Dueck, Amylou C.

Abstract Introduction: The clinical phenotype of patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) including primary myelofibrosis (PMF), polycythemia vera (PV), and essential thrombocytosis (ET) who manifest WHO grade 1 (on a 0-3 scale) for intramedullary fibrosis is poorly defined, and may represent MPN patients in a transitional state. We have specifically observed patients with existing PV and ET who manifest clinical progression towards a post PV/ET phenotype (IWG-MRT criteria) yet fail to progress to a 2+ marrow fibrosis. In contrast, the 2008 WHO definition of PMF does not require a minimum fibrosis threshold as long as patients meet the diagnostic criteria. In this study, we retrospectively analyzed the clinical characteristics and outcomes of MPN patients with 1+ marrow fibrosis. Methods: MPN patients with WHO grade 1 (scale 0-3) fibrosis within two institutional databases were identified. The clinical characteristics, laboratory, and outcome data were collected. Data were compared between PMF and PV/ET patients. 2008 IWG-MRT criteria were applied to PV/ET patients with exclusion of fibrosis component. Results: 91 MPN patients with WHO grade 1 fibrosis were identified, PMF in 33 patients (36%), PV in 37 (41%), ET in 20 (22%), and MPN-U in 1 (1%). The population characteristics are reported in Table 1. The majority (56%) of patients exhibited one or more symptoms (weight loss, night sweats, early satiety, bone pain, fatigue). The presence of symptomatic disease was similar between groups, with 52% PMF versus 57% PV/ET exhibiting at least one symptom. Symptoms were more severe in the PMF group with DIPSS risk of intermediate 2 or higher being present in 39%(PMF) versus 29% (PV/ET). Erythrocyte transfusion dependence occurred in a small percentage of overall population (9%), and was seen primarily in the PMF group (6/8 patients). Incidence and severity of splenomegaly was higher in the PMF group, with 55% having splenomegaly versus 43% of the PV/ET group. A higher incidence of a leukoerythoblastic blood smears was seen in PMF (45%) than PV/ET (38%). Two or more prior medical therapies were utilized in 45/90 (49%) of patients, with the most common prior therapies including hydroxyurea (71%), pegylated interferon (28%), anagrelide (18%), Jak inhibitor (13%), lenalidomide (4%), and prednisone (4%). At the time of this analysis, 78/91 patients (86%) were alive. When IWG-MRT criteria were applied to the PV/ET group, 38/58 (66%) of patients fulfilled criteria for diagnosis of post-PV/ET myelofibrosis (except for the 2+fibrosis requirement). Table 1 Patient characteristics UPN Age (yrs) Sex System Risk Activity Tx BRAFV600E (%) 1 56 F Multi High Inactive Yes 0 2 38 F Single High Inactive Yes 0 3 65 F Multi High Active Yes 2.59 4 48 M Single High Inactive Yes 0 5 41 F Single High Inactive Yes 0 6 28 M Multi High Inactive Yes 0 7 29 M Multi High Active No 1.00 8 47 F Multi High Active Yes 6.16 Discussion and Conclusion: PV and ET patients with WHO grade 1 marrow fibrosis manifest a phenotype that suggests progression to post-PV/ET myelofibrosis, and clinically overlap with PMF phenotype; however, these patients currently fail to meet 2008 IWG-MRT diagnostic criteria for this diagnosis on basis of sub-threshold fibrosis. MPN progression represents a biological spectrum and definitions of progression in ET/PV may benefit from other criteria not restricted by degree of fibrosis. Disclosures Mesa: Incyte, CTI, NS pharma, Gilead, Celgene: Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction: Approximately 75% of myelofibrosis (MF) patients develop anemia during evolution of the disease process predicting decreased survival. Previous studies exploring the effect of danazol in the treatment of anemia in MF demonstrate responses in anemia of 30-55%. Ruxolitinib has demonstrated improvement in MF related splenomegaly, symptom burden, and even survival yet improvements in cytopenias are uncommon. We designed a phase II multicenter pilot study to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of combination therapy with ruxolitinib and danazol in MF patients with anemia. Methods: This is a pre-planned interim analysis of a Simon optimum two-stage phase II trial designed to include a minimum of 10 and a maximum of 27 patients. Participants received ruxolitinib 10mg (plat >75 x10x9) BID or 5mg (plat <75 x10 x9) BID with danazol 200mg orally TID. Dose escalation was allowed after completion of 28 days for lack of response or for disease progression. Patients without progression were continued for 6 cycles at 56 days each. Treatment modifications were based on adverse events including thrombocytopenia, leukopenia, and elevation in creatinine and transaminases. Treatment responses were evaluated by the IWG-MRT response criteria (Blood 2013). Patient reported outcome questionnaires (MPN-SAF and EORTC QLQ-C30) were administered at baseline, prior to treatment cycles, and at study discontinuation. Results: Patients: Ten of the 12 evaluable patients enrolled (median age 70.5, range 57-78, M:F ratio 4:1) are included in this