Gerds, Aaron T.

Introduction: Approximately two-thirds of patients with primary or post-essential thrombocythemia/polycythemia vera myelofibrosis (MF) have anemia, many of whom require red blood cell (RBC) transfusions. In this heavily transfused population there are severely limited treatment options; effective treatment for anemia in MF is a critically unmet medical need. Luspatercept is a first-in-class erythroid maturation agent which binds to select TGF-β superfamily ligands to reduce aberrant Smad2/3 signaling and enhance late-stage erythropoiesis. Here we report the interim results of the ongoing open-label, phase 2 trial evaluating luspatercept in patients with MF and anemia. Methods: Seventy-four patients with MF and anemia were enrolled, including 41 not receiving concomitant ruxolitinib at study entry who received either no RBC transfusions (n = 20; Cohort 1) or 2-4 RBC U/28 d in the 12 wks prior to treatment (n = 21; Cohort 2). Thirty-three enrolled patients were receiving a stable dose of ruxolitinib for at least 16 wks, of which 14 were not receiving RBC transfusions (Cohort 3A) and 19 were (Cohort 3B). Patients in Cohorts 3A and 3B received a median dose of ruxolitinib of 20 mg/d (range, 5-50 mg/d) for a median of 41 and 43 wks, respectively. Patients received luspatercept every 21 d at a starting dose of 1.0 mg/kg in doses escalating up to 1.75 mg/kg. The primary endpoint in patients not receiving transfusions was a hemoglobin (Hb) increase ≥ 1.5 g/L at every assessment from baseline for ≥ 12 consecutive wks, within the first 24 wks on study. In patients receiving RBC transfusions, the primary endpoint was RBC transfusion-independence (RBC-TI) for ≥ 12 consecutive wks, within the first 24 wks on study. Additional endpoints included proportion of patients achieving mean Hb increase ≥ 1.5 g/dL in Cohorts 1 and 3A, and ≥ 50% decrease in RBC transfusions (minimum 4 RBC U decrease from baseline) in Cohorts 2 and 3B, with both responses lasting ≥ 12 consecutive wks, within 24 wks of study entry. Intent-to-treat (ITT) data were analyzed as of May 10, 2019. Results: Median age was 71 y (range, 50-88 y) and 42 (57%) were male. Median interval from MF diagnosis to study entry was 3.3 y (range, 19 d-13.5 y). Seven patients were Dynamic International Prognostic Scoring System (DIPSS) intermediate-1, 58 were intermediate-2, and 8 were high risk. Median Hb concentration at study entry was 8.8 g/dL (range, 6.7-9.8 g/dL) for Cohort 1 and 8.6 g/dL (range, 6.7-9.1 g/dL) for Cohort 3A. Patients in Cohort 2 received a median of 2.7 RBC U/28 d (range, 1-5 U/28 d) and patients in Cohort 3B received a median of 2.3 RBC U/28 d (range, 2-4 U/28 d). Patients received a median of 8 cycles of luspatercept (range, 1-24 cycles). Efficacy data are displayed in the Table, per ITT data. Two of twenty (10%) and 3/14 (21%) patients in Cohorts 1 and 3A, respectively, achieved an absolute Hb increase ≥ 1.5 g/dL at every measurement from baseline over any consecutive 12 wks. Two of twenty-one (10%) and 6/19 (32%) patients in Cohorts 2 and 3B, respectively, achieved RBC-TI over any consecutive 12 wks. Median duration of Hb response was 20 wks (range, 12-27 wks) in Cohort 1 and 12 wks (range, 12-13 wks) in Cohort 3A. Median duration of RBC-TI was 23 wks (range, 16-31 wks) in Cohort 2 and 32 wks (range, 12-65 wks) in Cohort 3B. Three (15%) and 8 (57%) patients in Cohorts 1 and 3A, respectively, achieved a mean Hb increase of ≥ 1.5 g/dL. Eight (38%) and 10 (53%) patients in Cohorts 2 and 3B, respectively, achieved a ≥ 50% reduction in RBC transfusion burden from baseline. Ruxolitinib exposure remained stable throughout the 24-wk treatment period in both Cohorts 3A and 3B. There was no difference in spleen size between responders and non-responders. Four (5%) patients had grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (AEs). There were no treatment-related deaths. Treatment-related AEs occurring in ≥ 3% of patients were hypertension (11%), bone pain (8%), and diarrhea (4%). Seven (9%) patients had ≥ 1 AE resulting in treatment discontinuation; 23 (31%) remain on study. Conclusions: The initial results from this ongoing study suggest clinically significant activity of luspatercept in patients with MF-associated anemia, including those receiving concomitant ruxolitinib. A minority of AEs were grade 3-4 in severity, consistent with previous studies in MDS and beta-thalassemia. Disclosures Gerds: CTI Biopharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy; Imago Biosciences: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Research Funding. Vannucchi:Italfarmaco: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; CTI: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Passamonti:Roche: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Kremyanskaya:La Jolla: Consultancy; Incyte, Celgene, Constellation, Protagonist.: Research Funding. Gotlib:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Promedior: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kartos: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Research Funding. Ribrag:BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AZ: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; argenX: Research Funding; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Infinity: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Epizyme: Honoraria, Research Funding; MSD: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Mead:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; CTI: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel/accommodation expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers-Squibb: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy. Harrison:Sierra Oncology: Honoraria; Gilead: Speakers Bureau; CTI: Speakers Bureau; Roche: Honoraria; Promedior: Honoraria; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; AOP: Honoraria; Shire: Speakers Bureau. Mesa:Shire: Honoraria; Promedior: Research Funding; Genotech: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses; LaJolla: Consultancy; AbbVie: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; CTI: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Samus: Research Funding; Baxalta: Consultancy; Galena Biopharma: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Consultancy; PharmaEssentia: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy; Pfizer: Research Funding; AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses; Incyte: Other: travel, accommodations, expenses, Research Funding. Kiladjian:AOP Orphan: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy. Gale:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Laadem:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Pariseau:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Gerike:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Zhang:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Linde:Abbott Laboratories, Inc.: Equity Ownership; Acceleron Pharma: Employment, Equity Ownership; Fibrogen, Inc.: Equity Ownership. Reynolds:Acceleron Pharma: Employment, Equity Ownership. Verstovsek:Gilead: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; CTI BioPharma Corp: Research Funding; Genetech: Research Funding; Blueprint Medicines Corp: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Research Funding; Pharma Essentia: Research Funding; Astrazeneca: Research Funding; Ital Pharma: Research Funding; Protaganist Therapeutics: Research Funding; Constellation: Consultancy; Pragmatist: Consultancy; Roche: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: Luspatercept is an investigational therapy that is not approved for any use in any country. Luspatercept is currently being evaluated for potential use in patients with anemia due to myelodysplastic syndromes, beta-thalassemia, or myelofibrosis.

