Citations

Anaplastic large cell lymphomas (ALCLs) are broadly classified into ALK-positive and ALK-negative. ALK-negative ALCL is composed of DUSP22-rearranged, TP63-rearranged, and triple-negative cases. While lymphoid enhancer–binding factor (LEF1) plays a crucial role in T-cell maturation, limited data exist on its expression in T-cell lymphomas, including ALCL. We characterized the expression of LEF1 in ALCL by immunohistochemistry. LEF1 nuclear expression in the neoplastic cells was graded as negative (0), weak (1+), intermediate (2+), or strong (3+), with the percentage of LEF1-positive neoplastic cells recorded. A total of 45 ALCL cases were evaluated, of which 16 were DUSP22-rearranged. About 93.8% (15/16) DUSP22-rearranged cases showed strong expression of LEF1 in >75% tumor cells, compared with 3.4% (1/29) non–DUSP22-rearranged ALCL (P<0.0001). The striking association of LEF1 protein overexpression with DUPS22 rearrangement in ALCL was further confirmed by a gene expression profiling study which revealed significantly higher LEF1 expression in DUSP22-rearranged ALCL compared with other ALCL subtypes (P=0.0001). Although LEF1 is a nuclear mediator of the Wnt/β-catenin pathway, CTNNB1 RNA and protein levels were not overexpressed in LEF1-positive cases, suggesting the LEF1 overexpression in ALCL may not be involved in the Wnt/β-catenin pathway. The strong and uniform LEF1 expression pattern has a high positive predictive value (93.8%) and high negative predictive value (96%) for DUSP22 rearrangement in ALK-negative ALCL. The combination of characteristic morphologic and molecular features of DUSP22-rearranged cases with the high LEF1 expression further emphasizes that DUSP22-rearranged ALCL represents a distinct clinicopathologic subset of ALCL.

Abstract Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is the major type of aggressive B-cell lymphoma. High-grade B-cell lymphoma (HGBCL) with MYC/BCL2 double-hit (DH) represents a distinct entity with dismal prognosis after standard immunochemotherapy in the current WHO lymphoma classification. However, whether TP53 mutation synergizes with MYC abnormalities (MYC rearrangement and/or Myc protein overexpression) contributing to HGBCL-like biology and prognosis is not well investigated. In this study, patients with DLBCL with MYC/TP53 abnormalities demonstrated poor clinical outcome, high-grade morphology, and distinct gene expression signatures. To identify more effective therapies for this distinctive DLBCL subset, novel MYC/TP53/BCL-2–targeted agents were investigated in DLBCL cells with MYC/TP53 dual alterations or HGBCL-MYC/BCL2-DH. A BET inhibitor INCB057643 effectively inhibited cell viability and induced apoptosis in DLBCL/HGBCL cells regardless of MYC/BCL2/TP53 status. Combining INCB057643 with a MDM2-p53 inhibitor DS3032b significantly enhanced the cytotoxic effects in HGBCL-DH without TP53 mutation, while combining with the BCL-2 inhibitor venetoclax displayed potent therapeutic synergy in DLBCL/HGBCL cells with and without concurrent TP53 mutation. Reverse-phase protein arrays revealed the synergistic molecular actions by INCB057643, DS3032b and venetoclax to induce cell-cycle arrest and apoptosis and to inhibit AKT/MEK/ERK/mTOR pathways, as well as potential drug resistance mechanisms mediated by upregulation of Mcl-1 and RAS/RAF/MEK/ERK pathways. In summary, these findings support subclassification of DLBCL/HGBCL with dual MYC/TP53 alterations, which demonstrates distinct pathobiologic features and dismal survival with standard therapy, therefore requiring additional targeted therapies. Implications: The clinical and pharmacologic studies suggest recognizing DLBCL with concomitant TP53 mutation and MYC abnormalities as a distinctive entity necessary for precision oncology practice. Visual Overview: http://mcr.aacrjournals.org/content/molcanres/19/2/249/F1.large.jpg.

