported MF symptoms daily using the modified Myelofibrosis Symptom Assessment Form (MFSAF) v2.0. The Total Symptom Score (TSS) from the MFSAF represents a combined score for the individual symptoms of abdominal discomfort, pain under ribs on left side, early satiety, itching, night sweats, and bone/muscle pain. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement System (PROMISE) Fatigue questionnaires were administered at each visit; Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) was administered at every visit beginning at wk 4. The PGIC rates a patient's overall sense of whether a treatment has been beneficial or not on a 7-point scale, ranging from 1 = very much improved to 7 = very much worse, with 4 = no change. Results: Baseline QoL scores reflected debilitating disease, and were similar to scores for similar-aged patients with other cancers (Scott NW, Fayers PM, Aaronson NK, et al. EORTC QLQ-C30 Reference Values Manual, July 2008). The impact on patients was particularly evident on the PROMIS Fatigue scale and QLC-C30 Global Health, Physical Functioning, Role Functioning, and Social Functioning subscales. Baseline Symptom and QoL Measures* Associations between changes in symptoms and QoL with the objectively measured changes in SV were evaluated. Patients receiving ruxolitinib were grouped according to SV reduction at 24 wks of treatment: ≥35% reduction in SV (n=65), 10-<35% (n=51), and <10% (n=23). Symptom and QoL responses were evaluated among the various subgroups (of the SV reduction percentage strata) and comparisons were made across these and the total placebo group (n=106). Shown in the Figure are mean changes at wk 24 relative to baseline for TSS, QoL indicators, and PGIC scores. Conclusions: Changes in SV as low as 10% in ruxolitinib-treated patients were associated with improvements on EORTC QLQ-C30 Global Health subscale, PROMISE Fatigue scale, and the MFSAF v2.0 diary TSS. Moreover, commensurate improvements in these outcomes were observed as the SV reduction increased. Importantly, the simple PGIC questionnaire allowed patients to characterize a meaningful change in their condition that was consistent with more comprehensive measures of MF symptoms and quality of life, reflecting a doctor-patient assessment easily applied to clinical practice. Disclosures: 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. 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. Shields:Incyte: Consultancy. Miller:Incyte: Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Winton:Incyte: Consultancy. Hare:Incyte: Employment. Erickson-Viitanen:Incyte: Employment. Sun:Incyte: Employment. Sandor:Incyte: Employment. Levy:Incyte: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kantarjian:Incyte: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding. Verstovsek:Incyte: Research Funding.

Abstract Background In the primary analysis of the phase III COMFORT-I study, the JAK1/JAK2 inhibitor ruxolitinib (RUX) significantly improved splenomegaly, myelofibrosis (MF)-related symptoms, and quality of life (QoL) measures in patients (pts) with MF versus placebo (PBO). An additional analysis (median follow-up 51 weeks [wks)]) showed RUX was associated with a survival advantage versus PBO (Verstovsek et al. N Engl J Med2012). Longer term follow-up (median 102 wks) showed durable SV reductions and QoL improvements. At this time point, RUX continued to be associated with a survival advantage, despite all pts originally randomized to PBO having discontinued or crossed over to ruxolitinib shortly after the primary analysis (Verstovsek et al. ASH 2012. abstract 800). We report additional longer-term follow-up of pts from COMFORT-I. Methods In COMFORT-I, 309 pts were randomized (1:1) to RUX or PBO. RUX starting dose depended on baseline platelet count (100–200´109/L: 15 mg BID; >200´109/L: 20 mg BID). Doses could be titrated for lack of efficacy or excess toxicity as specified in the protocol. Pts receiving PBO could crossover to RUX after the primary analysis (ie, when all pts completed 24 wks and half the pts completed 36 wks of therapy) or at any time if they met protocol-specified criteria for worsening splenomegaly. The primary endpoint was the proportion of pts who achieved a ≥35% reduction in spleen volume (SV) at wk 24. Symptoms were assessed up to wk 24 using the modified MF Symptom Assessment Form v2.0. QoL continued to be evaluated beyond wk 24 using the EORTC QoL Questionnaire-Core 30 (QLQ-C30). Survival was estimated by Kaplan-Meier analysis according to original randomized treatment. To better