Hogan, William J.

SummaryAmong 301 newly diagnosed patients with acute myeloid leukaemia receiving venetoclax and a hypomethylating agent, 23 (7.6%) experienced major cardiac complications: 15 cardiomyopathy, 5 non‐ST elevation myocardial infarction and/or 7 pericarditis/effusions. Four patients had more than one cardiac complication. Baseline characteristics included median age ± interquartile range; 73 ± 5 years; 87% males; 96% with cardiovascular risk factors; and 90% with preserved baseline ejection fraction. In multivariate analysis, males were more likely (p = 0.02) and DNMT3A‐mutated cases less likely (p < 0.01) to be affected. Treatment‐emergent cardiac events were associated with a trend towards lower composite remission rates (43% vs. 62%; p = 0.09) and shorter survival (median 7.7 vs. 13.2 months; p < 0.01). These observations were retrospectively retrieved and warrant further prospective examination.

Abstract Venetoclax + hypomethylating agent (Ven‐HMA) is currently the standard frontline therapy for older/unfit patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (ND‐AML). Our objective in the current retrospective study of 301 adult patients (median age 73 years; 62% de novo) with ND‐AML was to identify molecular predictors of treatment response to Ven‐HMA and survival; European LeukemiaNet (ELN) genetic risk assignment was favorable 15%, intermediate 16%, and adverse 69%. Complete remission, with (CR) or without (CRi), count recovery, was documented in 182 (60%) patients. In multivariable analysis, inclusive of mutations only, “favorable” predictors of CR/CRi were NPM1 (86% vs. 56%), IDH2 (80% vs. 58%), and DDX41 (100% vs. 58%) and “unfavorable” TP53 (40% vs. 67%), FLT3‐ ITD (36% vs. 63%), and RUNX1 (44% vs. 64%) mutations; significance was sustained for each mutation after adjustment for age, karyotype, and therapy‐related qualification. CR/CRi rates ranged from 36%, in the presence of unfavorable and absence of favorable mutation, to 91%, in the presence of favorable and absence of unfavorable mutation. At median follow‐up of 8.5 months, 174 deaths and 41 allogeneic stem cell transplants (ASCT) were recorded. In multivariable analysis, risk factors for inferior survival included failure to achieve CR/CRi (HR 3.4, 95% CI 2.5–4.8), adverse karyotype (1.6, 1.1–2.6), TP53 mutation (1.6, 1.0–2.4), and absence of IDH2 mutation (2.2, 1.0–4.7); these risk factors were subsequently applied to construct an HR‐weighted risk model that performed better than the ELN genetic risk model (AIC 1661 vs. 1750): low ( n = 130; median survival 28.9 months), intermediate ( n = 105; median 9.6 months), and high ( n = 66; median 3.1 months; p < .001); survival in each risk category was significantly upgraded by ASCT. The current study identifies genotype signatures for predicting response and proposes a 3‐tiered, CR/CRi‐based, and genetics‐enhanced survival model for AML patients receiving upfront therapy with Ven‐HMA.

Abstract Rationale Pulmonary complications contribute significantly to nonrelapse mortality following hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HCT). Identifying patients at high risk can help enroll such patients into clinical studies to better understand, prevent, and treat posttransplantation respiratory failure syndromes. Objectives To develop and validate a prediction model to identify those at increased risk of acute respiratory failure after HCT. Methods Patients underwent HCT between January 1, 2019, and December 31, 2021, at one of three institutions. Those treated in Rochester, MN, formed the derivation cohort, and those treated in Scottsdale, AZ, or Jacksonville, FL, formed the validation cohort. The primary outcome was the development of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), with secondary outcomes including the need for invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and/or noninvasive ventilation (NIV). Predictors were based on prior case-control studies. Measurements and Main Results Of 2,450 patients undergoing stem cell transplantation, there were 1,718 hospitalizations (888 patients) in the training cohort and 1,005 hospitalizations (470 patients) in the test cohort. A 22-point model was developed, with 11 points from prehospital predictors and 11 points from posttransplantation or early (&lt;24-h) in-hospital predictors. The model performed well in predicting ARDS (C-statistic, 0.905; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.870–0.941) and the need for IMV and/or NIV (C-statistic, 0.863; 95% CI, 0.828–0.898). The test cohort differed markedly in demographic, medical, and hematologic characteristics. The model also performed well in this setting in predicting ARDS (C-statistic, 0.841; 95% CI, 0.782–0.900) and the need for IMV and/or NIV (C-statistic, 0.872; 95% CI, 0.831–0.914). Conclusions A novel prediction model incorporating data elements from the pretransplantation, posttransplantation, and early in-hospital domains can reliably predict the development of post-HCT acute respiratory failure.

