Gore, Steven D.

Abstract Myelodysplastic neoplasms (MDS) are a collection of hematopoietic disorders with widely variable prognoses and treatment options. Accurate pathologic diagnoses present challenges because of interobserver variability in interpreting morphology and quantifying dysplasia. We compared local clinical site diagnoses with central, adjudicated review from 918 participants enrolled in the ongoing National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute National MDS Natural History Study, a prospective observational cohort study of participants with suspected MDS or MDS/myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs). Locally, 264 (29%) were diagnosed as having MDS, 15 (2%) MDS/MPN overlap, 62 (7%) idiopathic cytopenia of undetermined significance (ICUS), 0 (0%) acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with <30% blasts, and 577 (63%) as other. Approximately one-third of cases were reclassified after central review, with 266 (29%) diagnosed as MDS, 45 (5%) MDS/MPN overlap, 49 (5%) ICUS, 15 (2%) AML with <30%, and 543 (59%) as other. Site miscoding errors accounted for more than half (53%) of the local misdiagnoses, leaving a true misdiagnosis rate of 15% overall, 21% for MDS. Therapies were reported in 37% of patients, including 43% of patients with MDS, 49% of patients with MDS/MPN, and 86% of patients with AML with <30% blasts. Treatment rates were lower (25%) in cases with true discordance in diagnosis compared with those for whom local and central diagnoses agreed (40%), and receipt of inappropriate therapy occurred in 7% of misdiagnosed cases. Discordant diagnoses were frequent, which has implications for the accuracy of study-related and national registries and can lead to inappropriate therapy. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT05074550.

Abstract Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and vulnerability are variably affected in patients with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) and other cytopenic states; however, the heterogeneity of these diseases has limited our understanding of these domains. The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute-sponsored MDS Natural History Study is a prospective cohort enrolling patients undergoing workup for suspected MDS in the setting of cytopenias. Untreated patients undergo bone marrow assessment with central histopathology review for assignment as MDS, MDS/myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN), idiopathic cytopenia of undetermined significance (ICUS), acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with <30% blasts, or “At-Risk.” HRQoL data are collected at enrollment, including the MDS-specific Quality of Life in Myelodysplasia Scale (QUALMS). Vulnerability is assessed with the Vulnerable Elders Survey. Baseline HRQoL scores from 449 patients with MDS, MDS/MPN, AML <30%, ICUS or At-Risk were similar among diagnoses. In MDS, HRQoL was worse for vulnerable participants (eg, mean Patent-Reported Outcomes Management Information Systems [PROMIS] Fatigue of 56.0 vs 49.5; P < .001) and those with worse prognosis (eg, mean Euroqol-5 Dimension-5 Level [EQ-5D-5L] of 73.4, 72.7, and 64.1 for low, intermediate, and high-risk disease; P = .005). Among vulnerable MDS participants, most had difficulty with prolonged physical activity (88%), such as walking a quarter mile (74%). These data suggest that cytopenias leading to MDS evaluation are associated with similar HRQoL, regardless of eventual diagnosis, but with worse HRQoL among the vulnerable. Among those with MDS, lower-risk disease was associated with better HRQoL, but the relationship was lost among the vulnerable, showing for the first time that vulnerability trumps disease risk in affecting HRQoL. This study is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT02775383.