analysis. Eight patients had primary MF (PMF), 1 had post essential thrombocytosis (ET) MF, and 1 had post polycythemia vera (PV) MF. Jak2 V617F mutation was positive in 30%. At the time of enrollment 40% had received an erythrocyte transfusion in the last month and all were DIPSS Int-2 or higher. Median baseline hemoglobin was 9.0 g/dL (range 8.3 - 12.4). Median baseline platelet level was 172 x10 (9)/L (range 56 - 346). Most (90%) had received prior therapy and many were refractory to multiple lines of therapy prior to enrollment. Three (30%) patients had previously participated in a JAK inhibitor clinical trial. Tolerability: Among 6 patients who have completed treatment, median duration of treatment was 39 days (range 24-287) with treatment discontinuation due to progression of disease in 2 patients, allogeneic stem cell transplant in 1, alternative treatment in 1, unrelated adverse event (hyponatremia) in 1, and unrelated death (leukemic transformation with intracranial hemorrhage) in 1. Hematologic Grade 3 or > adverse events included anemia (60%), neutropenia (20%), and leukopenia (10%). Non-hematologic Grade 3 or > adverse events included electrolyte abnormalities (20%), edema (10%), infection (10%), and intracranial hemorrhage (10%). Efficacy: Treatment response per IWG-MRT response criteria included stable disease (SD) in 8/10 (80%), clinical improvement in 1/10 (10%), and progressive disease (PD) in 1 (10%). The median change in hemoglobin and platelet count from baseline was -0.05 g/dL (range -0.5 - 1.8) and 28.5 x10(9)/L (range -143 – 118) respectively, however 4/10 (40%) and 7/10 (70%) had improvement at some point during treatment in level of anemia and/or thrombocytopenia. The median follow-up time was 2 months (range 0.9-9.4). Among 6 patients with a baseline and at least one post-baseline MPN-SAF TSS, 2/6 (30%) of patients had at least a 10-point (clinically meaningful) improvement, with 1 of the 2 achieving the stricter 50% improvement from baseline. Responses might have been confounded due to impact of prior therapies. Conclusions: On interim analysis, ruxolitinib and danazol combination therapy demonstrates modest additional clinical benefit, however in a group of exceedingly high risk MF patients with significant anemia and prior single agent JAK inhibitor failures. Preliminary data suggests improvement in anemia and/or thrombocytopenia in some treated patients however only one clinical improvement per IWG-MRT criteria was observed. Combination therapy was well tolerated with no major incremental toxicity attributable to the addition of danazol. Maturation of data is needed to fully evaluate efficacy of ruxolitinib and danazol combination therapy prior to continuation of accrual. Disclosures Mascarenhas: Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Research Funding. Reeder:Millennium, Celgene, Novartis: Research Funding. Tibes:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Mesa:Incyte: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Gilead: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Ns Pharma: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Lilly: Research Funding; Cti: Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction New treatment strategies are improving outcomes for patients with Hodgkin (HL) and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) but achieving durable responses and cure in the relapsed patient remain a challenge. Both the mTORC1 inhibitor everolimus (RAD001) and the IMiD, lenalidomide (LEN) have efficacy as single agents in patients with relapsed and refractory (R/R) HL and NHL. Individually, LEN and RAD present a low toxicity profile and in combination may offer synergistic therapeutic efficacy by unique mechanisms of action. A phase I/II clinical trial of RAD and LEN was designed to explore the tolerability, toxicity and to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of this combination for the Phase II study. The results of phase I/II data are reported here. Methods MC0981 was activated on January 10, 2011. In phase I, the study enrolled a total of 25 patients and RAD 5 mg daily + LEN 10 mg/d X 21d in a 28-day cycle was defined as the MTD. The phase II opened on May 14, 2013, and closed on Feb 19, 2014, during which 33 patients were enrolled and were treated until progression of disease. Eligibility required age ≥18, biopsy proven relapsed or refractory NHL or HL, ECOG PS 0- 2, measurable disease, Hb >9g/dl, ANC ≥1200/uL, platelet ≥ 50,000/uL, creatinine ≤1.5xULN and willingness to sign informed consent. Women of child bearing potential had pregnancy testing and all patients followed recommendations for contraception. Follow up data was analyzed as of July 2014. Results A total of 58 patients were enrolled to this study and fifty five are evaluable for analysis (2 never started therapy, 1 deemed ineligible). The median age was 62 years (21-82) and 38 (69.1%) were male. Sixty-five percent had stage IV disease and 42% had 4 or more prior treatments including stem cell transplantation in 49%. Histologies included HL (n=10) and NHL (n=45 with 23 