Background: The 2022 European LeukemiaNet (ELN) genetic-risk stratification for acute myeloid leukemia (AML), assigns favorable prognosis to t(8;21)(q22;q22.1)/ RUNX1:: RUNX1T1, inv(16)(p13.1q22) or t(16;16)(p13.1;q22)/ CBFB:: MYH1, NPM1 mutations without FLT3-ITD or adverse karyotype, and bZIP in-frame CEBPA mutations (Döhner , Blood, 2022 ). This risk stratification was derived from intensively treated patients; accordingly, prognostication in ELN favorable genetic risk AML, following venetoclax and hypomethylating agent (VEN-HMA) therapy, remains unclear and was the subject of the current study. Methods: Under an institutional review board approved minimum risk protocol, the Mayo Clinic database was searched to identify AML patients with favorable genetic risk, who received treatment with VEN-HMA in the frontline setting. All patients received at least one cycle of either azacitidine 75 mg/m 2 days 1-7 or decitabine 20 mg/m 2 days 1-5 with VEN dose adjusted based on azole antifungal prophylaxis. Genetic risk stratification and treatment response were assessed according to the 2022 ELN criteria. Survival was estimated from the time of VEN-HMA treatment start to last follow-up or death. Results: Patient characteristics A total of 46 newly-diagnosed AML patients with ELN 2022 favorable genetic risk [ NPM1 mutation, n=36 (78%), CEPBA bZIP mutation, n=7 (15%) and t(8;21)(q22;q22.1)/ inv(16)(p13.1q22), n=4 (9%)] received a median of 4 cycles (range 1-32) of VEN-HMA. Median age was 71 years, with 63% males, and 87% de novo AML. Additional mutations frequently involved TET2 in 17/43 (40%), DNMT3A in 14/45 (31%), SRSF2 in 10/43 (23%), K/NRAS in 10/45 (22%), IDH1 in 8/46 (17%), FLT3-TKD in 7/46 (15%), ASXL1 in 6/43 (14%) and IDH2 in 6/46 (13%),of informative cases.Myelodysplasia (MDS)-related gene mutations ( ASXL1, RUNX1, BCOR, EZH2, SRSF2, U2AF1, SF3B1, STAG2, and/or ZRSR2) were present in 15 of 40 (38%) of patients (93% males). Predictors of response Of the 39 (85%) patients that achieved complete remission, with (CR) ( n=24; 52%), or without count recovery (CRi) ( n=15; 33%); CR/CRi rates were not significantly higher in patients with NPM1 mutations (89%), t(8;21)(q22;q22.1)/ inv(16)(p13.1q22) (75%), or CEPBA bZIP mutations (67%) ( p=0.37). Among patients achieving CR/CRi, measurable residual disease by multiparametric flow cytometry was negative in 15 of 16 (94%) of evaluable cases after cycles 1 or 2. In addition, NPM1 qPCR was negative in 15 of 24 (63%) informative patients. Median time to response was 1.2 months with median response duration of 9.4 months. CR/CRi rates were significantly higher in females vs males (100% vs 76%, p=0.01), and in the absence vs presence of MDS-related gene mutations (96% vs 60%, p=0.004). Multivariable analysis confirmed superior response in the absence of MDS-related gene mutations ( p=0.04). Predictors of survival At a median follow-up of 10.6 months (range; 1.1-51 months), 21 patients (46%) have died, 9 relapsed (23% of those achieving CR/CRi), and 6 (13%) underwent allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant. Median overall survival was 21 months with 1/2/3-year survival rates of 65%/41%/41% (Figure 1a); median relapse-free survival (RFS) was not reached; 1/2/3-year RFS rates were 81%/66%/57% (Figure 1b). Overall survival was superior in patients achieving CR/CRi (23 months vs 5.6 months; p&lt;0.01), in females vs males (not reached vs 9.7 months; p&lt;0.01), and in the absence of MDS-related gene mutations (not reached vs 5.6 