Abstract Background: High grade B-cell Lymphoma with rearrangements of MYC and BCL2 and/or BCL6, also known as double hit lymphoma (DHL), and double expressing lymphomas (DEL; DLBCL with IHC expression of MYC and BCL2, but without double hit cytogenetics) are highly aggressive B cell non-Hodgkin lymphomas and patients (pts) often develop relapsed/refractory disease following standard first-line chemoimmunotherapy. DA-EPOCH-R is widely used in patients with DHL, and a phase 1 trial of venetoclax + DA-EPOCH-R established the dose of 600 mg for 5 days with each cycle as the recommended phase 2 dose (Rutherford, et al. Proc ASCO 2020). A051701 is a phase II/III randomized trial evaluating chemoimmunotherapy +/- the BCL2 inhibitor venetoclax in a DHL cohort (pts with DHL with BCL2 rearrangement and/or expression), and a DEL cohort. Here we report the initial results from the DHL cohort of A051701. Methods: Pts age ≥ 18 years with newly diagnosed DHL were stratified on International Prognostic Index (IPI) score and receipt of a single cycle of chemotherapy prior to registration, which was permitted, and randomized 1:1 to receive DA-EPOCH-R (Arm 1) or DA-EPOCH-R with venetoclax (Arm 2). Enrollment was based on local pathology results which were centrally confirmed. DA-EPOCH-R was administered as previously published. Venetoclax was dosed at 600 mg po daily on days 4-8 of cycle 1 and on days 1-5 of subsequent cycles for up to 6 total cycles. All cycles were supported by GCSF or peg-GCSF. For the interim analysis at the end of phase II, 53 events ensured 90% power to detect an improvement in 24-month progression-free survival (PFS) from 40% in Arm 1 to 60% in Arm 2 (HR=0.557) using a one-sided stratified log-rank test with type I error rate of 20%. The Alliance Data and Safety Monitoring Board approved the data release after accrual was stopped early due to excess toxicity in Arm 2. These data were frozen July 8, 2021. Results: 73 pts were registered (36 in Arm 1 and 37 in Arm 2) between 8/7/19 and 9/18/20. Analyses were performed for the modified intent-to-treat (mITT) population, defined as eligible pts with DHL histology confirmed (n=66; 30 Arm 1, 36 Arm 2). Median age was 65 years in both arms (range 37-80) and baseline demographic factors were well balanced. An allowed pre-protocol chemoimmunotherapy cycle was administered in 60% and 56% of Arm 1 and Arm 2 pts, respectively. The majority of pts had advanced stage disease (Arm 1 87%, Arm 2 86%), GCB immunophenotype (Arm 1 100%, Arm 2 88%), ECOG PS 0-1 (Arm 1 90%, Arm 2 86%), and high-intermediate/high risk IPI score (Arm 1 63%, Arm 2 64%). Therapy was completed per protocol in 70% and 47% of pts, respectively, for Arm 1 and 2, and disease progression on therapy occurred in 10% and 3%. Treatment was discontinued due to adverse events in 7% of pts in Arm 1 and 11% of pts in Arm 2. Consent was withdrawn after beginning treatment in 3% and 11% in Arm 1 and 2, respectively. Death on treatment occurred in 1 patient (3%; PJP pneumonia) in Arm 1 and 6 pts (17%; sepsis (n=4), cardiac arrest (n=2)) in Arm 2. The observation of excess deaths on Arm 2 prompted suspension of accrual to the DHL cohort. Treatment was discontinued for other reasons in 3 (10%) and 4 (11%) pts in Arms 1 and 2, respectively. Venetoclax was dose-reduced and/or omitted in 15 (42%) pts. Grade 4 neutropenia was not significantly different between arms (Arm 1 67%, Arm 2 71%), nor was grade ≥3 neutropenic fever (Arm 1 36%, Arm 2 40%). Sepsis occurred more frequently in Arm 2 (14% vs. 23%). The end of treatment overall and complete response rates in the mITT population were 73% and 67% in Arm 1, and 58% and 50% in Arm 2. The end of treatment overall and complete response rates among only pts evaluated for response (n=52) were 79% and 71% in Arm 1, and 88% and 75% in Arm 2. With a median follow-up of 7.4 months, the median PFS was not reached (NR) in Arm 1 (95% CI 6.1-NR) and was 6.7 months in Arm 2 (95% CI 4.5-NR) (two-sided p=0.13). The median OS was NR in Arm 1 and was 8.5 months in Arm 2 (95% CI 5.2-NR) (two-sided p=0.004). Conclusions: DA-EPOCH-R plus venetoclax in DHL pts resulted in excess treatment-related mortality compared to DA-EPOCH-R alone, prompting early discontinuation of accrual and venetoclax treatment for the study cohort. Based on these data, we recommend against combining venetoclax with DA-EPOCH-R in DHL. Robust accrual to this study shows that prospective trials are feasible in DHL, and the favorable outcome thus far in the DA-EPOCH-R arm may serve as a benchmark for future trials Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Abramson: Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy; Allogene Therapeutics: Consultancy; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy; BeiGene: Consultancy; Kymera: Consultancy; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy; Genmab: Consultancy; EMD Serono: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; C4 Therapeutics: Consultancy; Morphosys: Consultancy; Kite