DLBCL, 2 FL-III, 5 LPL, 3 MCL, 2 MF, and 3 other). At least 1 Gr≥3 adverse event was seen in 74.5% of patients. The most common Gr≥3 toxicities were hematologic - neutropenia (30.9%), and thrombocytopenia (21.8%), and anemia (10.9%). Nine of 55 patients (16%) had Gr≥3 infection; 2 with skin infection, 1 with cholecystitis, 1 with lung infection, 1 with pharyngitis 1 with otitis externa, 1 with otitis media, and 1 with pleural infection and 1 with upper respiratory tract infection. Seven patients discontinued treatment due to adverse events. At this time, 44% (25/55) remain progression-free. A documented tumor response, as overall response rate (ORR) was seen in 20% (11/55) with 1CR, 8PR, and 2MR; 17 remain on therapy; and 22 deaths have occurred with a median survival of 15.0 months (95% CI 7.5-NR). Median follow up time was 5.5 (range, 0.7- 41.0) months. The median duration of response (DOR) in those responding is 19.4 months. Conclusions In a heavily pretreated population with baseline compromised bone marrow function, the combination of everolimus and lenalidomide is feasible with a modest ORR and a surprisingly long DOR. Future studies in more defined groups of NHL or HL are necessary to better predict which patients will be long-term responders. This trial is sponsored by Novartis and Celgene Disclosures Off Label Use: mTORC1 inhibitor (Everolimus) and the Immunomodulatory (IMiD) drug Lenalidomide for patients with Heavily Pretreated Relapsed Lymphoma . Mikhael:Onyx: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Nowakowski:Celgene, Morphosis: Consultancy. Witzig:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Reeder:Millennium, Celgene, Novartis: Research Funding.

Abstract Background: Thrombotic and hemorrhagic complications are commonly encountered in uncontrolled essential thrombocythemia (ET). Both anagrelide and hydroxyurea (HU) have proven efficacious in cytoreduction as well as reducing these events and remain first line therapy for most high-risk ET patients. Independent of their role in risk-reduction, little is known about how these therapies impact patient symptomatology or quality of life. In this study, we compared the clinical and symptomatic profiles of ET patients receiving HU or anagrelide against patients with no previous experience with these agents. Methods: Data was assessed from a prospectively collected international database of ET patients in which demographics, disease features, and ET symptoms utilizing the myeloproliferative neoplasm symptom assessment form (MPN-SAF; Scherber et al, 2011). The MPN-SAF includes the patient's perceptions of common MPN-related symptoms and overall quality of life (QOL) on a 0 (absent) to 10 (worst imaginable) scale. Total symptom score (TSS) was computed based on symptom items using the published scoring algorithm on a 0 (all reported symptoms absent) to 100 (all reported symptoms worst imaginable) scale. ET risk scores were calculated using the IPSET scoring algorithm (Passamonti 2012). Thrombocytopenia was defined as a platelet count <100 x 10(9)/L, anemia was defined as hemoglobin<10 g/dL and leukopenia was defined as a white blood cell count <4.0 x 10(9)/L. Associations between the MPN-SAF individual symptoms were investigated using chi-square test for categorical data and ANOVA F-test for continuous variables. Results Hydroxyurea vs. HU Naive A total of 402 ET patients with active HU use were compared to 392 ET patients with no history of HU use. Patients using HU were older (63.5 years vs. 52.3 years, p<0.001) and had a greater concentration of both high risk (24.9% vs. 11.4%, p=0.001) and intermediate risk (53.9% vs 38.4%, p<0.001) patients. They also had a higher rate of prior thrombosis (29.8% vs 11.3%, p<0.001) and leukopenia (10.1% vs. 3.0%, p<0.001). No differences were noted between gender, a history of prior hemorrhage, red blood cell transfusion requirements, or the presence of anemia/thrombocytopenia. In comparing symptom profiles, no significant differences were noted between TSS or individual symptoms with the exception of slightly more severe cough in HU patients (1.5 vs. 1.1, p=0.02, Figure 1). Anagrelide vs. Anagrelide Naive A total of 49 ET patients with active anagrelide use were compared to 794 ET patients with no history of anagrelide use. Patients using anagrelide had a longer mean disease duration (8.1 years vs. 5.8 years) and were more anemic (9.1% vs. 1.2%, p<0.001). No differences were noted between age, gender, risk scores, the presence of leukopenia/thrombocytopenia, a history of prior thrombosis or hemorrhage complications or red blood cell transfusion requirements. Additionally, there were no significant differences between TSS or individual symptom items (Figure 1). HU vs. Anagrelide A total of 402 patients currently using HU were compared to 39 patients currently using anagrelide. Overall, HU users were slightly older (63.5 years vs. 55.1 years, p<0.001) with a greater population of patients meeting high risk criteria (24.9% vs. 2.8%, p=0.002) and having a history of prior thrombosis (29.8% vs. 12.8%, p=0.02). Patients receiving