Frankfurt, Olga

PURPOSE Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) improves outcomes for patients with AML harboring an internal tandem duplication mutation of FLT3 ( FLT3-ITD) AML. These patients are routinely treated with a FLT3 inhibitor after HCT, but there is limited evidence to support this. Accordingly, we conducted a randomized trial of post-HCT maintenance with the FLT3 inhibitor gilteritinib (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02997202 ) to determine if all such patients benefit or if detection of measurable residual disease (MRD) could identify those who might benefit. METHODS Adults with FLT3-ITD AML in first remission underwent HCT and were randomly assigned to placebo or 120 mg once daily gilteritinib for 24 months after HCT. The primary end point was relapse-free survival (RFS). Secondary end points included overall survival (OS) and the effect of MRD pre- and post-HCT on RFS and OS. RESULTS Three hundred fifty-six participants were randomly assigned post-HCT to receive gilteritinib or placebo. Although RFS was higher in the gilteritinib arm, the difference was not statistically significant (hazard ratio [HR], 0.679 [95% CI, 0.459 to 1.005]; two-sided P = .0518). However, 50.5% of participants had MRD detectable pre- or post-HCT, and, in a prespecified subgroup analysis, gilteritinib was beneficial in this population (HR, 0.515 [95% CI, 0.316 to 0.838]; P = .0065). Those without detectable MRD showed no benefit (HR, 1.213 [95% CI, 0.616 to 2.387]; P = .575). CONCLUSION Although the overall improvement in RFS was not statistically significant, RFS was higher for participants with detectable FLT3-ITD MRD pre- or post-HCT who received gilteritinib treatment. To our knowledge, these data are among the first to support the effectiveness of MRD-based post-HCT therapy.

AbstractGilteritinib is approved for the treatment of relapsed/refractory (R/R) acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with an FLT3‐mutation (FLT3mut+). However, the gilteritinib phase 3 ADMIRAL study (Perl et al NEJM 2019) was conducted prior to widespread adoption of either midostaurin as a component of standard intensive induction and consolidation or posttransplant FLT3 inhibitor maintenance. We performed a retrospective analysis using data from 11 US centers and where we identified 113 patients who received gilteritinib alone or as combination therapy for the treatment of R/R FLT3mut+ AML. The composite complete remission (CR) rate (CRc, defined as CR + CRi + CR with incomplete platelet recovery [CRp]) was 48.7% (n = 55). The CRc rate after treatment with gilteritinib in patients who were treated with only prior 7+3 and midostaurin with or without consolidation was 58% with a median survival of 7.8 months. Survival was longest in patients who obtained a CR, particularly a cMRD (clinical minimal or measurable residual disease) negative response; this remained significant after censoring at the time of stem cell transplant. The mitogen‐activated protein kinase pathway activating mutations that are known for gilteritinib resistance (NRAS, KRAS, and PTPN11) had lower CRc (35% vs. 60.5%) and lower median overall survival than patients' whose leukemia did not express these mutations (4.9 months vs. 7.8 months) (HR 2.4; 95% CI 1. 5.4) p value <.01.