Abstract Introduction: Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HCT) is the only curative therapy for myelofibrosis (MF). Consideration of HCT is recommended by international working groups and national guidelines for MF patients (pts) age <70 with intermediate-1 with adverse indicators, intermediate-2 or high-risk disease by the Dynamic International Prognostic Scoring System (DIPSS) for MF- a recommendation made in the absence of clear data indicating the optimal timing of HCT for MF. In this large multicenter retrospective study, we analyze overall survival in MF pts treated with and without HCT. Methods: Disease characteristics, treatments, and outcome data from MF pts receiving non-transplant therapy at 14 US academic medical centers between 2000-2014 were retrospectively collected. MF pts who underwent HCT were identified from the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR). The Cox proportional hazards model was used. The reference time point (time zero) was time of referral for the non-transplant (non-HCT) arm and the time of transplant for the HCT arm. The main effect variable (HCT vs. non-HCT) violated the proportionality assumption where comparing to non-HCT, mortality was higher with HCT in early time period from time zero but then was lower in late time period; therefore, the comparison is presented as early time period and late time period. The Cox model identified 14 months from time zero as the ideal cut point to define early and late time periods. The proportionality assumption is satisfied within each of these two periods. Results: A total of 1377 and 551 pts were included in the non-HCT and HCT arms, respectively (Table 1). In the overall cohort, survival was higher with non-HCT vs. HCT in early time period (relative risk [RR]: 0.34, P< .0001, Figure 1D), but in late time period survival was lower with non-HCT vs. HCT (RR: 2.37, P< 0.001) (Table 2). In the DIPSS low-risk MF group, while survival was higher with non-HCT vs. HCT in the early time period (RR: 0.19, P=0.007, Figure 1A), survival was lower with non-HCT in the late time period, but the latter did not reach statistical significance (RR: 1.45, P=0.39). In the DIPSS intermediate-1 risk group, a survival advantage was present with non-HCT treatments vs. HCT in the early time period (RR: 0.27, P < .0001, Figure 1B), however survival was lower with non-HCT in the late time period (RR: 3.13, P < .0001). Similarly, in those with DIPSS intermediate-2 and high-risk MF, survival advantage was observed with non-HCT in the early time period (RR: 0.41, P< .0001, Figure IC), but survival was lower with non-HCT in the late time period (RR: 2.82, P < .0001). Conclusion: A long-term survival advantage with transplant was observed for pts with intermediate-1 or higher risk MF, but at the cost of potential early mortality. The magnitude of benefit increased as DIPSS risk score increased. Although this retrospective study has limitations, the results have an impact on clinical practice by suggesting that transplantation could be considered earlier in the disease course and supports the recommendation for consideration of HCT in the setting of intermediate-1 risk MF. Disclosures Gowin: Incyte: Consultancy, Other: Scientific Advisory Board, Speakers Bureau. Verstovsek:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy; Italfarmaco: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Ali:Incyte Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Gupta:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding. Gerds:Celgene: Consultancy; Apexx Oncology: Consultancy; CTI Biopharma: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy.

Abstract Background Myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) and chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) are mainly diagnosed based on morphological changes in the bone marrow. The diagnosis can be challenging in patients (pts) with pancytopenia with minimal dysplasia, and is subject to inter-observer variability. Somatic mutations can be identified in either disease but no genes, in isolation or in combination, are specific for disease phenotype. We developed a geno-clinical model that uses mutational data, peripheral blood values, and clinical variables to predict an MDS vs. CMML diagnosis in pts who presented with cytopenias, in the absence of bone marrow biopsy results. Method We combined genomic and clinical data from 1897 pts treated at our institution (593) and the Munich Leukemia Laboratory (1304). Pts were diagnosed with MDS or CMML according to 2008 WHO criteria. Diagnosis of MDS and CMML was confirmed by independent hematopathologists that were not associated with the study. A genomic panel of 40 genes commonly mutated in myeloid malignancies was included. The initial cohort was randomly (computer generated) divided into learner (80%) and validation (20%) cohorts. Multiple machine learning algorithms were applied to predict the phenotype. Feature extraction algorithms were used to extract genomic/clinical variables that impacted the algorithm decision and to visualize the impact of each variable on phenotype. Prediction performance was evaluated according to the area under the curve of the receiver operator characteristic (ROC-AUC) and confusion/accuracy matrices. Results Of 1897 pts included, 1368 pts had MDS and 529 had CMML. The median age for the entire cohort was 72 years (range, 11-102); 37% were female. The median white blood cell count (WBC) was 5.1x109/L (range, 0.60-176), absolute monocyte count (AMC) 0.19 x109/L (range, 0-96), absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) 0.77x109/L (range, 0-62), absolute neutrophil count (ANC) 2.44x109/L (range, 0-170), hemoglobin (Hgb) 10.2 (range, 3.9-19.6), and platelet (Plt) count 111x103/mL (range 2-1491). The most commonly mutated genes in all pts were: TET2 (33%), ASXL1 (26%), SF3B1 (21%), SRSF2 (16%), RUNX1 (12%), DNMT3A (10%), CBL (7%), U2AF1 (7%), STAG2 (6%), EZH2 (6%), ZRSR2 (6%), NRAS (6%). In CMML, they were: TET2 (51%), ASXL1 (43%), SRSF2 (25%), RUNX1 (18%), CBL (16%), KRAS (12%), NRAS (11%), EZH2 (9%), JAK2 (6%), U2AF1 (5%), SF3B1 (4%), and DNMT3A (3%). In MDS, they were: TET2 (27%), SF3B1 (24%), ASXL1 (21%), SRSF2 (13%), DNMT3A (12%), RUNX1 (10%), STAG2 (8%), U2AF1 (8%), ZRSR2 (7%), TP53 (7%), BCOR (5%), and EZH2 (5%).The median total number of mutations/sample was 2 (range 0-27) for all pts, 2 (range 0-8) for CMML, and 2 (range 0-27) for MDS. A set of 83 genomic/clinical variables were evaluated and several feature extraction algorithms were used to identify the least number of variables that have the most significant impact on the algorithm's decision. These variables included: AMC, ALC, TET2, ANC, ASXL1, SF3B1, Hgb, number of mutations/sample, AEC, age, Plt, splenomegaly, RUNX1, NRAS, CBL, U2AF1, STAG2, DNMT3A, TP53, EZH2, SRSF2, and ZRSR2, Figure 1. When applying the model to the validation cohort, the ROC-AUC was .98 with an accuracy of 94%, with other statistical values as follows: specificities CMML 93%, MDS 96%; sensitivities CMML 96%, MDS 93%; positive predictive values CMML 84%, MDS 98%; negative predictive values