understand the effect of crossover on the PBO arm, statistical modeling of survival was conducted using a generalized Gamma distribution. Results Median follow-up was 149 wks at the time of this updated analysis. Of 155 pts originally randomized to RUX, 77 remain on therapy. Of 154 pts originally randomized to PBO, 111 crossed over to RUX; the median time to crossover was 41.1 wks (range, 5.1–65.4). At wk 24, pts originally randomized to RUX had a mean SV reduction of −31.6%; this was durable for pts who continued on RUX, where the mean SV reduction at wk 144 was −34.1%. Fifty-nine percent (91/155) of pts originally randomized to RUX achieved a ≥35% SV reduction at any time during study; for these pts, the probability of maintaining this response for >132 weeks from the time of their initial response was 0.53. Pts originally randomized to RUX who continued on therapy experienced durable improvements in the Global Health Status/QoL and functional domains of the EORTC QLQ-C30. Overall survival favored RUX (HR=0.69; 95% CI: 0.46, 1.03; P= 0.067; Fig 1), with 42 and 54 deaths among pts originally randomized to RUX and PBO, respectively. Modeling of the hazard function of death over time to explore the effect of crossover to RUX in pts originally randomized to PBO showed a decrease in hazard for these pts, which corresponded to an increased proportion of pts crossing over to RUX. In pts originally randomized to RUX who continued on therapy, there was no substantial change in the rate, distribution, or severity of nonhematologic adverse events (AEs) with longer-term therapy; most nonhematologic AEs were grade 1 or 2. Mean and median hemoglobin and platelet count remained stable with longer-term therapy. Consistent with this, the incidence of new onset grade 3 or 4 anemia and thrombocytopenia observed after the first 6 months of RUX therapy decreased relative to that seen in the first 6 months of therapy (Fig 2). With approximately 1 year of additional follow up, 4 new cases of acute myeloid leukemia were reported: 2 pts originally randomized to PBO (376 and 666 days after crossover to RUX) and 2 pts originally randomized to RUX (848 and 1143 days after starting RUX). Conclusions After a median follow-up of 149 wks, the hazard ratio for overall survival favored pts originally randomized to RUX over those originally randomized to PBO, the majority of whom crossed over to RUX. The hazard of death for pts originally randomized to PBO decreased as pts crossed over to RUX. SV reductions and QoL improvements were sustained with longer-term therapy. The incidence of new onset grade 3 or 4 anemia and thrombocytopenia decreased with longer-term therapy. Collectively, these data reinforce the durable efficacy and longer-term safety of RUX in pts with MF. Disclosures: Verstovsek: Incyte Corporation: Research Funding. Mesa:Genentech: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; Lilly: Research Funding. Gotlib:Incyte Corporation: Travel support, Travel support Other; Incyte Corporation: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte Corporation: Research Funding. Levy:Incyte Corporation: Equity Ownership; Incyte Corporation: Employment. Gupta:Incyte Corporation: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Inctye Corporation: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Deininger:BMS, ARIAD, NOVARTIS: Consultancy; BMS, NOVARTIS, CELGENE, GILEAD: Research Funding; ARIAD, NOVARTIS: Advisory Boards, Advisory Boards Other. Miller:Novartis: Consultancy; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy; Novartis: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria; Incyte Corporation: Honoraria. Talpaz:Ariad: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Ariad: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Winton:Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Arcasoy:Incyte Corporation: Research Funding. Lyons:Lilly: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Ariad: Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Paquette:Incyte Corporation: Consultancy. Raza:Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Onconova Inc: Research Funding. Vaddi:Incyte Corporation: Employment; Incyte Corporation: Equity Ownership. Sun:Incyte: Employment; Incyte: Equity Ownership. Peng:Incyte Corporation: Employment; Incyte Corporation: Equity Ownership. Sandor:Incyte: Employment; Incyte: Equity Ownership. Kantarjian:Ariad: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 1753 Background: Ruxolitinib (INC424), a potent and selective oral JAK1 and JAK2 inhibitor, has demonstrated