Vey, Norbert

Abstract Introduction: Patients with RR-AML, particularly older adults, have dismal outcomes and limited therapy options. Given low response rates and high toxicity with salvage intensive chemotherapy, and frequent ineligibility for allogeneic stem cell transplantation (alloSCT), many patients are treated with HMAs. Robust data regarding use of HMAs in AML predominates in the frontline setting, while their use in RR-AML has limited supportive data. Here wesought to analyze theoutcomes and their predictors in patients with RR-AML treated with HMAs. Methods:We collected data, spanning a period from 2006 to 2016, from 7 centers in the United States and 4 centers in Europe regarding patients treated with HMAs for RR-AML. Responses were defined by International Working Group criteria. Kaplan-Meier methods estimated overall survival (OS) from initiation of HMAs to death or end of follow-up. Multivariable logistic regression models estimated odds for response, and multivariable Cox Proportional Hazard (CPH) models estimated hazards ratios (HR) for OS. Covariates considered included HMA received, age at diagnosis (in years), AML classification at diagnosis (AML with myelodysplasia-related changes [AML-MRC], therapy-related [t]-AML), disease status (relapsed vs. refractory), number of therapy lines prior to HMA (1 vs. 2 vs. >=3), duration of first complete remission (CR1), white blood cell count, peripheral blood blast percentage, bone marrow (BM) cellularity (<=20% vs. > 20%), BM blast percentage (<=20% vs. >20%), cytogenetic risk group, and the presence of complex or chromosome 7 abnormalities. Results: Of 514 patients, 217 patients (42.2%) had refractory and 297 (58%) had relapsed AML. By end of study, 415 patients (88.5%) had died. Median follow-up for living patients was 11.6 months.Median age at diagnosis was 64 years (range [R], 16-92). AML-MRC was diagnosed in 29.0% while 8.2% had t-AML. Median number of prior therapies was 2 (R, 1-7), with 48.3% receiving 1 prior line, 30.2% receiving 2 prior lines, and 21.5% receiving >=3 prior lines. Prior alloSCT was performed in 21.2%. Only 1.9% had good risk (core binding factor) karyotype, while 56.2% had intermediate risk karyotype, and 41.9% had poor risk karyotype. Azacitidine was used in 45.8% and decitabine in 54.2%; median number of azacitidine cycles was 4 (Interquartile range [IQR], 2-6) compared to 2 for decitabine (IQR, 1-4, p <0.001). Best response to HMAs was CR in 11.7% (95%CI, 9%-14%), CRi in 6.4% (95%CI, 4.3%-8.8%), hematologic improvement (HI) in 8% (95%CI, 5.7%-10.5%), stable disease (SD) in 9.8% (95%CI, 7.2%-12.5%), while 64.1% (95%CI, 57.7%-66.2%) had progressive disease (PD). Median OS from HMA initiation for all patients was 6.9 months (IQR, 3.0-13.3). There was a significant difference in OS based on best response achieved [Figure 1]. Unadjusted OS showed an insignificant trend for worsening with increasing number of prior lines of therapy [Figure 2A]. In unadjusted analyses, there was no difference in OS based on HMA received in all patients [Figure 2B] or the subset who received only 1 prior line of therapy (median OS: Azacitidine vs. decitabine 8.4 vs 7.3 months, p=0.88). Following HMA therapy, the median number of subsequent therapies was 0 (R, 0-6), and only 12.8% underwent alloSCT. In multivariate CPH models, HMA used was not significantly associated with OS (HR=0.80, 95%CI, 0.42-1.51, p=0.49), while increasing age, and presence of complex cytogenetics and chromosome 7 abnormalities were significantly associated with risk of death [Table 1]. In multivariable logistic regression models, HMA used was not associated with achieving CR+CRi (Odds ratio=0.56, p=0.32). Conclusions: In this largest reported cohort of patients with RR-AML treated with HMAs, we found that HMAs are often used as alast line of therapy, with a minority of patients receiving subsequent treatment. Nonetheless, the minority of patients who achieve CR (11.7%) with HMA therapy had a median OS of 25.6 months. Therefore, use of HMAs for management of RR-AML is a reasonable intervention in the absence of clinical trial options. There appears to be no difference in OS or probability of achieving CR+CRi based on HMA used. Ongoing analyses in this dataset include further evaluations of predictors, including genetic mutations, and the development of prediction tools for clinical outcomes with HMA therapy. Figure 1. Figure 1. Disclosures Podoltsev: Ariad: Consultancy, Honoraria; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria. Ritchie:Novartis: Honoraria; Incyte: Speakers Bureau; Arian: Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Honoraria; Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Sekeres:Millenium/Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Komrokji:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Al-Kali:Onconova Therapeutics, Inc.: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Santini:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Onconova: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Astex: Consultancy. Roboz:Cellectis: Research Funding; Agios, Amgen, Amphivena, Astex, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celator, Celgene, Genoptix, Janssen, Juno, MEI Pharma, MedImmune, Novartis, Onconova, Pfizer, Roche/Genentech, Sunesis, Teva: Consultancy. Fenaux:Celgene, Janssen,Novartis, Astex, Teva: Honoraria, Research Funding. Prebet:celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria. Gore:celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Zeidan:Ariad: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria.