CMML 98%, MDS 84%. Individual pt data can also be entered into the model, with a probability of whether the diagnosis is MDS vs. CMML provided along with the impact of each variable on the decision, as shown in Figure 1. When the analysis was restricted to mutations only, the accuracy of the model dropped dramatically (77%, ROC-AUC .85). Conclusions We propose a novel approach using interpretable, individualized modeling to predict MDS vs. CMML phenotypes based on genomic and clinical data without the need for bone marrow biopsy data. This approach can aid clinicians and hematopathologists when encountering pts with cytopenias and a diagnosis suspicious for MDS vs. CMML. The model also provides feature attributions that allow for quantitative understanding of the complex interplay among genotype, clinical variables, and phenotype. Disclosures Sekeres: Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Opsona: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Opsona: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Meggendorfer:MLL Munich Leukemia Laboratory: Employment. Walter:MLL Munich Leukemia Laboratory: Employment. Hutter:MLL Munich Leukemia Laboratory: Employment. Savona:Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, 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. Gerds:CTI Biopharma: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Apexx Oncology: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy. Sallman:Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Komrokji:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Haferlach:MLL Munich Leukemia Laboratory: Employment, Equity Ownership. Maciejewski:Apellis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Ra Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Consultancy; Apellis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Ra Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Consultancy; Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Haferlach:MLL Munich Leukemia Laboratory: Employment, Equity Ownership. Nazha:MEI: Consultancy.

Abstract Background: The Philadelphia chromosome negative myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN), including polycythemia vera (PV), essential thrombocythemia (ET) and primary myelofibrosis (PMF), carry a propensity to evolve into an accelerated phase (MPN-AP, 10-19% blasts in the blood or marrow) and blast phase (MPN-BP, ≥20% in the blood or marrow). Such disease evolution carries a dismal prognosis with a median survival of 3-5 months, and thus the development of innovative treatment strategies represents an urgent unmet clinical need. Responses in patients with MPN-AP/BP to both hypomethylating agents and single-agent ruxolitinib (RUX) have been reported. In vitro, the combination of RUX and decitabine (DEC) are synergistically active in cells derived from patients with MPN-BP and from a murine model of MPN-BP. These observations led us to explore the safety of the combination in MPN-AP/BP in a phase I study. An MTD for RUX in combination with DEC 20mg/m2/d x 5 days was not reached in this study and the recommended Phase II dose of RUX was selected as 25mg BID for the first cycle of therapy followed by 10mg BID in subsequent cycles with a goal to minimize myelosuppression and maintain ambulatory administration (Rampal et al ASH 2016). Here we report the final results of the phase 2 combination of RUX + DEC in patients with MPN-AP/BP (NCT02076191). Methods: We conducted a multicenter, open label, phase II trial in patients with MPN-AP/BP, following a previous diagnosis of ET, PV or PMF. Patients enrolled were treated with the RPTD dose of RUX + DEC on a 28-day cycle until progression of disease, unacceptable toxicity or patient/physician withdrawal. Adverse events (AEs) were assessed using the NCI CTCAE v4.0. The primary endpoint was response rate by cycle 6 using modified Cheson criteria: CR required 0% peripheral blood blasts, ANC >1000/uL, hemoglobin ≥10g/L, and platelets ≥100x109/L; CRi required 0% peripheral blood blasts with incomplete count recovery; and PR required ≥50% decrease in peripheral blood blasts regardless of blood counts. Results: A total of 25 patients were accrued to study. The median age was 71 years (46.7-85.6). 10 patients (40%) had MPN-AP and 15 patients (60%) had MPN-BP. 6 patients (24%) had been previously been treated with single-agent RUX, and 2 patients (8%) had been treated with single-agent DEC. Median palpable spleen size was 7cm (range 0 - 20cm). The median number of cycles of treatment received on study was 4 (range 1 - 20). The most common grade 3/4 non-hematologic AEs observed were pneumonia (16%), febrile neutropenia (16%) and infection (8%). The most common grade 3/4 hematologic AEs were anemia (16%), neutropenia (12%) and leukopenia (8%). The most common reasons for study discontinuation were AEs in 9 patients (36%), disease progression in 5 (20%) patients and hematopoietic cell transplantation in 2 (8%) patients. Eighteen (72%) patients were evaluable for response. The overall response rate (CR+CRi+PR) was 61% (11/18 patients). CRi was observed in 2 patients (11%), PR in 9 patients (50%) and no response in 7 patients (39%). The median time to CR/PR was 3.4 mos (95% CI: 2.1 - not estimated). The median peripheral blood blast count reduction was 80.1% (range 71.4-100%) (Figure 1A). The median reduction in spleen size by palpation was 70.5% (range 0-100%) (Figure 1B). Median overall survival for all patients was 7.6 months (95% CI: 4.3 - Not estimated); 9.7 months (95% CI: 4.3 - Not estimated) for MPN-BP and 5.8 months (95% CI: 3.6 - Not estimated) for MPN-AP (Figure 2). Three patients (17%) were able to proceed to HCT. The results of ongoing genomic, histopathologic and cytokine profiling studies will be available for presentation at the meeting. Conclusions: The combination of RUX+DEC has activity in patients with MPN-AP/BP. The drug combination is generally well tolerated and can be administered as an outpatient, a distinct advantage over intensive induction therapies that have not shown significant benefit in these patients. Additional work is ongoing to assess the genomic and clinical variables predictive of response with this combination therapy approach. Given the tolerability and efficacy, this regimen may be of particular benefit to patients who are not candidates for intensive therapies. Disclosures Rampal: Constellation: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria; Stemline: Research Funding; Incyte: Honoraria, Research Funding; Jazz: Consultancy, Honoraria. Mascarenhas:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding. Wang:Jazz: Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Jazz: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Gerds:Celgene: Consultancy; Apexx Oncology: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; CTI Biopharma: Consultancy. Heaney:Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Blueprint: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Decipheral: Research Funding. Abboud:Agios: Honoraria; Jazz: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Kremyanskaya:Incyte: Research