Introduction: Anaplastic large cell lymphomas (ALCLs) are CD30-positive T-cell lymphomas classified into ALK-positive and ALK-negative. The ALK-negative ALCLs are a genetically heterogeneous group that includes DUSP22-rearranged, TP63-rearranged and triple-negative cases. The DUSP22-rearranged ALCLs characteristically grow in a diffuse sheet-like pattern and are composed of intermediate-sized monomorphous hallmark cells, admixed with smaller cells with prominent nuclear indentations and occasional central nuclear pseudo inclusions (King RL et al, Am J Surg Pathol. 2016). Further, DUSP22-rearranged ALCL is a molecularly distinct subset of ALCL with a unique immunogenic phenotype that portends a favorable prognosis (Luchtel RA et al. Blood 2018). Lymphoid enhancer binding factor (LEF1) is a crucial nuclear mediator of the Wnt/ β-catenin pathway and a transcription factor involved in T-cell maturation. However, limited data exists on the association of LEF1 in T-cell lymphomas, including ALCL. The aims of this study were to explore LEF1 expression by immunohistochemistry in different subsets of ALCLs and to analyze the association of Wnt/ β-catenin pathway in this cohort. Methods: After approval by the institutional review board, we screened pathology reports from January 1, 1995 to December 31, 2019 and identified patients with a diagnosis of ALCL using our institutional database. Details on fluorescence in situ hybridization studies in ALK-negative cases were documented. Immunostaining for LEF1 and β catenin was performed on all cases where formalin fixed paraffin embedded tissue was available. The presence or absence of β catenin nuclear staining was recorded. LEF1 nuclear staining in the neoplastic ALCL cells was graded as negative (0), weak (1+), intermediate (2+) or strong (3+) and the percentage of LEF1-positive neoplastic cells was detailed (Figure 1). LEF1 scoring was performed by manual counting of the stained nuclei out of all tumor nuclei by two pathologists (A.R. and M.S.) and the grading was reviewed by another pathologist (P.J.K.). Results: We evaluated 45 ALCL cases, including 41 (91.1%) ALK-negative and 4 (8.9%) ALK-positive ALCLs. Among the ALK-negative ALCLs, there were16 DUSP22-rearranged, and 25 non-DUSP22-rearanged (7 TP63-rearranged and 18 triple-negative) cases. Fifteen (94%) of 16 DUSP22-rearranged ALCLs showed strong expression of LEF1 in &gt;75% tumor cells (Figure 2). In contrast, this strong and uniform LEF1 overexpression was only detected in 1 of 29 (3%) of the remaining ALCL cases (P &lt;.0001) (Table 1). We previously characterized a distinctive molecular signature in ALK-negative ALCLs with DUSP22-rearrangements using gene expression microarray analysis on frozen ALCL tissue samples (Luchtel RA et al. Blood 2018). On examining LEF1 gene expression in this previously published dataset, DUSP22 -rearranged cases had significantly higher LEF1 expression than any other genetic subtype (triple-negative, TP63-rearranged, or ALK-positive). Overall, mean LEF1 expression was 6.3-fold higher in ALCLs with DUSP22 rearrangements than in ALCLs without DUSP22-rearrangements (P=0.0001). LEF1 is a coactivator of the Wnt/β-catenin pathway; therefore, it is reasonable to hypothesize the overexpression of LEF1 may promote Wnt/β-catenin signaling. However, all LEF1-positive cases were negative for β-catenin by immunohistochemistry, suggesting that LEF1 overexpression is independent of the Wnt/β-catenin pathway signaling in these cases. Conclusions: There is a striking association between high LEF1 expression and DUSP22-rearrangements in ALCLs. The strong and uniform LEF1 expression pattern has a high positive predictive value (94%) and high negative predictive value (96%) for DUSP22- rearrangement in ALK-negative ALCLs (Table 2). The combination of characteristic morphologic and molecular features of DUSP22-rearranged cases with the unique LEF1 expression further emphasizes that DUSP22-rearranged ALCL represents a distinct clinicopathologic subset of ALCL. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Introduction: PD-1 inhibits the cytotoxic T-cell functions via the interaction with its ligands (PDL1 and PDL2). Recently, our group showed a selective response (~40%) with PD-1 blocking antibody pembrolizumab in patients with Richter transformation (RT), particularly after prior exposure to ibrutinib (Wei Ding et al, Blood, 2017). Additionally, PD-1 showed an increased expression in tumor B-cells of patients with RT (Rong He et al, AJSP, 2018). Here we investigated the functional implications of the PD-1 signaling axis in lymphoma B-cell pathobiology. Methods: 26 CLL-involved lymph node (LN) and 20 RT-involved LN samples were tested for PD-1 expression by immunohistochemistry (mouse clone NAT105, Abcam). Then, we checked PD-1 expression in 10 lymphoma cell lines and 1 CLL cell line (MEC-1) by both, flow cytometry and Western blot (WB) analysis. Over-expression of