rapid and durable reductions in splenomegaly and improved disease-related symptoms, role functioning, and quality of life (QoL) in 2 phase 3 studies in patients with myelofibrosis (MF) (the COMFORT studies). These studies compared ruxolitinib with either placebo or best available therapy (BAT). This analysis compares the efficacy outcomes between the placebo arm from COMFORT-I and the BAT arm from COMFORT-II. Methods: COMFORT-I is a randomized (1:1), double-blind, multicenter study comparing ruxolitinib 15 or 20 mg twice daily (bid) with placebo, and COMFORT-II is a randomized (2:1), open-label, multicenter study comparing ruxolitinib 15 or 20 mg bid with BAT (investigator-selected therapy, including no treatment). Both studies met their primary end points with statistical significance (ruxolitinib vs control): the percentage of patients achieving ≥35% reduction in spleen volume at week 24 (COMFORT-I, P <.0001) and week 48 (COMFORT-II, P <.0001). QoL was measured using patient responses with the European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire–Core 30 (QLQ-C30) as an exploratory end point in both studies. Results: In the COMFORT-I and COMFORT-II studies, 154 patients received placebo (ruxolitinib, n=155) and 73 patients received BAT (ruxolitinib, n=146), respectively, and were included in the primary efficacy analyses. The demographic and baseline characteristics were similar between the control arms of the 2 studies, including spleen size below the costal margin (mean [standard deviation, SD] 16.4 [6.27] cm and 15.8 [6.71] cm in placebo and BAT, respectively). Only 1 patient (0.7%) who received placebo and no patients who received BAT had a ≥35% reduction in spleen volume from baseline at week 24. The median spleen volume increased from baseline at week 24 in both the placebo and BAT groups and was numerically similar (placebo, 8.5% [range, −46.4% to 48.8%]; BAT, 5.1% [range, −33.3% to 29.7%]). In contrast, patients who received ruxolitinib had median reductions in spleen volume from baseline at week 24 of −33.0% (COMFORT-I) and −27.5% (COMFORT-II). The QLQ-C30 provides a measurement of change in QoL and MF-related symptoms, including fatigue, pain, dyspnea, insomnia, and appetite loss. At 24 weeks, neither the placebo nor BAT arms had clinically meaningful changes from baseline (10 points [Osoba et al. J Clin Oncol. 1998]) in any of the QoL (decreases indicate worsening) or symptom scores (increases indicate worsening) (Table). Although differences existed between the placebo and BAT arms, the SDs are large, thus complicating comparisons between the 2 groups. Conclusions: In the COMFORT studies, ruxolitinib demonstrated significantly greater reductions in spleen size compared with placebo or BAT. This post hoc analysis of the 2 studies shows that patients who received BAT in the COMFORT-II study had similar symptom and QoL responses and numerically similar increases in spleen size as those who received placebo in the COMFORT-I study. No clinically meaningful improvements in QoL or symptoms were seen on either the placebo or BAT arms. These new data strongly suggest that current therapies for MF provide little improvement in spleen size, symptoms, or QoL as compared with placebo. Disclosures: Mesa: Incyte: Research Funding; Lilly: Research Funding; SBio: Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Verstovsek:Incyte Corporation: Research Funding. Cervantes:Bristol-Myers-Squibb: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Waltzman:Novartis: Employment. Mendelson:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Martin:Novartis Pharma AG: Employment. Sun:Incyte: Employment. Sandor:Incyte: Employment. Levy:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Harrison:Novartis: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; S*Bio: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Sanofi Aventis: Honoraria.