Abstract Background: Mcl-1 is an anti-apoptotic protein in the Bcl-2 family that contributes to the pathophysiology of certain B-cell malignancies and AML. Dependence on Mcl-1 is associated with poor prognosis, and increased Mcl-1 levels is a common mechanism of resistance to venetoclax. Voruciclib (VORU), a potent oral CDK9 inhibitor (Ki &lt;10 nM), was shown to decrease Mcl-1 protein expression in preclinical models, supporting its evaluation as a single agent and in combination with venetoclax in AML and B-cell malignancies. In two dose escalation phase 1 studies of VORU in patients (pts) with solid tumors, the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was established at 350 mg when administered daily continuously and 600 mg when administered on days 1 to 14 in a 21-day cycle. Based on concentrations needed for antitumoral activity in preclinical models, pharmacokinetic (PK) results predict a dose of ~200 mg could be sufficient for target inhibition. The present phase 1 study is the first to evaluate the MTD, recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D), dose-limiting toxicities (DLT), safety, PK, and preliminary efficacy of VORU in pts with relapsed/refractory hematologic malignancies (NCT03547115). Methods: Pts with relapsed B-cell lymphoma, chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), or AML were eligible if age ≥18 years, ECOG performance status ≤1, disease progression after failure of standard therapies, adequate hepatic and renal function, and no prior CDK9 therapy. Dose escalation started at 50 mg, followed a 3+3 design, and DLTs were assessed in Cycle 1. Initially VORU was administered once daily continuously in a 28-day cycle (Group I). After 2 DLTs were observed at 100 mg, administration was changed to once daily on days 1 to 14 in a 28-day cycle (Group II), patients with prior allogeneic transplant were excluded, and dose escalation (100, 150, 200 mg) proceeded in separate cohorts for AML and B-cell malignancies. Disease response was assessed by the Lugano, iwCLL, and 2017 ELN criteria. Results: To date 28 pts have been enrolled: 14 AML, 7 diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), 3 follicular lymphoma (FL), 2 CLL and 2 mantle cell lymphoma. Group I enrolled 16 pts, 8 each at 50 mg and 100 mg. Group II enrolled 12 pts, 10 with AML administered VORU at 100, 150 or 200 mg and 2 pts with B-cell malignancies administered VORU at 100 mg. Dose escalation in AML is completed. Median age was 71 years (range 40-90) and 54% of pts were male. Pts were generally heavily pretreated, with a median of 3 prior therapies (range 1-8). Median number of VORU cycles administered was 2 (range 1-4). Drug-related serious adverse events (SAEs) were reported in Group I only and consisted of 2 DLT of Gr 3 pneumonitis at 100 mg, both in AML pts treated with allogeneic transplant followed by GVHD in the preceding 12 months, one of whom also had a concurrent Gr 3 differentiation syndrome (DS), and 1 SAE not meeting DLT criteria, a Gr 3 hypoxemic respiratory failure in Cycle 4 in a pt with DLBCL at 50 mg. One AML pt developed ischemic bowel thought to be due to disease progression. Symptoms consistent with DS were observed in 4 AML pts. In Group II, no DLTs have been observed to date and there were no Gr 3-5 drug-related adverse events reported. There is no evidence of significant drug-related neutropenia in pts with B-cell malignancies. To date, in Groups I and II combined, 1 AML pt achieved a morphologic leukemia-free state, 2 AML pts achieved stable disease (SD), and 3 pts with B-cell malignancies had a best response of SD, including 1 FL pt who achieved a 42% reduction in SPD, and 1 CLL pt with relapsed disease after chemoimmunotherapy, venetoclax, and ibrutinib who had stable blood counts. Conclusions: VORU at doses up to 200 mg administered on 14 consecutive days in a 28-day cycle was well tolerated with no DLTs observed. Consistent with the phase 1 studies in solid tumors, no significant myelosuppression was seen in pts with B-cell malignancies. The safety profile does not indicate overlapping toxicities with venetoclax. Disease stabilization was observed in heavily pretreated pts and differentiation syndrome was observed in AML indicating biologic activity. Enrollment at 200 mg will continue in an expansion cohort in AML. A forthcoming protocol amendment will evaluate VORU in combination with venetoclax in pts with relapsed AML to exploit the dual inhibition of Bcl-2 and Mcl-1. Disclosures Konopleva: Sanofi: Other: grant support, Research Funding; Ablynx: Other: grant support, Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: grant support; KisoJi: Research Funding; Novartis: Other: research funding pending, Patents & Royalties: intellectual property rights; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: grant support, Research Funding; Reata Pharmaceuticals: Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company, Patents & Royalties: intellectual property rights; Stemline Therapeutics: Research Funding; Eli Lilly: Patents & Royalties: intellectual property rights, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Other: grant support, Research Funding; Rafael Pharmaceuticals: Other: grant support, Research Funding; Agios: Other: grant support, Research Funding; Ascentage: Other: grant support, Research Funding; Calithera: Other: grant support, Research Funding; Cellectis: Other: grant support; Forty Seven: Other: grant support, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Grant Support, Research Funding. Brander: Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; BeiGene: Research Funding; DTRM: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Juno Therapeutics/Celgene/Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Other: Biosimilars outcomes research panel; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Ascentage: Research Funding; LOXO: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; MEI Pharma: Research Funding; ArQule: Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Other: informCLL registry steering committee, Research Funding; Verastem: Consultancy; Novartis: Research Funding; NCCN: Other: panel member; ArQule/Merck: Consultancy. Patel: TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Curis, Inc: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; Kite: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Genentech/Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Juno Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Fate Therapeutics: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; MEI Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Trillium Therapeutics: Research Funding; BeiGene: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Morphosys: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Aptevo Therapeutics: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Sunesis Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics/Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Velos Bio: Research Funding; Millenium/Takeda: Research Funding. Diefenbach: Celgene: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; IMab: Research Funding; Merck Sharp & Dohme: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Morphosys: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Gilead: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; AbbVie: Research Funding; Perlmutter Cancer Center at NYU Langone Health: Current Employment; IGM Biosciences: Research Funding; MEI: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Genentech, Inc./ F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Alvarado: BerGenBio: Research Funding; MEI Pharma: Research Funding; CytomX Therapeutics: Consultancy; Astex Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Daiichi-Sankyo: Research Funding; FibroGen: Research Funding; Sun Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding. Al Malki: Rigel Pharma: Consultancy; Neximmune: Consultancy; Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy; Hansa Biopharma: Consultancy; CareDx: Consultancy. Danilov: Bayer Oncology: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda Oncology: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; SecuraBio: Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Rigel Pharm: Honoraria; Bristol-Meyers-Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Beigene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Abedin: Pfizer: Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria; Helsinn: Research Funding; Astellas Pharma Inc.: Research Funding; Agios: Honoraria; Actinium: Research Funding; AltruBio: Research Funding. Ghalie: MEI Pharma: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Davids: Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; MEI Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Ascentage Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Verastem: Consultancy, Research Funding; Surface Oncology: Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy; BeiGene: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Eli Lilly and Company: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; MEI Pharma: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Research to Practice: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy. OffLabel Disclosure: Vorucicilb is an investigational CDK inhibitor being evaluated in patients with hematologic malignancies, specifically relapsed AML and B-cell malignancies. The abstract submitted to ASH 2021 reports the results of the completed dose escalation portion of a phase 1 study.

PURPOSEStandard cytotoxic induction chemotherapy for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) results in prolonged neutropenia and risk of infection. Romyelocel-L is a universal, allogeneic myeloid progenitor cell product being studied to reduce infection during induction chemotherapy.PATIENTS AND METHODSOne hundred sixty-three patients with de novo AML (age ≥ 55 years) receiving induction chemotherapy were randomly assigned on day 0 (d0), of whom 120 were evaluable. Subjects received either romyelocel-L infusion on d9 with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) starting daily d14 (treatment group) or G-CSF daily alone on d14 (control) until absolute neutrophil count recovery to 500/µL. End points included days in febrile episode, microbiologically defined infections, clinically diagnosed infection, and days in hospital.RESULTSMean days in febrile episode was shorter in the treatment arm from d15 through d28 (2.36 v 3.90; P = .02). Similarly, a trend toward decreased microbiologically defined infections and clinically diagnosed infection in the treatment arm was observed from d9 to d28 (35.6% v 47.5%; P = .09), reaching a statistically significant difference from d15 to d28 (6.8% v 27.9%; P = .002). Because of this, antibacterial or antifungal use for treatment of an infection was significantly less in the treatment group (d9-d28: 44.1% v 63.9%; P = .01). Significantly fewer patients in the treatment arm received empiric antifungals from d9 tod28 (42.4% v 63.9%; P = .02) and d15-d28 (42.4% v 62.3%; P = .02). Patients in the treatment arm also had 3.2 fewer hospital days compared with control (25.5 v 28.7; P = .001). Remission rates and days to absolute neutrophil count recovery were similar in the two groups. No patients in the romyelocel-L plus G-CSF group died because of infection compared with two patients in the control arm. No graft-versus-host disease was observed.CONCLUSIONSubjects receiving romyelocel-L showed a decreased incidence of infections, antimicrobial use, and hospitalization, suggesting that romyelocel-L may provide a new option to reduce infections in patients with AML undergoing induction therapy.