Abstract Abstract 677 Background: Activating mutations of NRAS and KRAS (‘RAS’) are found in 10–30% of myeloid malignancies. Evidence of constitutive activation of the RAS-RAF-MEK-ERK pathway, however, is more ubiquitous. Trametinib is a potent, selective, allosteric inhibitor of MEK1/2 that inhibits proliferation of myeloid cell lines in vitro. A Phase I/II study of single, daily, oral dosing of trametinib in myeloid malignancies is ongoing. Here we report the results from Phase I/II patients receiving the recommended Phase II dose (RP2D) of 2 mg. Methods: Patient eligibility was limited to patients with relapsed/refractory myeloid malignancies and adequate hepatic, renal and cardiac function. There were no hematologic eligibility criteria. Patients were prospectively screened for KRAS mutations at amino acids 12, 13 and for NRAS mutations at amino acids 12, 13 and 61. Clinical response was assessed using International Working Group (2003 and 2006) criteria for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS), respectively. Pharmacodynamic marker (pERK) analysis was conducted in phase II patients with patient paired (pre/during treatment) blood and bone marrow samples. Results: Eighty-seven (9 in Phase I and 78 in Phase II) patients received 2 mg of trametinib daily: AML (n=66), MDS (n=11), chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) (n=7) or other (n=3) (RAS mutations, n=57; RAS wild type, n=15 and RAS unknown, n=15). Median age was 68 years (range 21–87) and for close to half of the patients, trametinib was 3 3rd line of therapy. Trametinib exhibited a long effective half-life with small peak/trough ratios, and the exposure profile maintained time above preclinical target threshold for the 24-hour dosing period. Results of the pharmacodynamic analysis indicated an on-target effect of trametinib. Responses by RAS mutation status for Phase I/II subjects are summarized in Table 1. Responding patients have continued therapy for median of 16.9 weeks (range, 10.9 – 36.7). Drug-related grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) were encountered in 31/87 (36%) of the Phase I/II patients and there was one grade 5 drug-related AE,cerebrovascular accident. Hepatic toxicities (9%), gastrointestinal disorders (7%) and rash (5%) were the most frequent grade 3/4 AEs. AEs possibly related to inhibition of MEK signaling were blurred vision (total,13%; grade 3, 1%) and decreased cardiac ejection fraction (total, 9%; grade 3, 6%); events were generally reversible. Conclusion: At the RP2D of trametinib (2 mg orally daily), trametinib has shown promising clinical activity and responses (CR/CRp/Marrow CR/MLFS/PR) were almost exclusively seen in patients with refractory myeloid malignancies characterized by somatic RAS mutations. Expansion of the CMML cohort for RAS positive subjects is ongoing. Disclosures: Borthakur: GlaxoSmithKline, Sigma-Tau, Eisai, XBiotech: Research Funding. Off Label Use: Trametinib, to report outcome of clinicla trial to audience at ASH meeting. Foran:GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding. Platzbecker:GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria, Research Funding. Giagounidis:GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria. Ottmann:GlaxoSmithKline: Clinical trial participation Other. Kadia:GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding. Bauman:GlaxoSmithKline: Employment, Equity Ownership. Wu:GlaxoSmithKline: Employment. Liu:GlaxoSmithKline: Employment. Schramek:GlaxoSmithKline: Employment. Zhu:GlaxoSmithKline: Employment. Wissel:GlaxoSmithKline: Employment, Equity Ownership.

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.

BACKGROUNDRAS/RAF/mitogen‐activated protein kinase activation is common in myeloid malignancies. Trametinib, a mitogen‐activated protein kinase kinase 1 (MEK1)/MEK2 inhibitor with activity against multiple myeloid cell lines at low nanomolar concentrations, was evaluated for safety and clinical activity in patients with relapsed/refractory leukemias.METHODSThis phase 1/2 study accrued patients with any relapsed/refractory leukemia in phase 1. In phase 2, this study accrued patients with relapsed/refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML) or high‐risk myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) with NRAS or KRAS mutations (cohort 1); patients with AML, MDS, or chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) with a RAS wild‐type mutation or an unknown mutation status (cohort 2); and patients with CMML with an NRAS or KRAS mutation (cohorts 3).RESULTSThe most commonly reported treatment‐related adverse events were diarrhea, rash, nausea, and increased alanine aminotransferase levels. The phase 2 recommended dose for Trametinib was 2 mg orally daily. The overall response rates were 20%, 3%, and 27% for cohorts 1, 2, and 3, respectively, and this indicated preferential activity among RAS‐mutated myeloid malignancies. Repeated cycles of trametinib were well tolerated with manageable or reversible toxicities; these results were similar to those of other trametinib studies.CONCLUSIONSThe selective, single‐agent activity of trametinib against RAS‐mutated myeloid malignancies validates its therapeutic potential. Combination strategies based on a better understanding of the hierarchical role of mutations and signaling in myeloid malignancies are likely to improve the response rate and duration. Cancer 2016;122:1871–9. © 2016 American Cancer Society.