Abstract Abstract 1733 Background: Patients with myelofibrosis (MF) suffer from cytopenias, debilitating symptoms, and splenomegaly, all of which may contribute to shortened life expectancy. Cachexia is a common manifestation of MF. Its causes are multifactorial and include elevated inflammatory cytokines and mechanical effects of splenomegaly. It is a predictor of poor survival in patients with MF. Cachexia manifests as weight loss with low body-mass index (BMI; <20–21 kg/m2) (Strasser F. Sixth Research Congress of the European Association of Palliative Care; Wagner PD. Eur Respir J. 2008;31:492–501) and with metabolic indicators of poor nutritional status including hypocholesterolemia (total cholesterol <150 mg/dL or <3.89 mmol/L), which has been linked to poor prognosis in MF (Mesa et al. Blood 2007;110:abstract 2548). In the phase III, placebo-controlled, COMFORT-I study, ruxolitinib treatment significantly reduced spleen volume, improved MF-related symptoms, and exhibited a survival advantage compared with placebo in patients with MF. In this post hoc analysis, we investigated the effects of ruxolitinib treatment on weight and total cholesterol and the association of these changes with survival in COMFORT-I. Methods: Eligible patients in COMFORT-I were randomized to receive placebo (n=154) or ruxolitinib (n=155) at starting doses of 15 and 20 mg PO BID depending on baseline platelet count. Body weight was measured at baseline, and weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, and 24 and then every 12 weeks thereafter. Total serum cholesterol was measured at baseline and weeks 4, 12, 24, and then every 24 weeks thereafter. All patients receiving PBO completed crossover or discontinued within 3 months of the primary data analysis (when all patients completed 24 weeks and when half the patients remaining on study completed 36 weeks of treatment); thus, data for these patients were available for up to week 36 for weight and week 24 for total cholesterol. Kaplan-Meier analyses of overall survival were conducted in patients randomized to ruxolitinib stratified into 2 groups based on the median values separately for maximum weight gain and for maximum increase in total cholesterol during randomized treatment. Results: At baseline, mean body weight was similar between the treatment groups (72 kg, both) and mean total cholesterol was low (<150 mg/dL) in both treatment groups (ruxolitinib: 118 mg/dL; placebo: 115 mg/dL). The proportion of patients with BMI <22 were similar between the treatment groups (ruxolitinib: 23%; placebo: 28%) as was the proportion with total cholesterol <150 mg/dL (82%, both). Patients randomized to ruxolitinib experienced a gradual increase in body weight that stabilized by week 36 of treatment whereas patients receiving placebo experienced decreases in body weight over time (Figure 1). Similarly, total cholesterol increased in patients randomized to ruxolitinib and decreased in patients receiving placebo (Figure 2). Although total cholesterol increased over time in ruxolitinib-treated patients, increases did not exceed the upper limit of normal (199 mg/dL or 5.15 mmol/L). Nearly all patients randomized to ruxolitinib experienced weight gain (96% of patients) or an increase in total cholesterol (97% of patients). In patients randomized to ruxolitinib, weight gain above the median was associated with prolonged survival relative to lesser degrees of weight gain (HR=0.40; 95% CI: 0.18, 0.90; P=0.022; Figure 3). Similarly, increase in total cholesterol above the median was also associated with prolonged survival relative to a lesser degree of total cholesterol increase (HR=0.46; 95% CI: 0.21, 1.01; P=0.048; Figure 4). Meaningful comparisons with the placebo group based on the same stratification criteria could not be conducted as the majority of such patients experienced weight loss and decreases in total cholesterol while on the study; however, overall survival favored both ruxolitinib groups relative to all patients randomized to placebo even for ruxolitinib-treated patients with lower than median levels of weight gain or increase in total cholesterol. Conclusions: Ruxolitinib therapy promotes weight gain and improves total cholesterol in MF patients. These results suggest that the survival advantage exhibited by ruxolitinib over placebo in MF patients may be partly explained by reversal of the catabolic state and cachexia. Disclosures: Mesa: Incyte: Research Funding; Lilly: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; YM Bioscience: Research Funding. Verstovsek:Incyte Corporation: Research Funding. Gupta:Incyte: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; YM Biosciences: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sanofi#x2610;#x0025; Aventis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Mascarenhas:Incyte Corporation: Consultancy; Novartis: Clinical Trial Support, Clinical Trial Support Other. Atallah:Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding. Sun:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Sandor:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Gotlib:Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Support for travel to meeting for the study or other purposes from Incyte Other.

