Kantarjian, Hagop M.

Abstract Background: PRM-151 (PRM) is a recombinant form of pentraxin-2, an endogenous human protein that acts at sites of tissue damage, inducing macrophage differentiation to prevent and reverse fibrosis. 27 patients with primary myelofibrosis (MF), post-essential thrombocythemia MF, or post-polycythemia vera MF and Grade 2 or 3 bone marrow (BM) fibrosis enrolled in the first stage of a 2-stage adaptive trial in which PRM-151 10 mg/kg IV was administered for 24 weeks in four different arms: PRM-151 QW (n=8), PRM-151 Q4W (n=7), PRM-151 QW + ruxolitinib (RUX) (n=6), or PRM-151 Q4W + RUX (n=6). At 24 weeks, reductions in BM fibrosis, improvements in hemoglobin (Hgb) and platelets (PLT), decreases in symptoms (MPN-SAF Total Symptom Score [TSS]), and modest reductions in spleen size by palpation were observed in all arms, with a favorable safety profile (Verstovsek, ASH 2014, Abstract 713). Patients experiencing clinical benefit were allowed to continue beyond 24 weeks. We now report efficacy and safety in 13 patients who have completed at least 72 weeks of treatment. Bone marrow fibrosis status by morphologic WHO grading and computer-assisted image analysis (CIA) are available up to 48 weeks in some patients, as assessed by central hematopathologist reviewers blinded to patient, treatment, and timepoint. BM data through 72 weeks is pending. WHO response was defined as ≥1 grade reduction in MF grade at any time and CIA response was defined as a decrease in the % fibrosis compared to baseline with a negative slope > 1. (Pozdnyakova, EHA 2015, Abstract P677). Baseline Demographics (N=13): Median age 60 (51-76); 46% DIPSS Int-1, 54% DIPSS Int-2; 62% PMF, 15% post-ET MF, 23% post-PV MF; 46% grade 3 BM fibrosis, Hgb < 100 g/L in 38%, PLT < 100 x 109/L in 69% and <50 x 109/L in 38%; 31% JAK inhibitor-naive and 69% received a prior or current JAK inhibitor. Study treatment (N=13): In the first 24 weeks, treatment was PRM-151 QW (n=5), PRM-151 Q4W (n=3), PRM-151 QW + RUX (n=2), PRM-151 Q4W + RUX (n=3). At 28 weeks, treatment changed to PRM-151 QW (n=2), PRM-151 Q4W (n=7), and PRM-151 Q4W + RUX (n=4), with 1 patient stopping RUX for thrombocytopenia. Both PRM-151 QW patients switched to PRM-151 Q4W after 40 and 52 weeks. Two patients missed weeks 64 and 68 due to complications of a motor vehicle accident and abdominal surgery, respectively, but are continuing treatment as of week 72. BM (n=13): 54% had a morphologic response, and 85% had a CIA response. Hgb (g/L): In 5 pts with baseline Hgb < 100, median Hgb increased by 24% from 86 (range 77-97) at baseline to 107 (range 71-113) at Week 72. 3 of 5 patients who were receiving transfusions at baseline became transfusion independent, with durations of 32-60 weeks. (Figure 1) PLT (x 109/L): In 9 pts with baseline < 100, median PLT count increased by 37% from 38 (range 10-89) at baseline to 52 (range 26-159) at Week 72. All 4 patients who were receiving PLT transfusions at baseline became transfusion independent, with durations of 24-44 weeks. (Figure 2) Symptoms (N=13): 69% and 38% of patients had ≥ 50% and 100% reductions from baseline in TSS between 24 and 72 weeks, with durations of up to 48 and 12 weeks, respectively. (Figure 3) Spleen (N= 9 with palpable spleens at baseline): 50% of pts had ≥25% reduction, 2 of whom had ≥50% reduction lasting > 12 weeks. (Figure 4) Safety (N=13): Most common adverse events (AEs) regardless of relatedness were fatigue (4), nausea (3), fever (3), cough (2), diarrhea (2), tooth infection (2), headache (2), upper respiratory infection (2), hyperglycemia (2), and hyperuricemia (2). There were 13 possibly or probably related adverse events in 3 patients from beginning of study through 71 weeks, 11 Grade 1, 1 Grade 2 and 1 Grade 3, with no event occurring in > 1 patient. There were no related serious AEs in these patients. Conclusion: In 13 patients completing at least 72 weeks, PRM-151 treatment was well tolerated, and improvements in Hgb, PLT, symptoms and spleen appeared to increase with longer treatment duration. Disclosures Mesa: Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding. Foltz:Promedior: Research Funding. Gupta:Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding. Mascarenhas:Kalobios: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Research Funding. Ritchie:Incyte: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Hoffman:All Cells, LLC: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Geron: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Promedior: Research Funding. Silver:Promedior: Research Funding. Pozdnyakova:Promedior: Consultancy. Hasserjian:Promedior: Consultancy. Trehu:Promedior: Employment, Equity Ownership. Salama:Promedior: Consultancy. Gotlib:Allakos, Inc.: Consultancy.