Background: Gilteritinib is approved for the treatment of relapsed/refractory (R/R) AML and FLT3-mutation (FLT3mut+). However, the gilteritinib phase 3 ADMIRAL study (Perl et al NEJM 2019) enrolled prior to widespread adoption of either midostaurin as a component of standard intensive induction and consolidation or post-transplant FLT3inhibitor (FLT3i) maintenance. Some mechanisms of drug resistance can be shared across FLT3i's, suggesting response to gilteritinib might differ in patients treated with frontline FLT3i. A better understanding of how prior therapy modulates response to gilteritinib is necessary to clarify this novel agent's role in the current FLT3-mutated AML treatment algorithm. Methods: This is an ongoing multi-institutional analysis from 13 US centers identifying patients who received gilteritinib alone or as combination therapy for the treatment of R/R FLT3mut+ AML. Patients who received gilteritinib as a part of an ongoing trial were excluded. Response criteria were identical to the ADMIRAL trial. For patients with available data and a composite complete remission (CRc), we defined clinically measurable residual disease (cMRD) negative status by bone marrow flow cytometry using a cutoff of &lt;1 x 10x105 cells as well as polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for FLT3 mutation with a minimum sensitivity of 5%. Survival from the time of gilteritinib initiation was recorded. Multivariate analysis included all variables collected to determine interaction with patient outcome (CR and survival data). Kaplan-Meier curves and log rank test were used for survival analysis after gilteritinib initiation. Results: 72 patients treated with prior FLT3i exposure received gilteritinib for treatment of R/R FLT3mut+ AML. Patient characteristics are presented in table-1 with 46 (64%) previously receiving midostaurin, 19 (26%) sorafenib, and 7 (10%) other FLT3i. 8 (11%) received more than one prior TKI. NGS at diagnosis were available in 66 patients (92%) and co-mutations in DNMT3A, NPM1 and NRAS were observed in more than 10% of patients. Average duration of gilteritinib therapy was 5.7 months (range: 0.2-25 months). 27 (37.5%) received stem cell transplant (SCT) before gilteritinib and 15 (21%) underwent SCT after gilteritinib. The composite CR rate (CRc, defined as CR + CRi + CRp) was 51.4% (n= 37 patients). With regard to specific FLT3i's, we found no significant difference in median survival (7.1 months and 6.4 months for midostaurin and sorafenib, respectively) or remission rates (CRc 54% and 47% for prior midostaurin and sorafenib, respectively). The CRc rate for patients who received only prior 7+3 and midostaurin with or without consolidation was 58% with a median survival of 7.8 months. A trend toward higher CRc rate was noted in patients treated with gilteritinib in combination regimens rather than as a single agent (64% vs 43%, respectively, p=0.09 using Chi-square test). No survival advantage for combination therapy was seen over single agent. Survival was longest in patients who obtained a CR, particularly a cMRD negative response; this remained significant after censoring at the time of SCT (figures 1&2). Patients who received SCT after gilteritinib had significantly longer survival than non-transplanted patients (9.3 months vs 5.6 months, respectively, HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.2-0.8)(figure-3). Patients with concurrent mutations of NPM1/DNMT3A had a trend toward a higher CRc compared to FLT3 mutation alone (71% vs 50%, p= 0.2) but similar survival. With regard to mutations associated with drug resistance to other FLT3i's, patients with both FLT3-ITD and FLT3-D835 mutation had similar response and survival to FLT3-ITD alone. However, patients with MAPK pathway activating mutations (e.g. NRAS and PTPN11) had lower CRc (37.5% vs 59.5%) and poorer median survival than other patients (3.3 months vs 7.5 months) (HR 2.2- 95% CI 1.1-4.4) p value &lt;0.01(figure-4). Conclusions: In this multi-center, retrospective analysis, gilteritinib remains a clinically active agent after treatment failure of prior FLT3i's (midostaurin or sorafenib). Mutations activating MAPK pathway have been implicated in secondary gilteritinib resistance but are seldom co-mutated at initial FLT3mut+ AML diagnosis. While further study is required, we hypothesize that their detection after frontline FLT3i therapy may represent treatment-emergent clones with propensity for pan-FLT3i resistance. Disclosures Zeidan: Cardiff Oncology: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other; Trovagene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Otsuka: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Boehringer-Ingelheim: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene / BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Jazz: Consultancy, Honoraria; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria; BeyondSpring: Consultancy, Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Taiho: Consultancy, Honoraria; Cardinal Health: Consultancy, Honoraria; Acceleron: Consultancy, Honoraria; Astellas: Consultancy, Honoraria; Aprea: Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding; MedImmune/Astrazeneca: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Ionis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Epizyme: Consultancy, Honoraria; Astex: Research Funding; CCITLA: Other; Leukemia and Lymphoma Society: Other; Agios: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Yilmaz:Pint Pharma: Honoraria; Pfizer: Research Funding; Daicho Sankyo: Research Funding. Foran:Agios: Honoraria, Research Funding; H3Biosciences: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Kura Oncology: Research Funding; Aptose: Research Funding; Aprea: Research Funding; Actinium: Research Funding; Boehringer Ingelheim: Research Funding; 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; Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Revolution Medicine: Consultancy. Daver:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Syndax: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; KITE: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Servier: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Astellas: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novimmune: Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Trovagene: Research Funding; Fate Therapeutics: Research Funding; ImmunoGen: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Trillium: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Perl:Novartis: Honoraria, Other, Research Funding; Agios: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other; Biomed Valley Discoveries: Research Funding; Jazz: Honoraria, Other; FORMA Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other; Syndax: Consultancy, Honoraria; Actinium Pharmaceuticals Inc: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie Inc: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other, Research Funding; Loxo Oncology Inc, a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly & Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other; Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; New Link Genetics: Honoraria, Other; Astellas: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: writing/editorial support, travel costs for meeting presentations related to study, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Writing/editorial support, travel costs for meetings, Research Funding; Leukemia & Lymphoma Society, Beat AML: Consultancy; Arog Pharmaceuticals Inc: Other: uncompensated consulting, travel costs for meetings; FUJIFILM Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel costs for meeting. Altman:Kartos: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Boehringer Ingelheim: Research Funding; ImmunoGen: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Aprea: Research Funding; Amphivena: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Syros: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Immune Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; ASH: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Glycomimetics: Other: Data safety and monitoring committee; Daiichi Sankyo: Other: Advisory Board - no payment but was reimbursed for travel; Kura Oncology: Other: Scientific Advisory Board - no payment accepted, Research Funding; BioSight: Other: No payment but was reimbursed for travel , Research Funding; AbbVie: Other: advisory board, Research Funding; Agios: Other: advisory board, Research Funding; Theradex: Other: Advisory Board; Astellas: Other: Advisory Board, Speaker (no payment), Steering Committee (no payment), Research Funding; PrIME Oncology: Consultancy; PeerView: Consultancy; Cancer Expert Now: Consultancy; France Foundation: Consultancy; Fujifilm: Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: Some of the patients we are reporting on received gilteritinib in combination with other agents which is off-label use.

