Fenaux, Pierre

Abstract Background: No approved treatment options are available to HR-MDS pts after HMA therapy. Study 04-21 (“ONTIME” trial) was a Phase III, randomized, controlled study of the efficacy and safety of rigosertib, a novel small molecule inhibitor of PI3-kinase and PLK pathways, in a heterogeneous population of MDS pts who had relapsed after, failed to respond to, or progressed during administration of HMAs. The study was conducted at 87 sites in the United States and 5 European countries. Methods:From Dec 2010 to Aug 2013, 299 HR-MDS pts [<30% bone marrow blasts (BMBL)] who had progressed on (37% of total enrollment), failed to respond to (25%), or relapsed after (38%) HMA treatment were stratified on BMBL count and randomized 2:1 to receive rigosertib (199 pts) or BSC (100 pts). Rigosertib was administered at 1800 mg/24 hr for 72-hr as a continuous intravenous (CIV) ambulatory infusion, every 2 weeks for the first 16 weeks, and then every 4 weeks. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), analyzed on an intention-to-treat (ITT) basis using the Kaplan-Meier method stratified on BMBL (5% to 19% vs. 20% to 30%). The trial had a 95% power to detect a 13-wk increase in median OS from 17 wks on BSC, with a 2-sided alpha = 0.05. The following results are based on 242 deaths: 161 in the rigosertib arm and 81 in the BSC arm. Results : Overall, the 2 arms were balanced in terms of baseline characteristics, with the majority of pts being male (66%), and White (82%). Age ranged from 50-90 yrs in the rigosertib arm and 55-86 years in the BSC arm (median, 74 yrs). The majority of pts (85%) had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) score of 0 or 1. The median duration of the last HMA therapy was 8.8 months (mo) in the rigosertib arm and 10.3 mo in the BSC arm; 127 (64%) of rigosertib pts and 57% of BSC pts were classified as “primary HMA failure” (ie, they failed to respond to or progressed during HMA therapy, as defined by Prebet et al, J Clin Oncol, 2011). A 2.3-mo improvement in median OS was found in the overall (ITT) population (8.2 mo rigosertib vs. 5.9 mo BSC) (Figure 1). The ITT survival for rigosertib was similar to that noted in Phase I/II studies (35 weeks). The stratified log-rank p-value was 0.33. The stratified hazard ratio was 0.87, which was quite different from the ratio of medians (5.9/8.2 = 0.72), due to the fact that the 2 survival curves converged at 15 mo. Notably, among the 184 patients with primary HMA failure, the median OS was 8.6 mo in the rigosertib arm (N = 127) vs. 5.3 mo in the BSC arm (N = 57), HR= 0.69, p= 0.040 (Figure 2). Multivariate Cox regression, adjusting for pretreatment prognostic factors, showed little change in the treatment effect. The following subgroups were correlated with better OS: pts with failure of/progression on HMA treatment, pts with duration of HMA treatment ≤ 9 mo, pts < 75 years of age, and pts with very high risk per IPSS-R (Figure 3). Rigosertib was well tolerated, with a median dose intensity of 92%. There were no significant compliance or operations issues related to ambulatory continuous infusion. Protocol-defined dose reductions were reported in 5% of pts, with 24% experiencing dose delays of >7 days, mostly due to unrelated adverse events (AEs). No obvious differences between rigosertib and BSC were found in the incidence of AEs (rigosertib, 99%; BSC, 85%) or of ≥ Grade 3 AEs (rigosertib, 79%; BSC, 68%). In the rigosertib arm, AEs reported by ≥ 20% of pts, irrespective of severity or causality, were nausea (35%), diarrhea (33%), constipation (31%), fatigue (30%), fever (27%), anemia (22%), and peripheral edema (21%). Rigosertib had low myelotoxicity, consistent with previous clinical experience. Conclusions:Although the primary endpoint in this Phase III study of rigosertib vs BSC in pts with HR-MDS did not reach statistical significance in the ITT population, encouraging rigosertib treatment-related improvement in OS was noted in several subgroups of MDS pts, including those with “primary HMA failure and in patients in the IPSS-R Very High Risk category. CIV therapy with rigosertib had a favorable safety profile in this orphan population of elderly pts with MDS. Figure 1 Figure 1. Figure 2 Figure 2. Figure 3 Figure 3. Disclosures Fenaux: Celgene: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Sekeres:Celgene Corp.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Boehringer Ingelheim: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Roboz:Novartis: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Glaxo SmithKline: Consultancy; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy; Sunesis: Consultancy; Teva Oncology: Consultancy; Astex: Consultancy. Wilhelm:Onconova Therapeutics, Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Wilhelm:Onconova Therapeutics, Inc: Employment. Azarnia:Onconova Therapeutics, Inc: Employment. Maniar:Onconova Therapeutics, Inc: Employment.