Abstract Abstract 2926 Background: RAS proteins are encoded by 3 proto-oncogenes (K-RAS, N-RAS, and H-RAS) and regulate the growth and differentiation of many cellular types, including the myeloid compartment. Codons 12, 13, and 61 (in N-RAS and K-RAS) have been reported to be common targets of mutations. These mutations result in constitutive activation of the RAS pathway by increasing intracellular RAS GTP levels, which result in activation of the RAS/MEK and the RAS/PI3K pathways. Its prognostic significance in MDS is yet to be clarified. Because the potential prognostic and therapeutic implications of RAS mutations in MDS, we decided to study the impact of RAS mutations in patients (pts) with MDS. Methods: Mutation analysis of KRAS and NRAS codons 12, 13, and 61 was performed by Pyrosequencing using biotinylated reverse primers. All pts referred to MD Anderson between 2000–2009 were reviewed. In addition to standard clinical characteristics, including karyotyping, mutational status of Flt3, c-Kit and JAK2 was also analyzed. Overall survival was calculated based on Kaplan-Meier. Results: Of the 1067 pts with MDS of age above 17 evaluated for RAS mutation, 43 pts (4%) were positive. Seventy nine percent of RAS mutations were of N-RAS type (codon12 (55%), codon 13 (12%), codon 61(12%)) with K-RAS 12 comprising the rest (21%). Median age was 68 years (range, 18–94) with 66% being males (703 pts). Their median white blood cell (WBC) was 3.3×109/L (range, 0.3–72.2), hemoglobin 9.8 (range, 3–17.5), and platelets 73×109/liter (range, 1–1040). Median bone marrow blast was 5% and 77 pts (7%) had leukemic transformation. More than half of the pts had RAEB or RAEB-t (44% and 9 % respectively) which translated into fewer patients in the low IPSS category (19%). The median age was 66 years (range 26–84) in the RAS mutated (muRAS) group compared to 68 in the wild type (wtRAS). WBC was higher in the muRAS group compared to wtRAS (6.8 ×109/L vs. 3.2 ×109/L, p<0.001 by Mann-Whitney median test (M-W-T)). Percent of bone marrow blasts was higher (9%) in muRAS group compared to 5% in wtRAS (p<0.001 by M-W-T). High (Int-2 and high) risk by IPSS was more frequent in muRAS 51% compared to 40% in wtRAS group (p=0.11). Leukemic transformation was 9% and 7% (p=0.61) in both muRAS and wtRAS groups respectively. RAS mutation was detected more frequently in the CMML subgroup (12/80 (15%) pts). There were no differences in terms of response to DNA methylating inhibitors (CR in 41% in muRAS versus 40% in wtRAS). ARA-C-based regimens resulted in better CR in wtRAS than muRAS (59% vs 25%); however, the size of muRAS group was too small (1 out 4 pts).There was a trend towards shorter overall survival (OS) in the muRAS group compared to wtRAS (395 vs. 500 days, p value=0.057). MuRAS RAEB (325 vs. 450 days, p= 0.13) and RAEB-t (125 vs. 375 days, p= 0.27) subgroups showed a trend towards worse OS compared to wtRAS group. There was a significant OS decrease in RCMD (150 vs. 700 day, p= 0.015). Surprisingly, muRAS CMML group showed a trend towards better OS compared to wtRAS (728 vs. 687 days, p=0.44). Additionally we analyzed patients for presence of Flt3 mutation. These were present in only 18 of the pts (4%) but none of them had also a RAS mutation. There was no c-Kit mutations found in this cohort of pts, compared to 9/37 (24%) pts tested positive for JAK2V617F. Conclusion: MuRAS occurs in 4% of pts with MDS. In the muRAS group, pts tended to have higher risk disease and risk of transformation to acute leukemia compared with wtRAS. OS tended to be worse in some subgroups in muRAS. Although the prognostic impact of RAS mutations in MDS appears to be limited, mutations could be used to develop targeted therapeutic interventions. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Background SGI-110 is a second generation HMA formulated as a dinucleotide of decitabine (DAC) and deoxyguanosine. The compound is delivered as a small volume, pharmaceutically stable subcutaneous (SQ) injection which allows longer half-life and more extended DAC exposure than DAC intravenous infusion. This pharmacokinetic profile offers the potential for improved biological and clinical activity and safety over currently available HMAs (Kantarjian et al. ASH, 2012). Methods A randomized Phase 1-2 first-in-human PK/PD-guided, dose-escalation study was conducted in patients with relapsed or refractory intermediate or high-risk MDS or AML. Patients were initially randomized to one of two SQ regimens - Dailyx5 or Weeklyx3, for 28-day courses. Subsequently, a Twice Weeklyx3 regimen (Monday, Thursday) was added for evaluation based on emerging LINE-1 demethylation data from the Weeklyx3 regimen. Results 93 patients (74 AML, 19 MDS) were treated in the dose escalation phase: 44, 34, and 15 patients were treated in the Dailyx5, Weeklyx3, and the Twice Weeklyx3 regimens, respectively. Across the three regimens, median age was 70 years (range, 29–86), 68% male, and 87% had ECOG PS of 0-1. The median number of prior regimens was 3 (range, 1–9) and 68% of patients had prior HMA treatment (59% AML, and 100% MDS). Of the 74 AML patients treated, 31 (42%) had secondary AML including antecedent MDS. Patients received a median of 2 courses of SGI-110 (range, 1-20). LINE-1 demethylation data at the 2 highest dose levels which were well tolerated and evaluated for all 3 regimens (60 and 90 mg/m2) are shown in the figure below. The Dailyx5 regimen demonstrated the most potent average LINE-1 demethylation, while the Twice Weeklyx3 achieved the most prolonged LINE-1 demethylation. The least potent demethylation was seen with the Weeklyx3 regimen. There was no additional demethylation at the 90 mg/m2 dose compared to 60 mg/m2in all 3 regimens. Responses were reported according to the IWG Criteria 2006 (MDS)/2003 (AML). Complete remissions were observed in 5 AML patients (2CRs, 1CRp, and 2CRi). Clinical responses (2 mCR and 3 HI-E, 1 HI-N, 1 HI-P) were observed in 6 MDS patients, all of whom had been previously treated