Abstract Background: The selective AURKA inhibitor alisertib (MLN8237) exhibits disease modifying activity in murine models of myelofibrosis by eradicating atypical megakaryocytes resulting in reduction of marrow fibrosis (Nat Med 2015). Here, we present long term follow-up results from the investigator initiated pilot study of alisertib in patients with myelofibrosis (clinical trials.gov Identifier NCT 02530619). Methods: 24 patients with DIPSS intermediate 1, intermediate-2, or high risk myelofibrosis who were in need of therapy, refractory/intolerant or unlikely to respond to JAK inhibitors with neutrophil count ≥ 1 x109/L, and platelet count ≥ 50 x109/L, received alisertib (provided by Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc) at a dose of 50 mg twice daily for one week every 21 days. Toxicity assessment was performed by the standard common terminology criteria (Version 4.0). Response was assessed by the international working group for myelofibrosis research and treatment (IWGMRT) criteria. Correlative studies included assessments of JAK2V617F, CALR, and MPL mutant allele burden, degree of fibrosis and GATA1 expression in bone marrow samples obtained pre and post therapy. Results: We enrolled 17 patients with primary myelofibrosis, 4 with post essential thrombocythemia myelofibrosis and 3 with post polycythemia vera myelofibrosis. Median age was 72 years with 66% males. 79% of patients were DIPSS intermediate risk, and the remainder were high risk with 15 patients (62.5%) having received prior JAK inhibitor therapy. Driver mutational status was as follows; 58% JAK2V617F, 29% CALR, and 13% MPL mutated. At study entry, 54% of patients demonstrated palpable splenomegaly ≥ 5 cm below the left costal margin, 54% were transfusion dependent with all patients experiencing constitutional symptoms. At the time of data cut-off, patients received a median of 7.5 cycles (range; 1-29 cycles) of therapy. The 7 patients presently on study have received a median of 23 cycles (range; 8-29 cycles). Reasons for treatment discontinuation included progressive disease/lack of response in 11 (65%) patients, toxicity in 4 (24%) patients and refusal of further therapy in 2 (11%) patients.Safety and Efficacy assessments The most common treatment-emergent grade 3/4 adverse events included neutropenia (42%), thrombocytopenia (29%) and anemia (21%), with 4% each experiencing neutropenic fever, diarrhea, vertigo, elevated creatinine and elevated alanine aminotransferase. 22 patients were considered for response evaluation with 4 of 14 patients (29%) with palpable splenomegaly ≥ 5 cm achieving a spleen response, 1 of 13 patients (8%) becoming transfusion independent, and 5 of 22 patients (23%) experiencing symptom response with ≥ 50% reduction in the MPN-SAF total symptom score. However, when response assessment was restricted to 13 patients who had received a minimum of 5 cycles of therapy, spleen responses were observed in 4 of 7 (57%) patients, 1 of 5 (20%) achieved transfusion independence and 5 of 13 (38%) achieved symptom response. All patients presenting with leukocytosis (n=4) and thrombocytosis (n=2) had resolution with therapy. Of the 7 patients presently on study, four patients continue to demonstrate symptom response, two patients with both spleen and symptom response, and another patient with sustained anemia response. Correlative assessments We compared the intensity of staining of GATA1, a factor that is required for maturation, in sequential bone marrow biopsies from six patients at baseline and after a minimum of five cycles and observed a striking increase in the numbers of GATA1-positive megakaryocytes in five of six cases (Figure 1a). In addition, we observed a one grade reduction in marrow fibrosis in 4 of 6 paired samples (Figure 1b). This reduction in fibrosis was accompanied by sustained responses to the drug. Finally, we compared JAK2, MPL or CALR mutant allele burden in eight paired baseline and cycle 5 or 6 samples and observed decreases in 4 of 8 patients (Figure 1c). Conclusions: Alisertib is safe and well tolerated in patients with myelofibrosis with prolonged administration up to 1.7 years. In addition to providing clinical benefit, alisertib restored normal morphology and GATA1 expression in atypical megakaryocytes and reduced marrow fibrosis and mutant allele burdens. These findings demonstrate that AURKA inhibition should be further explored as a therapeutic option in myelofibrosis. Figure 1. Figure 1. Disclosures Swords: AbbVie: Employment. Watts:Jazz Pharma: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Research Funding. Frankfurt:Celgene, Jazz, Agios: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Altman:Cyclacel: Other: payment to the institution to conduct clinical trial work; Epizyme: Other: payment to the institution to conduct clinical trial work; Ariad: Other: payment to the institution to conduct clinical trial work; Bayer: Other: payment to the institution to conduct clinical trial work; Celator: Other: payment to the institution to conduct clinical trial work; FujiFilm: Other: payment to the institution to conduct clinical trial work; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: payment to the institution to conduct clinical trial work; Agios: Other: Payment to the institution to conduct the trial ; Astellas Pharma: Other; Genetech: Other: Payment to the institution to conduct clinical trial work; Syros: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Other: payment to the institution to conduct clinical trial work; GSK: Other: payment to the institution to conduct clinical trial work; Immune Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Boeringer Ingelheim: Other: payment to the institution to conduct clinical trial work; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Other: payment to the institution to conduct clinical trial work. Rampal:Celgene: Honoraria; Stemline: Research Funding; Incyte: Honoraria, Research Funding; Constellation: Research Funding; Jazz: Consultancy, Honoraria. Giles:Actuate Therapeutics Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Crispino:Forma Therapeutics: Research Funding; Scholar Rock: Research Funding.

Abstract Background: The bone marrow (BM) niche protects acute myeloid leukemia (AML) cells from chemotherapy. BM homing of AML cells is dependent on CXCR4 and its ligand CXCL12; high levels of CXCR4 expression correlate with poor survival in AML. It is postulated that blocking the CXCL12/CXCR4 axis with a potent CXCR4 antagonist will disrupt the interaction of the leukemic blasts with the BM and augment the anti-leukemic effect of chemotherapy. BL-8040 (BKT140) is a short synthetic peptide which inhibits the binding of CXCR4 to CXCL12, resulting in the mobilization of leukemic blasts from the bone marrow to the peripheral blood. BL-8040 also inhibits CXCR4/CXCL12 mediated pro-survival ERK/Akt signaling and alters balance of pro/anti-apoptotic Bcl-2 proteins. BL-8040 has strong affinity for the CXCR4 receptor with long receptor occupancy, and, in contrast to other CXCR4 inhibitors, as a single agent induces apoptosis of leukemia cells ex-vivo in clinical samples. A clinical trial assessing the safety and efficacy of BL-8040 in combination with cytarabine (Ara-C) for the treatment of adult relapsed/refractory AML patients is currently ongoing (NCT01838395). Objective: To assess the safety, efficacy and pharmacodynamics/pharmacokinetic parameters of BL-8040 in combination with Ara-C in first or second relapse and refractory AML patients. Method: The study includes a dose escalation phase (3+3 design) followed by an expansion phase. Each patient receives a once daily SC dose of BL-8040 monotherapy on days 1-2 followed by the same dose of BL-8040 plus Ara-C (1.5 g/m2 for patients ≥60; 3 g/m2 for patients <60) on days 3-7. Five dose levels of BL-8040 (0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.25 and 1.5 mg/kg) have been tested. Extensive pharmacodynamic parameters such as CXCR4 expression on the leukemic cells, receptor occupancy, mobilization of leukemic cells and induction of apoptosis are being assessed after monotherapy with BL-8040 using peripheral blood sampling (PB) and BM aspirates at baseline and on day 3 prior to Ara-C administration. Clinical response to treatment is evaluated by BM biopsy on day 30 (-/+ 2). Results: Twenty two patients (median age, 61 y; range, 43-74 y) with relapsed/refractory AML were treated during the escalation phase. BL-8040 was escalated up to 1.5 mg/kg (recommended phase 2 dose) without reaching the MTD. Combination of BL-8040 with Ara-C was safe and well tolerated at all doses tested. Only one SAE (Sweet Syndrome) was reported as possibly related to study drug. The primary treatment related AEs were transient injection site and systemic reactions. The composite complete remission including complete remission (CR) and complete remission with incomplete blood count recovery (CRi) rate was 38% in subjects receiving BL-8040 doses of 1 mg/kg and higher (n=16). Two days of BL-8040 monotherapy triggered an average 40.2-fold (range 1.0-350.9) mobilization of immature AML progenitors (CD45+Low/CD34+/CD117+/HLA-DR+) from the BM to the PB. Moreover, a significant apoptotic effect on the immature leukemia progenitors in the BM following 2 days of BL-8040 monotherapy was noted. Flow cytometric evidence of apoptosis by BL-8040 was corroborated by an increase in cleaved caspase 3 positive blasts in day 3 bone marrow biopsies. In addition, BL-8040 treatment resulted in a median decrease of 57.7% (range, -10.4% to -96.2%) in the number of BM Leukemia progenitor cells (CD45+Low/CD34+/CD117+/HLA-DR+ out of total CD45+/CD34+ normal/progenitor cells) compared with the baseline biopsy. This decrease was accompanied with a 3.1 fold increase in granulocytes in the day 3 BM biopsy supporting differentiation effect. Finally, long receptor occupancy (up to 24 hours post dosing) was confirmed by FACS analysis measuring surface CXCR4 staining. Pharmacokinetics analysis confirmed dose incremental BL-8040 exposure with a short plasma half-life. Conclusions: The current data demonstrate that sustained blockade of the CXCR4-CXCL12 axis with BL-8040 has potent anti leukemic activity and in combination with Ara-C may improve the response typically achieved in this advanced AML population. Mechanistically, BL-8040 was able to induce apoptosis of leukemic progenitor cells, overcoming the stroma protection, inducing mobilization and differentiation. Disclosures Rowe: BioLineRx Ltd.: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; BioSight Ltd.: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Uy:Novartis: Research Funding. Altman:Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Spectrum: Consultancy; Astellas: Consultancy; Ariad: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy. Peled:Biokine Ltd.: Consultancy, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; BiolineRX: Consultancy, Research Funding. Pereg:BioLineRx: Employment. Vainstein:BioLineRx: Employment. Aharon:BioLineRx: Employment. Pemmaraju:Stemline: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; LFB: Consultancy, Honoraria. Cortes:Teva: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; BerGenBio AS: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Ariad: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astellas: Consultancy, Research Funding; Ambit: Consultancy, Research Funding; Arog: Research Funding; Celator: Research Funding; Jenssen: Consultancy.

Abstract Purpose: Myelofibrosis is characterized by bone marrow fibrosis, atypical megakaryocytes, splenomegaly, constitutional symptoms, thrombotic and hemorrhagic complications, and a risk of evolution to acute leukemia. The JAK kinase inhibitor ruxolitinib provides therapeutic benefit, but the effects are limited. The purpose of this study was to determine whether targeting AURKA, which has been shown to increase maturation of atypical megakaryocytes, has potential benefit for patients with myelofibrosis. Patients and Methods: Twenty-four patients with myelofibrosis were enrolled in a phase I study at three centers. The objective of the study was to evaluate the safety and preliminary efficacy of alisertib. Correlative studies involved assessment of the effect of alisertib on the megakaryocyte lineage, allele burden, and fibrosis. Results: In addition to being well tolerated, alisertib reduced splenomegaly and symptom burden in 29% and 32% of patients, respectively, despite not consistently reducing the degree of inflammatory cytokines. Moreover, alisertib normalized megakaryocytes and reduced fibrosis in 5 of 7 patients for whom sequential marrows were available. Alisertib also decreased the mutant allele burden in a subset of patients. Conclusions: Given the limitations of ruxolitinib, novel therapies are needed for myelofibrosis. In this study, alisertib provided clinical benefit and exhibited the expected on-target effect on the megakaryocyte lineage, resulting in normalization of these cells and reduced fibrosis in the majority of patients for which sequential marrows were available. Thus, AURKA inhibition should be further developed as a therapeutic option in myelofibrosis. See related commentary by Piszczatowski and Steidl, p. 4868