Background:There are limited treatment options for red blood cell (RBC) transfusion dependent (TD) LR (IPSS Low/Int‐1) MDS patients who are relapsed/refractory to ESAs. Imetelstat is a first‐in‐class telomerase inhibitor that targets cells with short telomeres and active telomerase, characteristics observed in some MDS patients across all disease stages. Preliminary results show that imetelstat is effective treatment in LR‐MDS patients inducing durable TI (Steensma et al ASH 2018 Abstr463).Aims:We report updated efficacy data with a median follow‐up of 12.1 months in 38 LR non‐del(5q) MDS patients, R/R to ESA and LEN/HMA naive from the open‐label, single‐arm Part 1 of IMerge, an ongoing phase 2/3 study (NCT02598661).Methods:Part 1 of the IMerge study included patients with LR MDS, who were heavily transfused (≥4U/8wks), were R/R to ESA or had sEPO >500 mU/mL. Imetelstat 7.5 mg/kg was administered IV every 4 weeks. The primary endpoint was 8‐week TI rate; key secondary endpoints included 24‐week TI rate, safety, duration of TI, and hematologic improvement (HI) rate. Among the initially enrolled patients, higher 8‐week TI rate was observed in the non‐del5q, LEN/HMA naive patients. Therefore, the study was amended to subsequently enroll only these patients. From a total of 57 patients enrolled in Part 1, 38 were non‐del(5q), LEN/HMA naïve patients (13 in the initial and 25 in the expansion cohort). Here we report long‐term efficacy, safety and biomarker data from these 38 patients.Results:Median baseline RBC transfusion burden was 8U/8weeks (range 4–14), 37% of the patients had IPSS Int‐1; 71% had WHO 2001 RARS or RCMD‐RS subtype and 32% with evaluable sEPO levels had baseline level >500 mU/mL.As of 23 January 2019, median follow‐up was 12.1 months for the 38 patients, representing 30.4 and 11.6 months for the initial 13 and additional 25 patients, respectively. The 8‐week TI rate was 45% (17/38) and median TI duration was 8.5 months (range 1.8–32.4). Of the 17 responding patients, 10 (59%) remained transfusion free for over 24 weeks. The 8‐week TI rate did not differ based on the presence of ring sideroblasts or baseline sEPO levels. The 24‐week TI rate was 26% (10/38). Erythroid HI, defined as transfusion reduction by at least 4 units /8 weeks (IWG2006), was achieved in 68% (26/38) of the patients. The most frequently reported adverse events were manageable and reversible grade ≥3 cytopenias. 6/38 patients had IPSS‐R intermediate/poor cytogenetic risk. All 6 patents achieved 8‐week TI; 2/6 patients achieved partial cytogenetic response. Post treatment decrease in telomerase hTERT RNA level was observed in 25/34 (73.5%) patients with available sample. Among 7 patients with pre‐ and post‐treatment mutation analyses, six had SF3B1 mutations at baseline, and a decrease in the mutation VAF was observed in 2 patients that had longest TI duration on study.Summary/Conclusion:In high RBC transfusion burden patients with non‐del(5q) LR‐MDS R/R to ESA and naive to LEN/HMA, single‐agent imetelstat yielded 8‐week TI rate of 45%, with a median duration of 8.5 months (range 1.8–32.4). The 24‐week TI rate was 26%. HI‐E rate was 68%. All patients with IPSS‐R intermediate and poor cytogenetic risk responded. Biomarker analyses of telomerase activity and mutation allele burden indicate an effect on the malignant mutant clone. These data support Part 2 of IMerge, Phase 3 placebo‐controlled, randomized portion of the study, expected to open mid‐2019.

Key Points In the largest study of HMAs in RR-AML to date, 16% of patients achieved CR/CRi and experienced a median OS of 21 months. Low proliferative disease (peripheral blood blasts <5%) was associated with improved response and OS.

Abstract Myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) and myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) are hematologically diverse stem cell malignancies sharing phenotypic features of both myelodysplastic syndromes and myeloproliferative neoplasms. There are currently no standard treatment recommendations for most adult patients with MDS/MPN. To optimize efforts to improve the management and disease outcomes, it is essential to identify meaningful clinical and biologic end points and standardized response criteria for clinical trials. The dual dysplastic and proliferative features in these stem cell malignancies define their uniqueness and challenges. We propose response assessment guidelines to harmonize future clinical trials with the principal objective of establishing suitable treatment algorithms. An international panel comprising laboratory and clinical experts in MDS/MPN was established involving 3 independent academic MDS/MPN workshops (March 2013, December 2013, and June 2014). These recommendations are the result of this collaborative project sponsored by the MDS Foundation.