anagrelide had a slightly longer disease duration (8.2 years vs. 6.0 years, p=0.0446). In comparing symptom profiles, no differences were noted in TSS or individual symptom items between cohorts. Discussion In this retrospective analysis, it does not appear cytoreduction with either HU and/or anagrelide has a significant impact on ET symptom burden despite reducing vascular events. Importantly, the higher risk scores in HU patients did not translate directly into greater patient symptomatology supporting previous studies demonstrating a poor association between these two items. Prospective trials measuring ET symptom change, in the setting of randomized trials will better quantify impact of cytoreduction on symptom burden as well as quantify impact of newer agents such as interferon or jak inhibition. Figure 1. Symptom Comparisons Between HU, Anagrelide and Other Therapy Figure 1. Symptom Comparisons Between HU, Anagrelide and Other Therapy Disclosures Kiladjian: Incyte Corporation: Consultancy; Novartis: Other: Travel grant; Research Funding paid to institution (Hôpital Saint-Louis et Université Paris Diderot); Novartis: Consultancy. Zweegman:Takeda: 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, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Harrison:Sanofi: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Shire: Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Honoraria; CTI Biopharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Cervantes:Sanofi-Aventis: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; CTI-Baxter: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Barbui:Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Etienne:ARIAD: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Congress Travel/Accomodations, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Roy:Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding. te Boekhorst:Novartis: Consultancy; CTI Biopharma: Consultancy. Vannucchi:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Shire: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Other: Research Funding paid to institution (University of Florence), Research Funding; Baxalta: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Mesa:Novartis. Research- incyte, Gilead, cti, Genentech, promedior, NS Pharma: Consultancy.

Abstract We conducted a two-stage Simon phase II, multi-center study in two groups: related and unrelated donor transplants. Based on the results of a previously conducted prospective study (MPD-RC 101, Rondelli et al, Blood, 2014) demonstrating relatively poor outcome in the unrelated donor arm due to high non-relapse mortality and graft failure (GF), we sought to improve this noted disparate outcome. The hypothesis driving this trial was that pre-transplant JAK1/2 inhibition would result in an increase in performance status, reduction in splenomegaly and inflammatory cytokine expression leading to improved HCT outcome. In the unrelated arm in the first 11 patients, the trial was to be terminated if 6 or more failures (GF or death due to any cause by 100 days post-transplant) were observed. In the related arm in the first 11 patients, the trial was to be terminated if 3 or more failures were observed. Key eligibility criteria included diagnosis of primary MF or post-PV MF or post-ET MF, age 18-70 years, and DIPSS int-2/high risk disease or int-1 risk disease with at least one additional risk factor. Patients could have received up to 6 months of ruxolitinib prior to enrollment provided that there was no evidence of loss of response to ruxolitinib during this period. Ruxolitinib was given for 56 days followed by a 4-day taper ending day -6. The conditioning regimen utilized was IV fludarabine 40 mg/m2 IV and IV busulfan 2.0 mg/KBW IV once daily for 4 days from days -5 to -2. GVHD prophylaxis consisted of cyclosporine or tacrolimus and methotrexate. Patients undergoing unrelated donor HCT also received low dose thymoglobulin (0.5 mg/KBW on day -3/2.0 mg/KBW on day -2 & day -1). The study has enrolled 21 patients (related, 7; unrelated, 14) with a median age of 59 years (range 39-70). 17 (81%) patients had palpable splenomegaly with median spleen size of 11 cm, and 16 patients had int-2/high risk disease. Of the 21 patients, 19 patients received transplantation (related 5/7 [71%], unrelated 14/14 [100%] underwent transplant). Two patients in the related arm did not proceed with transplantation as one progressed to acute myeloid leukemia (baseline blast count 14%) and another experienced sudden death of unknown cause the day after starting ruxolitinib. In addition, there was one GF in the related arm. Due to these 3 failures in the related arm, further enrollment was stopped in this arm per protocol criteria. In the unrelated arm, there were 4 failures (Table 1), and the study met the protocol criteria for further enrollment. Mean percent reduction from baseline to day -9 in palpable spleen length below the left costal margin was 30% (p=0.04) in 12 patients with palpable spleen. 