with HMA. All AML responses and both mCR in MDS patients achieved ≥10% LINE-1 demethylation. Safety is reported based on Adverse Events (AEs) as graded by the CTCAE v4 criteria. Across regimens, the Twice Weeklyx3 demonstrated an increased number of related AEs compared to the other regimens. The most commonly reported related AEs ≥ 10% in the Dailyx5 regimen (injection site pain, thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, anemia, fatigue), Weeklyx3 regimen (injection site pain and diarrhea), and Twice Weeklyx3 regimen (injection site pain, injection site reaction, fatigue, dizziness, febrile neutropenia, neutropenia, anemia, and thrombocytopenia). Conclusions SQ SGI-110 is a potent HMA using all 3 regimens evaluated. The most potent hypomethylation was achieved with Dailyx5 dosing and the most prolonged hypomethylation was achieved using the Twice Weeklyx3 regimen. All 3 regimens were well tolerated. Clinical responses were observed in heavily pretreated patients, including those with prior HMA exposure. These results support the ongoing Phase 2 expansion study investigating the Dailyx5 dosing schedule in patients with MDS and AML who are either HMA treatment naïve or previously treated with HMAs. Disclosures: Roboz: Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding. Issa:Astex Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding. Rizzieri:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Stock:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. O'Connell:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Yee:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Tibes:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Griffiths:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Walsh:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Feldman:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Ritchie:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Rao:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Larson:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Garcia-Manero:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Ravandi:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Jabbour:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Cortes:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Schimmer:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Mesa:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Blum:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Chung:Astex Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Research Funding. Naim:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Taverna:Astex Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Employment. Hao:Astex Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Employment. Choy:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Azab:Astex Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Employment. Kantarjian:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding.

Abstract Background: Blood eosinophilia results either from autonomous expansion of a myeloid stem/progenitor cell, or as a response to cytokines that promote growth and differentiation of eosinophil progenitors. A subset of patients with hypereosinophilic syndrome/idiopathic eosinophilia (HES/IE) display abnormal T-cell immunophenotype and/or clonal rearrangements of the T-cell receptor (TCR), operationally assigned the term “lymphocyte variant” HES/IE. Information on the prevalence, FIP1L1-PDGFRA status, and clinical course of such patients is limited. Methods: Consecutive patients with eosinophilia were identified by querying our institutional electronic database from 1995 to 2004. Clonal rearrangements of the γchain of the TCR were identified by polymerase chain reaction followed by gel electrophoresis in all cases, and confirmed by Southern Blot analysis of the gene coding for the β chain of the TCR, using standard methods. FIP1L1-PDGFRA was screened by fluorescence in situ hybridization. Results: We studied a total of 205 consecutive patients with eosinophilia defined as an absolute eosinophil count (AEC) of > 600/μL, who also had a bone marrow study performed. Of these, TCR gene rearrangements studies were performed in 99 patients (AEC range of 650 to 38,000/μL) including 3 children and 96 adults (age range 18 to 88 years; 58 males). Among these 99 patients, 14 (~14%) had a demonstrable T-cell clone in peripheral blood, bone marrow aspirate, lymph node, and/or skin. Six of the 14 patients with a demonstrable T-cell clone were found to have a concurrent T-cell malignancy at the time of evaluation including T-cell large granular lymphocytic (T-LGL) leukemia - 1 case and peripheral T-cell lymphoma - 5 cases. The other 8 (~8%) patients otherwise fulfilled the working diagnosis of “lymphocyte variant” HES/IE (median AEC=2045/μL, range 720/μL to 9600/μL). The median duration of eosinophilic prodrome, prior to identification of the occult T-cell clone was 5 years (range 3 months to 11 years), and virtually all had dominant skin involvement presenting as dermatitis (5 cases) or episodic angioedema with eosinophilia (EAE) (2 cases). Five of 7 patients tested had an elevated serum IgE level, and a similar proportion displayed an abnormal T-cell immunophenotype (most commonly, aberrant CD5 and/or CD7 expression). Six of the 8 patients with an occult T-cell clone were evaluated for FIP1L1-PDGFRA and tested negative. Two patients were effectively treated with low-dose oral cyclophosphamide or methotrexate (follow-up duration of 3+ and 6+ years, respectively) whereas imatinib treatment was ineffective in another 2 patients. Two patients (25%) transformed into cutaneous T-cell lymphoma after 3 to 8 years of eosinophilic prodrome. Conclusion: The current study suggests that the presence of a T-cell clone in idiopathic eosinophilia is a marker/harbinger of a primarily skin-based peripheral T-cell lymphoma that responds to T cell-directed therapy but not imatinib therapy, which is consistent with the absence of FIP1L1-PDGFRA in such cases.