PD-1 using pLEX-lentiviral system (Thermo Scientific) was evaluated for in vitro cell cycle regulation and in vivo tumor growth. Overexpression of PD-1 was further examined on the regulation of cell signaling pathways using human phospho kinase array kit (R&D) and WB analysis. Gene expression signatures in CLL and RT patients were also identified by Illumina-based RNA sequencing using Formalin-Fixed Paraffin-embedded (FFPE)-nodal tissue obtained by clinical biopsy (Tempus Labs; Chicago, IL). Results: The expression of PD-1 was significantly increased in RT-LN compared to CLL-LN (mean ± SEM in RT vs. CLL, 30.6% ± 4.7% vs. 11.5% ± 2.8%, p &lt; 0.001) [Fig 1A]. PD-1 expression was highest in patients with RT where the last prior CLL therapy was ibrutinib. To test the role of PD-1 in lymphoma B-cells, its expression was assessed in lymphoma and CLL cell lines. The expression of PD-1 was found to be variable, but at very low-levels in lymphoma lines OCI-LY7 and OCI-LY19 (data not shown). Constitutive lentiviral (pLEX-PD-1)-mediated overexpression of PD-1 in OCI-LY7 and OCI-LY19 cells led to increased cell growth (1.4 and 1.9 fold compared to original lines on day 4, respectively, Fig 1BI-II), which was further confirmed by cell cycle analysis which showed an increase in S phase by 20.4% and 24.53% in OCI-LY7 and OCI-LY19 cells (Fig 1B III), respectively. When the luciferase + PD-1 expressing OCI-LY7 cells were injected intravenously (1X106 cells) into NSG mice, increased tumor growth was observed at 22 days of follow up by bioluminescence imaging (p&lt;0.01, Fig 1C). Using phospho-kinase array, an overall decrease of phosphorylation was detected on multiple sites of p53 (S392, S15, S46) and CHK2 (T68) (data not shown). This finding was further confirmed by WB analyses (Fig1DI). In addition, decreased of total p53 and increased phosphorylation on both SHP-1 and SHP-2 were found in PD-1 overexpressing OCI-LY19 and OCI-LY17 cell lines (Fig 1DI). Immunoprecipitation experiments with anti-PD1 antibody showed that PD-1 was in the same complex with SHP-1 and SHP-2 in OCI-LY7 cells but only with SHP-2 in OCI-LY19 cells (Fig 1DII). In parallel, mRNA sequencing was performed on 11 nodal tissues from either RT (n=8) or progressive CLL (n=3) after they developed clinical progression. The expression of PD-1 (PDCD1) was positively correlated with the expression of SHP-1 (PTPN6, r=0.56) and Cyclin E1 (CCNE1, r=0.62), implicating a direct role of PD-1 in regulating cellular proliferation and the induction in phosphatase expression in RT and CLL. Conclusion: Our data support the notion that PD-1 overexpression in lymphoma cells modifies cell proliferation in vitro and in vivo and regulates the function of phosphatase SHP and p53- pathways. These findings also indicate that aggressive lymphoma or CLL leukemic cells have the ability to hijack the PD-1 pathway and may result in downregulation of the p53 mediated DNA repair. This novel information provide for new strategies to further evaluate the interaction of checkpoint signals with DNA repair pathway, and possibly provide novel targets for Richter's transformation. Disclosures Ding: alexion: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Beigene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; Octapharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; DTRM: Research Funding; MEI Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Sakemura:Humanigen: Patents & Royalties. Parikh:Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Research Funding; Ascentage Pharma: Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria; MorphoSys: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Research Funding; Verastem Oncology: Honoraria; Genentech: Honoraria; AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding. Wang:Novartis: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Innocare: Research Funding. Liu:Eisal: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; GRAIL: Research Funding; Menarini Silicon Biosystems: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Tesaro: Research Funding. Braggio:DASA: Consultancy; Bayer: Other: Stock Owner; Acerta Pharma: Research Funding. Ansell:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; AI Therapeutics: Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding. Kenderian:Sunesis: Research Funding; Tolero: Research Funding; Torque: Consultancy; BMS: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Kite: Research Funding; Humanigen: Consultancy, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Mettaforge: Patents & Royalties; Novartis: Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; MorphoSys: Research Funding; Lentigen: Research Funding; Juno: Research Funding. Kay:Acerta Pharma: Research Funding; Oncotracker: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Juno Theraputics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; MEI Pharma: Research