Abstract Abstract 2847 Background and Purpose: Myelofibrosis (MF) is a progressive Philadelphia-negative myeloproliferative neoplasm characterized by debilitating symptoms, massive splenomegaly, and anemia, which severely impairs quality of life. When medical therapy is not effective or tolerated, splenectomy may be required to ease symptoms in patients with symptomatic portal hypertension, massive splenomegaly, and/or frequent red blood cell transfusions (Barbui et al. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:761–770). In a recent study (Tefferi et al. Mayo Clin Proc. 2012;87:25–33) up to 27% of patients diagnosed with MF eventually underwent splenectomy. However, splenectomy is associated with limited duration of symptom response, high rates of perioperative morbidity and mortality, and acceleration of hepatomegaly. Clinical studies in patients with MF have demonstrated that ruxolitinib, an oral JAK1/JAK2 inhibitor, provides significant and durable reductions in splenomegaly, the burden of MF-associated symptoms, and also improved quality of life. In this post hoc analysis of pooled data from these studies, we determined the incidence of splenectomy in patients treated with ruxolitinib and those who received placebo or best available therapy (BAT) to evaluate whether ruxolitinib therapy may affect the need for splenectomy. Methods: This analysis included patients who participated in the ruxolitinib phase I/II trial (N=153; Verstovsek et al. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:1117–1127); COMFORT-I, a phase III, 24-month placebo-controlled trial of ruxolitinib (N=309; Verstovsek et al. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:799–807); and COMFORT-II, a phase III, 48-month randomized trial comparing the effects of ruxolitinib and BAT (N=219; Harrison et al. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:787–798). Incidence of splenectomy while on treatment or during the protocol-specified follow-up period, adjusted for differences in the duration of follow up, was calculated for patients on ruxolitinib, placebo, or BAT. Results: As a result of the crossover rules and a higher discontinuation rate on the comparator arms in the phase III studies, mean follow-up duration for placebo (0.67 years) or BAT (0.95 years) overall was substantially shorter than mean follow-up duration for ruxolitinib (1.78 years). Baseline characteristics of the 14 patients who underwent splenectomy were as follows: median age=63 years; median time since initial diagnosis=7.8 years; median spleen length (n=13): 17.0 cm (range: 0–28.0 cm); median spleen volume (in those with measurement, n=11)=2924 cm3 (range: 1203–6807 cm3); IPSS high risk=50%, intermediate-2 risk=43%, intermediate-1=7%. Among patients originally randomized and treated with ruxolitinib, the incidence of splenectomy was 1.1 events per 100 patient years (Table). For patients treated with placebo or BAT in the phase III studies, the incidence of splenectomy was approximately three times higher at 2.9 events per 100 patient years, despite the fact that patients on placebo or BAT were allowed to crossover to ruxolitinib if they had worsening symptomatic splenomegaly. Conclusions: Although limited by small numbers, results of this analysis suggest that ruxolitinib reduces the need for splenectomy in patients with MF. Because of crossover to ruxolitinib and higher discontinuation rates in placebo and BAT, follow-up duration was shorter in these treatment arms compared with ruxolitinib. Further, ruxolitinib treatment in crossover patients may have prevented progression of symptomatic splenomegaly in some patients who may have otherwise become candidates for splenectomy. Our analysis may underestimate the true incidence of splenectomy among patients not receiving ruxolitinib therapy and therefore, the relative reduction in splenectomy rate in patients receiving this therapy. Longer-term follow up will better define the splenectomy rate in ruxolitinib-treated patients. Disclosures: Verstovsek: Incyte Corporation: Research Funding. Kiladjian:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Shire: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Research Funding. Mesa:Incyte: Research Funding; Lilly: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; YM Bioscience: Research Funding. Vannucchi:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Gotlib:Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Support for travel to meeting for the study or other purposes from Incyte Other. Kantarjian:Incyte: grant support Other. Sirulnik:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Peng:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Sandor:Incyte Corporation: An employee of Incyte and receiving stock options as part of his compensation Other, Employment. Harrison:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; YM Bioscience: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi Aventis: Honoraria; Shire: Honoraria, Research Funding.