months; p=0.01) (Figure 1c). Subsequent multivariable analysis identified female gender ( p=0.01), and absence of MDS-related mutations ( p=0.17) as independent predictors of superior survival. Similar results were obtained when analysis was restricted to NPM1 mutated patients. Conclusions: In the current retrospective study, VEN-HMA therapy in elderly/unfit AML patients with ELN 2022 favorable genetic risk, resulted in response rates that were comparable to those previously appreciated from published reports of patients receiving intensive induction therapy; however, follow-up in the current study was too short to accurately assess long-term overall and relapse-free survival impact. Our study also highlights the adverse prognosis retained by MDS-related gene mutations.

Background: Non-transplant treatment options in myelofibrosis MF are palliative in scope and include Janus kinase 2 (JAK2) inhibitors (JAKi). FDA-approved JAKi for the treatment of MF include ruxolitinib, fedratinib, and pacritinib. A fourth JAKi, momelotinib, is currently under review. We have previously reported long-term survival data on momelotinib and drug survival that was significantly longer, retrospectively compared to ruxolitinib ( AJH. 2022;97:E433). In the current study, we focused on molecular predictors of drug survival (i.e., drug retention) and longevity without allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant AHSCT (transplant-censored survival). Methods : The current study included data from Mayo Clinic patients who participated in a phase-1/2 core study of momelotinib (NCT00935987). Study design, drug doses and schedule, and additional details on treatment effect and side effects have previously been published. Drug survival was calculated from time of initiation of momelotinib to time of treatment discontinuation. Survival analysis required censoring of patients at time of AHSCT. Conventional statistical methods were applied using JMP Pro 16.0.0 software (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA). Results : 79 JAKi-naïve patients with MF were considered: median age 67 years; males 54%; PMF 65%, post-PV MF 20%, post-ET MF 15%; JAK2 71%, type 1/like CALR ( CALR-1) 14%, CALR-2 3%, MPL 8%, triple-negative 5%. Risk category according to DIPSS was high/intermediate in 80% of the patients and unfavorable karyotype in 29%. Non-driver mutation information was available in a subset of patients and included ASXL1 22% and SRSF2 18%. Median time from diagnosis to study entry was 25.2 months; patients were enrolled between November 2009 and March 2011 with follow-up information updated through July 2023; during this period, 68 (86%) deaths, 13 (16%) leukemic transformations, and 7 (9%) AHSCTs were recorded. Median follow-up for alive patients was 12.5 years (range 11.3-13.1). Anemia response rate was 48% and spleen 47%. Median treatment duration was 25 months (range 0.1-157); the proportion of patients remaining on active therapy was 68% at 1 year, 30% at 3 years, 16% at 5 years, and 7% at 10 years (Figure 1a). At the time of this writing, 5 (6.3%) patients were still receiving momelotinib therapy with treatment durations of 152 to 157 months. In univariate analysis, molecular predictors of drug survival included CALR-1 (p=0.006) but not ASXL1 (p=0.6) or SRSF2 (p=0.3) mutation, or unfavorable karyotype (p=0.08). The 3-, 5-, and 10-year drug survival rates for CALR-1-mutated patients were 64%, 40%, and 18%, respectively, and for CALR-1 wild-type 25%, 11%, and 4% (p=0.01, Figure 