Funding. Odenike:ABBVIE: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; CTI/Baxalta: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Dava Oncology: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncotherapy Science: Research Funding; Agios: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Astex: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding. Levine:Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding; C4 Therapeutics: Equity Ownership; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; Epizyme: Patents & Royalties; Prelude: Research Funding; Qiagen: Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Loxo: Consultancy, Equity Ownership; Imago: Equity Ownership; Novartis: Consultancy; Isoplexis: Equity Ownership. Mesa:Novartis: Consultancy; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; UT Health San Antonio - Mays Cancer Center: Employment; CTI Biopharma: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding. Dueck:Phytogine: Employment; Bayer: Employment; Pfizer: Honoraria. Hoffman:Incyte: Research Funding; Formation Biologics: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Merus: Research Funding; Summer Road: Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction: Patients develop anemia as a result of myelofibrosis (MF) or its treatment, including Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors. However, momelotinib (MMB), a JAK1/2 and Activin A receptor type I (ACVR1) inhibitor with demonstrated clinical activity in MF, improved anemia in prior clinical trials. JAK1/2 and ACVR1 respond to inflammation and iron stores to control iron availability through hepcidin, the key regulator of the entry of iron into circulation. Like other inflammatory diseases, MF is characterized by high hepcidin. MMB inhibited ACVR1 to modulate hepcidin and ameliorate anemia in a rodent model (Asshoff, Blood 2017). The impact of MMB was investigated on blood hepcidin, along with markers of iron storage and availability, erythropoiesis, and inflammation to explore mechanisms of the favorable effects of MMB on MF-associated anemia. Methods: In a phase 2 open-label study, MMB 200 mg once daily was given for 24 weeks to transfusion-dependent (TD; ≥4 units red blood cells [RBC] transfusion in the 8 weeks prior to first dose of MMB) patients with primary or post-ET/PV MF (age ≥18 yrs, required MF therapy, CrCl ≥ 60 mL/min, platelets ≥50 K, and absence of Gr ≥2 peripheral neuropathy, baseline palpable spleen was not required, patients with prior splenectomy were excluded). Patients were evaluated for MMB efficacy and safety. Total symptom score (TSS) was based on a modified Myeloproliferative Neoplasm Symptom Assessment Form. Transfusion-independent response/non-response (TI-R/NR) was defined as RBC transfusion-independence ≥12 weeks at any time on study. Serial blood samples were analyzed for a panel of biomarkers and liver iron content (LIC) was measured by MRI. Blood hepcidin was evaluated at every study visit in the morning (8-10am) pre-dose and 6 hours post-dose using a mass spectrometry assay and, prior to first dose, the normal daily increase of blood hepcidin was observed in half the population. Results: 41 patients (mean age 70, 63% male, 88% white) received MMB. By week 24, 14 (34.1%, 90% CI: 22.0-48.1%) patients had a TI-R and 39.0% had no RBC transfusion for ≥8 weeks at any time (90% CI: 26.2-53.1%). Six patients (15.8%, 90% CI: 7.1-28.8%) had a ≥50% reduction from baseline to week 24 in TSS and 5 patients (12.2%, 90% CI: 4.9-23.9%) had a ≥35% reduction in spleen volume; in those patients with week 24 data, the TSS and splenic response rates were 28.6% and 19.2% respectively. TSS and spleen volume assessments were not available for 17 (44.5%) and 15 (36.6%) patients, respectively, and these patients were considered non-responders. Adverse events were consistent with previous studies of MMB in MF, with cough, diarrhea, nausea, and fatigue as the most common. AEs ≥Gr 3 were experienced by 21 patients, most commonly anemia and neutropenia. At every study visit, median blood hepcidin decreased 6 hours after dosing with MMB (Fig. 1). Daily inhibition of hepcidin did not lead to an increase in serum iron for the entire population. However, serum iron, transferrin, hemoglobin, reticulocytes, and hematocrit increased at week 2 in patients with TI-R. Following this peak, serum iron decreased while hemoglobin, hematocrit and platelet count increased through week 24. At baseline, TI-R was associated with lower hepcidin, LIC, serum iron, reduced inflammation (C-reactive protein and ferritin), and higher hematocrit, erythrocytes, reticulocytes, platelets, and hemoglobin than TI-NR (Fig. 2). In multivariable analysis, TI-R was strongly associated with baseline hemoglobin ≥8g/dL (p=0.036) and lower morning hepcidin (p=0.013), weakly associated with younger age (p=0.070) and lower DIPSS score (p=0.075), but not with gender, type of MF (primary vs post-ET/PV), spleen volume, TSS, or JAK2V617F mutation. Conclusion: Safety findings and rate of TI-R were similar to TD MF patients in other MMB trials. Consistent with preclinical data, daily MMB treatment led to a transient decrease in blood hepcidin. In patients with TI-R, hepcidin suppression was associated with increased iron availability and markers of erythropoiesis. At baseline, TI-R associated with reduced inflammation, lower hepcidin, and increased markers of erythropoiesis and bone marrow function. Overall, the study suggests that transient modulation of hepcidin by MMB is sufficient to boost erythropoiesis in those transfusion-independent MF patients with lower baseline inflammation and greater erythropoietic potential. Disclosures Oh: Takeda: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Gerds:Celgene: Consultancy; Apexx Oncology: Consultancy; CTI Biopharma: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy. Gupta:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding. Verstovsek:Italfarmaco: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Mesa:Novartis: Consultancy; Celgene: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; UT Health San Antonio - Mays Cancer Center: Employment. Miller:Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Heaney:Decipheral: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Blueprint: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding. O'Connell:Incyte: Research Funding. Arcasoy:Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; CTI BioPharma: Research Funding; Samus Therapeutics: Research Funding. Zhang:Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Employment. Kawashima:Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ganz:Intrinsic LifeScience: Consultancy, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Silarus Pharma: Consultancy, Equity Ownership; Keryx Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Akebia: Consultancy, Research Funding; Vifor: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Ablynx: Consultancy; La Jolla Pharma: Consultancy, Patents & Royalties: Patent licensed to La Jolla Pharma by UCLA. Baker Brachmann:Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership.