Abstract Background The Janus-kinase (JAK) pathway plays a critical role in normal hematopoiesis. In two phase 3 studies, the JAK1/JAK2 inhibitor ruxolitinib (RUX) demonstrated clinical benefit over placebo (COMFORT-I) or best available therapy (COMFORT-II) in patients with intermediate-2 or high-risk myelofibrosis (MF). Anemia and thrombocytopenia, the most common adverse events associated with RUX treatment, were dose-dependent and expected based on RUX's mechanism of action. These events were successfully managed and few RUX-treated patients discontinued for anemia or thrombocytopenia (<1% for each event). The ability to identify patients who would most likely benefit from a dose adjustment may contribute to improved patient management. Therefore, an analysis was conducted in patients who received RUX in COMFORT-I to identify patient characteristics that could help select patients who would potentially benefit from closer monitoring and dose titration in the early period after initiation of therapy. Methods In COMFORT-I, starting doses in the patients randomized to RUX were 15 mg twice daily (BID) for patients with baseline platelet counts of 100–200 ×109/L (n=55) and 20 mg BID for those with platelet counts >200 ×109/L (n=100). Dose reductions were required for protocol-defined decreases in platelet counts; there was no protocol-mandated dose change for anemia. The time course of dose adjustments and the most common titrated doses by starting dose were evaluated. Logistic regression analyses with baseline hemoglobin (Hgb) level, platelet count, IPSS risk category, sex, and MF type as model effects were conducted to determine predictors of: 1) titration to a RUX dose of ≤10 mg BID within 8 weeks of starting therapy (early dose titration event); or 2) development of grade ≥3 anemia or new need for RBC transfusions (≥2 units of packed RBCs) within 12 weeks of therapy initiation (anemia event). Only baseline platelet count and Hgb emerged as significant predictors (alpha=0.05). Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analyses were also conducted for these two predictors to determine a clinically relevant cutoff of the underlying predictor variable with a positive predictive value (PPV), true positive rate (TPR), and false positive rate (FPR) obtained at all possible cutoffs and a general goal of obtaining a TPR ≥ 50%, an FPR ≤ 10%, and a high PPV. Results Approximately 70% of patients had a dose adjustment within the first 12 weeks of initiating RUX treatment. At week 24, 77% of patients with baseline platelet counts of 100–200 ×109/L and 39% of those with baseline platelet counts >200 ×109/L had titrated to a reduced RUX dose relative to their starting dose. With longer-term follow-up (median 149 weeks), the mean dose over time in patients who continued on study was ∼10 mg BID for patients starting at 15 mg BID and ∼15 mg BID for those starting at 20 mg BID (Figure). ROC analyses identified that a baseline platelet count range of less than 150–175 x109/L may predict which patients would experience an early titration event, while a baseline Hgb level of less than 10 mg/dL may predict which patients would experience an anemia event (Table). Conclusions In COMFORT-I, most patients experienced a RUX dose adjustment in the first 12 weeks of treatment and stable doses were achieved with long-term therapy. Dose titration allowed most patients to maintain adequate platelet counts. After starting therapy at 15 or 20 mg BID, the majority of patients titrated to RUX doses of 10 mg BID or higher, which have been previously been shown to produce meaningful spleen volume reductions and symptom improvements (Mesa et al. 8th Annual Hematologic Malignancies Conference. Abstract 305; Verstovsek et al. ASH 2012. Abstract 800; Talpaz et al. ASH 2012. Abstract 176). A baseline platelet count of less than 150 ×109/L and baseline Hgb level of less than 10 g/dL may be clinically useful cutoffs for predicting which patients may benefit from closer monitoring shortly after treatment initiation of RUX and appropriate dose adjustments as needed. Disclosures: Mesa: Lilly: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Research Funding. Komrokji:Incyte Corporation: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Sun:Incyte Corporation: Equity Ownership; Incyte Corporation: Employment. Sandor:Incyte Corporation: Equity Ownership; Incyte Corporation: Employment. Verstovsek:Incyte Corporation: Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 800 Background: Ruxolitinib (RUX), an oral JAK1/JAK2 inhibitor, reduced spleen volume (SV), improved myelofibrosis (MF)-associated symptoms and quality of life (QoL), and appeared to exhibit a survival advantage over placebo (PBO) in patients (pts) with MF regardless of JAK2V617F mutation status in the phase III COMFORT-I study. We describe long-term efficacy and safety of RUX from COMFORT-I, with 1 year of additional follow up beyond previously published data. Methods: Eligible pts (N=309) were randomized (1:1) to RUX or PBO. The primary analysis occurred when all pts completed 24 weeks (wks) and when half the pts completed 36 wks of treatment. All pts receiving PBO were eligible for crossover to RUX after the primary analysis; crossover before wk 24 was permitted if pts met protocol-defined criteria for worsening splenomegaly. The proportion of pts with ≥35% SV reduction at 24 wks (primary endpoint) and durability of SV response were assessed. Although symptom burden (measured daily using the modified MF Symptom Assessment Form v2.0) was only measured up to wk 24, QoL continued to be evaluated beyond wk 24 (every 24 wks) using the EORTC QoL Questionnaire-Core 30 (QLQ-C30). Overall survival (OS) was assessed according to original randomized treatment. Results: In this updated analysis, median follow-up of pts randomized to RUX was 102 wks. All pts receiving PBO completed crossover or discontinued within 3 months of the primary analysis. Of 134 pts randomized to RUX who remained on treatment after the primary data analysis, 100 continue on study. Mean SV reduction in pts