1b). CALR-1 independent association with longer drug survival was also appreciated for younger age (p&lt;0.01) and absence of baseline transfusion dependency at time of study entry (p=0.02); all three risk factors remained significant during multivariable analysis with HR (95% CI) rates of 0.4 (0.2-0.87) for CALR-1, 0.5 (0.3-0.89) for age &lt;63 years, and 0.6 (0.3-0.9) for absence of transfusion-dependency. Spleen response (p&lt;0.01) but not anemia response (p=0.23) was also associated with longer drug survival; in multivariable analysis all 4 risk factors retained significance. Multivariable analysis of genetic variables for transplant-censored survival identified absence of CALR-1 (HR 3.5, 95% CI 1.2-10.5; p=0.03) and presence of high molecular risk (HMR; ASXL1/ SRSF2) mutations (HR 2.3, 95% CI 1.1-4.6; p=02) to independently predict inferior survival. Among 11 patients with CALR-1 mutation, median transplant-censored survival was 125 months with 10-year survival rate of 60% (Figure 1c); by contrast, the corresponding figures were 37 months and 12%, in the 68 patients not harboring CALR-1 mutation (Figure 1c). In multivariable analysis, absence of CALR-1 (HR 2.9, 95% CI 1.02-8.1), age ≥63 years (HR 3.0, 95% CI 1.5-6.0), and absence of spleen response (HR 2.6, 95% CI 1.5-4.5) were identified as being most significant in predicting inferior transplant-censored survival. Conclusions : CALR-1 mutation is the most important risk factor for both drug survival and longevity without AHSCT, in momelotinib-treated patients with MF. Such information might help identify MF patients who might benefit from treatment with momelotinib and in whom AHSCT might be deferred or not.

Background Venetoclax (Ven) in combination with hypomethylating agent (HMA) is the standard treatment for newly diagnosed elderly/unfit patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Treatment options for patients with relapsed/refractory (RR) disease following Ven-HMA are limited in the absence of targetable mutations. In a recent phase 2 study, the addition of Ven to cladribine (CDA) plus low-dose cytarabine (LDAC), in newly-diagnosed elderly/unfit AML, resulted in complete remission with (CR) or without (CRi) count recovery rate of 93% ( J Clin Oncol 20;40(33)). In the current study, we share our experience with this regimen in patients relapsed or refractory to Ven-HMA, treated outside of clinical trials. Methods Under an institutional review board approved minimum risk protocol, the Mayo Clinic (MN, AZ, FL) database was searched to identify patients with AML who failed treatment with Ven-HMA and subsequently received at least one cycle of salvage therapy with Ven-CDA-LDAC: Ven 100-400 mg, dose adjusted, d1-21, CDA 5 mg/m 2 d1-5, LDAC 20 mg twice daily d1-10, outside of clinical trials. Cytogenetic and molecular studies were performed at the time of Ven-CDA-LDAC initiation in most cases, by conventional karyotype and next-generation sequencing, respectively. The 2022 European LeukemiaNet (ELN) criteria were applied to define risk and response. Survival was calculated from the time of Ven-CDA-LDAC treatment start to last follow-up or death. Results Patient characteristics A total of 39 RR AML patients (median age 65 years, 67% male, 64% de novo), with prior exposure to Ven-HMA, received Ven-CDA-LDAC (median 1 cycle; range 1-5). Study patients had received one ( n=16), two ( n=14), three ( n=5), four ( n=2), five ( n=1) or nine ( n=1) prior therapies, including Ven-HMA. Nine (23%) patients had relapsed following allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (AHSCT). ELN cytogenetic risk included intermediate (46%, n=18), and adverse (54%, n=21). Mutations involved TP53 in 9 patients (23%), K/ NRAS in 8 (21%), RUNX1 in 7 (18%), TET2 in 6 (15%), ASXL1 in 5 (13%), and STAG2 in 5 (13%). Response and toxicity Eleven (28%) patients achieved CR ( n=2; 5%) or CRi ( n=9; 23%); median time to response was 1 month and median response duration 3.4 months. In addition, 2 (5%) patients each experienced partial remission (PR) and bone marrow aplasia without fulfilling criteria for morphologic leukemia free state. Measurable residual disease (MRD) was negative by multiparametric flow cytometry in 2 of 7 (29%) informative CR/CRi cases. CR/CRi rates were higher in females (54% vs 15%; p=0.01), de novo vssecondary AML (40% vs 7%; p=0.02), and absence of adverse karyotype (50% vs 9%; p&lt;0.01), K/NRAS (35% vs 0%, p=0.01), ASXL1 (32% vs 0%, p=0.05), or STAG2 mutations (32% vs 0%, p=0.05) (Table 1). Multivariable analysis confirmed superior response in de novo AML (p&lt;0.01), absence of adverse karyotype, (p&lt;0.01), and absence of K/NRAS mutations (p=0.02). CR/CRi rates were not significantly affected by relapsed vs refractory setting ( p=0.95), number of prior therapies ( p=0.51), prior AHSCT ( p=0.64), or TP53 mutations ( p=0.64) (Table 1). Treatment-emergent toxicities included infections (49%, n=19), comprising bacteremia ( n=11), pneumonia ( n=10), peri-rectal abscess ( n=6), and laboratory evidence of tumor lysis syndrome (3%, n=1). Survival At a median follow-up of 3.9 months, from initiation of Ven-CDA-LDAC, 31 deaths (79%), 6 relapses (15%), and 7 AHSCT (18%; including 5 in CR/CRi, 1 in aplasia) were documented. Median survival following Ven-CDA-LDAC was 4.6 months, and superior in the presence vs absence of CR/CRi (8.1 vs 2.9 months; p=0.01), and in patients receiving AHSCT (10.5 vs 3.4 months; p=0.02). Absence of adverse karyotype was also associated with superior survival (6 vs 3.4 months; p=0.05). Multivariable analysis confirmed the favorable survival impact of CR/CRi ( p=0.03) and AHSCT ( p=0.05); survival impact was not apparent for secondary AML ( p=0.29) or K/NRAS ( p=0.70) or TP53 ( p=0.10) mutations. Conclusions The current study suggests transplant bridging value for Ven-CDA-LDAC in AML patients relapsed or refractory to Ven-HMA, especially in the absence of adverse karyotype or K/NRAS mutation. AHSCT and achievement of CR/CRi appear to be indispensable for favorable post-Ven-CDA-LDAC survival.

INTRODUCTION: The Stromal Antigen 2 ( STAG2), on Xq25, is the most common cohesin complex gene mutated in myeloid neoplasms (MN) (5-10%). STAG2 mutations ( STAG2m) were incorporated in the ELN2022 as AML-MDS defining genetic mutations inferring poor prognosis and is a genetic marker in IPSS-M risk stratification. The PHD-finger protein 6 ( PHF6) gene, on Xq26.3, is a tumor suppressor gene, mutated in 3% of MN, and is more common in T-ALL. PHF6m is believed to be a late event in MN with little data on its prognostic implications in MN. Both STAG2m and PHF6m are more prevalent in males, but their implications on the clinical presentation of MN have not been compared prior. METHOD: Our study is a multicenter study at Mayo Clinic (Rochester, Florida, Arizona). After IRB approval, we retrospectively analyzed charts of 7935 patients who had NGS between 2016-2022. STAG2m was found in 96 patients, and PHF6m in 116 (including 3 with concurrent STAG2m and PHF6m). We excluded 4 PHF6m patients who had T-ALL. Data was captured at time of NGS. MDS risk stratification was by IPSS-M and AML by ELN2022. Overall survival (OS) was calculated from date of NGS to date of last follow-up. BlueSky Software was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Characteristics: We compared 96 STAG2m vs 112 PHF6m MN patients. Of STAG2m cases, 78% were male vs 76% in PHF6m MN. Median age was 72 vs 73 years, respectively. Diagnoses included AML (29% of STAG2m vs 34% of PHF6m MN), MDS (54% vs 28%), MDS/MPN (10% vs 21%) and MPN (3% vs 9%). MDS was more common among STAG2m MN (p&lt;.001) while MDS/MPN was more common among PHF6m MN (=.05). MDS-IB was the most common subtype in both (69% vs 52% in STAG2m vs PHF6m MDS). MDS-LB and 5q subtypes were only found in PHF6m MDS, and there was more PHF6m MDS-RS (13% vs 2%). Median IPSS-M score was 0.9 vs 0.8 in STAG2m vs PHF6m MDS (both high-risk). Majority of STAG2m AML were adverse risk (96%) while PHF6m AML were intermediate (79%) (p&lt;.001). AML cases included 43% vs 30% secondary AML (sAML) in STAG2m vs PHF6m AML. Among STAG2m and PHF6m MN, 17% of each were tMN. Cytogenetic abnormalities were more common in PHF6m MN (50% vs 31%, p=.005). The median bone marrow (BM) blasts count among STAG2m MN was 7% vs 4% in PHF6m MN (p=.03). Genetic characteristics: STAG2m were nonsense, frameshift and splice site (54%, 36% and 11%). PHF6m were nonsense, frameshift, splice site, missense and start loss variant mutations (44%, 33%, 12%, 10% and 1%). The median variant allele frequency (VAF) of STAG2m MN was 50% compared to 32% in PHF6m MN (p=.008). Co-mutations: The median number of co-mutations was 3 in STAG2m and 4 in PHF6m MN (p=.04). The most common were TET2m (37% in STAG2m MN vs 45% in PHF6m MN), RUNX1m (31% in both), SRSF2m (39% vs 20%), ASXL1m (66% vs 38%), BCORm (19% vs 6%), U2AF1m (13% vs 14%) and IDH2m (18% vs 7%). ASXL1m, SRSF2m, BCORm, IDH2m and SF3B1m were more common among STAG2m MN (p=&lt;.001, .003, .006, .02, .09). JAK2m, IDH1m are more common among PHF6m MN (p=.02, .06). Survival: Of STAG2m and PHF6m MN, 70% and 72% of patients received treatment. HSCT was performed in 23 (24%) and 23 (21%) of STAG2m and PHF6m patients, including AML (n=9, n=10), MDS (n=12, n=8), MDS/MPN (n=2, n=2). OS among STAG2m and PHF6m MN was 20.5 and 22.1 months, respectively. OS among AML cases was 13.5 vs 21 months (p=.6) in STAG2m vs PHF6m, was NR vs 22 months (p=.4) in MDS, 11.7 vs 17.6 months in MDS/MPN (p=.4), and 10.4 vs 27.4 months (p=.5) in MPN. There was no difference between males and females in either STAG2m or PHF6m MN. HSCT led to longer OS among both STAG2m (NR vs 19.9 months, p=.01) and PHF6m MN patients (NR vs 17.6 months, p=.07). Among AML patients, HSCT did not significantly impact OS (18 vs 9.6 months, p=.3 and 25.1 vs 21 months, p=.2, in STAG2m and PHF6m). HSCT improved OS in STAG2m MDS (NR vs 20.5 months, p=.03). In PHF6m MDS, OS was 22.1 vs 13.1 months in HSCT vs non-HSCT (p=.3). CONCLUSION: STAG2m and PHF6m are 2 X-linked mutations that occur in MN. Both commonly occur in elderly males. MDS was the most common diagnosis in STAG2m MN. STAG2m co-occurred particularly with SRSF2m ASXL1m and BCORm, which are associated with poor prognosis. In our cohort, STAG2m AML carried a poorer prognosis than PHF6m AML. Our study confirms the ELN2022 AML risk stratification. MDS risk classification and OS did not differ between STAG2m and PHF6m in our cohort. A larger cohort is required to confirm our findings and may provide stronger validation.

Introduction: Risk stratification approaches using clinical criteria or biomarkers in acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) have traditionally been implemented at diagnosis or initiation systemic treatment with corticosteroids. For patients who require second-line treatment, the significance of biomarkers at salvage therapy and the relationship between biomarker risk and choice of therapy are unknown. Methods: We studied adult patients who received second-line treatment for acute GVHD between January 2016 and December 2021 in the Mount Sinai Acute GVHD Consortium (MAGIC) database, which collects clinical data and longitudinal serum samples from allogeneic HCT recipients using a rigorous PRoBE study design. Exclusion criteria included relapse of underlying malignant disease prior to second-line therapy, missing response data, or missing serum sample. Serum samples collected from 7 days prior to 3 days after initiation of second-line therapy met criteria for biomarker analysis. The MAGIC algorithm probability (MAP) was calculated as a single value based on concentrations of ST2 and REG3α and was stratified at a threshold of 0.290 to define high MAP and low MAP groups. The primary objective evaluated the association between MAP and survival for patients receiving second-line therapy for acute GVHD. The key secondary objective was to investigate the MAP and choice of second-line systemic agent on Day 28 overall response rate (ORR) and survival. Results: In total, 316 adult patients received second-line treatment for acute GVHD; 149 patients (47%) were excluded for disease relapse (n=27), missing response data (n=48), or missing sample (n=74).Of the 167 evaluable patients, most had steroid-refractory acute GVHD (n=146, 87%), rather than steroid-dependent (n=8, 5%) or steroid-sensitive (n=14, 8%) disease. 62 patients received ruxolitinib while 102 received other systemic agents (best available therapy: BAT). Baseline clinical characteristics of the study population according to treatment choice were similar, except for donor type (Rux: MRD 15%, MUD 74%, haplo 11%; BAT: MRD 30%, MUD 67%, haplo 3%; P=0.014) and median days from corticosteroids to second-line treatment (Rux: 18, BAT: 12; P=0.02).In total, 81 patients had high MAPs and 86 patients had low MAPs, with similar distribution in each treatment cohort (P=0.53). For the entire cohort, the median follow-up for survivors was 22 months (range, 1.5-27).The MAP separated patients into 2 groups (high vs low) with significantly different mortality (NRM at 2 years, 76% vs 29%, P&lt;.0001) and survival (OS at 2 years, 12% vs 63%, P&lt;.0001). Patients who received ruxolitinib as second-line therapy had lower mortality (NRM at 2 years, 35% vs 60%, P&lt;.002) and improved survival (OS at 2 years, 51% vs 32%, P&lt;.008), compared to those who received other systemic agents. However, the outcomes of patients with high MAP were poor, regardless of second-line treatment choice ( Figure 1A). The MAP (low vs high), time from corticosteroids to second-line treatment (≥14 days vs &lt; 14 days), GVHD grade at second-line (0-2 vs 3-4), and choice of second-line therapy (Rux vs BAT) were all significant (P&lt;0.05) predictors of lower NRM and higher OS in multivariate analysis. The MAP also separated patients into 2 groups with significantly different D28 ORR (low: 49%, high: 30%, P&lt;.0001). In agreement with prospective trials, ruxolitinib resulted in higher D28 response rates compared to other systemic therapies (ORR 54.9% vs 30.5%, P=0.005), which was observed in both low MAP (ORR, 64.5% vs 38.5%, P=0.017) and high MAP cohorts (ORR, 42.9% vs 22.6%, P=0.06) ( Figure 1B). The MAP (low vs high), GVHD grade at second line (0-2 vs 3-4), and choice of second-line therapy (Rux vs BAT) were significant predictors (P&lt;0.05) of higher D28 ORR in multivariate analysis. Conclusion: The MAP measured at the initiation of second-line systemic treatment for acute GVHD predicts NRM and OS, as well as treatment response. The outcomes of patients with high MAP are poor, regardless of second-line treatment choice, and the higher CR rate in low MAP patients may drive higher survival rates. Incorporation of MAP into clinical trials in this setting warrants investigation. The results also support the current use of ruxolitinib as second-line treatment for acute GVHD, particularly in patients with low MAP.