Pharma: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Seagen Inc.: Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy. Ruppert: Telios Pharma: Consultancy. Hsi: Seattle Genetics: Honoraria; Cytomx: Honoraria; Eli Lilly: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding. Landsburg: Triphase: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Curis: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: DSMB member; ADCT: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Morphosys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kahl: AbbVie, Adaptive, ADCT, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BeiGene, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Genentech, Incyte, Janssen, Karyopharm, Kite, MEI, Pharmacyclics, Roche, TG Therapeutics, and Teva: Consultancy; AbbVie, Acerta, ADCT, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Genentech: Research Funding. Friedberg: Acerta: Other: DSMC ; Novartis: Other: DSMC ; Bayer: Other: DSMC . Bartlett: Millennium: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Forty Seven: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy; Autolus: Research Funding; Seagen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Leonard: ADC Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS/Celgene, Epizyme, Inc., Genmab, Gilead/Kite, Karyopharm, BMS/Celgene, Regeneron, MEI Pharma, Miltenyi, Roche/Genentech, Sutro: Consultancy; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy. OffLabel Disclosure: venetoclax in double hit lymphoma

Abstract Background: CML is managed by life-long TKI therapy in most pts which can be associated with chronic toxicities and substantial costs. Discontinuation of TKI in some pts can result in sustained therapy-free remission (TFR); however only a minority are candidates for discontinuation approaches; of those most still relapse and must restart TKI. High expression of programmed death receptor-1 (PD-1) and its ligand PD-L1 on CML-specific cytotoxic T-cells and CML cells, respectively, suggests that PD-1/PD-L1-mediated immune escape contribute to CML persistence and relapse after TKI discontinuation. We designed the BLAST MRD CML trial (NCT#03516279) to study whether adding anti-PD-1 antibody pembrolizumab to TKI therapy is safe and tolerable and increases rate of conversion to undetectable minimal residual disease (UMRD). We present data from the early safety cohort from this ongoing trial with a data cut-off date June 15th, 2021. Methods: BLAST MRD CML-1 is an ongoing national, ECOG-sponsored, single-arm pilot phase II clinical trial that enrolls adults with chronic phase CML who achieved a major molecular response (MR 3) but not UMRD while on a stable dose of up to three lines of TKI therapy. UMRD was defined as an undetectable BCR-ABL by central RQ-PCR (assay sensitivity of 4.5 [MR 4.5]) on 2 consecutive samples separated by ≥4 weeks. Once enrolled, pts continue on TKI and concurrently receive pembrolizumab 200mg IV on day (D)1 of each 21-D cycle with central MRD assessment every 4 cycles for 17 cycles. Pts who achieve UMRD at or prior to C17 discontinue pembrolizumab, while those with persistent MRD continue TKI + pembrolizumab for another 18 cycles. TKI is discontinued one year following first documentation of UMRD. After TKI discontinuation, BCR-ABL is monitored at defined intervals for 24 months. Primary endpoint is proportion of CML pts on stable-dose TKI who convert to UMRD within 2 years (yrs) of combined TKI + pembrolizumab therapy. Secondary endpoints include rates of TKI discontinuation and proportion of pts achieving 2-year TFR, MRD kinetics, and safety. Immune related and other adverse events (AE) were assessed and graded according to CTCAE v 5.0. Results: As of cut-off date, 6 pts enrolled in safety cohort. Median age was 43 yrs (range 32-65). TKIs received on trial included imatinib (N=2), dasatinib (N=3), and nilotinib (N=1). All 6 pts were on 2 nd line TKI. Median exposure to pembrolizumab was 20 doses (range, 5-36). Five pts were still on combined pembrolizumab + TKI treatment, while the 6 th pt has completed combined therapy for 2 yrs and then continued TKI monotherapy on trial after achievement of UMRD (pt has to be in UMRD for 1 yr before TKI can be discontinued). The combination of TKI and pembrolizumab was safe and well tolerated (Table 1). Only 3 pts experienced grade (G) 1/2 AEs as the worst non-hematologic AE while on trial. Hematologic toxicity reported was also generally minimal with only one G 1/2 anemia AE. The only reported G3 AE was a lipase elevation (283 U/L, normal range 11 - 55 U/L) noted on routine laboratory assessment in a pt receiving nilotinib at 400mg BID dose after 48 weeks of starting on trial combined therapy. Amylase was also elevated at G2. No baseline lipase levels were available as protocol at that time did not require baseline assessments. The pt had no symptoms and CT imaging showed no radiologic evidence of pancreatitis. The lipase and amylase levels normalized with holding of both nilotinib and pembrolizumab for 7 