5/12 (42%) had any reduction, and 4/12 (33%) had ≥50% reduction. From baseline to best score on day -9 or day -5, 11/19 (58%) patients with data had any improvement in MPN-SAF Total Symptom Score, and 7/19 (37%) had ≥50% reduction. Of the 19 patients undergoing transplant, ruxolitinib was tapered off successfully in all patients with no significant withdrawal syndrome or delay in transplant noted. In the pre-transplant phase, most common Grade 3 or higher toxicity considered to be related to ruxolitinib was anemia (6/21, 29%), and one patient had legionella pneumonia deemed not related to ruxolitinib. Median time to neutrophil recovery (> 0.5 x 109/L) and platelet recovery (>20 x 109/L) was 19 and 19.5 days. By day 100, 7/19 (37%) experienced Grade 2-4 acute GVHD (G2 in 5, G3 in 2). In the first 30 days post HCT, most common Grade 3 or higher toxicity was febrile neutropenia seen in 5/19 (26%) patients. In all 21 patients from time of registration with median follow-up of 5.8 months, 6-mo overall survival was 75% (95% CI 44-90%). For the 19 transplant recipients, 6-mo OS was 83% (95% CI 55-94%) from date of transplant. Conclusions: Stage 1 trial results highlight important observations. First, ruxolitinib may not be suitable for all myelofibrosis patients pre-transplant, eg, alternative approaches might be more appropriate in the context of accelerating disease. Second, we demonstrated a safe approach for tapering ruxolitinib prior to transplant which allowed patients to commence conditioning with reduced spleen size and symptoms. Third, pre-transplant ruxolitinib does not appear to have any adverse impact on early post-HCT outcomes following unrelated donor transplant, although Stage 2 enrollment will be required to better assess the potential benefits of this approach. Disclosures Gupta: Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding. Yacoub:Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Alexion: Honoraria. Mesa:Promedior: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; CTI: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Galena: Consultancy; Ariad: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy. Mead:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Mascarenhas:Novartis: Other: DSMB , Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Research Funding; Incyte: Other: Clinical Trial Steereing Committee, Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction Individuals with the Philadelphia chromosome negative myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) have previously been shown to experience symptoms in excess to age and comorbidity matched peers. Although numerous assessments of symptom burden and quality of life have been utilized among MPN populations, including the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30), Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS¨) fatigue scale, and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lymphoma (FACT-Lym) and the Myeloproliferative Neoplasm Symptom Assessment Form Total Symptom Score (MPN-10), there are currently no validated assessments of overall health. Developed by the EuroQol Group to assess heath status, the EQ-5D is an internationally validated self-assessment which may be useful in the assessment of health state among MPN patients (Annals of Medicine, 2001. 33:337-43). Methods The EQ-5D evaluates five dimensions of mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression, on a scale from no problems to extreme problems and assesses patient reported health state via a numerical visual analogue scale (VAS) ranging from 0 to 100. The health state score is a composite score of these items ranging from 0 to 1.0, with higher scores indicating an improved health state. EQ-5D survey participants were essential thrombocythemia (ET) and polycythemia (PV) patients participating in the MAJIC United Kingdom (UK) trial. The MAJIC trial is a randomized, phase II study of best available therapy versus JAK inhibition in individuals with PV or ET who have been resistant or intolerant of cytoreduction with hydroxyurea /hydroxycarbamide. This study was one of the first Trials Acceleration Programme (TAP) trials and is funded by Leukaemia Lymphoma Research, with drug supplied by Novartis. Only baseline EQ-5D assessments taken at study enrollment were included in this analysis. Comparative analysis was preformed using the MPN-10 (J Clin Oncol.2012. 30:4098-103). Results: Participant Demographics: Sixty six patients with ET and 55 patients with PV completed the EQ-5D questionnaire. Median respondent age was 65 years old and half of respondents were female (54%). Average MPN duration was 10 years for ET and 9.2 years for PV. EQ-5D Scoring: Severe to extreme difficulties in the items of mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression were common (Table 1).Patients with PV tended to have higher proportion of patients with severe to extreme difficulties in individual disease dimensions, higher VAS score, and worsened health state compared to their essential thrombocythemia counterparts, although these effects were not significant. Average VAS health score was 70.4 (+21.2) for ET and 66.5 (+19.6). When evaluating the health state composite score, the mean ET score was 0.74 (+0.32) and mean PV score was 0.66 (+0.28). EQ-5D Validation: The EQ-5D had excellent internal consistency (CronbachÕs alpha=0.87) and strong internal correlation. When evaluating external validity, strong correlations existed between the EQ-5D and the MPN-SAF TSS scales for dimensions of mobility, usual activities, pain and overall health state (many items with r >0.5 and p<0.001). Conclusions: The EQ-5D is a valid and accurate instrument for the brief assessment of health state among MPN patients. This instrument demonstrates excellent clinical utility in a large clinical study cohort and can be used in both clinical practice and trial settings. When comparing EQ-5D health state scores, ET and PV patients had worsened health than the general UK population age 60 to 69 (0.774; Med Decis Making. 2011.31(6)800-4), but similar health to individuals with other malignancies including breast cancer (0.760), prostate cancer (0.743), and lung cancer (0.689). Disclosures Mesa: NS Pharma: Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy; Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding. Harrison:CTI Biopharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Shire: Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

The TP53 pathway has been shown to be dysregulated in myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) through several different mechanisms, including TP53 mutations, TP53 deletions and Murine Double Minute 2 (MDM2) overexpression. Downregulation of the TP53 pathway likely plays a role in MPN progression as evidenced by the association of TP53 loss of heterozygosity with transformation to acute leukemia and the presence of inactivating mutations of TP53 found in a proportion of MPN-blast phase (MPN-BP) cases (Kubesova et al, Leukemia. 2018;32(2):450-61). Furthermore, MDM2 inhibition induces TP53 pathway upregulation and consequent targeting of hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells in polycythemia vera (PV) and myelofibrosis (MF). The MDM2 inhibitor, idasanutlin, has shown activity in a Phase I trial of high-risk PV patients (Mascarenhas et al. Blood. 2019 Jun 5). An additional regulator of TP53 is protein phosphatase, Mg2+/Mn2+ dependent 1D (PPM1D) which by dephosphorylating TP53 and stabilizing MDM2 regulates the DNA damage response pathway and apoptosis. Somatic activating mutations of PPM1D are present in both solid and hematologic malignancies and are specifically associated with therapy-related myeloid disorders (Hsu et al. Cell Stem Cell. 2018 Nov 1;23(5):700-13). Grinfeld et al. (N Engl J Med. 2018 Oct 11;379(15):1416-30) recently reported that in their genomic analysis of 2035 MPN patients, PPM1D was the eighth most common mutated gene in MPNs at 1.9% frequency. To determine whether there was an association of PPM1D mutations with MPNs we analyzed the genomic data of patients who participated in several clinical trials executed by the Myeloproliferative Neoplasm Research Consortium (MPN-RC). Of 89 MPN-BP patients, 5 patients harbored a PPM1D mutation with a median variant allele frequency (VAF) of 17%. In comparison, 4 out of 135 high risk PV and ET patients harbored a PPM1D mutation with a median VAF of 24%. All mutations were truncating which is consistent with previous reports of PPMID mutations in malignancies. The PPM1D gene is located on the long arm of chromosome 17 (17q23.2) and we hypothesized that cytogenetic aberrations involving this gene locus might also contribute to abnormalities of PPM1D function. Through analysis of our cytogenetic database, 16/1,124 (1.4%) MPN patients were found to have cytogenomic abnormalities involving the region containing the PPM1D gene. Eight of these patients had karyotypic abnormalities, including 3 pts with isochromosome 17q resulting in a gain of 17q and a loss of 17p, including the TP53 gene. The other 4 patients had structural variations of 17q which might lead to aberrant expression of PPM1D. One patient by FISH analysis had gain of 17q. Ten patients had cytogenomic aberrations of 17q detected through analysis of array comparative genomic hybridization and single nucleotide polymorphism (aCGH+SNP), 2 of which had concurrent karyotypic abnormalities of 17q. All patients had a gain or copy neutral loss of heterozygosity (cnLOH) of the 17q22-24.2 region. CnLOH of this region could lead to aberrant overexpression of the PPM1D gene. One of the 8 patients with cnLOH of 17q harbored a PPM1D mutation. Of the 16 patients with 17q cytogenomic abnormalities, 7 (44%) had MPN-BP and 7 (44%) patients had ET or ET that progressed to myelofibrosis (MF) or MPN-BP indicating an association of these abnormalities with advanced disease. By quantitative real time-PCR we determined the PPM1D transcript levels in mononuclear cells from 31 MPN patients without known PPM1D mutations (7 polycythemia vera (PV), 6 ET, 14 MF, 4 MPN-BP) and compared the transcript levels to mononuclear cells from healthy control patients. Forty-two percent (13/31) patients had overexpression of PPM1D (>1.5 fold increase range). Fold increase ranged from 1.5-8 and overexpression was present in the following diagnoses: 4/7 PV, 1/6 ET, 8/14 MF and 0/4 MPN-BP. We have provided evidence that a number of abnormalities of PPM1D including activating mutations, cytogenetic aberrations and transcript overexpression are present in a significant proportion of MPN patients. These abnormalities in PPM1D can be additional events that lead to the downregulation of TP53 and contribute to MPN disease progression. We propose that inhibitors of PPM1D may be used in combination with other drugs that upregulate TP53 to treat MPN patients. Disclosures Rampal: Constellation, Incyte, and Stemline Therapeutics: Research Funding; Agios, Apexx, Blueprint Medicines, Celgene, Constellation, and Jazz: Consultancy. Mascarenhas:CTI Biopharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; 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; Janssen: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Merus: Research Funding. Hoffman:Merus: Research Funding.

Background: Quality of life (QOL) is predictive of survival in many malignancy types, including myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs; Scherber 2017, Sloan 2012, Montazeri 2009, Nilsson 2017). We have previously characterized that an association exists between symptom burden and QOL among MPN patients, but due to the disease specificity of symptoms, symptoms rather than QOL remains a key therapeutic endpoint (Scherber 2017, NCCN Guidelines). Despite these advancements, our understanding of the extent that different patient and disease characteristics, including symptoms, contribute to overall QOL has remained elusive. In this analysis, we utilized information from a large survey of MPN patients to develop a model of QOL that establishes the degree that individual variables contribute to QOL, including psychosocial variables, comorbidities, and MPN disease symptoms. Methods: The FATIGUE survey of MPN patients (Scherber 2016) investigated self-reported symptoms using the MPN10 (Scherber 2012), depression utilizing the Profile of Mood States-Brief (POMS-B, McNair 1971), Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-2, Kroenke 2003) and Mental Health Inventory (MHI-5, Berwick 1991), and QOL utilizing a single numeric analog scale (range 0-10) regarding overall quality of life. Linear regression analysis was utilized to establish the relationship between individual symptoms and QOL, and a structural equation model (SEM) was used to identify complex relationships among patient demographics, behavioral factors, comorbidities, and QOL. Results: A total of 914 patients from the online survey lived in the USA and provided data for this analysis. Average age was 62 with 67% of patients being female and the mean BMI was 25. Education varied across middle school or high school education (22%), undergraduate or college degree (44%), masters (26%), to doctorate (8%). 43% of respondents were employed. Fatigue (β coefficient 0.23, p<0.001), inactivity (β 0.21, p<0.001), concentration difficulties (β 0.13, p<0.001), sad mood (β 0.18, p<0.001), and night sweats (β 0.05, p=0.03) showed statistically significant impact on QOL. SEM Model: We developed the SEM model in Figure 1. Out of all variables analyzed, MPN total symptom burden demonstrated the strongest association with (β 0.89) with QOL, followed by depression (β 0.76). Comorbidities, including COPD and renal issues, age, and body mass index abnormalities had some impact on symptoms (all β <0.40), but did not demonstrate a significant impact on QOL. Comparative Fit Index (CFI) was 0.905 and root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) was 0.051 (0.048, 0.054) indicating good fit. Conclusions: Previous clinical trials of JAK inhibition have targeted improvement in symptoms as a key endpoint, and ultimately demonstrated improvements in overall survival. The mechanism of this survival benefit has not been fully explored. This analysis suggests that symptoms and mood are strongly associated and potentially a major contributor to QOL among MPN patients, whereas other major comorbidities and age are not as strongly correlated. Efforts are underway to analyze more comprehensive datasets to better understand the role of other variables, including marriage status and financial concerns, on QOL. Disclosures Scherber: Blueprint: Other: Ad board; Incyte: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy. Hasselbalch:Novartis: Research Funding; AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals: Other: Data monitoring board. Mesa:Baxalta: Consultancy; LaJolla: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Research Funding; Samus: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses; CTI: Research Funding; Galena Biopharma: Consultancy; Pfizer: Research Funding; Incyte: Other: travel, accommodations, expenses, Research Funding; Genotech: Research Funding; AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses; PharmaEssentia: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Shire: Honoraria; Sierra Oncology: Consultancy.