Abstract Introduction Population level data about the survival outcomes of patients with hematologic malignancies occurring as second cancers is limited. We undertook one of the largest analyses of second hematologic malignancies (SHM) using the Surveillance, Epidemiology & End Results (SEER) registry to identify factors associated with survival. Methods SEER 9 &13 registries were queried to identify adult patients (pts>18 years) diagnosed with SHM that comprised of Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML), Acute Lymphoid Leukemia (ALL), Myelodysplastic Syndromes (MDS), Chronic Myeloid Leukemia (CML) & Other Acute Leukemias (OAL, biphenotypic leukemias, myeloid sarcomas & leukemias NOS) > 1 year (yr) after diagnosis of a primary unrelated cancer, using ICD-O-3 codes over a 40 yr period (1973-2012). Data on demographics, follow up, primary tumor & survival were abstracted. Univariate & multivariate analyses were performed to identify factors influencing survival of SHM & compared with hematologic malignancies occurring as first cancers. Hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) are reported & significance was set at p< 0.01. Results SHM cases included 4665 AML, 3569 MDS, 1140 OAL, 1076 CML & 536 ALL pts. Median age at diagnosis of SHM was 73 yrs (range, 18-100) for AML, 79 yrs (18-100) for MDS, 74 yrs(20-99) for OAL, 74 yrs(18-98) for CML & 70 yrs(19-97) for ALL. Pts>60 yrs comprised 79.2% of AML, 92% of MDS, 88.7% of OAL, 82.9% of CML & 75.2% of ALL cases. Gender distribution was similar across all categories, with females comprising 48.5% of AML, 42.2% of MDS, 45.3% of OAL, 42.8% of CML & 50.2% of ALL cases. More than 85% of pts in each group were Caucasians. While the majority of pts had one primary unrelated cancer (82-89%), 14% of AML pts, 17.8% of MDS pts, 13.8% of OAL, 15.3% of CML pts& 10.6% of ALL pts had >1 primary unrelated cancer. Most common primary sites were prostate (19.1-29.6%), breast (16.1-21.9%) & colorectal (9.3-14.5%). Median survival (range) was as follows: AML 0.2 yrs (0-28.2); MDS 1.5 yrs (0-14); OAL 0.2 yrs (0-29.1); CML 2.5 yrs (0-27.1); & ALL 0.7 yrs (0-28.8). Median latency periods (range) for secondary cancers were as follows: AML 5.2 yrs (1.0-24.2); MDS 7.6 yrs (1.0-35.5); OAL 5.7 yrs (1.0-=34.3); CML 5.2 yrs (1.0-31.6); & ALL 6.2 yrs (1.0-35.5). In univariable analyses, age <60 yrs predicted for better survival (p<0.0001) for all SHM, as did diagnosis in recent yrs (2001-2012) (p< 0.0001 for AML, OAL, CML & ALL). Effect of time period on survival for MDS was not done, as it became formally reportable in 2001. Having >2 primaries was associated with an unfavorable outcome for subsequent AML (HR=1.15; 1.08-1.23; p < 0.0001), MDS (HR=1.13; 1.05-1.22: p=0.001) & CML (HR=1.30; 1.13-1.48: p=0.0002). In multivariable analyses, advancing age was an independent adverse prognostic factor for all secondary leukemias & MDS, both as a continuous variable & when categorized as <60 yrs vs. >60 yrs (p<0.001). Race & gender did not impact survival. Using breast cancer as a referent primary, AML pts had worse outcomes following colorectal (HR=1.31; 1.14-1.5; p=0.0002) or lung (HR=1.46; 1.22-1.74; p< 0.0001) primaries, while MDS pts fared worse with prior lung (HR=1.61; 1.22-2.12; p=0.0007) or Non-Hodgkin lymphoma (HR=1.58; 1.3-1.92: p< 0.0001). Of all 2ndCML cases, those after colorectal cancer had worst survival (HR=1.54; 1.12-2.13; p=0.008). Among SHM pts, MDS pts had better survival than those with AML (HR=0.42; 0.4-0.44: p< 0.0001), as did pts with CML (HR=0.37; 0.35-0.41: p< 0.0001) & ALL (HR=0.64; 0.58-0.70; p< 0.0001). Out OAL had similar outcomes compared to AML (HR=0.99; 0.92-1.05; p=0.66). Pts with CML fared better than MDS (HR=0.47; 0.41-0.54; p< 0.0001) & OAL (HR=0.37; 0.34-0.41: p< 0.0001). Pts with ALL had worse survival than CML (HR=1.8; 1.6-2.03: p< 0.0001) & MDS (HR=1.28; 1.11-1.48: p=0.0005), but better than OAL (HR=0.65; 0.58-0.73: p< 0.0001). (Figure 1) Patients with all SHM, except CML, had worse outcomes compared to those with primary hematologic cancers (Figure 2). Conclusion The prolonged latencies for SHM in this study suggest that they are likely therapy-related. Our findings show that type & number of primary cancers influence survival of subsequent leukemias & MDS. SHM have worse survival compared to those with primary hematologic malignancies except CML where non-separation of survival curves suggest that CML as SHM does not behave like a therapy-related neoplasm. Disclosures Sekeres: TetraLogic: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Abstract Background: The incidence of thyroid cancers has been rising in the United States primarily due to the increased detection of well differentiated thyroid cancers (WDTC). Radioactive iodine (RAI), which is frequently used to treat WDTC, can be considered a circulating radiation emitter with the potential for mutagenic effects on hematopoietic stem cells. With a growing number of WDTC patients (pts) surviving long term following RAI therapy, establishing the risk of developing a myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) in this cohort has important clinical implications. Methods: A novel R program, SEERaBomb (Radiat Environ Biophys. 