weeks, and the AE did not recur with resumption of combined therapy at same dose of pembrolizumab but with nilotinib reduced to 400mg daily. No G4 or 5 AEs occurred. No other dose-adjustments or treatment discontinuation/interruptions due to AEs occurred. No immune-related AEs (IRAEs) have been reported. Discussion: Data from the early safety cohort suggest that the combination of TKI and pembrolizumab is safe and well tolerated. The AEs observed were mild and generally G1/2. No pt discontinued trial therapy due to AEs. Only one G3 AE (asymptomatic lipase elevation) was reported, which could have been related to nilotinib therapy and could have predated trial entry as no baseline lipase value was available and was fully reversible with a temporary hold of therapy. No IRAEs have been reported to date. Work is ongoing on an amendment to study protocol to enhance accrual. Efficacy results will be reported as they mature. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Zeidan: Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy, Research Funding; Ionis: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy, Other: Clinical Trial Committees; Loxo Oncology: Consultancy, Other: Clinical Trial Committees; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astex: Research Funding; Jasper: Consultancy; Cardiff Oncology: Consultancy, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Aprea: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; BeyondSpring: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy, Other: Clinical Trial Committees, Research Funding; Acceleron: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Other: Clinical Trial Committees, Travel support, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy; Epizyme: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; BioCryst: Other: Clinical Trial Committees; Janssen: Consultancy; Kura: Consultancy, Other: Clinical Trial Committees; Geron: Other: Clinical Trial Committees; Astellas: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding; Agios: Consultancy; Jazz: Consultancy; Pfizer: Other: Travel support, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Other: Clinical Trial Committees, Research Funding. Radich: Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Bhatt: National Marrow Donor Program: Research Funding; Tolero Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding; Jazz: Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Partnership for health analytic research, LLC: Consultancy; Servier Pharmaceuticals LLC: Consultancy; Rigel: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy. Luger: Syros: Honoraria; Agios: Honoraria; Daiichi Sankyo: Honoraria; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; Brystol Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Acceleron: Honoraria; Astellas: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Onconova: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Biosight: Research Funding; Hoffman LaRoche: Research Funding; Kura: Research Funding. Litzow: Omeros: Other: Advisory Board; Astellas: Research Funding; Jazz: Other: Advisory Board; Amgen: Research Funding; Pluristem: Research Funding; Biosight: Other: Data monitoring committee; Actinium: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: Pembrolizumab has not been approved for the treatment of CML

Abstract The role of haploidentical hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) using posttransplant cyclophosphamide (PTCy) for acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) is being defined. We performed a retrospective, multivariable analysis comparing outcomes of HCT approaches by donor for adults with ALL in remission. The primary objective was to compare overall survival (OS) among haploidentical HCTs using PTCy and HLA-matched sibling donor (MSD), 8/8 HLA-matched unrelated donor (MUD), 7 /8 HLA-MUD, or umbilical cord blood (UCB) HCT. Comparing haploidentical HCT to MSD HCT, we found that OS, leukemia-free survival (LFS), nonrelapse mortality (NRM), relapse, and acute graft-versus-host disease (aGVHD) were not different but chronic GVHD (cGVHD) was higher in MSD HCT. Compared with MUD HCT, OS, LFS, and relapse were not different, but MUD HCT had increased NRM (hazard ratio [HR], 1.42; P = .02), grade 3 to 4 aGVHD (HR, 1.59; P = .005), and cGVHD. Compared with 7/8 UD HCT, LFS and relapse were not different, but 7/8 UD HCT had worse OS (HR, 1.38; P = .01) and increased NRM (HR, 2.13; P ≤ .001), grade 3 to 4 aGVHD (HR, 1.86; P = .003), and cGVHD (HR, 1.72; P ≤ .001). Compared with UCB HCT, late OS, late LFS, relapse, and cGVHD were not different but UCB HCT had worse early OS (≤18 months; HR, 1.93; P < .001), worse early LFS (HR, 1.40; P = .007) and increased incidences of NRM (HR, 2.08; P < .001) and grade 3 to 4 aGVHD (HR, 1.97; P < .001). Haploidentical HCT using PTCy showed no difference in survival but less GVHD compared with traditional MSD and MUD HCT and is the preferred alternative donor HCT option for adults with ALL in complete remission.