Abstract Background Systemic mastocytosis (SM) is characterized by abnormal proliferation and accumulation of neoplastic mast cells. Patients (pts) with SM are treated with recombinant interferon-alpha or cladribine. Responses to these agents are poor. Malignant mast cells in SM carry, in most cases, a mutation involving codon 816 of the c-KIT gene (D816V) resulting in constitutively activated c-kit receptor tyrosine kinase believed to be important for disease progression. Agents that antagonize this mutated form of c-kit may have clinical benefit in SM. Dasatinib is one such agent, proven effective in pre-clinical in vitro and in vivo models of SM. Study Design In pilot Phase II trial for SM, Dasatinib was administered at 70mg PO BID. Response was assessed after minimum of 3 months (3 cycles) of therapy. Therapy was discontinued in pts who showed no response after 6 cycles of therapy. Response was evaluated following guidelines proposed by Valent et al. (Leuk Res. 25;603–625, 2001). In addition, all symptoms related to SM were recorded and monitored. Results Thus far, a total of 30 pts have been treated; 24 are evaluable for response and toxicity, including 6 with aggressive SM (ASM), 4 with SM and associated hematologic non-mast cell disease (SM-AHNMD; 2 with chronic myelomonocytic leukemia and one each with myelofibrosis [SM-MF; JAK2 mutation positive and abnormal cytogenetics] and hypereosinophilic syndrome [SM-HES; FIP1L1-PDGFRa negative]) and 14 with indolent SM (ISM) with uncontrolled symptoms despite optimal supportive care measures. Median age is 57 years (range, 35–73); these were 10 males and 14 females; time from diagnosis to dasatinib therapy 49 months (range, 0–233), performance status 1 in 23 and 2 in 1 pt. Eleven patients were previously treated: imatinib mesylate in 6; denileukin diftitox in 4; and erythropoietin, interferon-alpha, or cladribine in 2 each. One pt, who had undergone splenectomy, had hepatomegaly prior to start of therapy. Median Hb 12.4g/dL (range, 8.5–15.4), WBC 6.7×109/L, (range, 3.5–53.3), and platelets 263×109/L (range, 60–377); no patient was transfusion dependent. Percent bone marrow mast cell varied from <10% in 9 pts, to 60% in 4 pts; blood tryptase level was ≤20ng/mL (not significant) in 7 pts and >200ng/mL (upper limit of the test) in 7 pts. A total of 94 cycles of therapy were administered. The median number of cycles was 4 (range, 1–8). Ten patients stopped therapy: 1 due to progression of AHNMD to acute leukemia, 1 lost a response (symptomatic improvement), 2 had no response after 3 months of therapy, and 6 due to toxicity. No grade 4 toxicity was observed. Twelve patients decreased the dose of dasatinib to 50mg PO BID, of which four to 40mg PO BID. Two patients (8%) achieved complete remission, one with SM-MF, and one with SM-HES. Both were c-KIT mutation negative and had low, not significant tryptase levels. Both were anemic (Hb 9.4g/dL) and failed erythropoietin therapy, and had abnormal WBC differential; one had low platelets (90×109/L). No significant response in % bone marrow mast cells (4 pts are too early in therapy) or blood tryptase levels have been observed in other patients so far. Symptoms related to SM improved significantly in 7 patients (29%). Conclusion Dasatinib is active in SM (overall response rate 37%). Updated clinical and molecular results will be presented.

Abstract PRM-151 (PRM) is a recombinant form of Pentraxin-2, an endogenous human protein that acts at sites of tissue damage, inducing macrophage differentiation to prevent and reverse fibrosis. PRM has broad anti-fibrotic activity in multiple preclinical models of established fibrotic diseases and no dose limiting toxicities in phase 1 trials. Myelofibrosis (MF: primary (PMF), post-essential thrombocythemia (post-ET MF), and post polycythemia vera (Post PV MF)) is a myeloid malignancy characterized by progressive bone marrow (BM) fibrosis with resultant anemia, abnormal platelet and leukocyte counts, extramedullary hematopoiesis, and a well-defined symptom complex. This study investigated the potential of PRM in MF to reduce BM fibrosis and to improve key disease features including abnormal blood counts, symptoms, and splenomegaly. MF patients (pts) with Dynamic International Prognostic Scoring System (DIPSS) intermediate-1, intermediate-2, or high-risk disease and grade ≥ 2 BM fibrosis, either on no current therapy or on a stable dose of ruxolitinib (RUX) for ≥ 12 weeks and no improvement in spleen for ≥ 4 weeks, were eligible for stage 1 of this open-label adaptive trial. Assignment to one of the 4 treatment arms was per investigator and pt choice: PRM 10 mg/kg IV 1-hour infusion days 1, 3, 5, then weekly (QW) or every 4 weeks (Q4W), alone or with RUX, for 24 weeks. Primary endpoint was overall response rate by IWG-MRT (symptoms by MPN-SAF Total Symptom Score (TSS), spleen by palpation) and/or decrease in BM fibrosis by ≥ 1 grade with otherwise stable disease. BM biopsies were obtained at baseline, 3 and 6 months, and were evaluated centrally by two blinded hematopathologists. Pts with clinical benefit were allowed to continue treatment in an extension. At least one response in any arm was required for that regimen to be evaluated in Stage 2. Twenty seven pts were enrolled: 8 PRM QW, 7 PRM Q4W, 6 PRM QW + RUX, 6 PRM Q4W + RUX. Median age 67 years (52-85); 70% DIPSS Int-2 or High Risk; 52% PMF, 15% post-ET MF, 33% post-PV MF; 63% grade 3 BM fibrosis, Hemoglobin (Hgb) < 100 g/L in 56% and < 85 g/L in 26%, platelet count (PLT)< 100 x 109/L in 52% and < 25 x 109/L in 30%; 22% were JAK inhibitor-naive and 52% had received a prior JAK inhibitor (not including ongoing RUX). Twenty pts completed 24 weeks of therapy; 18 continued extension treatment. PRM-151 was well-tolerated alone and with RUX; most adverse events (AEs) were Grade 1/2 and unrelated, with 3 Grade 3 possibly related