2014;53(1):55-63) was used to query all 18 Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) registries to identify WDTC cases treated with RAI and MDS as second cancers. SEERaBomb allows merging of all 18 SEER registries - a function not permitted by the SEER*Stat MP-SIR that limits researchers to use to one of two datasets (SEER 9 or SEER 13), thereby significantly increasing the capture of MDS cases (Figure 1). WDTC includes papillary and follicular thyroid histologies. WDTC survivor person-years at risk for developing MDS was based on age at diagnosis of WDTC, survival time, and age at diagnosis of MDS. Relative risks (RR) for developing MDS were then based on observed/expected cases between the cohorts receiving surgery alone (control), surgery combined with RAI as well as those receiving external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) and surgery with or without (+/-) RAI. Mean radiation exposure to bone marrow was compared between RAI and prostate cancer (as example) treated with other radiation modalities - brachytherapy (seeds), EBRT (3D, IMRT and VMRT). Results: In total 132,157 WDTC patients were identified from 1973-2011, of whom 69,975 (53%) received surgery alone, 59,015 (45%) underwent surgery + RAI and 3167 (2%) underwent EBRT [combined with surgery+/- adjuvant RAI]. Mean age at the time of WDTC diagnosis was: 49.4 years (yrs, range, 2-105) in the surgery group; 46.7 yrs (2-99) in the surgery + RAI group and 55.1 yrs (10-101) in the EBRT group. Median person years of follow up after WDTC diagnosis was: 6.1 yrs (2.5-11.6) in pts undergoing thyroidectomy; 5.4 yrs (2.4-9.7) in the surgery + RAI group and 5.9 yrs (1.7-11) in the EBRT group. A total of 55 patients developed MDS; 24 had surgery alone, 27 received surgery + RAI and 4 had EBRT. Median time to development of MDS after WDTM diagnosis (25-75 interquartile range) was: 6.4 yrs (4-15) in pts receiving surgery alone; 4 yrs (1.7-6.7) in the surgery + RAI group and 3.6 yrs (2.4-7.9) in the EBRT group. MDS cases were classified as RA (n=11), RARS (n=2), RCMD (n=3), RAEB (n=9), MDS with 5q deletion syndrome (n=1), and MDS-U (n=29). Compared to patients definitively treated with surgery, those who additionally received RAI (+/- EBRT) had a statistically significantly increased risk of developing MDS within the first two years of exposure (RR=1.9; 95% CI, 0.43-5.61 vs. RR=5.8; 95% CI, 2.84-12.22). Beyond 2 years, the risk for MDS drops to baseline rates, and a trend observed beyond 12 years, which did not reach statistical significance (Figure 2). Conclusion: WDTC pts undergoing RAI treatment appear to have an increased risk of developing MDS within the first two years of exposure to RAI. It is difficult to determine whether this early excess risk is true risk or an effect of ascertainment bias (RAI pts followed more closely), as the kinetics of RAI indicate a lower magnitude of bone marrow exposure compared to other radiation modalities (Figure 3). Considering the long latency of MDS seen in atomic bomb cohorts, relative young age of WDTC pts, current trend towards overdiagnosis and overtreatment of WDTCÕs, MDS rates are likely to continue to rise. Disclosures Sekeres: Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; TetraLogic: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Abstract Background: PAC is an oral kinase inhibitor with specificity for JAK2, FLT3, IRAK1, and CSF1R that has demonstrated significant and sustained spleen volume reduction (SVR) and symptom control vs BAT (excluding JAK2 inhibitors) in MF pts regardless of platelet count (PERSIST-1). The PERSIST-2 study was a randomized, controlled, open-label, phase 3 trial of PAC 200 mg BID and PAC 400 mg QD vs BAT (including JAK1/JAK2 inhibitor ruxolitinib [RUX]) in pts with 10 or 20 MF whose platelet counts were ≤100,000/µL, a recognized adverse prognostic variable. Prior JAK2 inhibitor use was allowed. Methods: Pts were randomized 1:1:1 to PAC BID, PAC QD, or BAT. The co-primary efficacy endpoints were the percentages of pts achieving ≥35% SVR (MRI or CT) and ≥50% reduction in total symptom score (TSS; MPN-SAF TSS 2.0), both from baseline to Week 24. The primary objective was to compare the efficacy of pooled PAC (BID+QD) to BAT and the secondary objectives were to compare PAC BID and PAC QD individually to BAT. PK samples were collected and analyzed for PAC. Safety analyses were based on all pts exposed to study treatment of any duration (safety population); efficacy analyses were based on ITT pts with a randomization date allowing Week 24 endpoint evaluations prior to the full clinical hold* (ITT efficacy population). Results: 311 pts were randomized (107 PAC BID, 104 PAC QD, 100 BAT), 308 received study drug, and 221 were included in the ITT efficacy population (74 PAC BID, 75 PAC QD, 72 BAT). Demographics and baseline disease characteristics were generally balanced among the treatment arms (Table) and analysis populations. A total of 32 (44%) BAT pts in the ITT efficacy population received RUX as treatment at some point on study. Population PK analyses showed that the steady-state plasma levels achieved with BID were higher than with QD, however the Cmax levels were lower. A significantly higher percentage of pts in the pooled PAC arm achieved SVR ≥35% (18% [27/149]) vs the BAT arm (3% [2/72]; p=0.001; Figure 1A). 25% of PAC pts (37/149) had ≥50% reduction in TSS vs 14% of BAT pts (p=0.079; Figure 1B). In secondary analyses vs BAT, PAC BID demonstrated significant improvement over BAT for both efficacy endpoints with 22% achieving SVR ≥35% (BAT=3%; p=0.001) and 32% achieving ≥50% reduction in TSS (BAT=14%; p=0.011). The PAC QD arm had a significant SVR ≥35% (15% v 3%, respectively; p=0.017), but a similar proportion with ≥50% reduction in TSS (17% v 14%, respectively; p=0.652). More PAC pts reduced their red blood cell transfusion dependence at Week 24 (defined as a ≥50% reduction in average transfusions/month for 3 months relative to baseline) with 19% (7/37) in the PAC QD arm, 22% (8/36) in PAC BID, and 9% (3/35) in BAT. There was no significant difference observed in OS across the treatment arms (Figure 2). Hazard ratios for OS (95% confidence intervals) were 0.68 (0.30, 1.53) for PAC BID v BAT, 1.18 (0.57, 2.44) for PAC QD v BAT, and 0.61 (0.27, 1.35) for PAC BID v QD. PAC BID maintained this survival advantage vs BAT across nearly all demographic and MF-associated risk factors. During the course of the study, 10 (9%), 15 (14%), and 15 (14%) died on PAC BID, PAC QD, and BAT, respectively. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) associated with PAC were gastrointestinal (diarrhea, nausea, vomiting) and hematologic (anemia and thrombocytopenia), and were generally less frequent for BID vs QD administration. Grade 3/4 cardiac AEs occurred in 7%, 13% and 9% of PAC BID, PAC QD, and BAT pts, respectively, and grade 3/4 bleeding AEs occurred in 14%, 7%, and 7%, respectively. Grade 3/4 bleeding AEs were associated with grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia, which was also more common in the PAC BID group. Nine pts had cardiac failure (2% PAC QD, 4% PAC BID, 3% BAT) and 1 (1%, PAC QD) had intracranial hemorrhage.* Conclusions: The PERSIST-2 study is the only randomized, controlled trial to date in pts with MF and thrombocytopenia (platelets ≤100,000/µL), allowed prior JAK2 inhibitor treatment exposure (including RUX), and allowed RUX as BAT comparator. Irrespective of prior JAK2 inhibitor treatment, both PAC arms were more effective at SVR than BAT; however, PAC BID appeared more active than QD dosing and achieved significance versus BAT for both SVR and TSS. The most frequent AEs with PAC were gastrointestinal and hematologic toxicities. *PAC on full clinical hold by the FDA on 2/8/2016 based on concerns around excess deaths and cardiac and hemorrhagic events in PERSIST-1. Disclosures Mascarenhas: Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; CTI BioPharma: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding. Talpaz:CTI BioPharma: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; Ariad: Other: Expense reimbursement, travel accomodation expenses, Research Funding; Gilead: Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding; BMS - Canada: Consultancy. Gerds:CTI BioPharma: Research Funding; Astra-Zeneca: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding. Stein:Incyte Corporation: Consultancy. Gupta:Incyte Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Drummond:CTI BioPharma: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Speakers Bureau. Granston:CTI BioPharma Corp.: Employment. Daly:CTI BioPharma Corp.: Employment. Dean:CTI BioPharma Corp.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Al-Fayoumi:CTI BioPharma Corp.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Callahan:CTI BioPharma: Employment. Singer:CTI BioPharma Corp.: Employment, Equity Ownership, Other: Leadership . Gotlib:Novartis: Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; Steering Committee Chairman, Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; CTI BioPharma: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding. Jamieson:GSK: Research Funding; Johnson & Johnson: Research Funding; CTI BioPharma: Research Funding. Harrison:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; CTI BioPharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Baxter: Consultancy, Honoraria; Shire: Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Speakers Bureau. Mesa:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Incyte: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; CTI BioPharma: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Genetech: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding. Verstovsek:CTI BioPharma Corp: Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction Myelofibrosis (MF) and Post PV/ET MF represents a group of debilitating hematological disorders in which quality of life (QOL) is severely compromised in most patients as a result of persistent constitutional symptoms, progressive cytopenias, and splenomegaly. Conventional therapeutic modalities have largely focused on symptoms palliation rather than cure. Allogeneic stem cell transplantion (ASCT) remains the only potential curative option for intermediate and high risk disease. Till now, outcome data for MF have historically focused on survival benefit. Until now, few studies have evaluated the QOL, financial burden, and symptom response in MF patients undergoing treatment including ASCT. The development of the Myeloproliferative Symptom Assessment Form Total Symptom (MPN-SAF TSS) score in 2012 allows us to objectively quantify with a standardized tool these crucial aspects of patients care. The Myeloproliferative Neoplasm Quality of Life (MPN-QOL) Study Group aims to objectively quantify symptomatic response to standard available treatments by utilizing the MPN-SAF TSS. We introduce two MPN-QOL prospective trials currently in active enrollment: The MPN Experimental Assessment of Symptoms by Utilizing Repetitive Evaluation (MEASURE) Trial and the Symptoms Yielded in Myelofibrosis Patients after Transplant as Objectified by MPN-SAF TSS (SYMPTOMS) Trial. Our intention with these studies is to quantify the QOL and symptom burden of PMF and post PV/ET MF patients undergoing treatment including ASCT. Methods The MEASURES trial is a prospective questionnaire based study evaluating the responsiveness of the MPN-SAF TSS in detecting symptomatic changes in target symptoms for an anticipated 180 ET, PV and MF (including primary MF, post-ET and post PV MF) patients receiving non-experimental medical therapy (aspirin, hydroxyurea, anagrelide, interferon, busulfan, melphalan, cladribine, thalidomide, lenalidomide, prednisone, danazol, ruxolitinib) and/or phlebotomy. Patients complete the MPN-SAF for seven consecutive