Introduction: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) such as quality of life (QOL) are variably affected in patients with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS), but the heterogeneous composition of disease states grouped together as "MDS" increases the difficulty of assessing and understanding these outcomes. Moreover, little is known about the potential relationship between QOL and frailty in this population. Methods: The NHLBI MDS Natural History Study (NCT02775383) is a prospective cohort enrolling patients undergoing diagnostic work up for suspected MDS or MDS/myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) in the setting of cytopenias. Untreated participants undergo bone marrow assessment with centralized histopathology review at enrollment for assignment into subcategories for longitudinal follow-up: MDS, MDS/MPN, ICUS, AML (<30% blasts), and "At-Risk" (cases with sub-threshold dysplasia or select karyotypic or genetic mutations). PRO and frailty data are collected at enrollment and every six months thereafter. PRO instruments include MDS-specific (QUALMS) and general (FACT-G, PROMIS Fatigue Short Form 7a, EQ-5D-5L) instruments, and a measure of frailty (VES-13). While no frailty instrument alone has been shown to be a substitute for comprehensive geriatric assessment, VES-13 has been successfully used in cancer-related studies for basic screening, where a score of 3 or more is considered frail (vulnerable). An analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used for the overall comparisons of mean baseline scores between diagnostic categories. Pairwise comparisons of scores between diagnostic categories and vulnerability subgroups were performed via two-sample t-tests. Results : Of 835 participants assessed for eligibility, 369 (44%) were classified as MDS, MDS/MPN, AML, ICUS or At-Risk, and further evaluated. Mean age was 72 years (standard deviation (SD)=10.7) and 68% were male. Mean baseline scores on the PRO measures are compared between diagnostic categories in the Table; scores did not differ significantly across categories. In particular, no significant differences were found between MDS and the other diagnostic categories. ICUS had similar QOL scores to MDS and MDS/MPN (e.g., means (SD) on EQ-5D-5L of 74.1 (17.8) in ICUS and 70.8 (19.4) in MDS, p=0.348) but had significantly higher scores than those for AML on EQ-5D-5L (60.7 (28.4), p=0.031). For the 216 participants with diagnostically-confirmed MDS, QOL impairment was similar to that routinely seen in other cancers; for example, the mean total FACT-G was 81.8 (SD=15.9), similar to localized breast cancer (82.4, SD=16.2), localized colorectal cancer (79.6, SD=16.1), and lung cancer with no current evidence of disease (82.6, SD=15.5; comparison means from Pearlman, Cancer, 2014). For frail/vulnerable participants with MDS or MDS/MPN (N=87), the most common reasons for vulnerability were age ≥75 years (68%), overall rating of health as poor or fair (62%), and difficulty with prolonged physical activity (90%) such as walking a quarter mile (75%) or doing heavy housework (70%). A minority also were vulnerable due to requiring help with instrumental activities of daily living (iADLS) such as shopping (28%) or managing money (16%). Mean QOL scores were compared between vulnerability subgroups (Figure). Vulnerable participants pooled over all diagnostic categories had significantly worse PROs than non-vulnerable participants for all measures (p<0.001). In particular, vulnerable MDS participants scored significantly worse on the QUALMS (mean 64.4, SD=13.4) vs. non-vulnerable MDS participants (mean 72.7, SD=13.3), p<0.001. Conclusions: Participants in our cohort with histologically-confirmed MDS-even low-grade MDS-had similar impairments in PROs as those with other cancers. Among those with histologically-confirmed MDS, vulnerable participants had significantly worse QOL on many measures compared to non-vulnerable participants, suggesting that this domain of function be specifically assessed in clinic. Moreover, while a "gestalt" of frailty may be inferred by observing how patients present and move in the office, these data suggest that other contributing domains, such as difficulty with prolonged physical activity and iADLs, should be evaluated explicitly. Disclosures Foran: H3Biosciences: Research Funding; Aptose: Research Funding; Kura Oncology: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Xencor: Research Funding; Agios: Honoraria, Research Funding; Boehringer Ingelheim: Research Funding; Actinium: Research Funding; Aprea: Research Funding; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Trillium: Research Funding; Revolution Medicine: Consultancy; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Research Funding. Gore:Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Padron:Incyte: Research Funding; Kura: Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria; BMS: Research Funding. Sekeres:BMS: 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; Takeda/Millenium: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Introduction: The NHLBI National MDS Study (NCT02775383) is a prospective cohort study conducted at 92 community hospitals and 29 academic centers. It enrolls patients undergoing work up for suspected MDS to understand the genetic, epigenetic, and biological factors associated with the initiation and progression of the disease. Previously untreated, cytopenic participants undergo both local and centralized pathology review and are assigned a diagnosis, including MDS, MDS/MPN, AML with blasts < 30%, and "Other". Emerging data suggests that Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), along with cytogenetics and clinical variables, may improve MDS diagnostic precision. Given that our study relies on central review (with additional tertiary pathology review used to adjudicate disagreements), we examined whether targeted gene sequencing data could be used to increase the agreement between local and central pathologic diagnosis of MDS vs. Other. Methods: Peripheral blood and bone marrow (BM) biopsy specimens from cytopenic patients, along with clinical history, CBC, and other results including karyotyping, FISH and pathology reports from local pathologists were reviewed by central pathologists. The updated 2016 WHO classifications were used to diagnose MDS. Targeted exon sequencing of 96 genes was performed using BM specimens. A subset of 648 individuals that were classified as MDS (n=212) or Other (n=436, including 90 CCUS and 89 individuals with other cancers) by pathology assessments were selected. A mean coverage of 1,317X was achieved and variants had a minimum variant allele frequency (VAF) of 2% (except FLT3). Variants for 596 subjects were manually reviewed to retain likely disease-causing variants to build a binary classifier (MDS vs. Other) using the maximum VAF per gene as input (Figure 1). Subjects diagnosed with MDS or Other by both central and local pathology were used for training, validation, and testing, and were considered "gold standard" (GS) cases (n=546). These subjects were split into 4 random groups with equal proportions of MDS cases. 75% of the GS cases were used to train and validate lasso-regularized logistic regression models using 3-fold cross validation. ROC curve analysis was carried out using the remaining 25% of GS cases (Test Set 1) on the best model to identify an optimal probability cut off point for classifying subjects as MDS. Model performance was then tested on 50 subjects for which the central and local pathology diagnosis disagreed (Test Set 2), as well as on 52 additional subjects irrespective of agreement (Test Set 3). Results : The best performing logistic regression model retained 7 genes as most informative in a discriminating diagnosis of MDS from Other based on their VAFs, in order of impact: TP53, SF3B1, U2AF1, ASXL1, TET2,STAG2, and SRSF2. We used this model to assign probabilities for each of the subjects in Test Set 1 and to estimate the performance using ROC analysis (Figure 1), resulting in a high area under the curve (AUC) of 0.89. We chose a probability cut-off of ≥0.17, being associated with a high percentage of correct classification of MDS with a sensitivity and specificity of 0.90 and 0.81, respectively. Among the cohort of 50 subjects with a discordant local and central pathology diagnosis (Test Set 2), the classifier accurately reassigned 37 subjects (accuracy = 74%) from the local to the central pathology. The blinded tertiary pathology reviewer agreed with central in all Test Set 2 cases. This included 24/34 MDS cases that had been labeled as Other by local pathology (positive predictive value [PPV]=0.89). 3/16 final pathology-classified Other cases were mis-classified as MDS by the local pathologist (negative predictive value [NPV] = 0.57). Next, we assessed the ability of the model to predict MDS vs. Other for 52 additional independent subjects using the third pathologist's diagnosis to break any ties (Test Set 3). The classifier correctly predicted 15/21 MDS cases (PPV=0.83) and misclassified 6/31 Others as MDS (NPV=0.82). The overall accuracy was 83%. Conclusions: We identified that VAFs for 7 genes can correctly re-classify subjects as either MDS or Other in 74% of cases that were misclassified between local and central pathology review. Further assessment on an independent cohort showed an accuracy of 83% of the model. Taken together, these data suggest that complementing pathology reviews with targeted sequencing of 7 genes could improve MDS diagnosis. Disclosures Lindsley: MedImmune: Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy; Takeda Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Bejar:Aptose Biosciences: Current Employment; AbbVie/Genentech: Honoraria; Astex/Otsuka: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene/BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding; Daiichi-Sankyo: Honoraria; Forty-Seven/Gilead: Honoraria; Genoptix/NeoGenomics: Honoraria. DeZern:MEI: Consultancy; Astex: Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Foran:H3Biosciences: Research Funding; Aptose: Research Funding; Kura Oncology: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Revolution Medicine: Consultancy; Xencor: Research Funding; Agios: Honoraria, Research Funding; Aprea: Research Funding; Actinium: Research Funding; Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Research Funding; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Boehringer Ingelheim: Research Funding. Gore:Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Komrokji:Acceleron: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Agios: Speakers Bureau; BMS: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Jazz: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Geron: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria. Maciejewski:Alexion, BMS: Speakers Bureau; Novartis, Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria. Padron:Novartis: Honoraria; BMS: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Kura: Research Funding. Starczynowski:Captor Therapeutics: Consultancy; Tolero Therapeutics: Research Funding; Kurome Therapeutics: Consultancy, Current equity holder in private company, Research Funding. Sekeres:BMS: Consultancy; Takeda/Millenium: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy.