Citations

Introduction Despite continuous improvement of clinical outcome in multiple myeloma (MM), disease relapse remains a major challenge, leading to progressively shorter remissions and fewer treatment options. Strategies attempting to counteract this challenge include recent efforts resulting in an increase in the availability of novel promising anti-MM agents and targeting specific genetic profiles of the disease. In this context, we aim to develop predictive models of sensitivity and resistance to novel compounds by connecting an ex vivo high-throughput drug screen with genetic, transcriptomics, FISH, and clinical features. Methods Twenty compounds (afatinib, afuresertib, belinostat, buparlisib, cobimetinib, CPI-0610, crenolanib, dinaciclib, dovitinib, JQ1, LGH447, osimertinib, OTX015, panobinostat, romidepsin, selinexor, sunitinib, trametinib, venetoclax, and vorinostat) were selected based on overall promising anti-MM activity from an ex vivo high throughput drug screen with a panel of 79 single agents incubated for 24 hours. The area under the curve (AUC) was used to rank order the ex vivo responses for each compound and the lowest and highest quartile samples were identified for further analysis. Clinical data and FISH data, including t(11;14), t(4;14), t(14;16), del(17p), +1q, monosomy 13, and MYC rearrangement, were collected. Targeted DNA sequencing was performed using a 2.3 Mb custom capture panel covering 139 MM-relevant genes. mRNA-sequencing was performed and differential gene expression analysis in the highest and lowest quartile identified subsets of markers positively and negatively associated with the AUC response for a given compound. An additional unbiased selection of markers using lasso techniques was performed, resulting in predictive generalized linear models (GLM) for each agent. Responses from the remaining intermediate samples were estimated with the predictive models, with overall predictive ability assessed by correlating predicted AUCs with their actual counterparts. Results Our integrative analysis was performed on 50 primary patient samples (36% untreated and 64% relapsed MM). Venetoclax, dinaciclib, romidepsin, panobinostat, osimertinib, belinostat and selinexor were the most active compounds in the cohort. Interestingly, LGH447, dovitinib, selinexor, JQ1, OTX-015, cobimetinib, and trametinib showed increased activity in relapsed MM when compared to untreated samples (Wilcoxon Test; p<0.05). We generated GLMs using an average of 92 markers (range 64-107) per compound, combining mRNA-sequencing expression with FISH and mutation data. The analysis proposed in the present study was validated through the unbiased selection of BCL2 among the subset of markers included in the GLM predicting sensitivity to venetoclax, a first-in-class orally bioavailable selective BCL2 inhibitor. Expression level of critical NF-kB and cell cycle genes, such as BIRC3, CKS1B, PAX5, NFKB2, and CCND2, were included in 60% of our predictive models. Mutations of DNA repair genes (ATM,TP53) were included in the GLMs of three epigenetic therapies, one histone deacetylase inhibitor and two BET inhibitors, associated to ex vivo resistance to the drugs. The presence of monosomy 13 was also a marker for ex vivo resistance for five epigenetic therapies, four HDAC inhibitors and one BET inhibitor. The three BET inhibitors, JQ1, CPI-0610, and OTX015, were among the compounds most accurately predicted by our integrative approach, with Spearman correlation values between 0.773-0.858. Overall, our models accurately predicted the ex vivo response for 16 (80%) of the compounds (r>0.7). Five (25%) of these compounds displayed a remarkably accurate prediction model in both training (highest and lowest quartiles) and validation (intermediate quartiles) samples (r>0.8). Conclusions The GLM data integration approach enabled the establishment of effective predictive models, identifying FISH, transcriptomics, and mutations of putative driver genes important in anti-MM agent responsiveness. In addition, the resulting dataset is promising for future research focusing on the discovery of novel mechanisms of action and establishing markers of sensitivity and resistance to novel compounds. We are currently increasing our dataset and seek to create an omnibus approach that predicts responses to multiple anti-MM agents simultaneously. Disclosures Bergsagel: Celgene: Consultancy; Ionis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Stewart:Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol Myers-Squibb: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Ionis: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Consultancy; Ono: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy.

Introduction: Hypomethylating agents (HMAs) such as decitabine (DEC) or azacitidine (AZA) are FDA approved therapies for patients with different myeloid malignancies as single agent or in combination with venetoclax. Both DEC and AZA require IV infusion for 1 hour or subcutaneous (SC) injections daily for 5-7 days of every 28-day treatment cycle. They both have limited oral bioavailability due to rapid degradation by cytidine deaminase (CDA) in the gut and liver. An orally bioavailable HMA option could reduce clinic visit frequency and reduce infusions/injections related adverse events and burden. ASTX727 is an oral tablet comprised of a fixed-dose combination (FDC) of CDA inhibitor cedazuridine (C) at 100 mg with DEC at 35 mg. In a phase 2 study, C-DEC (ASTX727) demonstrated pharmacokinetic (PK) AUC exposure similar to IV-DEC at 20mg/m2 with comparable clinical activity and safety (Garcia-Manero, et al, 15th Int'l MDS Symposium, 2019). We describe here the results of a phase 3 study designed to demonstrate exposure bioequivalence of oral C-DEC and IV-DEC and generate clinical data using C-DEC in a larger population (ASCERTAIN study). Methods: The study used a randomized cross over design where patients were randomized 1:1 to either Sequence A: C-DEC (100 mg/35 mg respectively) in Cycle 1 followed by IV-DEC at 20 mg/m2 in Cycle 2, or Sequence B receiving IV-DEC in Cycle 1 followed by C-DEC on Cycle 2 to compare PK (primary endpoint AUC equivalence over 5 days of dosing) and pharmacodynamic (PD) of DNA demethylation using LINE-1 assay. All patients received C-DEC in all subsequent cycles from Cycle 3 onwards until treatment discontinuation to study clinical efficacy and safety of C-DEC. Patients were eligible as per the FDA-approved label (MDS IPSS Intermediate [Int]-1,-2 or high risk[HR] and CMML patients). Clinical responses were assessed by an independent expert panel according to International Working Group (IWG) 2006 response criteria. Adverse events (AEs) were graded by Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v 4.03. Results: 138 patients were randomized, of whom 133 were treated with median age of 71.0 years (range 44-88), median weight was 83.1 kg (range 45-158), and median BSA was 1.99 m2 (range 1.4-2.9 m2). The IPSS status of the patients were Int-1 in 44%, Int-2 in 20%, and HR in 16%, and 12% of pts had CMML. Patients in the two arms were well balanced regarding cytogenetic risk, baseline hemoglobin, neutrophils, platelets, or red blood cell or platelet transfusion dependence. For the primary end point, the decitabine AUC0-24 (h*ng/mL) 5-Day geometric mean estimate was 856 from the C-DEC and 865 from IV-DEC resulting in an oral/IV AUC ratio of 98.9% (90% CI of 92.7-105.6%). All sensitivity and secondary exposure analyses confirmed the primary results. Comparison of hypomethylating activity as measured by LINE-1 demethylation showed difference between oral C-DEC and IV-DEC demethylation of <1% and the 95% CI of the difference included zero. Safety findings were consistent with those anticipated for IV-DEC (related Grade ≥ 3 AEs in more than 5% were thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, anemia, febrile neutropenia, and leukopenia). As of the data cutoff, median follow up was 5.2 months ( IQR 3.5-8.0) with 101 patients evaluable for response . Preliminary response analysis of all evaluable patients showed best responses of complete response (CR) in 12 patients (11.9%), marrow (m)CR in 46 (45.5%) including 14 patients (13.9%) with mCR + hematological improvement (HI), hematologic improvement (HI) in 7 (6.9%) resulting in an objective response rate (CR+mCR+ HI) in 65 patients (64%). In addition, of all 133 treated patients, 16 patients (12%) underwent hematopoietic cell transplant. Updated response data will be presented at the meeting. Summary/Conclusions: This randomized phase 3 study demonstrates that C-DEC, the oral FDC of cedazuridine/decitabine (100 mg/35 mg) resulted in an equivalent DEC exposure to IV-DEC at 20 mg/m2 over 5 days. Safety findings are consistent with those anticipated with IV-DEC with no clinically significant GI toxicity. Preliminary clinical activity is also consistent with published data from IV-DEC. C-DEC is an oral HMA alternative to IV-DEC. Combination studies with other oral agents are being planned. Disclosures Garcia-Manero: Amphivena: Consultancy, Research Funding; Helsinn: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astex: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onconova: Research Funding; H3 Biomedicine: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding. Griffiths:New Link Genetics: Consultancy; Astex Phramaceuticals/Otsuka Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Persimmune: Consultancy; Boston Scientific: Consultancy; Genentech, Inc.: Research Funding; Genentech, Inc.: Research Funding; Novartis Inc.: Consultancy; Novartis Inc.: Consultancy; Partner Therapeutics: Consultancy; Astex Phramaceuticals/Otsuka Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onconova Therapeutics: Other: PI on a clinical trial; Celgene, Inc: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie, Inc.: Consultancy; Celgene, Inc: Consultancy, Research Funding; Persimmune: Consultancy; Partner Therapeutics: Consultancy; Boston Scientific: Consultancy; New Link Genetics: Consultancy; Onconova Therapeutics: Other: PI on a clinical trial; Abbvie, Inc.: Consultancy, PI on a clinical trial; Appelis Pharmaceuticals: Other: PI on a clinical trial; Appelis Pharmaceuticals: Other: PI on a clinical trial. Yee:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding. Zeidan:Ariad: Honoraria; Acceleron Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Otsuka: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Medimmune/AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Astellas: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria; Cardinal Health: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Agios: Honoraria; Daiichi Sankyo: Honoraria; BeyondSpring: Honoraria; Boehringer-Ingelheim: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Trovagene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding; Jazz: Honoraria. Al-Kali:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Dao:Incyte Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Patel:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Dava Oncology: Honoraria; France Foundation: Honoraria. Sabloff:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; ASTX: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sanofi Canada: Research Funding; Actinium Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer Canada: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas Pharma Canada: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Keating:Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Hoffman La Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Shire: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria. Fazal:Janssen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Jazz: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Odenike:AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen Oncology: Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Agios: Research Funding; CTI/Baxalta: Research Funding; Astex Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Oncotherapy: Research Funding. DeZern:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy. O'Connell:Astex: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Shionogi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Roboz:Janssen: 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; Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Orsenix: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Otsuka: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Trovagene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sandoz: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MEI Pharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Eisai: 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; Celltrion: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bayer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas: 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; Actinium: 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; Amphivena: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Argenx: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astex: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Oganesian:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Hao:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Keer:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Azab:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Savona:Incyte Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Boehringer Ingelheim: Patents & Royalties; Sunesis: Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Selvita: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Background: Heterozygous somatic mutations in the genes encoding RNA splicing factors SF3B1, U2AF1, SRSF2 or ZRSR2 induce aberrant splicing in cancer cells and are among the most common mutations in patients with MDS, AML or CMML. H3B-8800 is an orally available small molecule that binds to the SF3b complex and induces alternative splicing changes in cells. Because splicing factor mutant cells depend on residual wild-type function of splicing factors for survival, we hypothesized that H3B-8800 would induce preferential cell killing of mutant cells by further perturbing splicing to synthetic lethality. In pre-clinical models, H3B-8800 preferentially kills spliceosome mutant cells and induces antitumor activity in xenograft leukemia models with core spliceosome mutations (Seiler M et al Nature Medicine 2018). Therefore, we conducted a phase I clinical trial (NCT02841540) of H3B-8800 in patients with MDS, AML or CMML. Here we describe the safety profile and clinical outcomes of the dose escalation cohorts in this phase I trial. Methods: This phase I trial explored the safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), and pharmacodynamics (PD) of H3B-8800 in patients with myeloid cancers. Dose escalation cohorts, employing a standard 3+3 design, examined 2 different once daily dosing regimens (schedule I: 5 days on/9 days off; schedule II: 21 days on/7 days off) in a 28-day cycle, with stratification based on lower-risk (LR) versus higher-risk (HR) myeloid neoplasms. Results: As of June 16th, 2019, 84 patients were enrolled at 24 centers in the US and Europe. Dose ranged from 1-40 mg among 65 patients on schedule I, while 19 patients were enrolled with dose ranging from 7-20 mg on schedule II. The patient population included AML (n=38), CMML (n=4), HR-MDS (n=20), LR-MDS (n=21) and 1 MDS with unknown risk level. Most patients (88%) had spliceosome mutations of interest. The most common mutations were in SRSF2 (p.P95H in 17, p.P95L in 9, p.P95_R102Del in 4), SF3B1 (p.K700E in 11, p.R625C in 4), and U2AF1 (p.Q157P in 6, p.S34F in 4). Patients remained on treatment from 7 to 819 days; 25 patients (30%) had time on treatment greater than 180 days, 20% more than 1 year and 2% over 2 years. The median therapy duration for LR-CMML/MDS, HR-CMML/MDS, and AML patients were 216, 62, and 47 days respectively. Most observed treatment related treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were Grade 1 or 2. The most common treatment-related (as judged by the investigator, >10% frequency) TEAEs in the patients treated on schedule I were diarrhea (75%), nausea (37%), fatigue (28%) and vomiting (27%). The most common treatment-related TEAEs in the patients treated on schedule II were diarrhea (68%), vomiting (42%), QTc prolongation (21%), nausea (16%), and fatigue (16%). The most common dose limiting toxicity was prolongation of the QTcF interval >500 msec (n=2, 40 mg on schedule I and n=1, 20 mg on schedule II, all ≥Grade 3) and bradycardia without other arrhythmias (n=1, 14 mg on schedule II, ≥Grade 3). No ophthalmic AEs were observed; 1 patient (LR-MDS) experienced durable marrow aplasia. The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) has not been confirmed for either Schedule I or Schedule II. PK analysis indicates that H3B-8800 is rapidly absorbed and exhibits dose-proportional increase in plasma exposure. Consistent dose-dependent target engagement (i.e., alteration in mature mRNA transcripts) was observed in blood mononuclear cells from patients enrolled in the 2 mg up to 40 mg dose cohorts on both schedules. Despite this splicing modulation, no objective complete responses (CR) or partial responses (PR) meeting International Working Group criteria were observed. One patient with CMML had a durable platelet response that began in Cycle 1 and persisted through Cycle 13. Nine red blood cell (RBC) transfusion-dependent patients with MDS or CMML and 2 patients with AML did not require RBC transfusions for ≥8 weeks (up to 28 weeks) while on study. One platelet transfusion-dependent patient with LR-MDS did not require platelet transfusions for ≥8 weeks. Conclusion: Results from this first-in-human multicenter prospective clinical trial of a splicing modulator in myeloid neoplasms demonstrate dose-dependent target engagement and predictable PK profile of H3B-8800, and safety even with prolonged dosing. Although no objective CR or PR were achieved, decreased RBC or platelet transfusion requirements were observed in 12 (14%) of enrolled patients. Disclosures Steensma: H3 Biosciences: Other: Research funding to institution, not investigator.; Pfizer: Consultancy; Aprea: Research Funding; Stemline: Consultancy; Arrowhead: Equity Ownership; Summer Road: Consultancy; Astex: Consultancy; Onconova: Consultancy. Wermke:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding. Greenberg:Notable Labs: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; H3 Biotech: Research Funding; Aprea: Research Funding; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Font:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Komrokji:Agios: Consultancy; JAZZ: Speakers Bureau; DSI: Consultancy; JAZZ: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; celgene: Consultancy; pfizer: Consultancy. Yang:Agios: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Research Funding. Brunner:Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Forty Seven Inc: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Research Funding. Ades:Agios: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Silence Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Research Funding; Helsinn Healthcare: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Al-Kali:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Coombs:H3 Biomedicine: Research Funding. Foran:Agios: Honoraria, Research Funding. Garcia-Manero:Helsinn: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amphivena: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astex: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onconova: Research Funding; H3 Biomedicine: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding. Micol:AbbVie: Consultancy; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Perez De Oteyza:Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Wang:Abbvie: Other: Advisory role; Kite: Other: Advisory role; Jazz: Other: Advisory role; Astellas: Other: Advisory role, Speakers Bureau; celyad: Other: Advisory role; Pfizer: Other: Advisory role, Speakers Bureau; Stemline: Other: Advisory role, Speakers Bureau; Daiichi: Other: Advisory role; Amgen: Other: Advisory role; Agios: Other: Advisory role. Watts:Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Buonamici:H3 Biomedicine: Employment. Kim:H3 Biomedicine: Employment. Gourineni:H3 Biomedicine: Employment. Marino:H3 Biomedicine: Employment. Rioux:H3 Biomedicine: Employment. Schindler:H3 Biomedicine: Employment. Smith:H3 Biomedicine: Employment. Yao:H3 Biomedicine: Employment. Yuan:Eisai: Employment. Yu:H3 Biomedicine: Employment. Platzbecker:Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: H3B-8800 (experimental, unapproved)

6 Background: Rates and survival outcomes for second-line therapy for mCRC for OA vs. YA are poorly understood. Methods: Pts with available subsequent treatment data after progression from 10 1st line trials were included. Associations between key clinical/disease characteristics, time to initial progression (TTiP) and rate of receipt of second-line therapy were evaluated. Time to progression (TTP) and overall survival (OS) were compared between OA and YA who were enrolled on second-line trials by Cox regression, adjusting for age, sex, ECOG PS, number of metastatic sites, presence of metastasis in lung/liver/peritoneum. Results: OA comprised 16.4% of first-line trials. OA and ECOG PS >0 were less likely to receive second-line therapy than YA. Odds of receiving second-line therapy decreased by 11% for each additional decade of life in multivariate analysis (p=0.0117). OA enrolled in second-line trials experience similar mTTP and mOS as YA (5.1 vs. 5.2mos; 11.6 vs 12.4mos, respectively). Conclusions: OA are less likely to receive 2nd line therapy for mCRC. We did not observe a statistical difference in survival outcomes for OA vs. YA following second-line therapy. Further study is needed to examine unmeasured factors, including comorbidity and functional status given observed inferior outcomes among adults with ECOG PS >0, and consideration given to inclusion of geriatric assessment to select OA likely to benefit from 2nd line therapy for mCRC. [Table: see text]

Arterial baroreflex activation through electrical carotid sinus stimulation has been developed for the treatment of resistant hypertension. Previous studies suggested that the peripheral chemoreflex is tonically active in hypertensive patients and may inhibit baroreflex responses. We hypothesized that peripheral chemoreflex activation attenuates baroreflex efficacy evoked by electrical carotid sinus stimulation. We screened 35 patients with an implanted electrical carotid sinus stimulator. Of those, 11 patients with consistent acute depressor response were selected (7 men/4 women, age: 67±8 years, body mass index: 31.6±5.2 kg/m 2 , 6±2 antihypertensive drug classes). We assessed responses to electrical baroreflex stimulation during normoxia, isocapnic hypoxia (SpO 2 : 79.0±1.5%), and hyperoxia (40% end-tidal O 2 fraction) by measuring heart rate, blood pressure, ventilation, oxygen saturation, end-tidal CO 2 and O 2 fractions, and muscle sympathetic nerve activity. During normoxia, baroreflex activation reduced systolic blood pressure from 164±27 to 151±25 mm Hg (mean±SD, P <0.001), heart rate from 64±13 to 61±13 bpm ( P =0.002), and muscle sympathetic nerve activity from 42±12 to 36±12 bursts/min ( P =0.004). Hypoxia increased systolic blood pressure 8±12 mm Hg ( P =0.057), heart rate 10±6 bpm ( P <0.001), muscle sympathetic nerve activity 7±7 bursts/min ( P =0.031), and ventilation 10±7 L/min ( P =0.002). However, responses to electrical carotid sinus stimulation did not differ between hypoxic and hyperoxic conditions: systolic blood pressure: −15±7 versus −14±8 mm Hg ( P =0.938), heart rate: −2±3 versus −2±2 bpm ( P =0.701), and muscle sympathetic nerve activity: −6±4 versus −4±3 bursts/min ( P =0.531). We conclude that moderate peripheral chemoreflex activation does not attenuate acute responses to electrical baroreflex activation therapy in patients with resistant hypertension. These patients provided insight into human baroreflex-chemoreflex interactions that could not be gained otherwise.

Introduction: Myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) are a heterogenous group of blood disorders defined by peripheral cytopenia(s), bone marrow failure, morphological dysplasia, and risk of progression. To understand the genetic, epigenetic and biological factors associated with the initiation and progression of MDS, NHLBI created the National MDS Study (NCT02775383). This is a prospective cohort study conducted at 92 community hospitals and 29 academic centers enrolling patients undergoing diagnostic work up for suspected MDS or MDS/myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN) overlap syndrome. Eligible patients have yet to receive any therapy directed at their cytopenias. Previously untreated cytopenic participants underwent centralized histopathology and data review at the time of enrollment for assignment into distinct subcategories: MDS, MDS/MPN overlap, AML, and Other. Targeted exon sequencing of 96 genes was performed using marrow specimens from the first 300 consecutive individuals in the study. Here we report the genetic mutations for this cohort. Methods: NovaSeq 6000 was used for deep sequencing at a mean coverage of 1,286X and mean breadth (bases covered at ≥100X) of 99.8%. Reads were aligned against build GRCh38 using BWA-MEM, and VarScan2 was used to detect SNVs and INDELS. Variants were filtered for those with an allele base quality of >25 in combination with rule-based and manual review criteria. Subjects in the Other category without an identified malignancy were considered clonal cytopenias of undetermined significance (CCUS) when a mutation or a clonal cytogenetic change was present. Fisher's exact and Wilcoxon rank sum tests in combination with Bonferroni correction were applied to compare groups. Results : A total of 350 putative nonsynonymous pathogenic variants in 36 genes with an allele frequency of >.05 were identified across 150 patients (50%). At least one variant was noted in the following proportion of individuals: 61/72 (85%) with MDS, 13/13 (100%) with MDS/MPN, 15/17 (88%) with AML, and 61/198 (31%) in the Other category, of which 48 were CCUS and 13 were other cancers. Two CCUS patients only had a cytogenetic abnormality. Table 1 shows the distribution of variants in each subcategory of patients for the most commonly mutated genes in our cohort of 300 subjects. Mutations in these genes were enriched in specific groups: SF3B1, STAG2,TP53, and ASXL1 in MDS; TET2 in MDS/MPN; and IDH2 and TP53 in AML (one-sided p<0.0012). None were enriched in the Other group. Within the CCUS subset, 21 genes were mutated, with 37 of 50 (74%) patients having a mutation in TET2, ASXL1, SRSF2, SF3B1, or DNMT3A. The heatmap presented in Figure 1 summarizes variants by subject and allele frequency. Pair-wise comparisons of baseline characteristics of subjects between MDS, MDS/MPN, AML, or CCUS groups revealed no significant differences for age or sex. The CCUS group had significantly higher hemoglobins than the MDS group with median hemoglobin levels of 11.35 and 9.40 g/dL, respectively (p<0.0084). AML had significantly lower platelets compared to all other groups (median of 53 vs. > 110x109/L , respectively, p<0.0084). All groups significantly differed in their median ANC with AML having the lowest (0.8x109/L), followed by MDS (1.5x109/L), CCUS (2.45x109/L), and MDS/MPN overlap (5.95x109/L) (p<0.0084). There was no difference in the median number of variants per patient between groups or correlation with age (rs=0.11, p=0.18). The maximum variant allele frequency (maxVAF) per patient was highest in the MDS/MPN group (median = 0.42, range = 0.38-0.91) and lowest in the CCUS group (median = 0.37, range =0.06-0.98) with the MDS/MPN group having a significantly higher maxVAF compared to the MDS and the CCUS groups (p<0.0084). The proportions of subjects with mutations was similar for those who had abnormal (92% [34/37]) and normal (91% [80/88]) cytogenetics. Conclusions: Incorporation of gene-panel sequencing in the comprehensive evaluation of 300 adult cytopenic patients identified half of the cohort with potentially pathogenic variants. Ultimately, a diagnosis of CCUS was possible in 48 of 183 subjects (26%) not diagnosed with MDS, MDS/MPN overlap syndrome, AML, other cancers or clonal cytogenetics. This study continues to serially bank samples from patients with CCUS, in addition to MDS, MDS/MPN, and ICUS, with the goal to better understand the natural history of these diseases and their progression. Disclosures Lindsley: Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Takeda Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Medlmmune: Research Funding. Bejar:Celgene: Consultancy; Takeda Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; AbbVie/Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria; Astex/Otsuka: Consultancy; Modus Outcomes: Consultancy; Daiichi-Sankyo: Consultancy. Al Baghdadi:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Heron: Consultancy, Honoraria; Tracon: Equity Ownership; Epizyme: Equity Ownership; Bristol Myer Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sunesis: Equity Ownership; Portola: Equity Ownership; Heron therapeutics: Equity Ownership; Cardinal health: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol Myer Squibb: Equity Ownership; Celgene: Equity Ownership; Spectrum pharmaceutical: Equity Ownership; Astrazeneca: Equity Ownership; Seattle genetics: Equity Ownership; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria. DeZern:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy. Foran:Agios: Honoraria, Research Funding. Gore:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding. Komrokji:DSI: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; JAZZ: Speakers Bureau; pfizer: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; JAZZ: Consultancy. Maciejewski:Alexion: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy. Starczynowski:Kurome Therapeutics: Consultancy. Sekeres:Millenium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Syros: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Abstract Abstract 3009FN2 Objective: To determine toxicity and efficacy of adding fludarabine (FLU) to a regimen of total body irradiation (TBI), anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG) and cyclophosphamide (CY), with de-escalation of the CY dose. The goal is to minimize CY-related toxicities while preserving (or improving) engraftment and survival in patients with SAA receiving an unrelated donor marrow transplant. Patients and Methods: Since May 2006, the Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinical Trials Network (BMT CTN), sponsored by the NHLBI and NCI, has conducted a prospective Phase I/II clinical trial of unrelated donor marrow transplantation in SAA (BMT CTN 0301). Patients with SAA are eligible if they are < 65 years, have adequate organ function, and have an available unrelated marrow donor matched 7 of 8 HLA-A, B, C, DRB1 loci. Patients with Fanconi anemia and other marrow failure syndromes are excluded. All patients receive TBI 200 cGy, ATG (either thymoglobulin: 3 mg/kg IV or ATGAM 30 mg/kg IV daily × 3, days –4 to –2), FLU (30 mg/m2 IV daily × 4, days –5 to –2). The Phase I portion of the trial sequentially tested four CY dose levels: 150 mg/kg (administered days –4 to –2); 100 mg/kg (days –3 to –2); 50 mg/kg (day –2); and, 0 mg/kg, and allowed enrollment of up to six patients at each CY dose level unless toxicity or graft failure boundaries were crossed. In the Phase II portion of the trial, patients enroll onto the optimal CY dose level, which is chosen using adaptive Bayesian criteria to rank desirability of the CY doses. All patients are followed for two years after transplantation. Early stopping guidelines are used to monitor for graft failure and early transplant-related mortality through day 100. Results: Twenty-one patients accrued to the Phase I portion of the trial. CY dose level 0 mg/kg was closed after all three enrolled patients developed secondary graft failure. All received a second allograft. One patient remains alive at 23 months after the first transplantation. The other two died from adult respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) at 114 days after the first transplant and idiopathic pneumonia at 200 days after the first transplant. Review of Phase I results for the other three dose levels suggested CY dose 150 mg/kg as the optimal dose level for Phase II testing. However, after an additional eight patients were treated at this dose, the level was closed to further accrual because of excess toxicity. Seven of the 14 patients receiving 150 mg/kg of CY (and 7 of the last 8 enrolled) died. Causes of death were cardiac/pulmonary/multi-organ failure (n=4), ARDS (n=2), and parainfluenza virus type 3 pneumonia (n=1). Bayesian evaluation of the two remaining dose levels indicates very similar desirability scores and accrual continues at both the CY 100 mg/kg and 50 mg/kg levels. As of July 15, 2011, a total of 61 patients have been enrolled, 17 on the two closed levels, 33 on the 100 mg/kg level and 11 on the 50 mg/kg level. Conclusions: Early analysis of this trial, made necessary by these unexpected severe adverse events, revealed two important findings among patients receiving low-dose TBI, ATG, and FLU at the doses outlined: 1) CY dose 0 mg/kg is associated with higher than expected graft failure; and, 2) CY dose 150 mg/kg is associated with excess transplant-related toxicity. Neither CY dose level should be tested further in the context of the regimen used in this trial. To date, the two intermediate CY dose levels (100 mg/kg and 50 mg/kg) have not crossed the graft failure or fatality stopping boundaries and accrual is in progress. Disclosures: Pulsipher: Genzyme: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Abstract Systemic mastocytosis (SM) is a rare hematologic neoplasm characterized by abnormal growth and accumulation of tissue mast cells (MC) in various organ systems, including bone marrow (BM). Indolent and advanced forms of SM have been described. Whereas patients with ISM have a normal or near normal life-expectancy, patients with advanced SM, including those suffering from mast cell leukemia (MCL) have a poor prognosis. In these patients, neoplastic MC are usually resistant against conventional drugs and various targeted drugs. In rapidly progressive aggressive SM (ASM) and MCL, polychemotherapy followed by allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (alloHCT) has been proposed. However, outcome of alloHCT in advanced SM is unknown, and it also remains uncertain whether clinically relevant graft-versus-SM (GVSM) effects may occur in these patients, as only sporadic case reports have been published. We performed a retrospective multi-center analysis to evaluate the outcome of alloHCT in patients with advanced SM. Fifty-four advanced SM patients receiving SCT in 32 transplantation centers in Europe and America were identified between 1990 and 2013. The median patient age was 45 years. Donors were: HLA identical siblings (31), unrelated donors (URD) (15), umbilical cord blood donors (UCB) (2), and haploidentical donors (1). In 5 patients, stem cell source was not defined (5). Thirty-four patients received myeloablative conditioning (MAC) and 18 received reduced intensity conditioning regimens (RIC). In 2 patients, conditioning regimen was not specified. Indications for alloHCT were SM with an associated clonal hematologic non-mast cell lineage disease (SM-AHNMD) (n=32), MCL (n=13, including one with MCL-AHNMD), 8 with ASM and 1 with myelomastocytic leukemia (MML). The most prevalent AHNMD was acute myeloid leukemia (AML, n=16). With follow-up of 35-6180 (median 365) days, SM responses (defined as ≥50% decrease in BM mast cells ± decrease in serum tryptase ± regression of other organ manifestations) were observed in 39 patients (72%), including complete responses (CR) documented in 12 patients (22%). Eleven patients had stable disease, whereas 4 patients (7%) progressed immediately after alloHCT (primary resistance). In addition, 10 patients progressed (5 of them within 100 days) after an initial response. Progression was most frequently seen in MCL patients (n=6, 50%). In the AHNMD group, only 8 patients relapsed/progressed (25%). The overall survival (OS) and SM progression-free survival (PFS) at 1 year were 63% and 50% for all patients, 77% and 68% for SM-AHNMD, 63% and 50% for ASM, and 25% and 17% for MCL, respectively. The strongest predictive variable associated with inferior survival was a diagnosis of MCL. Other factors associated with poor outcome were: Karnofsky performance status ≤70%, ≥2 SM regimens given before alloHCT (e.g., steroids, cladribine, chemotherapy, tyrosine kinase inhibitor), donor source (alternative donors-UCB and haploidentical compared to sibling or URD), SM progression within the first 100 days, normal cytogenetics (compared to t(8;21) (q22;q22), and RIC (compared to MAC). The following variables were not associated with poor outcome: patient and donor age, recipient-donor sex match status, graft source (BM vs. peripheral stem cells), BM mast cell percentage at time of alloHCT, and CR status of AML or SM response at time of alloHCT. This largest multi-center analysis of results in advanced SM provides evidence for clinical efficacy of alloHCT, presumably because of a GVSM effect of alloHCT (achieving CR, and response to donor-lymphocyte infusions and RIC alloHCT). However, responses varied among different SM categories: while patients with SM-AHNMD enjoyed excellent outcomes, the OS for MCL patients in general, was poor. Nevertheless it is remarkable that 3 of 13 patients with MCL – an otherwise fatal disease with a median survival of &lt;12 months – became long-term survivors after alloHCT. In summary, our results support development of a prospective alloHCT study, with the aim to optimize therapy and to improve overall outcome in advanced SM. Based on our pilot study, alloHCT should also be considered in practice for eligible and fit patients with SM-AHNMD (if treatment of AHNMD component needs alloHCT or SM component is aggressive), rapidly progressing ASM, MCL and MML when a suitable HLA-matched sibling donor or URD is available. Disclosures: Vercellotti: Sangart Inc.: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Akin:Novartis: Consultancy. Valent:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding.

Abstract BACKGROUND: Both thalidomide (Br J Haematol2002;117:288) and lenalidomide (Blood2006;108:1158) are effective for alleviating anemia in approximately 20% of patients with myelofibrosis (MF). However, the value of these drugs is undermined by their respective potential for peripheral neuropathy and severe myelosuppression. In the current study, we evaluated the safety and efficacy of the new immunomodulatory drug, pomalidomide (POM) in MF. METHODS: This is a phase-2 randomized, multicenter, double-blind, active-control, parallel-group study to determine safety and select a “Best” dose of POM alone or combined with prednisone (PRED). Patients were equally randomized to 4 treatment groups: POM (2 mg/day) + placebo, PRED (30 mg/day) + placebo, POM (2 mg/day) + PRED (30 mg/day), and POM (0.5 mg/day) + PRED (30 mg/day). POM therapy was given for up to twelve 28-day treatment cycles. PRED therapy was given in a tapering dose schedule during the first three of these 12 treatment cycles. Protocol eligibility criteria included absolute neutrophil count of ≥ 1 × 109/L, platelet count of ≥ 50 × 109/L and hemoglobin level of < 10 g/dL including red blood cell (RBC) transfusion requirement. Patients with prior thalidomide or lenalidomide therapy and/or venous thrombosis were excluded from study participation. Response was assessed by the International Working Group for Myelofibrosis Research and Treatment (IWG-MRT) criteria (Blood.2006;108:1497) and by independent analysis of the component variables. RESULTS: A total of 104 patients with MF were assessed for eligibility; 85 were randomized and 84 received the assigned therapy. Blinded data for the first 82 patients are presented here; median age was 67 years and MF subtype was PMF in 70% of the patients and post-PV/ET MF in 30%. All patients belonged to either intermediate or high risk disease category (Blood1996;88:1013); 42 (51%) were RBC transfusion-dependent. Median duration of disease before randomization was 3 years (range 2–14). The number of patients assigned to each arm was relatively balanced: 21, 20, 19 and 22, respectively. After a median treatment duration of 3 months, 42 (51%) patients have discontinued protocol therapy because of lack of therapeutic effect (n=19), withdrawal of consent (n=11), adverse event (n=11) or death (n=2). Grade 3/4 adverse events (regardless of attribution) included anemia (10%), thrombocytopenia (9%), leukopenia (9%), fatigue (7%), dyspnea (5%), thrombosis (4%), diarrhea (4%) and hyperglycemia (4%). Combined response rate using IWG-MRT criteria was 25% (95% CI, 16–34%) and ranged between 11% and 42% among the four treatment arms. CONCLUSION: Pomalidomide, with or without concomitant prednisone therapy, is well tolerated in patients with MF, especially from the standpoint of myelosuppression. Response rates are high. Additional, unblinded, information regarding response details, remission duration and laboratory correlative studies will be presented at the meeting.