days at the time of enrollment and repeat the survey for an additional seven consecutive days between 90 days and six months. Patients also complete the MDASI, EORTC and Global Impression of Change Items on the first day of the second assessment. Physicians acquire demographic, laboratory, physical examination and radiographic data, along with serial response assessments. In parallel, the SYMPTOMS trial is prospective questionnaire based study evaluating the QOL of patients undergoing ASCT utilizing MPN-SAF TSS, the FACT-BMT, Global Impression of Change, and a financial questionnaire. Patients will be evaluated at various time points pre-transplant, day 30, day 100 and 1 year post-transplant. Participants (N=110) will be prospectively enrolled from Mayo Clinic Arizona (MCA) with other centers to soon join. To date we have enrolled 5 patients from MCA on the SYMPTOMS trial and 32 patients on the MEASURES trial. Results Both trials began open enrollment in the summer of 2012 and remain in recruitment phase. Our updated preliminary data will be presented at the ASH 2013 meeting Conclusion Myeloproliferative Neoplasms have been associated with debilitating symptom profile that can significantly impair the QOL. We recognize the burden of this disease and treatment and have therefore initiated two ongoing parallel prospective trials with goals to quantify the QOL and symptom burden of MPN patients. By quantifying degree of burden and impairment in QOL in a standardized format in MPN patients undergoing a range of treatments, we will in the future be better able to inform our patients of the likely benefits and toxicities of the available treatment options. Disclosures: Birgegard: Vifor Pharma: Honoraria.

Abstract Introduction: Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) registry captures data on acute leukemias (AL) that morphologically do not conform to well characterized acute leukemic entities in the established French-American-British (FAB) nomenclature. Not much is known about population level outcomes of these rare AL. We performed a comprehensive survival analysis of these rare AL over a forty-year period using the SEER registry. Methods: SEER 18 dataset was queried to identify adult patients (pts > 18 years) diagnosed with Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML), Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia (ALL) and rare AL from 1973-2012. Rare AL cases were identified using ICD-O-3 morphology codes and included Leukemias, Not Otherwise Specified (NOS) (9800-01, 9860) and myeloid sarcoma (9930). Data on demographics,follow up and survival was abstracted. Univariate and multivariate analysis was performed to identify factors influencing survival of rare AL and survival patterns were compared to AML and ALL. Hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) are reported. Results: We identified 61,550 AML pts, 13,457 ALL pts, 525 myeloid sarcoma pts and 13,446 pts with leukemia NOS. Median age at diagnosis was 68 years (yrs, range 18-100) for AML, 54 yrs (18-100) for ALL, 65 yrs (18-95) for myeloid sarcoma and 76 yrs (18-100) for leukemia NOS. Gender distribution was similar with females comprising 45.9% of AML, 43% of ALL, 42.3% of myeloid sarcoma and 47.2% of leukemia NOS cases. Over 80% pts in all categories were Caucasian. Median survival was as follows: 0.4 (0-40) yrs for AML; 1.4 (0-39.8) yrs for ALL; 0.7 (0-32.9) yrs for Myeloid Sarcoma; and 0.3 (0-38.9) yrs for leukemia NOS. In univariable analysis, younger age predicted for better survival for both myeloid sarcoma and leukemia NOS (p<0.0001). Improvement in survival over time period was observed for pts with leukemia NOS (p < 0.0001). In multivariable analysis, advancing age was an independent prognostic factor for rare AL, both as a continuous variable and when categorized as older vs. younger pts using age cutoff of 60 yrs. Compared to younger pts, HR for pts > 60 yrs with rare AL was as follows: 2.68 (2.13-3.37; p <0.0001) for myeloid sarcoma; and 2.18 (2.07-2.31; p<0.0001) for leukemia NOS. No difference in survival over time was seen for myeloid sarcoma. Pts with leukemia, NOS diagnosed in yrs 2006-2012 (HR=0.87; 0.82-0.92; p < 0.0001) had better survival compared to the referent years 1973-80. Race and gender did not impact survival. In multivariable analysis, pts with leukemia NOS did worse overall compared to AML (HR=1.13; 1.11-1.53; p<0.0001) and ALL (HR=1.86; 1.81-1.91; p<0.0001). Interestingly, younger pts had a poorer outcome than AML (HR=1.10; 1.04-1.16; p=0.0003), but pts > 60 yrs had a better outcome (HR=0.93; 0.91-0.95; p<0.0001). Both younger (HR=1.33; 1.26-1.41; p<0.0001) and older pts (HR=1.45, 1.40-1.50: p<0.0001) compared unfavorably to ALL (Figure 1). Pts with myeloid sarcoma had a better survival compared to AML pts (HR=0.77; 0.7-0.85; p<0.0001) (Figure 2). This was uniform for pts <60 yrs (HR=0.77; 0.64-0.93; p=0.006) and > 60 yrs (HR= 0.77; 0.69-0.87; p<0.0001). Conclusion: Pts with leukemias NOS have poor outcomes compared to AML and ALL but prognosis has improved in recent years. The most probable explanation is identification of prognostic molecular mutations that has allowed accurate risk-stratification of pts using the WHO classification and in turn better selection of treatment strategies. Several reasons have limited our understanding of these rare AL - small numbers, exclusion from clinical trials and wide variability in treatment options used. Efforts at better molecular characterization of these AL holds the most promise for improving outcomes. Disclosures Sekeres: Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; TetraLogic: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.