Funding; Sunesis: Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Cytomx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Morpho-sys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Dava Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Tolero Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol Meyer Squib: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Rigel: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Background: Allogeneic HCT continues to be the optimal consolidation strategy for many patients with AML. Cytogenetic and molecular abnormalities are known to influence post-transplant outcomes. We tested the prognostic ability of a modified (mELN) classification system based on available CIBMTR genetic data, to predict post-transplant outcomes. Methods: Adult patients with a diagnosis of AML in first complete remission (CR1) with available pre-transplant cytogenetic and molecular mutational data, receiving a first allogeneic HCT from 2013-2017, were included. Patients were stratified according to mELN genetic classification in three distinct groups: favorable (Fav), intermediate (IM) and adverse (Adv). Clinical outcomes following HCT were compared among groups after adjusting for significant patient, disease, and transplant-related variables. The primary endpoint was disease free survival (DFS). Secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), non-relapse mortality (NRM), cumulative incidence of relapse, acute GVHD, and chronic GVHD. Cox proportional hazard models were used to compare endpoints among mELN risk groups, age groups and genetic subsets within the adverse-risk group. Results: Demographic characteristics are summarized in Table 1. 2289 patients (Fav, n=181; IM n=1185; and Adv n=923) met the inclusion criteria. Median follow-up for survivors was 35 months. Importantly, 41% of transplant recipients (n=936) were &gt;60 years, 76% (n=1743) had de novo AML and 48% (n=1111) received a myeloablative conditioning regimen. Univariate analysis (UVA) demonstrated significant differences in 2-year OS (Fav: 67.7%, IM: 64.9% and Adv: 53.9%; p&lt;0.001); DFS (Fav: 57.8%, IM: 55.5% and Adv: 45.3; p&lt;0.001) and relapse (Fav: 28%, IM: 27.5% and Adv: 37.5%; p&lt;0.001) There were no significant differences in NRM (p=0.467) or the incidence of acute (p=0.423) and chronic GVHD (p=0.442) among mELN groups. Initial multivariate analysis (MVA) of mELN risk groups indicated that there was no significant difference in clinical outcomes between the Fav and IM risk groups. Thus, these groups were combined for subsequent analyses. Adv risk (vs. Fav/IM) led to significantly worse OS (HR 1.39 [1.24-1.57] p=&lt;0.001), DFS (HR 1.32 [1.18-1.48] p=&lt;0.001), and relapse (HR 1.42 [1.23-1.63] p=&lt;0.001) (Table 2). This mELN classification effectively stratified both younger (&lt;60 y/o) and older (&gt;60 y/o) patients for OS (Adv vs. Fav/IM HR for &lt;60: 1.43 [1.21-1.69] p&lt;0.001; &gt;60: 1.44 [1.21-1.72] p&lt;0.001), DFS (Adv HR for &lt;60: 1.31 [1.12-1.53] p&lt;0.001; &gt;60: 1.41 [1.19-1.66] p&lt;0.001) and relapse (Adv HR for &lt;60: 1.44 [1.20-1.74] p&lt;0.001, &gt;60: 1.42 [1.15-1.76] p=0.001). NRM was higher for older patients (&gt;60 y/o) in both the Fav/IM (HR 1.40 [1.10-1.78] p=0.007) and Adv-risk cohorts (HR 1.59 [1.18-2.13] p=0.002). Genetic subset comparisons within the adverse-risk group showed that patients carrying monosomy 5, del(5q) or monosomy 7 had inferior 2-year OS (42.6%, p&lt;0.001) and DFS (35.2%, p&lt;0.001), as well as higher rates of relapse (45%, p= 0.002) when compared to other patients within the Adv-risk cohort (OS 60%, DFS 50.8%, relapse 33.5%). Conclusion: Stratification using mELN criteria resulted in clear prognostic separation of OS, DFS and relapse in this large cohort of AML patients undergoing allogeneic HCT. While Fav and IM groups had similar OS, DFS and relapse rates; patients in the Adv risk group had the highest risk of relapse and inferior DFS/OS. However, the majority of patients in all cohorts had favorable outcomes for HCT in CR1. Our findings confirm the value of a combined genetic prognostic model in the AML HCT setting and justify the use of this stratification system in future HCT trials. Correlation of genetic subtypes with other important transplant variables, such as conditioning intensity and pre-transplant MRD status deserves further evaluation. There remains a subset of Adv-risk patients for which post-transplant outcomes continue to be poor, even when transplanted in CR1. Novel peri-transplant pre-emptive/therapeutic strategies are urgently needed for this high-risk cohort. Disclosures de Lima: Celgene: Research Funding; Pfizer: Other: Personal fees, advisory board, Research Funding; BMS: Other: Personal Fees, advisory board; Incyte: Other: Personal Fees, advisory board; Kadmon: Other: Personal Fees, Advisory board. Komanduri:Kiadis: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Atara: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Adaptimmune: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kite/Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kebriaei:Ziopharm: Other: Research Support; Jazz: Consultancy; Kite: Other: Served on advisory board; Amgen: Other: Research Support; Novartis: Other: Served on advisory board; Pfizer: Other: Served on advisory board. Bhatt:National Marrow Donor Program: Research Funding; Rigel Pharmaceuticals: Other; Jazz: Research Funding; Agios: Other: Personal Fees; Incyte: Other: Personal Fees, Research Funding; Takeda: Other: Personal Fees; Partner Therapeutics: Other: Personal Fees; Pfizer: Other, Research Funding; CSL Behring: Other; Tolero Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Oncoceutics: Other: Drug support for a trial; Partnership for health analytic research, LLC: Other: Personal Fees; Omeros: Other: Personal Fees; Abbvie: Other: Personal Fees, Research Funding. Saad:Orcabio: Other: research support; Kadmon: Other: research support; Amgen: Other: research support; Incyte Pharmaceuticals: Other: Personal Fees; Magenta Therapeutics: Other: Personal Fees. Copelan:Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Defilipp:Incyte: Research Funding; Regimmune: Research Funding; Syndax Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Nishihori:Karyopharm: Other: Research support to institution; Novartis: Other: Research support to institution. Weisdorf:Incyte: Research Funding; FATE Therapeutics: Consultancy.

Introduction: Hypomethylating agents (HMAs) or DNA methyltransferase inhibitors (DNMTi) such as decitabine or azacitidine are established standard of care for the treatment of MDS and CMML. The oral bioavailability of these agents has been limited due to rapid degradation by cytidine deaminase (CDA) in the gut and liver, hence requiring intravenous infusion or subcutaneous injections daily for 5-7 days every month (m). This parenteral administration requirement adds significant burden to older cancer patients due to daily time commitment and travel to treatment centers. It also increases exposure to and infection risk with SARS-CoV-2 during the COVID-19 pandemic. Oral decitabine 35 mg/cedazuridine 100 mg (ASTX727) is an oral fixed dose combination drug of decitabine and the CDA inhibitor cedazuridine that have shown 99% (90% CI 93% to 106%) equivalent exposure to standard dose IV decitabine 20 mg/m2 in a randomized cross-over study (Garcia-Manero et al, ASH 2019). Here, we present the clinical efficacy and safety results of oral decitabine/cedazuridine from 133 patient study in MDS and CMML (ASTX727-02 ASCERTAIN study). Methods: We used a randomized cross over design where patients were randomized in the first 2 cycles 1:1 to either Sequence A: decitabine 35 mg/ cedazuridine 100 mg in Cycle 1 followed by IV decitabine at 20 mg/m2 in Cycle 2, or Sequence B: IV decitabine in Cycle 1 followed by oral decitabine/cedazuridine in Cycle 2 to do an intra-patient comparison of decitabine PK (primary PK endpoint: decitabine AUC equivalence over 5 days of dosing). Cycles were repeated every 28 days. All patients received oral decitabine/cedazuridine in all subsequent cycles from Cycle 3 onwards until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Patients were eligible as per the FDA-approved label of IV decitabine (MDS patients by FAB classification including CMML, or MDS IPSS Intermediate-1, 2 or high-risk patients). Clinical endpoints were best response as assessed by an independent expert panel according to International Working Group (IWG) 2006 response criteria, transfusion independence for at least 8 or 16 consecutive weeks, overall survival, and safety. Adverse events (AEs) were graded by Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v 4.03. Results: 138 subjects were randomized, of whom 133 were treated on study. The median age was 71.0 years (range 44-88), 65% were male, 88% MDS and 12% CMML, 43% were either red blood cells (RBCs) or platelets transfusion-dependent at baseline, 25% had poor-risk cytogenetics, and 42% had baseline bone marrow blasts &gt;5%. At the data cutoff for the response analysis, the median duration of follow up was 12.6 m (range 9.3 to 20.5 m) with median number of treatment cycles of 8 (range 1 to 18). Of the 133 treated patients the best response was complete response (CR) in 28 patients (21%; 95% CI 15-29%), marrow (m)CR with hematological improvement (HI) in 20 patients (15%), mCR without HI in 23 patients (17.3%), and HI in 10 patients (7.5%) for an overall objective response (CR+mCR+HI) in 81 patients (61%; 95% CI 52-69%). Median duration of CR was 7.5 m (range 1.6 to 17.5 m), and median time to CR was 4.3 m (range 2.1 to 15.2 m). Of the 133 treated patients 27 (20%) went on to receive allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant. Of the 57 patients who were either RBCs or platelets transfusion-dependent at baseline, 30 (53%) became transfusion independent for both RBCs and