AEs and 5 possibly related serious AEs. Nine of 26 evaluable pts responded, for an overall response rate (ORR) of 35%, with 4 IWG symptom clinical improvements (CI) and 6 BM fibrosis responses (Table 1), with ≥ 1 response in each arm. One pt had a CI and BM response. Reduction in BM fibrosis was associated with normal erythroid microarchitecture, normal or decreased myeloid:erythroid ratio, and fewer paratrabecular megakaryocytes, all potential surrogates of improved bone marrow microenvironment. IWG stable disease was observed in 77% of pts, with trends of clinical benefit in Hgb, PLT, peripheral blood blasts, spleen, and symptoms (Table 2). In 14 patients (54%), all parameters were stable or improved. Conclusion: PRM-151 was well-tolerated in patients with advanced MF, with no evidence of drug-related myelosuppression and encouraging trends in both clinical and histologic aspects of the disease. Reduction in BM fibrosis, stable to improved hematologic parameters, symptom responses, and stable to reduced spleen size support further development of PRM-151 in MF. Table 1 Two additional subjects had decrease in bone marrow fibrosis but progressive disease. Number of Patients BM Fibrosis Grade at Last Study Timepoint 3 2 1 BM Fibrosis Grade at Baseline 3 8 3 1 2 1 4 2 Abstract 713. Table 2 Outcome Parameter Denominator (n) Clinical Benefit Pts with Improvement (n/%) ORR (primary endpoint) All evaluable pts (26) IWG-MRT CI AND/OR reduction in BM fibrosis by ≥ 1 grade 9 (35%) Hgb Hgb < 100 g/L (15) ≥10 g/L increase from baseline AND no transfusions or 50% reduction in transfusions if transfusion dependent 6 (40%) PLT PLT < 100 x 109/L (13) > 100 x 109/L AND increase of ≥20 x 109/L ; increase of ≥20 x 109/L if baseline < 50, AND/OR increase of ≥ 10 x 109/L with discontinuation of transfusions 8 (62%) Blasts ≥ 1% peripheral blasts (14) No peripheral blasts 3 (21%) Symptoms All evaluable pts (26) ≥ 25% reduction in TSS ≥ 12 weeks 10 (38%) Spleen Palpable spleen (19) ≥ 25% decrease ≥ 4 weeks AND any decrease ≥ 12 weeks 5 (26%) Disclosures Verstovsek: Incyte: Research Funding; Astrazeneca: Research Funding; Lilly Oncology: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Geron: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Cell Therapeutics: Research Funding. Mesa:Incyte, CTI, NS pharma, Gilead, Celgene: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding. Foltz:Janssen: Consultancy; Promedior: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Gupta:Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding. Mascarenhas:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding. Ritchie:Celgene, Incyte: Speakers Bureau; Promedior: Research Funding. Hoffman:Geron: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; All Cells LLC: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Promedior: Research Funding. Pozdnyakova:Sanofi: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; Promedior: Consultancy. Hasserjian:Sanofi: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; Promedior: Consultancy. Trehu:Promedior: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kantarjian:ARIAD, Pfizer, Amgen: Research Funding. Gotlib:Novartis: Research Funding, Travel Reimbursement, Travel Reimbursement Other; Sanofi: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Travel Reimbursement Other; Promedior: Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 2847 Background and Purpose: Myelofibrosis (MF) is a progressive Philadelphia-negative myeloproliferative neoplasm characterized by debilitating symptoms, massive splenomegaly, and anemia, which severely impairs quality of life. When medical therapy is not effective or tolerated, splenectomy may be required to ease symptoms in patients with symptomatic portal hypertension, massive splenomegaly, and/or frequent red blood cell transfusions (Barbui et al. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:761–770). In a recent study (Tefferi et al. Mayo Clin Proc. 2012;87:25–33) up to 27% of patients diagnosed with MF eventually underwent splenectomy. However, splenectomy is associated with limited duration of symptom response, high rates of perioperative morbidity and mortality, and acceleration of hepatomegaly. Clinical studies in patients with MF have demonstrated that ruxolitinib, an oral JAK1/JAK2 inhibitor, provides significant and durable reductions in splenomegaly, the burden of MF-associated symptoms, and also improved quality of life. In this post hoc analysis of pooled data from these studies, we determined the incidence of splenectomy in patients treated with ruxolitinib and those who received placebo or best available therapy (BAT) to evaluate whether ruxolitinib therapy may affect the need for splenectomy. Methods: This analysis included patients who participated in the ruxolitinib phase I/II trial (N=153; Verstovsek et al. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:1117–1127); COMFORT-I, a phase III, 24-month placebo-controlled trial of ruxolitinib (N=309; Verstovsek et al. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:799–807); and COMFORT-II, a phase III, 48-month randomized trial comparing the effects of ruxolitinib and BAT (N=219; Harrison et al. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:787–798). Incidence of splenectomy while on treatment or during the protocol-specified follow-up period, adjusted for differences in the duration of follow up, was calculated for patients on ruxolitinib, placebo, or BAT. Results: As a result of the crossover rules and a higher discontinuation rate on the comparator arms in the phase III studies, mean follow-up duration for placebo (0.67 years) or BAT (0.95 years) overall was substantially shorter than mean follow-up duration for ruxolitinib (1.78 years). Baseline characteristics of the 14 patients who underwent splenectomy were as follows: median age=63 years; median time since initial diagnosis=7.8 years; median spleen length (n=13): 17.0 cm (range: 0–28.0 cm); median spleen volume (in those with measurement, n=11)=2924 cm3 (range: 1203–6807 cm3); IPSS high risk=50%, intermediate-2 risk=43%, intermediate-1=7%. Among patients originally randomized and treated with ruxolitinib, the incidence of splenectomy was 1.1 events per 100 patient years (Table). For patients treated with placebo or BAT in the phase III studies, the incidence of splenectomy was approximately three times higher at 2.9 events per 100 patient years, despite the fact that patients on placebo or BAT were allowed to crossover to ruxolitinib if they had worsening symptomatic splenomegaly. Conclusions: Although limited by small numbers, results of this analysis suggest that ruxolitinib reduces the need for splenectomy in patients with MF. Because of crossover to ruxolitinib and higher discontinuation rates in placebo and BAT, follow-up duration was shorter in these treatment arms compared with ruxolitinib. Further, ruxolitinib treatment in crossover patients may have prevented progression of symptomatic splenomegaly in some patients who may have otherwise become candidates for splenectomy. Our analysis may underestimate the true incidence of splenectomy among patients not receiving ruxolitinib therapy and therefore, the relative reduction in splenectomy rate in patients receiving this therapy. Longer-term follow up will better define the splenectomy rate in ruxolitinib-treated patients. Disclosures: Verstovsek: Incyte Corporation: Research Funding. Kiladjian:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Shire: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Research Funding. Mesa:Incyte: Research Funding; Lilly: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; YM Bioscience: Research Funding. Vannucchi:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Gotlib:Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Support for travel to meeting for the study or other purposes from Incyte Other. Kantarjian:Incyte: grant support Other. Sirulnik:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Peng:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Sandor:Incyte Corporation: An employee of Incyte and receiving stock options as part of his compensation Other, Employment. Harrison:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; YM Bioscience: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi Aventis: Honoraria; Shire: Honoraria, Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 1727 Background: Myelofibrosis (MF) is characterized by cytopenias, splenomegaly, and burdensome symptoms that may worsen over time. Ruxolitinib (RUX) has been shown to reduce splenomegaly and improve MF-associated symptoms in 2 phase III studies, including COMFORT-I, a randomized, double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled trial, which also showed prolonged survival in favor of RUX. Purpose: In this post hoc analysis of COMFORT-I, the efficacy of RUX in patients with varying degrees of splenomegaly and symptom severity at baseline was evaluated to assess the potential effects of earlier versus later intervention in this progressive disease. Methods: COMFORT-I participants randomized to RUX (n=155) or PBO (n=154) had MF with an International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) score ≥2 and a platelet count of ≥100 × 109/L. Patients with protocol-defined worsening splenomegaly were permitted to cross over from PBO to RUX. The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients with ≥35% reduction in spleen volume (SV) at week (wk) 24. Change in Total Symptom Score (TSS) was a secondary endpoint. TSS was the sum of 6 symptom scores (night sweats, itching, abdominal discomfort, pain under ribs on left side, early satiety, muscle/bone pain) assessed with the modified MF Symptom Assessment Form (MFSAF) v2.0 on a scale of 0 (“absent”) to 10 (“worst imaginable”). Patients were stratified by palpable spleen length (SL) (≤ 10 cm, <10 to 20 cm, >20 cm) and TSS tertile (≤11.1, >11.1 to 22.0, >22.0) at baseline. SV and TSS stratified by baseline values as described were summarized over time. To account for PBO crossover, modeling was performed to predict SV after crossover using a nonlinear mixed model that best predicted individual patient data. Last observation carried forward was used to impute missing TSS data. Results: Mean absolute SV and TSS worsened over time in the PBO group regardless of baseline SL and TSS, demonstrating the progressive nature of MF. In patients treated with RUX, mean absolute SV and TSS at wk 24 were lower for patients with smaller SL and less severe TSS at baseline, respectively (Table); absolute differences with PBO were significant within each subgroup. Therefore, patients who initiated RUX therapy with more advanced MF were less likely to achieve the same clinical status experienced by patients initiating therapy with less advanced MF. Notably, even after 24 wks of RUX treatment, SV and TSS reductions in the cohorts with larger SL or greater TSS at baseline did not achieve levels equivalent to baseline of the next lesser baseline severity group (Table; Figure). Although the severity of splenomegaly and symptoms at baseline influenced the absolute SV and TSS achieved at wk 24, RUX treatment resulted in similar percent reductions in SV and improvements TSS across all subgroups, with the exception of the lower TSS tertile (where there is less room for improvement). In contrast, PBO treatment resulted in increases in SV and worsening of symptoms and patients with less severe SV and TSS at baseline experienced the greatest percent increases in SV and TSS at wk 24. Conclusions: RUX therapy was associated with SV reduction and symptom improvement regardless of spleen size or symptom severity at baseline, whereas patients on PBO experienced