randomized to RUX was 31.6% at wk 24 and has remained stable with additional follow up through wk 96 (Table). In pts who achieved a ≥35% SV reduction, response was durable, with a median response duration of 108 wks. RUX treatment was also associated with durable improvements in the Global Health Status/QoL (Table) and the 5 functional domains of the EORTC QLQ-C30. Twenty-seven (27) pts randomized to RUX and 41 pts randomized to PBO died, representing a continued OS benefit in favor of RUX (HR=0.58; 95% CI: 0.36, 0.95; P = 0.028; Fig 1) similar in magnitude to that previously reported. OS favored RUX across subgroups including starting dose as well as baseline risk status and hemoglobin (Hgb). Of 34 pts randomized to RUX who discontinued after the primary analysis, 4 discontinued for an adverse event (AE). In pts who continued on RUX, anemia and thrombocytopenia remained the most frequently reported AEs. New onset of grade 3 or 4 anemia and thrombocytopenia was reported in only 12 and 5 pts, respectively. One pt discontinued for anemia. Overall, among all pts randomized to RUX, Grade 3 and 4 anemia regardless of baseline Hgb was reported in 37.4% and 14.8% of pts, respectively. Similarly, Grade 3 and 4 thrombocytopenia was reported in 11.0% and 5.2% of pts, respectively. These rates were similar to those reported in the primary analysis. By wk 36, the proportion of pts receiving red blood cell transfusions decreased to the level seen with PBO and remained stable thereafter (Fig 2). Rates of nonhematologic AEs adjusted for increased follow-up duration remain similar to those seen at the time of the primary data analysis. No additional cases of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in pts randomized to RUX were reported. Two pts originally randomized to PBO developed AML, 21 and 178 days after crossover to RUX. There continued to be no reports of a withdrawal syndrome after RUX discontinuation. Conclusions: RUX provides durable reductions in SV and improvements in QoL. Although all pts randomized to PBO crossed over to RUX shortly after the primary analysis, with 1 year of additional follow up, RUX continues to be associated with a survival advantage over PBO. RUX continues to be well tolerated; the AE profile with long-term treatment is consistent with that previously reported. The proportion of pts receiving transfusions decreased over time to rates similar to PBO, and there were no reports of a specific withdrawal syndrome or cytokine rebound phenomenon after RUX discontinuation. Disclosures: Verstovsek: Incyte Corporation: Research Funding. Mesa:Incyte: Research Funding; Lilly: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; YM Bioscience: Research Funding. Gotlib:Incyte: Consultancy, travel to congress Other. Levy:Incyte: Employment, Equity Ownership. Gupta:Incyte: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; YM Biosciences: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sanofiå]Aventis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Catalano:Incyte: Consultancy. Deininger:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Ariad: Consultancy. Miller:Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau, development of educational presentations Other; Incyte: development of educational presentations, development of educational presentations Other. Talpaz:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; B.M.S.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Ariad: Research Funding; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Teva: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Winton:Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria. Arcasoy:Incyte: Research Funding. Lyons:Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Telik: Research Funding. Paquette:Incyte: Consultancy. Vaddi:Incyte: Employment, Equity Ownership. Erickson-Viitanen:Incyte: Employment, Equity Ownership. Sun:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Sandor:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kantarjian:Incyte: grant support Other.

SummaryMyelofibrosis (MF) patients can present with a wide spectrum of disease characteristics. We analysed the consistency of ruxolitinib efficacy across patient subgroups in the COntrolled MyeloFibrosis Study With ORal JAK Inhibitor Treatment (COMFORT‐I,) a double‐blind trial, where patients with intermediate‐2 or high‐risk MF were randomized to twice‐daily oral ruxolitinib (n = 155) or placebo (n = 154). Subgroups analysed included MF subtype (primary, post‐polycythaemia vera, post‐essential thrombocythaemia), age (≤65, > 65 years), International Prognostic Scoring System risk group, baseline Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (0, 1, ≥2), JAK2 V617F mutation (positive, negative), baseline haemoglobin level (≥100, <100 g/l), baseline platelet count (100–200 × 109/l, >200 × 109/l), baseline palpable spleen size (≤10, >10 cm), and baseline quartile of spleen volume and Total Symptom Score (TSS; Q1 = lowest, Q4 = highest). Mean percentage change from baseline to week 24 in spleen volume and TSS were calculated for ruxolitinib and placebo in each subgroup. Overall survival was estimated by Kaplan–Meier method according to original randomization group. In ruxolitinib‐treated patients, reductions in spleen volume and TSS and evidence of improved survival relative to placebo across subgroups were consistent with those seen in the COMFORT‐I population, confirming that ruxolitinib is an effective therapy for the spectrum of MF patients studied in COMFORT‐I.