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

Background: Pegylated Interferon-alpha (PEG-IFNa) improves hematologic parameters and reduces mutant allele fraction in patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs); however, widespread clinical use is limited by frequent discontinuation due to side effects. Identifying biomarkers of response to PEG-IFNa therapy might identify patient subsets most likely to derive benefit from this therapy. Serum pro-inflammatory cytokine levels are increased in MPN patients and associated with adverse clinical outcomes. The effect of PEG-IFNa therapy on cytokine levels in MPN patients and correlation with clinical response has not been elucidated. We hypothesized that identification of cytokine signatures could predict for clinical/molecular response to PEG-IFNa in MPNs. Methods: Pre- and post-treatment serum samples were collected from available patients enrolled on the Myeloproliferative Disorders Research Consortium (MPD-RC) 111/112 trials-multicenter studies assessing efficacy of PEG-IFNa in patients with high-risk polycythemia vera/essential thrombocythemia either up front or in the setting of hydroxyurea failure/intolerance. Serum was prepared using the Millipore MAP Human 41-Cytokine Magnet Bead System (Millipore; Cat:HCYTOMAG-60K) and run on the Luminex FLEXMAP 3D platform. Data was analyzed using Luminex xPonent 4.3 software. Correlative mutational data on 156 genes implicated in myeloid malignancies was also available for all patients. Age-matched serum from healthy individuals (N=6) was obtained from AllCellsTM for use as wild-type (WT) controls. Baseline cytokine samples were compared between groups of interest by use of Wilcoxon rank-sum test. Change from baseline in cytokines for each group were compared to the null hypothesis of zero change. P values <0.05 were considered statistically significant. Results: Pre- and post-treatment serum samples were available on 29 MPN patients from the MPN-RC 111/112 cohorts. 21 patients were classified as complete responders (CRs) vs. 8 non-responders (NRs) using European LeukemiaNet criteria. Baseline cytokine levels were generally increased in both CRs and NRs compared to WT, including significant increases in Eotaxin (p=0.023), IL3 (p=0.048), IP10 (p=0.04), and TNFa (p=0.006) (Table 1), as well as a non-significant trend increase in IL8 (p=0.076). Notably, other cytokines were decreased at baseline in comparison to WT, including EGF (p<0.001), as well as MDC (p=0.040) and PDGFaabb (p=0.02), in line with previous studies. Compared to CRs, NRs displayed significantly lower levels of GRO (p=0.020), MDC (p=0.003), and PDGFaabb (p=0.026) at baseline along with elevated levels of IP10 (p=0.028) suggesting pre-treatment levels of these cytokines might predict response to therapy. Comparison of pre- and post- treatment samples revealed a general increase in median cytokine levels in CRs, with significant changes in GM-CSF (p=0.012), IP10 (p<0.001), MCP1 (p=0.015) and IFNa itself (p=0.010). Notably, median cytokine levels in NRs post-treatment, including IFNa, were relatively unchanged from baseline despite on-going PEG-IFNa therapy. Additional pre-treatment serum samples, as well as correlative analysis of cytokine changes with JAK-STAT driver mutant allele fraction and mutational profiling are underway and will be presented at the meeting. Conclusions: Preliminary findings suggest individual cytokines are affected by PEG-IFNa in MPNs. Furthermore, baseline levels of GRO, MDC, PDGFaabb, and IP10 correlate with response to PEG-IFNa. These data may identify MPN patients most likely to respond to PEG-IFNa therapy and those for whom this therapy may be most appropriate. Further analysis with a larger cohort of treatment-naïve patients is underway to validate these findings and identify additional molecular and cytokine signatures of response to PEG-IFNa therapy. Disclosures Yacoub: Agios: Speakers Bureau; Hylapharm: Equity Ownership; Dynavax: Equity Ownership; Cara: Equity Ownership; Ardelyx: Equity Ownership; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Mascarenhas:Incyte: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; 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; Pharmaessentia: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Levine:Lilly: Honoraria; Qiagen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Imago Biosciences: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Loxo: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Prelude Therapeutics: Research Funding; Isoplexis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy; Amgen: Honoraria; C4 Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy. Hoffman:Merus: Research Funding. Rampal:Constellation, Incyte, and Stemline Therapeutics: Research Funding; Agios, Apexx, Blueprint Medicines, Celgene, Constellation, and Jazz: Consultancy.