disease progression across all subgroups. Patients receiving RUX with less advanced disease achieved an overall better clinical status, as defined by lower absolute SV and symptom scores. This analysis suggests that initiation of RUX in patients with less severe splenomegaly and symptoms may contribute to improved patient outcomes. Disclosures: Mesa: Incyte: Research Funding; Lilly: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; YM Bioscience: Research Funding. Gotlib:Incyte: Consultancy. Kantarjian:Incyte: grant support Other. Sun:Incyte: Employment. Verstovsek:Incyte Corporation: Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction: Guadecitabine (SGI-110) is a novel next-generation HMA administered as a small volume subcutaneous (SC) injection which results in extended decitabine exposure. Phase 2 studies have been conducted in TN-AML patients who were not candidates for intensive chemotherapy using two different doses and schedules of guadecitabine. We report here a comparative efficacy and safety analysis of the 5-day and 10-day regimens. Methods: TN-AML patients who were not candidates for intensive chemotherapy based on age (≥ 65 y), poor performance status (PS 2), comorbidities, or poor risk cytogenetics were enrolled in 2 separate treatment cohorts in the Phase 2 study. In the first cohort, patients were randomized (1:1) to either 60 mg/m2/d or 90 mg/m2/d on Days 1-5 (5-day regimen). In the second cohort, patients were treated with 60 mg/m2/d on Days 1-5 and Days 8-12 (10-day regimen) for up to 4 cycles, followed by 60 mg/m2/d Days 1-5 in subsequent cycles. Cycles were scheduled every 28 days for both regimes with dose reductions/delays allowed based on response and tolerability. Patients remained on treatment as long as they continued to benefit with no unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was the composite Complete Response (CRc): Complete Response (CR) + CR with incomplete platelet recovery (CRp) + CR with incomplete neutrophil recovery (CRi) using modified International Working Group (IWG) criteria (Cheson et al, 2003). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), and safety. Results: There was no difference in efficacy or safety between 60 and 90 mg/m2/d on the 5-day regimen (Yee et al, European Hematology Association meeting 2014, S647), so data are reported here for the two doses combined on the 5-day cohort. There were 51 patients treated in the 5-day regimen cohort and 52 treated with the 10-day regimen. There was no statistically significant difference in patient characteristics between the 2 regimens; median age 77.9 vs. 77.3 years ; male 59% vs. 65%; PS 2 or higher 35% vs. 40%; median BM blasts 40.0% vs. 49.5%; poor risk cytogenetics 46% vs. 43% for the 5-day and 10-day cohorts, respectively. Follow up of the 10-day cohort patients was shorter as it started after completion of enrolment of the 5-day cohort. The median follow up was 25.7 and 12.4 months and median number of cycles was 5 (range 1-26) and 3 (range 1-13) for the 5-day and 10-day cohorts, respectively. There was no significant difference in the primary efficacy endpoint, CRc, between the 2 regimens (p=0.43). CRc was achieved in 29/51 patients (57%) on the 5-day regimen (19 CR, 3 CRp, and 7 CRi) and in 25/52 patients (48%) on the 10-day regimen (16 CR, 5 CRp, and 4 CRi). Median OS was 10.5 and 8.7 months for the 5-day and 10-day cohorts, respectively (p=0.89). The 30, 60, and 90-day all-cause mortality rates were not statistically significant between the two cohorts: 5.9%, 15.7%, and 21.6% on the 5-day regimen and 1.9%, 17.3%, and 28.8% on the 10-day regimen. The most common Grade ≥3 AEs regardless of relationship to guadecitabine were: febrile neutropenia 59% vs. 60%, thrombocytopenia 47% vs. 38%, neutropenia 39% vs. 33%, anemia 27% vs. 19%, pneumonia 24% vs. 27%; and sepsis 12% vs. 19%, for the 5-day and 10-day cohorts respectively, none of which was statistically significant. Fifteen patients remain on treatment (5 from the 5-day cohort and 10 from the 10-day cohort). Conclusions: Guadecitabine is clinically active with a good safety profile in TN-AML patients not candidates for intensive chemotherapy. Unlike in relapsed/refractory AML, where the 10-day regimen of guadecitabine showed a trend toward improved efficacy (Roboz et al, Annals of Oncology 25 Supplement 4, 2014), there was no significant difference in either efficacy or safety between the 5-day and 10-day regimens in newly diagnosed AML patients. Guadecitabine 60 mg/m2/d SC Days 1-5 is currently being investigated in an 800-patient multicenter randomized phase 3 study in TN-AML patients unfit to receive intensive chemotherapy (ASTRAL-1 Phase 3 clinical trial: ClinicalTrials.gov reference NCT02348489). Disclosures Kropf: Teva Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. O'Connell:Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Griffiths:Astex: Research Funding; Alexion Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Rizzieri:Teva: Other: ad board, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Other: ad board, Speakers Bureau. Stock:Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Savona:Karyopharm: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Rosenblat:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Berdeja:Celgene: Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Array: Research Funding; Curis: Research Funding; Acetylon: Research Funding; MEI: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Wilson:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Lowder:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Taverna:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Hao:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Azab:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Issa:Janssen: Consultancy; Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy.

Abstract Background: SGI-110 is a second generation HMA formulated as a dinucleotide of decitabine (DAC) and deoxyguanosine delivered as a small volume SC injection that yields longer half-life and more extended DAC exposure than DAC IV infusion. A phase 1 clinical trial of SGI-110 demonstrated a differentiated pharmacokinetic profile from DAC IV, potent hypomethylation, and clinical responses in previously treated patients with MDS and AML (Kantarjian et al. 2012). Phase 1 established 60 mg/m2 QDx5 as the biologically effective dose (BED), and 90 mg/m2QDx5 as the Maximum tolerated dose (MTD) in MDS patients given in 28-day cycles. Phase 2 is conducted to evaluate dose response between the BED and MTD in MDS patients. Methods: Int, or HR MDS, and CMML patients who were either treatment-naïve or previously treated were randomized to either 60 mg/m2 or 90 mg/m2QDx5 every 28 days. Efficacy was evaluated by the clinical responses of CR, PR, marrow CR (mCR), and Hematological Improvement (HI) based on the International Working Group Criteria 2006 as well as transfusion-independence. Adverse events (AEs) as graded by the CTCAE v4 criteria and pharmacodynamic biological activity as measured by Long Interspersed Nucleotide Element LINE-1 (an index of global DNA methylation) were also assessed. Patients are being followed for overall survival. Results: The study completed target enrolment with 102 patients: 53 who were refractory or have relapsed on prior treatment, and 49 previously untreated. Fifty three patients were randomized to 60 mg/m2 and 49 patients to 90 mg/m2 QDx5 with a median follow up of 8.2 months (range 1-21). Most baseline patient characteristics were well balanced between the 2 treatment arms with no significant differences in median age (71.7 vs. 72.5 y); male gender (70 vs. 61%); ECOG PS 2 (15 vs. 12%); HR MDS (28 vs. 37%); transfusion-dependence (57 vs. 55%), median baseline Hb (9.25 vs. 9.3 g/dL); platelets count (42.5 vs. 45 x109/L), and neutrophils count (1.19 vs. 1.16 x109/L) for the 60 and 90 mg/m2 QDx5 respectively. However, there were 15 CMML patients (28%) randomized to 60 mg/m2 vs. only 7 CMML patients (14%) randomized to 90 mg/m2(p=0.097). All but 2 patients in the previously treated group received one or more HMA. At the time of the data cutoff, 38 of 102 patients (37%) were still on treatment. Median number of treatment cycles was 4 for previously treated patients, and 5 for the treatment naïve group (range 1-22 cycles). CR+mCR were observed in 10/53 (19%), and 11/49 (22%) in the 60 and 90 mg/m2 arms respectively (p=0.8). CR was observed in 7/49 treatment naïve patients (14%) while CR+mCR were observed in 11/53 previously treated patients (21%) with no significant differences between 60 and 90 mg/m2 arms. Transfusion independence for at least 8 weeks was reported in 32% and 24% for platelets and RBCs respectively with no difference between the 2 treatment arms. Treatment naïve patients benefited from higher rate of transfusion-independence (58% and 46% for platelets and RBCs respectively). Potent demethylation was achieved in both treatment arms with a mean LINE-1 DNA demethylation of 27.3 and 30.5% for 60 and 90 mg/m2 respectively (p=0.12). Overall incidence of Grade ≥3 AEs regardless of relationship to treatment was reported in 81 vs. 88% for 60 and 90 mg/m2 treatment arms respectively (p=0.42).There was a slightly higher but non-significant difference in Grade ≥3 thrombocytopenia (51 vs 38%) and pneumonia (20 vs. 13%) for the 90 mg/m2 arm compared to 60 mg/m2. Early 8-week any-cause mortality occurred in 3/102 patients treated (3%), 2 at 60 and 1 at 90 mg/m2. Follow up for survival is still ongoing. Conclusions: SC SGI-110 is a well-tolerated novel HMA with biological and clinical activity in the treatment of Int and HR MDS, and CMML patients with particularly promising activity in patients previously treated with azacitidine or decitabine. Clinical responses, transfusion independence, DNA demethylation as assessed by LINE-1, and Safety did not significantly differ between the 2 treatment doses. Disclosures Tibes: Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Rosenblat:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Yee:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Griffiths:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Issa:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding. Naim:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Taverna:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Hao:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Azab:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Roboz:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy.