Shah, Meera

Abstract Introduction: Therapy related myeloid neoplasm (t-MN) is a rare but devastating complication of cytotoxic therapy used for management of unrelated malignancy or autoimmune diseases. Therapeutic options for t-MN are limited and although hypomethylating agents (HMA) are frequently used, the benefit of it in t-MN is unclear. There are no prospective trials of HMA in t-MN and published experience is based on retrospective analysis of small number of cases (n=42 to 54). The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of HMA therapy in t-MN patients and evaluate predictors for it. Methods: t-MN patients managed with first line HMA therapy were analyzed. This study was approved by the participating institutional review board. Criteria for inclusion were a pathologically confirmed diagnosis of t-MN based on WHO 2016 criteria, age >18 years, and ≥1 cycle of decitabine or azacitidine. Patient characteristics were summarized by frequency (percentage). Overall survival was calculated from the time of starting azacitidine to last follow up or death date using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Multivariable analysis was performed using Cox proportional hazard model. Statistical analysis was performed using R program and significance was defined as P<0.05. Results: Of the 554 t-MN patients analyzed, 184 (33%) patients were treated with HMA as the first line therapy and were included in the study. Median age at t-MN diagnosis was 70 (IQR 64-75) years and 112 (60%) patients were male. At the time of diagnosis, 84% (n=154) and 16% (n=30) patients were classified as t-MDS and t-AML and 47% (87/184) and 46% (49/107) of the evaluable patients had complex karyotype and TP53 somatic mutations (TP53 Mut) respectively. Azacitidine (n=145, 79%) was most frequently used HMA followed by decitabine (n=39, 21%). Median survival of the whole cohort since t-MN diagnosis was 13.2 months. At the time of analysis further treatment details were available for 78 patients and outcome of these patients were compared with primary MDS (p-MDS) and oligoblastic AML managed at the same institute. Completion of six-cycles of HMA (50% vs. 62%; P=0.07) and overall response rate (47 vs. 50%, P=0.22) was not significantly different between t-MN and p-MDS. However, median OS of t-MN was significantly poor compared to p-MDS (10 vs. 20 months, P=0.0004; Figure 1A). In t-MN patients treated with HMA as the first-line agent, median OS was significantly shorter in t-AML compared to t-MDS (7 vs.10 months, P=0.04; Figure 1B). Median OS was significantly shorter in patients with TP53 Mut and complex karyotype (Figure 1C-D). In Cox proportional hazard analysis, t-AML and complex karyotype were independently associated with poor outcome. Conclusion: This study demonstrates significantly poor outcome of t-MN patients treated with HMA therapy as first line. The outcome is particularly poor in t-AML and patients with complex karyotype and TP53 Mut. Hence there is urgent need for clinical trials of novel therapies for t-MN. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Sharplin: Kite Gilead: Honoraria; Novartis: Other: Travel Support. Ross: Keros Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squib: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Hiwase: Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Abstract Background: The DEAD-box helicase 41 (DDX41), an RNA helicase, have been described as a component of the RNA spliceosome (Cheah et al. International Journal of Hematology 2017). Although DDX41 mutations predispose to late-onset higher grade myeloid neoplasms (MN), these patients may have a trend toward favorable prognosis and outcomes. In this work, we describe the clinical characteristics and survival outcomes of isolated and co-mutated DDX41 patients (pts). Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 4,524 consecutive pts who underwent next-generation sequencing (NGS) (OncoHeme 42 genes panel, Mayo Clinic) testing and included 32 pts harboring pathogenic DDX41 mutation and one pt with proven DDX41 germline variant of unknown significance (VUS). Chart review of DDX41-mutated (m) cases between 2009 and 2021 was conducted after IRB approval. We compared overall survival (OS) of unmatched 27 t(8;21)AML and 40 inv(16) AML pts with 10 m DDX41-AML pts. JMP® Pro 14.1.0 Software was used for statistical analysis. Results: DDX41 mutations characteristics: Our cohort included 19 (58%) myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS), 10 (30%) acute myelogenous leukemia (AML), 2 (6%) myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN), one clonal cytopenia of undetermined significance (CCUS) (3%) and one (3%) germline carrier. Germline testing was carried out in 10 pts, 9 of whom (90%) were confirmed to be germline). The start-loss variant (p.M1I) was the most common mutation type (N=10, 31%). Other types were frameshift (N=9, 28%), missense mutation (N=8, 25%), nonsense (N=3, 9%), and splice site mutation (N=2, 2%). Twenty-one (65.6%) DDX41 mutations clustered in the N-terminus (NT), 7 (22%) in the helicase-C domain (HCD), and 4 (12.5%) in the DEAD-box domain. Compared to NT mutations, patients with HCD mutation had no family history of solid tumors and were more likely to have an accompanying additional DDX41-VUS (0% vs 70%; p=.001) and (N=6, 86% vs. N=2,10%; p=.0001); respectively. I solated vs. co-mutated DDX41: Twenty (60%) pts were isolated-DDX41 and 13 (40%) were co-mutated. The median DDX41-VAF was 48% vs. 45% (p= .2) in the isolated compared to the co-mutated cases, respectively. The median number of co-mutations in the 13 co-mutated cases was 1 (range,1-3) with DNMT3A (38%), ASXL1 (30%), JAK2 (N=3, 23%), and EZH2 (N=2, 15%) were the most common co-mutations detected. Isolated DDX41 had more males (85% vs. 54%, p=.05), the p.M1I variant (47% vs. 8%, p=.02), normal cytogenetics (100% vs. 91%, p= .02), and less family history of solid tumors (77% vs. 33%, p= .02) compared to their co-mutated counterparts. However, there was no difference in OS (p=.99). Comparison of clinical characteristics and hematological features of isolated and co-mutated DDX41 pts are reported in (Table 1). Treatment and survival outcomes in DDX41-MDS/AML : Twenty-three (80%) patients were treated, MDS pts received hypomethylating agents (HMA) (N=10, 71%), HMA plus Venetoclax (HMA+VEN) (N=1, 7%), erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (N=2, 14%) and lenalidomide (N=1 ,7%). AML pts were treated with induction chemotherapy (N=6, 67%) and HMA+VEN (N=3, 33%). Overall response rate of MDS/AML patients was 77% and 100% of AML pts achieved complete remission (CR) when treated with induction chemotherapy or HMA+VEN regimen. There was no significant difference in OS between responders vs. non-responders 2-yr-OS (90% vs. 50%; p=.38) and treated vs. untreated 2-yr-OS (83% vs. 100%; p=.52). Comparing m DDX41-AML vs. core binding factor-AML: After a median follow-up of 33.3 months, all m DDX41-AML patients were alive. There was a significantly better OS in mDDX41-AML patients compared to pts with t(8;21) AML with 2-yr-OS (100% vs. 51%; p=.024) and a trend of better survival when compared to inv(16) AML 2-yr-OS (100% vs. 84%; p=.2). Conclusion We describe the characteristics and outcomes of m DDX41 patients. We demonstrated that isolated and co-mutated m DDX41 patients have different features. Isolated DDX41 patients had male predominance, more p.M1I variant, normal cytogenetics and less family history of solid tumors. In this study we found that m DDX41 AML has high response to treatment and has comparable (if not possibly better) OS compared to other "favorable risk" AML. This study, although limited by the small number of patients, supports the universal testing for DDX41 mutation in adults with MN diagnosis. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Al-Kali: Astex: Other: Research support to institution; Novartis: Research Funding. Foran: abbvie: Research Funding; OncLive: Honoraria; boehringer ingelheim: Research Funding; trillium: Research Funding; pfizer: Honoraria; takeda: Research Funding; revolution medicine: Honoraria; bms: Honoraria; gamida: Honoraria; actinium: Research Funding; aptose: Research Funding; novartis: Honoraria; servier: Honoraria; taiho: Honoraria; syros: Honoraria; sanofi aventis: Honoraria; certara: Honoraria; kura: Research Funding; h3bioscience: Research Funding; aprea: Research Funding; sellas: Research Funding; stemline: Research Funding. Badar: Pfizer Hematology-Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Salama: Mayo Clinic: Current Employment, Other: Mayo Clinic had the contractual work for the central pathology review for this study and I was one of the reviewing pathologists; Constellation Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Litzow: Astellas: Research Funding; Biosight: Other: Data monitoring committee; Amgen: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Actinium: Research Funding; Pluristem: Research Funding; Jazz: Other: Advisory Board; Omeros: Other: Advisory Board. Patnaik: Stemline Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kura Oncology: Research Funding; Stemline Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Abstract Introduction: Historically, clinical outcome of patients with myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS), progressing on hypomethylating agents (HMA; azacitidine or decitabine) has been dismal with median overall survival (OS) of less than 6 months (Jabbour et al. Cancer 2010). With recent approval of venetoclax based combinations for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and CPX-351 for AML with MDS related changes (primary or secondary), clinical outcome has improved in sub-set of high-risk patients compared to historical cohorts. Hence, we analyzed clinical outcome of MDS patients progressing on HMA, in the current era of novel therapies. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed clinical outcome of 43 MDS patients who progressed on HMA-based therapy and treated at the Mayo Clinic between February 2015 and February 2021. We describe clinical characteristics of these patients, therapies received after progressing on HMA-based therapy, duration of response attained after 1st line therapy post HMA-based therapy and OS from time of HMA failure till death or last follow up. We also performed Cox regression multivariate analysis for OS after progression on HMA-based therapy. Results: Baseline characteristics are summarized in Table 1.The median age of the patients were 69 years (range [R], 48-93). R-IPSS score in this cohort of patients was very low (2[5%]), low (5[12%]), intermediate (5 [12%]), high (11[26%]) and very high (20 [46.5%]). Forty-nine percent of patients had complex cytogenetics. Most commonly occurring mutations (≥ 5%) were TP53 (42%), splicing mutation (SRSF2/SF3B1/ or U2AF1) (16%), ASXL1 (12%), RUNX1 (7%), DNMT3A (5%) and IDH1/ or IDH2 (5%). The HMA-based therapy patients received were azacitidine (40%), decitabine (30%) and HMA plus venetoclax (30%). The median time to progression from time of initiation of HMA-based therapy was 5 months (R= 1-30). Sixty-three percent (n= 27) of patients progressed to AML after HMA-based therapy. The most common 1 st line therapies post HMA was venetoclax-based (12 [28%]), CPX-351 (12 [28%]), and allogeneic stem cell transplantation (SCT) (4 [9%]). Fifteen (45.5%) patients achieved CR/CRi, 17 (51.5%) patients progressed and 1 (3%) patient had stable disease. The percentage of patients received venetoclax with HMA, 1 st and 2 nd line therapy post HMA were 26%, 28% and 10%, respectively. Overall, 11 (25%) patients received SCT in this cohort of patients. The median duration of response after 1 st line therapy post HMA was not reached (NR; 66% progression free at 1 year) (Figure 1A). The median OS after HMA failure was 12.7 months (95% CI: 3.1-22.2) (Figure 1B). In the univariate analysis for OS after HMA failure, SCT at any time point (p = 0.01) and achieving CR/CRi after 1 st line therapy post HMA (p= <0.001) showed favorable significance for OS. Whereas, R-IPSS high/very high (p= 0.35), treatment with CPX-351 on AML progression (p=0.33), venetoclax-based therapy (p= 0.59) did not show statistical significance. Subsequently, in multivariate analysis, only achievement of CR/CRi after 1 st line therapy post HMA retained significance for favorable OS (HR: 0.19, 95% CI: 0.04-0.86, p= 0.03). Conclusions: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report analyzing outcome of MDS patients progressing on HMA in the recent era. Acknowledging the limitations of retrospective analysis, our report suggests improved outcome of these high-risk patients compared to historical data. Utilizing venetoclax plus HMA combination earlier in patients with high-risk MDS as being evaluated in VERONA trial and consolidation therapy with SCT in eligible patients have potential to improve long term outcome of this group of high-risk patients. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Al-Kali: Astex: Other: Research support to institution; Novartis: Research Funding. Palmer: PharmaEssentia: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Protagonist: Consultancy, Research Funding; CTI BioPharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Consultancy, Research Funding. Murthy: CRISPR Therapeutics: Research Funding. Litzow: Pluristem: Research Funding; Actinium: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Omeros: Other: Advisory Board; Jazz: Other: Advisory Board; Amgen: Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; Biosight: Other: Data monitoring committee. Foran: pfizer: Honoraria; takeda: Research Funding; trillium: Research Funding; boehringer ingelheim: Research Funding; syros: Honoraria; sanofi aventis: Honoraria; revolution medicine: Honoraria; servier: Honoraria; bms: Honoraria; certara: Honoraria; abbvie: Research Funding; OncLive: Honoraria; gamida: Honoraria; taiho: Honoraria; novartis: Honoraria; aptose: Research Funding; actinium: Research Funding; kura: Research Funding; h3bioscience: Research Funding; aprea: Research Funding; sellas: Research Funding; stemline: Research Funding. Badar: Pfizer Hematology-Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Abstract Introduction: Mutations involving isocitrate dehydrogenase 1/2 (IDH) are known oncogenic drivers in hematological malignancies, conferring neomorphic enzymatic activity to IDH 1/2, resulting in the oncometabolite, 2-hydroxyglutarae (2-HG). 2-HG in turn suppresses TET activity, making IDH and TET2 mutations synthetically lethal and almost mutually exclusive. The frequency of IDH mutations in CMML is <10% and their prognostic impact remains unclear. We carried out this study in a large database of molecularly annotated CMML patients to better define the clinical profile and prognostic impact of these mutations. Methods: After IRB approval, CMML patients from the Mayo Clinic, Minnesota and the Moffitt Cancer Center (MCC), Tampa, Florida, were included in the study. All patients had bone marrow (BM) biopsies with cytogenetics and molecular genetics done either at diagnosis, or at first referral. Clinical and mutational data were abstracted and retrospectively analyzed. Overall survival (OS) was calculated from date of CMML diagnosis to date of death/last follow, while AML-free survival (AML-FS) was calculated from date of CMML diagnosis to date of leukemic transformation (LT). Patients that had undergone allogeneic HCT were excluded from the study (n=3). Statistical analysis was carried out using the Blue Sky software. Results: Six hundred and forty four patients were included in the study (Mayo Clinic-357, MCC- 287), median age 71 years (range, 20-95 years), 67.8% being male. Forty-three (6.7%) patients had IDH mutations, 35 (82%) IDH2 and 8 (18%) IDH1; of which, 34 (97%) involved the IDH2R140 hotspot and 5 (62.5%) involved the IDH1R132 hotspot, respectively. The median variant allele fractions (VAF) for IDH1 mutations was 41% (range, 8-46%) and for IDH2 mutations was 46% (range, 7-70%). There were no significant demographic or clinical differences between IDH mutant and wild type CMML patients, with the exception that IDH mutant CMML patients were less likely to be thrombocytopenic (p=0.006), were less likely to have TET2 co-mutations (14% vs 53.2%; p<0.001) and were more likely to have SRSF2 co-mutations (69.8% VS 40.3%; p<0.001). Importantly there were no differences in proliferative or dysplastic subtypes (p=0.3), cytogenetic (p=0.12) and molecular risk stratifications (p=045). There were also no significant demographic or clinical differences between IDH1 vs IDH2 mutant CMML patients. Six (14%) IDH mutant CMML patients had TET2 co-mutations; 5 (83%) with IDH2R140Q (median VAF-28%;all male) and 1 (17%) with IDH1R132H (VAF-44%;female) (Figure 1). Five (11%) IDH2 mutant patients were treated with enasidenib (IDH2 inhibitor), none with a durable response, while none of the IDH1 mutant patients received targeted therapy. At last follow up (median 18 months), 337 (52%) deaths and 119 (18.5%) LT have been documented, with IDH mutant patients having a higher LT rate (30.2% vs 17.6%, p=0.04) compared to wildtype patients. The median OS of the entire cohort was 35 months, with no difference in OS between IDH mutant and wild type patients (34.5 vs 35 months, p=0.12), with IDH1 mutant patients having a shorter OS in comparison to IDH2 mutant patients (31 vs 37 months; p=0.005- Figure 1). IDH mutant CMML patients also had a shorter AML-FS in comparison to wild type patients (36.6 vs 210 months, p=0.005), with there being no differential impact on AML-FS of IDH1 vs IDH2 mutations (p=0.26, Figure 1). Conclusions: IDH mutations are infrequent in CMML (7%), with IDH2 mutations being more common than IDH1 mutations (80 vs 20%). IDH mutations co-occur very infrequently with TET2 mutations (14%), with IDH mutant patients being less likely to have thrombocytopenia and more likely to have SRSF2 co-mutations. IDH mutations negatively impacting AML-FS without a significant impact on OS. Prospective clinical trials testing the safety and efficacy of IDH1/2 inhibitors in CMML are much needed. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Komrokji: AbbVie: Consultancy; PharmaEssentia: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Taiho Oncology: 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; Jazz: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Acceleron: Consultancy; BMSCelgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Geron: Consultancy. Al-Kali: Novartis: Research Funding; Astex: Other: Research support to institution. Padron: BMS: Research Funding; Stemline: Honoraria; Taiho: Honoraria; Kura: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Blueprint: Honoraria. Patnaik: StemLine: Research Funding; Kura Oncology: Research Funding.

Abstract INTRODUCTION Rosai-Dorfman disease (RDD) is a rare histiocytic disorder associated with histiocytes expressing high level of macrophage colony stimulating factor receptor (c-fms). Mutations in mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway have been reported in RDD, indicating an underlying clonal process in some patients. Aberrant activation of MAPK pathway can occur due to mutations or high c-fms expression. Data on the use of MAPK/extracellular-signal-related kinase (ERK)-inhibitor therapy in RDD are very limited. Cobimetinib is a MEK inhibitor, which is listed in the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Compendium ® for the treatment of RDD. We present our retrospective experience of cobimetinib treatment in a large series of patients with RDD. METHODS Following approval of the institutional reviewed board, patients (pts) with RDD who were consecutively seen at Mayo Clinic and treated with cobimetinib between 2013-2021 were included. Response was assessed as described by Goyal et al (Haematologica 2020;105:2). Cobimetinib was given 20-60 mg once a day by mouth for 21 days in a 28-day cycle. Adverse events (AEs) were graded using the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria v5.0. Time-to-event analyses were calculated from the time of treatment initiation, while duration of response was calculated from the time of 1 st response. Tumor genomic profile was analyzed using Tempus-xT ® assay (Chicago, IL), which includes targeted DNA sequencing (648 oncogenes) and whole transcriptome sequencing. RESULTS Of the 54 pts with RDD, ten were treated with cobimetinib and included in this study. The median follow-up was 16 months (m) [95% confidence interval (CI): 13-not reached (NR)] and most (n=8; 80%) were females. The median age at the time of treatment was 63 years (range: 36-74). Cobimetinib was used as first line therapy in four pts. Overall response rate was 70%, with 30% and 40% achieving complete (CR) and partial (PR) responses, respectively. One had stable disease (SD) and two had progressive disease (PD) (Table 1). The median progression-free-survival was 6.4 m (95%CI: 4.9-NR) and at 6 and 12 m, 67% and 50% of pts remained free from disease progression or death, respectively (Figure 1). The median duration of response was 7.6 m (95%CI: 3.1-NR). At the time of last follow-up, nine (90%) pts were alive. One pt died due to myelodysplastic syndrome with excessive blasts. She had multiple chemotherapy treatments before initiation of cobimetinib. Cobimetinib was discontinued in this pt due to grade 3 anemia and skin toxicity after 6 m of therapy and had SD as the best response. Median duration of treatment for the entire cohort was 6 m (range: 2-14). In the seven pts who responded, the median duration of treatment was 7 m (range: 2-14). Cobimetinib was discontinued in seven pts: disease progression (n=3; one disease progression after achieving PR and two PD while on therapy), grade 3 left ventricular systolic dysfunction (n=1), grade 3 diarrhea (n=1), grade 3 anemia (n=1), and grade 2 creatinine elevation (n=1). Five (50%) pts were started at a reduced dose of cobimetinib at the discretion of treating physician [20 mg (n=4) and 40mg, (n=1)]. Two pts were started at 60 mg and dose reduced to 20 mg after one cycle of treatment due to grade 2 skin toxicity in one and grade 2 skin toxicity and diarrhea in the other. Both pts achieved a PR but progressed after four and six cycles, respectively. One pt started at 40 mg and reduced to 20 mg due to grade 2 skin toxicity after two cycles achieving a PR. The response was sustained in this pt for at least 9 months, until the time of last follow-up (Table 1). Tissue molecular testing showed five pts with MAPK pathway alterations and all of them responded to therapy (CR=3 and PR=2). Of the other five pts who either did not have a MAPK pathway alteration (n=4) or had test failure (n=1), responses were observed in two (40%) pts, both PR (Table 1). CONCLUSION Our study suggests that cobimetinib is an effective treatment in RDD, with responses observed in all pts having MAPK pathway alterations. Less than half of pts without a MAPK pathway alteration achieved a response. However, treatment discontinuations due to AEs were common despite dose reductions. Patients who were treated at low doses of cobimetinib also had remarkable clinical response. Further studies are needed in evaluating other MAPK pathway inhibitors with better toxicity profile to improve adherence and outcomes. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Tobin: National Institutes of Health: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Center for MS and Autoimmune Neurology: Research Funding; Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Bennani: Vividion: Other: Advisory Board; Kyowa Kirin: Other: Advisory Board; Daichii Sankyo Inc: Other: Advisory Board; Verastem: Other: Advisory Board; Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory Board; Kymera: Other: Advisory Board. Vassallo: Pfizer: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers-Squibb: Research Funding; Sun Pharma.: Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction: Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy is an effective treatment that has transformed hematologic malignancy management. However, its significant short-term toxicities, mainly cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and neurotoxicity, require frequent monitoring almost universally achieved via prolonged inpatient admissions. We have reported our institution's specialized, multi-disciplinary hospital-based outpatient (HBO) CAR-T service and experience (Bansal et.al, ASCO 2021). To enhance the HBO practice, we implemented a remote patient monitoring (RPM) program, comprised of in-home, electronic health record-integrated technology to monitor vital signs and neurologic symptoms for 30 days post CAR-T infusion. The RPM program's triaging algorithm generates alerts based on predetermined parameters to guide escalation of care if needed. In this report, we describe the characteristics of RPM program patients (pts), focusing on the alerts received within 48 hours (h) of first hospitalization in the post-CAR-T setting. Methods: Pts undergoing commercial CAR-T cell therapy at Mayo Clinic Rochester were enrolled in the RPM program as part of our standard of care from 06/2020 to 05/2021. Pts with detailed RPM data available were included in this analysis. Patient characteristics, health care utilization, inpatient interventions, and RPM alert data were reviewed. Wilcoxon test was used for continuous variables, chi-squared test was used for categorical variables. Results: Baseline characteristics are summarized in Table 1. Of 20 pts in this analysis, 13 had RPM alerts in the 48h preceding the first hospitalization post CAR-T. For the remaining 7 pts without RPM alerts, 3 were hospitalized within 24h of CAR-T infusion without significant RPM data, 1 patient hospitalized with acute pancreatitis (day +8 post CAR-T infusion), 1 for doubling of CRP (day +10), 1 for acute pain crisis (day +5), and 1 with neutropenic fever (day +5) with not reporting RPM data. The median RPM program duration was 18 days (range 3-32) which accounts for interruptions in the RPM monitoring while pts are hospitalized. The median number of data points per patient was 231 (range 22-532), with a median of 20 alerts per patient (range 2-81). The median missing data points per patient were 20 (10%) (range 0-95). Of the 13 pts with RPM alerts within 48h of first hospitalization, alerts met our definition of urgent criteria in 6 pts [temperature (temp) > 100F (n=3), temp > 100F + tachycardia (n=1), temp > 100F + hypoxia (n=1), and hypoxia (n=1)]. In the remaining 7 pts, the RPM alerts met our routine criteria definition [temp 99-100 (n=2), tachycardia + hypertension + weight loss (n=2), hypertension (n=2), new incontinence (n=1)]. CRS was reported in 12 pts [grade 1-2 (n=11), grade 3-4 (n=1)] and neurotoxicity in 8 pts [grade 1-2 (n=7), grade 3-4 (n=1)]. The median post CAR-T first hospitalization day was day +4 (range day +2-10), Figure 1. The median time from the last RPM alert to hospitalization was 5.8h for pts meeting urgent criteria vs 10.8h for those meeting routine criteria (p=0.13). Tocilizumab was used in 5 pts during the first hospitalization [3 (50%) in the urgent criteria group and 2 (28%) in the routine criteria group], with a median time from admission to tocilizumab of 12h in the urgent criteria group vs 43h in the routine criteria group (p=0.05). Early hospitalization (≤ 3 days) post CAR-T infusion was associated with later need for tocilizumab [median 51h (range 30-57) vs. 11.5h (range 6-33) from admission, p=0.03] than late hospitalization (> 4 days post CAR-T). Upon admission, oxygen supplementation was started on both pts with hypoxia noted in the RPM alerts. Only 1 patient (routine criteria group) required use of vasopressors while hospitalized, initiated more than 48h after admission. Conclusion: A CAR-T RPM program can identify adverse symptoms and vital sign changes in CAR-T pts managed in the outpatient setting. In this pilot implementation, the CAR-T RPM triaging algorithm identified pts requiring expedited hospitalization and facilitated early initiation of tocilizumab. The intermittent monitoring and proportion of missing data are the main limitations of the RPM in the acute care setting post-CAR-T infusion. Incorporation of wearable devices for continuous remote monitoring is being explored as a mitigating strategy to these limitations. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Paludo: Karyopharm: Research Funding. Dingli: Apellis: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; GSK: Consultancy; Novartis: Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy; Alexion: Consultancy. Kapoor: Glaxo SmithKline: Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy; Amgen: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Ichnos Sciences: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Takeda: Research Funding; Regeneron Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Cellectar: Consultancy; BeiGene: Consultancy. Gertz: Aurora Biopharma: Other: Stock option; Ionis Pharmaceuticals: Other: Advisory Board; Akcea Therapeutics, Alnylam Pharmaceuticals Inc, Prothena: Consultancy; AbbVie Inc, Celgene Corporation: Other: Data Safetly & Monitoring; Akcea Therapeutics, Ambry Genetics, Amgen Inc, Celgene Corporation, Janssen Biotech Inc, Karyopharm Therapeutics, Pfizer Inc (to Institution), Sanofi Genzyme: Honoraria. Wang: InnoCare: Research Funding; LOXO Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; MorphoSys: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Eli Lilly: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Kenderian: Humanigen, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Kumar: Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Consultancy; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche-Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Carsgen: Research Funding; Antengene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Adaptive: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy; Beigene: Consultancy; Tenebio: Research Funding; KITE: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding. Bennani: Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory Board; Daichii Sankyo Inc: Other: Advisory Board; Kyowa Kirin: Other: Advisory Board; Vividion: Other: Advisory Board; Kymera: Other: Advisory Board; Verastem: Other: Advisory Board. Ansell: Bristol Myers Squibb, ADC Therapeutics, Seattle Genetics, Regeneron, Affimed, AI Therapeutics, Pfizer, Trillium and Takeda: Research Funding. Lin: Merck: Research Funding; Vineti: Consultancy; Gamida Cell: Consultancy; Juno: Consultancy; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy, Research Funding; Legend: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sorrento: Consultancy; Takeda: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Abstract Background Clonal cytopenia of undetermined significance (CCUS) is a risk factor for development of myeloid neoplasms (MN) such as myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) or acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Therapy-related myeloid neoplasm (t-MN) is defined as the development of a MN in the context of prior DNA damaging therapies including chemotherapy, radiation, and immunosuppressive therapies. CCUS diagnosed in the setting of prior DNA damaging therapy (t-CCUS) and its outcomes are not known. The aim of this study was to study clinicopathological features and outcome of t-CCUS and compare it with t-MN. Methods Patients who had received DNA-damaging therapy and subsequently determined to have CCUS or t-MN were identified. The diagnosis of CCUS was made if the patient had non-diagnostic bone marrow biopsy evaluation combined with evidence of pathogenic myeloid somatic genetic alterations using conventional cytogenetics or next generation sequencing (NGS) panel. Pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants (PV) were stratified by DTA (DNMT3A, TET2, and ASXL1) genes vs. others. Event-free survival (EFS) was calculated using interval from t-CCUS to t-MN with death as a competing risk. Overall survival (OS) for t-CCUS and t-MN patients was calculated using interval from t-CCUS or t-MN diagnoses respectively to the last follow up. Statistical analysis was performed using JMP (v14.1, SAS Institute). Results We identified 30 patients with t-CCUS and 259 patients with t-MN. Eleven (37%) t-CCUS patients developed t-MN and were included in both cohorts (Fig. A). Clinical characteristics of t-CCUS patients are shown in Table 1. Briefly, age (median, interquartile range or IQR) at the diagnosis of primary malignancy and t-CCUS was not different between those who developed t-MN and those did not (P=0.09 and 0.378 respectively). There was no difference in hemoglobin, white blood cells, or ANC between the two groups. Patients who developed t-MN had a significantly lower platelet count (68 vs. 130, P<0.01) and higher bone marrow blast percent (2 vs. 0, P=0.04) compared to those who did not. At t-CCUS diagnosis, cytogenetics was abnormal in 11 (37%) patients and none had complex karyotype (CK). Paired cytogenetic analysis at t-CCUS and t-MN was available for 10 patients: 4 had unchanged karyotype at t-MN, whereas 6 had cytogenetic evolution. In contrast, 213 (83%) of 256 t-MN patients with available cytogenetics had abnormalities and 126/256 (49%) had CK. Thus, a significantly higher proportion of patients had CK t-MN compared to t-CCUS (χ 2 26.4, P<0.01). A 42-gene NGS panel identified 36 PV in 21 patients (median 1, range 1-4) at t-CCUS. The most common PV were in TET2 (37.1%), TP53 (11.4%), DNMT3A (8.6%), and ZRSR2 (8.6%) genes. Two patients had paired NGS available at t-CCUS and t-MN: one had BCOR and U2AF1 PV at t-CCUS and acquired an additional NRAS PV at t-MN. The second patient had 2 PV in TP53 at t-CCUS diagnosis, that remained the only PV identified at t-MN. In the t-MN cohort, median number of PV was 2 (range 1-9). The most common PV identified were TP53 (21.5%), TET2 (6.7%), DNMT3A (6.4%), and ASXL1 (6.4%), whereas 4.8% patients had no PV. Three of 22 patients in the t-CCUS cohort had TP53mut, compared to 55 of 157 in the t-MN cohort (χ 2 4, P=0.05). Management strategies for t-CCUS included observation (20), growth factors (4), treatment of primary malignancy (2), immunosuppressives (1), hypomethylating agent followed by allogeneic SCT (1), and others (2). Following t-CCUS, 9 patients progressed to MDS and 2 to AML with a median of 3.5 months (IQR 1.7-43.4). EFS was 43.4 months (IQR 6.8-80.9). The presence of abnormal cytogenetics (Fig. B) and the absence of DTA-mutations (Fig. C) predicted shorter EFS. At last follow up, 12 (40%) deaths were noted. Four (33%) patients died without developing t-MN. Causes of death in the t-CCUS cohort were: t-MN (3), primary malignancy (1), progressive cytopenia without MN (1), infection (1), graft-vs.-host-disease (1), and undetermined (5). t-MN patients had a significantly shorter survival compared to t-CCUS (Fig. D). Conclusion More than 10% of t-MN patients had a precursor t-CCUS. On the other hand, t-CCUS patients are at a high risk of progression to MN. t-MN is characterized by the acquisition of TP53mut, genomic instability, and a significantly shorter survival compared to t-CCUS. The presence of abnormal cytogenetics and the absence of DTA mutations at t-CCUS predict shorter EFS. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Litzow: Omeros: Other: Advisory Board; AbbVie: Research Funding; Jazz: Other: Advisory Board; Amgen: Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; Pluristem: Research Funding; Actinium: Research Funding; Biosight: Other: Data monitoring committee. Patnaik: Kura Oncology: Research Funding; Stemline Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Stemline Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Al-Kali: Novartis: Research Funding; Astex: Other: Research support to institution.

Abstract Objective : We describe the Mayo Clinic experience in 797 newly-diagnosed patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) serially treated with 7+3 induction chemotherapy that included 3 days of daunorubicin at a daily dose of 60 mg/m2 (dauno-60; n=239) or 90 mg/m2 (dauno-90; n=52), or idarubicin 12 mg/m2 (IDA-12; n=506). Our objective was to compare overall (OS) and relapse-free (RFS) survival outcome. Methods : Newly-diagnosed AML patients seen at our institution and received intensive induction chemotherapy were identified from the Mayo Clinic AML database. Treatment period spanned from January 2004 through May 2021. Follow-up information was updated as of June 2021. Conventional criteria were used to diagnose AML, assign cytogenetic risk category, and classify treatment response. Results : The study group included 797 patients (median age 60 years, range 18-88; 58% males): 506 (63%) patients received IDA-12, 239 (30%) dauno-60, and 52 (7%) dauno-90. The respective median (range) ages were 60 (18-88), 61 (19-82), and 53 (22-72) years (p=0.01) (Table). Primary, secondary, and therapy-related AML accounted for 65%, 25% and 10% of patients treated with IDA-12, 69%, 22%, and 9% of those treated with dauno-60, and 75%, 23% and 2% of patients treated with dauno-90, respectively (p=0.1). The corresponding frequencies of adverse karyotype were 34%, 25% and 25% (p=0.05). CR/CRi was documented in 78% (620/793) of all evaluable patients: IDA-12 80% (400/503), dauno-60 75% (175/238), and dauno-90 87% (45/52) (p=0.1). 210 (34%) patients underwent allogenic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (AHSCT), including 125 (25%), 59 (25%) and 26 (50%) patients, in the three treatment groups, respectively (p=0.0004). After a median (range) follow up 19 (0.2-203) months, 348 (54%) relapses and 518 (65%) deaths were documented. Median (range) survivals for IDA-12, dauno-60 and dauno-90 groups were 21 (0.3-243), 14.5 (0.45-198), and 27.7 (0.2-180) months (p=0.07; figure 1). The respective 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS rates were 67%, 42%, and 34% (IDA-12); 66%, 37%, and 30% (dauno-60); and 78%, 51%, and 49% (dauno-90), respectively; the trend favoring dauno-90 was no longer apparent during age-adjusted analysis (p=0.33). Multivariable analysis that accounted for age, cytogenetic risk category, FLT3-ITD/NPM1 status and AML subtype confirmed the lack of additional contribution from IDA-12 vs dauno-60 vs dauno-90 (p=0.2) while affirming the independent prognostic value of the other four variables; AHSCT carried an additional predictive value for superior survival without altering these results. A total of 348 (54%) relapses were documented: 228 (57%) in the IDA-12; 99 (57%) in the dauno-60; and 21 (47%) in the dauno-90 cohorts (p=0.7); RFS was similar in the three treatment groups (p=0.1; figure 2). Conclusion :In the current large single-institution study of consecutive adult patients with AML, neither the choice of anthracycline (idarubicin vs daunorubicin) or the dose of daunorubicin (60 vs 90 mg/m2) appeared to effect outcome in terms of remission rates or overall or relapse-free survival. The study otherwise confirms the independent favorable effect of younger age, non-adverse karyotype, FLT3-ITD-/NPM1+ status, and AHSCT. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Patnaik: Kura Oncology: Research Funding; Stemline Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Stemline Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Al-Kali: Astex: Other: Research support to institution; Novartis: Research Funding. Litzow: Pluristem: Research Funding; Actinium: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Jazz: Other: Advisory Board; Biosight: Other: Data monitoring committee; Omeros: Other: Advisory Board; AbbVie: Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction: Therapy-related myeloid neoplasm (t-MN) is defined as the development of a myeloid neoplasm in the context of prior DNA damaging therapies. t-MN is an aggressive disease with no effective therapies. BCL2-inhibitor venetoclax (VEN) represents a novel treatment for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients including those with high-risk features. Available VEN studies included only a small portion of t-AML patients, and its efficacy in t-MDS is not known. Our aim was to study the efficacy and outcomes of VEN in t-MN. Methods: Patients diagnosed with t-MN based on the WHO criteria who received VEN were identified. Minimal residual disease (MRD) assessment was performed in a subset of patients by multiparametric flow cytometry or molecular marker as available. Best response to VEN was divided into 3 categories: 1) MRD(-) complete remission (CR); 2) other CR [including complete morphological remission, MRD(+) CR, and CR with incomplete count recovery]; and 3) partial response/progressive disease/stable disease (PR/PD/SD). Progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated from the time of initiation of VEN therapy using Kaplan-Meier analysis using Wilcoxon test. Logistic regression analysis was performed using Cox Proportional Hazard method. Statistical analysis was performed using JMP (v14.1, SAS Institute) and significance was defined as P<0.05. Results: Of 332 t-MN patients identified (248 at Mayo Clinic, 84 at the Central Adelaide Health Network), 65 (19.6%) received VEN. Clinical and pathological characteristics of patients that received VEN and did not receive VEN (non-VEN) were matched except: a higher proportion of VEN patients had t-AML (49.2% vs. 32.6%, P=0.004), higher peripheral (2% vs. 0%, P=0.02), and bone marrow blasts (18% vs. 8%, P=0.02). VEN patients had a higher proportion of abnormality of chromosome 17, complex karyotype, and monosomal karyotype compared to non-VEN patients. The proportion of patients with pathogenic/likely pathogenic variant (PV) in TP53 or RAS genes was not different. The proportion of patients receiving stem cell transplant for t-MN was not different (Table 1). The indication for VEN was treatment naïve t-MN, relapsed/refractory (R/R) disease, and maintenance in 31 (47.7%), 32 (49.2%), and 2 (3.1%) patients respectively. Prior to VEN, patients received a median of 1 (range 0-4) lines of therapy. The median duration of VEN exposure was 3 cycles (IQR 1-4). VEN was administered with azacitidine, decitabine, low dose cytarabine, intensive chemotherapy, single agent, and >1 agents in 37.9%, 40.9%, 12.1%, 4.5%, 4.5%, and 2.9% respectively. The best and the final responses to VEN are shown in Table 2. Median PFS and OS from initiation of VEN was 5 months (IQR 2-9.5, Fig. A) and 6.5 months (2-14.5, Fig. B) respectively. Female sex (vs. male, χ 2 9.6, P=0.03), VEN as the 1 st line of therapy (vs. other line of therapy, χ 2 8.3, P=0.02), and hypomethylating agent (HMA)-backbone (vs. other, χ 2 12.1, P=0.02) were associated with a significantly higher likelihood of achieving CR. Abnormality of chromosome 7 was associated with a shorter PFS (3.5 vs. 6 months, P=0.03) and OS (4.7 vs. 10.5 months, P=0.02). Using VEN as the 1 st line therapy was associated with an improved PFS (5.5 vs. 2.7 months, P<0.01) and a trend towards improved OS (9.3 vs. 5.1 months, P=0.06). Using HMA (n=51), Ara-C based (n=8), and single agent VEN (n=3) was associated with median PFS of 5.5, 4.2, and 1.5 months (P<0.01) and OS of 9.1, 4, and 1.5 months (P<0.01, Fig. C) respectively. Achieving MRD(-) CR (n=7), other CR (n=17), and PR/PD/SD (n=36) was associated with a median PFS of 7.7, 9.5, and 2 months (P<0.001) and median OS not reached, 12.9, and 2.9 months respectively (P<0.01, Fig. D). Finally, best response rate, PFS, and OS did not differ based on morphological diagnosis [t-MDS vs. t-AML] at diagnosis or bone marrow blast percent [<20% vs. ≥20%] at the start of VEN therapy. On multivariate analysis, only the best response remained an independent predictor of PFS and OS. Conclusion: VEN induced remission, including MRD(-) remission, in a subset of patients. However, progression was noted in 83% patients with continued use, and PFS and OS were overall short. The morphological diagnosis of t-MDS/t-AML or blast percentage at the start of VEN therapy did not impact outcome. Earlier use of VEN, using HMA-based therapies, and achieving deeper responses were associated with improved outcomes. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Al-Kali: Novartis: Research Funding; Astex: Other: Research support to institution. Patnaik: StemLine: Research Funding; Kura Oncology: Research Funding. Wei: Astra Zeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Agios: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Macrogenics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene/BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Astellas: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Tiong: Pfizer: Consultancy; Amgen: Speakers Bureau; Servier: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Hiwase: Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. OffLabel Disclosure: venetoclax is not approved in the treatment of myelodysplastic syndrome.

SummaryErdheim–Chester disease (ECD) is a rare histiocytic neoplasm with frequent multiorgan involvement. An accurate diagnosis of ECD requires the correlation of clinical features, histopathologic and radiologic findings. We describe a case series of patients with a referral diagnosis of ECD, whereby the diagnosis was changed to non‐histiocytic diseases after comprehensive review at a tertiary care center. This accurate revision of the referral diagnosis of ECD enabled initiation of proper disease‐directed therapy in a timely manner for these patients and avoided unnecessary exposure to systemic cytotoxic chemotherapy or targeted agents. Our study highlights the value of a multidisciplinary team of histiocytosis experts in confirming the diagnosis of ECD and also brings attention to other conditions to consider that can mimic ECD, including osteopoikilosis, tenosynovial giant cell tumour, IgG4‐related disease, fibrous dysplasia and chronic recurrent multifocal osteomyelitis.