platelets for at least 8 consecutive weeks, and 19 (33%) were both RBCs and platelets transfusion independent for at least 16 consecutive weeks. Median survival has not been reached. Most common Treatment-Emergent AEs of Grade ≥3 regardless of causality were neutropenia in 51.5%, thrombocytopenia in 50%, anemia in 40%, febrile neutropenia in 26%, leukopenia in 21%, pneumonia in 12%, and sepsis in 7% of patients treated with oral decitabine/cedazuridine (excluding the IV decitabine cycle). Summary/Conclusions: Efficacy and safety from oral decitabine 35 mg/ cedazuridine 100 mg daily for 5 days every 28 days are consistent with clinical data from standard IV decitabine 20 mg/m2 daily for 5 days. Oral decitabine/cedazuridine is the only oral HMA with systemic exposure equivalent to its injectable drug. Further investigation of oral decitabine/cedazuridine in all-oral combination studies is warranted and underway. Disclosures Savona: BMS: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Ryvu: Consultancy; Boehringer Ingelheim: Patents & Royalties; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astex: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sunesis: Consultancy, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Griffiths:Celgene/BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding; Genentech Inc: Research Funding; Boston Biomedical: Honoraria; AbbVie Inc: Honoraria; Persimmune: Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Alexion Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Research Funding; Astex Pharmceuticals: Research Funding. Zeidan:CCITLA: Other; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; BeyondSpring: Consultancy, Honoraria; Taiho: Consultancy, Honoraria; Cardinal Health: Consultancy, Honoraria; Epizyme: Consultancy, Honoraria; Leukemia and Lymphoma Society: Other; Jazz: Consultancy, Honoraria; Trovagene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Ionis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Astex: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Otsuka: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Acceleron: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Boehringer-Ingelheim: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene / BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Agios: Consultancy, Honoraria; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding; Aprea: Research Funding; MedImmune/Astrazeneca: Research Funding; Cardiff Oncology: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Astellas: Consultancy, Honoraria. Patel:DAVA Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; France Foundation: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Agios: Consultancy. Keating:Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Hoffman La Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Shire: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Taiho: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Dao:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Current Employment. Fazal:Jansen: Speakers Bureau; Gilead/Kite: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Jazz Pharma: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Karyopham: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Glaxosmith Kline: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Agios: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Stemline: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Odenike:Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astex Pharmaceuticals, NS Pharma, Gilead Sciences, Janssen Oncology, Oncotherapy, Agios, CTI/Baxalta, Aprea: Other: Institutional research funding; Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; Incyte: Other: Institutional research funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Impact Biomedicines: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Kantarjian:Abbvie: Honoraria, Research Funding; BioAscend: Honoraria; Delta Fly: Honoraria; Ascentage: Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Actinium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Immunogen: Research Funding; Aptitute Health: Honoraria; BMS: Research Funding; Daiichi-Sankyo: Honoraria, Research Funding; Jazz: Research Funding; Oxford Biomedical: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Adaptive biotechnologies: Honoraria. DeZern:MEI: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Astex: Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy. Roboz:Novartis: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Astex: Consultancy; Amphivena: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Array BioPharma: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; Celltrion: Consultancy; Eisai: Consultancy; Jazz: Consultancy; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy; Sandoz: Consultancy; Actinium: Consultancy; Argenx: Consultancy; Astellas: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Orsenix: Consultancy; Otsuka: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Trovagene: Consultancy; Cellectis: Research Funding; Jasper Therapeutics: Consultancy; Epizyme: Consultancy; Helsinn: Consultancy; MEI Pharma: Consultancy. Busque:Pfizer: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria. Wells:Alexion: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Leber:Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Otsuka Pharmaceutical: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda/Palladin: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Treadwell: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Lundbeck: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Alexion: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; BMS/Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Hao:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Current Employment. Keer:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Current Employment. Azab:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Current Employment. Garcia-Manero:Acceleron Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; H3 Biomedicine: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Astex Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Amphivena Therapeutics: Research Funding; Helsinn Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Onconova: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding.

Abstract Background: Accumulating evidence suggests a relationship between endometrial cancer and ovarian cancer. Independent genome-wide association studies (GWAS) for endometrial cancer and ovarian cancer have identified 16 and 27 risk regions, respectively, four of which overlap between the two cancers. We aimed to identify joint endometrial and ovarian cancer risk loci by performing a meta-analysis of GWAS summary statistics from these two cancers. Methods: Using LDScore regression, we explored the genetic correlation between endometrial cancer and ovarian cancer. To identify loci associated with the risk of both cancers, we implemented a pipeline of statistical genetic analyses (i.e., inverse-variance meta-analysis, colocalization, and M-values) and performed analyses stratified by subtype. Candidate target genes were then prioritized using functional genomic data. Results: Genetic correlation analysis revealed significant genetic correlation between the two cancers (rG = 0.43, P = 2.66 × 10−5). We found seven loci associated with risk for both cancers (PBonferroni &lt; 2.4 × 10−9). In addition, four novel subgenome-wide regions at 7p22.2, 7q22.1, 9p12, and 11q13.3 were identified (P &lt; 5 × 10−7). Promoter-associated HiChIP chromatin loops from immortalized endometrium and ovarian cell lines and expression quantitative trait loci data highlighted candidate target genes for further investigation. Conclusions: Using cross-cancer GWAS meta-analysis, we have identified several joint endometrial and ovarian cancer risk loci and candidate target genes for future functional analysis. Impact: Our research highlights the shared genetic relationship between endometrial cancer and ovarian cancer. Further studies in larger sample sets are required to confirm our findings.

OBJECTIVES: With increasing complexity of critical care medicine comes an increasing need for multidisciplinary involvement in care. In many institutions, pharmacists are an integral part of this team, but long-term data on the interventions performed by pharmacists and their effects on patient care and outcomes are limited. We aimed to describe the role of pediatric clinical pharmacists in pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) practice. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the records of pharmacy interventions in the PICU at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, from 2003-2013, with a distinct period of increased pharmacist presence in the PICU from 2008 onward. We compared demographic and outcome data on patients who did and who did not have pharmacy interventions during 2 periods (2003–2007 and 2008–2013). RESULTS: We identified 27,773 total interventions by pharmacists during the 11-year period, of which 79.8% were accepted by the clinical team. These interventions were made on 10,963 unique PICU admissions and prevented 5867 order entry errors. Pharmacists' interventions increased year over year, including a significant change in 2008. Patients who required pharmacy involvement were younger, sicker, and had longer intensive care unit, hospital, and ventilator duration. Average central line infections and central line entry rates decreased significantly over the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Increased pharmacist presence in the PICU is associated with increased interventions and prevention of adverse drug events. Pharmacist participation during rounds and order entry substantially improved the care of critically sick children and should be encouraged.