Citations

Abstract Introduction: The preferred post-remission therapy for older patients (pts) with AML remains uncertain. We compared outcomes for older AML pts in CR1 receiving HCT reported to the CIBMTR to older AML pts achieving CR1 on National Clinical Trials Network induction and non-HCT consolidation therapy (CT) trials. Methods: This study focused on pts 60-75 years of age treated between 2004 to 2013. CT pts (n=211) underwent induction and consolidation on Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology, ECOG-ACRIN or SWOG clinical trials for initial therapy for newly diagnosed AML; the CIBMTR provided data for HCT pts (n=431). CT patients received at least one cycle of CT on study and were excluded if HCT occurred at any time. Time to event started at CR1 and pts entered at CT or HCT, respectively, using left-truncation to account for differential entry times. Results: For the CT cohort, first consolidation included standard therapy (e.g., cytarabine or a hypomethylating agent) and additional study drug (e.g., bortezomib, dasatinib, sorafenib, and Zosuquidar, gemtuzumab) or tipifarnib alone. Among HCT pts, the donor was a HLA-matched sibling or unrelated donor (URD) in 66% and the others were partially HLA-matched/mismatched URD (10%) or cord blood (24%). HCT pts were younger and more frequently had high-risk AML (high WBC, secondary AML and unfavorable cytogenetics) (Table). The median time from CR1 to HCT and CT was 3.2 and 0.5 months, respectively. Allogeneic HCT showed worse overall survival (OS) (HR=1.52, p=0.02) prior to 9 months and better OS thereafter (HR= 0.53, p <0.0001) relative to CT (figure 1A). Treatment-related mortality (TRM) was worse after HCT in the first 9 months (HR=2.8, CI: 1.5 -5.2, p=.0009), while relapse was less frequent beyond 9 months after treatment (HR = 0.42, CI: 0.29 to 0.61, p<.0001). Despite higher early TRM, HCT recipients went on to manifest superior OS [5 year OS: HCT 29% (24-34%), CT 13.8% (9 -22%)] (Figure 1A). The benefit of HCT for survival after 9 months was more prominent in those with unfavorable cytogenetics (Figure 1B). Multivariate analysis for OS showed no statistically significant effect of age or performance status, while unfavorable cytogenetics were detrimental (HR=1.74, p<.0001). Conclusions. Allogeneic HCT led to heightened early risks from TRM, but resulted in superior long-term survival in older AML pts receiving HCT relative to CT by reducing relapse. Efforts to attenuate early TRM after allogeneic HCT may further improve HCT outcomes for older pts. Disclosures Ustun: novartis: Speakers Bureau. Attar:Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership. Larson:Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; BristolMyers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Ariad/Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding. Roboz:Roche/Genentech: Consultancy; Eisai: Consultancy; Cellectis: Research Funding; Aphivena Therapeutics: Consultancy; Sandoz: Consultancy; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Otsuka: Consultancy; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Sandoz: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Celltrion: Consultancy; Cellectis: Research Funding; Eisai: Consultancy; Astex Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Argenx: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy; Orsenix: Consultancy; Astex Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Otsuka: Consultancy; Orsenix: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Celltrion: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Aphivena Therapeutics: Consultancy; Argenx: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy. Uy:GlycoMimetics: Consultancy; Curis: Consultancy. Stone:Fujifilm: Consultancy; Ono: Consultancy; Orsenix: Consultancy; Otsuka: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy; Argenx: Other: Data and Safety Monitoring Board; Celgene: Consultancy, Other: Data and Safety Monitoring Board, Steering Committee; Arog: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Jazz: Consultancy; Astellas: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Sumitomo: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Cornerstone: Consultancy. Foran:Agios: Research Funding; Xencor, Inc.: Research Funding. Weisdorf:Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Equillium: Consultancy; FATE: Consultancy; SL Behring: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy.

Abstract BACKGROUND: Recurrent mutations in isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) are observed in approximately 4% of patients with myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) and have been linked with increased transformation to acute myeloid leukemia. Ivosidenib (AG-120), an oral, potent, targeted, small-molecule inhibitor of the mutant IDH1 protein (mIDH1), is a therapeutic candidate for the treatment of patients with mIDH1 MDS. Through inhibition of mIDH1, ivosidenib suppresses the production of the oncometabolite 2-hydroxyglutarate (2-HG), leading to clinical responses via differentiation of malignant cells. AIM: To report safety and efficacy data from patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) MDS enrolled in the first-in-human, phase 1, dose escalation and expansion study of ivosidenib in patients with mIDH1 advanced hematologic malignancies (NCT02074839). METHODS: This ongoing study is evaluating the safety, maximum tolerated dose (MTD), pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and clinical activity of ivosidenib. Trial enrollment was completed on 08May2017. In dose escalation, patients received single-agent ivosidenib orally once daily (QD) or twice daily in 28-day cycles. The MTD was not reached and 500 mg QD was selected as the dose to be tested in expansion. Expansion Arm 3 enrolled patients with mIDH1 advanced hematologic malignancies, including MDS. The overall response rate (ORR) for MDS was defined as complete remission (CR) + partial remission + marrow CR. Exploratory biomarker assessments included baseline co-occurring mutations (next-generation sequencing panel for hematologic malignancies) and mIDH1 variant allele frequency (VAF) in bone marrow mononuclear cells (BEAMing Digital PCR; lower limit of detection for mIDH1, 0.02-0.04%). Here, we present safety and efficacy data for patients with MDS in expansion Arm 3 and in dose escalation whose starting dose was 500 mg QD. RESULTS: In all, 258 patients (78 in dose escalation, 180 in expansion) received ivosidenib, including 12 patients with MDS (9 from expansion and 3 from escalation) whose starting dose was 500 mg QD. Baseline characteristics for these 12 patients were: 9 men/3 women; median age, 72.5 years (range, 52-78) and 42% were ≥75 years of age; median number of prior therapies, 1 (range, 1-3). As of 10Nov2017, 7 of 12 (58.3%) patients remained on treatment and 5 (41.7%) had discontinued (one for allogeneic stem cell transplantation). The median duration of exposure to ivosidenib was 11.0 months (range, 3.3-31.1). The most common adverse events (AEs) of any grade, irrespective of causality, occurring in ≥20% of the 12 patients were back pain (n=4, 33.3%) and anemia, decreased appetite, diarrhea, dyspnea, fatigue, hypokalemia, pruritus, and rash (n=3, 25.0% each). The majority of these AEs were grade 1-2 and reported as unrelated to treatment. No AEs led to permanent discontinuation of treatment. IDH differentiation syndrome (IDH-DS) was observed in 2 of 12 (16.7%) patients; the events were grade 1 and 2, respectively. Of the 12 patients with MDS receiving ivosidenib 500 mg QD, 5 achieved CR (41.7%; 95% CI 15.2%, 72.3%) and 6 achieved marrow CR (50.0%), resulting in an ORR of 91.7% (95% CI 61.5%, 99.8%). The median durations of CR and overall response were not estimable at the time of the data cutoff. The percentages of patients who remained in CR and response at 12 months were 60.0% and 61.4%, respectively. Among 5 patients who were transfusion dependent at baseline, 4 became transfusion independent for at least 56 days on treatment. Baseline co-occurring mutations and changes in mIDH1 VAF levels on ivosidenib therapy will be presented. CONCLUSION: In patients with mIDH1 R/R MDS, ivosidenib monotherapy was well tolerated and induced durable remissions and transfusion independence. These findings support the role of ivosidenib as an effective, oral, targeted treatment for patients with mIDH1 R/R MDS. Disclosures DiNardo: Karyopharm: Other: Advisory role; Medimmune: Other: Advisory role; Celgene: Other: Advisory role; Bayer: Other: Advisory role; Agios: Consultancy, Other: Advisory role; AbbVie: Consultancy, Other: Advisory role. Watts:Jazz Pharma: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Research Funding. Stein:Celgene: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy. de Botton:Agios: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Fathi:Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Jazz: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Boston Biomedical: Consultancy, Honoraria; Astellas: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Agios: Honoraria, Research Funding. Stein:Amgen: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Foran:Agios: Research Funding; Xencor, Inc.: Research Funding. Stone:AbbVie: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cornerstone: Consultancy; Orsenix: Consultancy; Fujifilm: Consultancy; Sumitomo: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Other: Data and Safety Monitoring Board, Steering Committee; Ono: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Otsuka: Consultancy; Jazz: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Astellas: Consultancy; Arog: Consultancy, Research Funding; Argenx: Other: Data and Safety Monitoring Board; Amgen: Consultancy. Patel:France Foundation: Honoraria; Dava Oncology: Honoraria; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Tallman:Cellerant: Research Funding; BioSight: Other: Advisory board; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Daiichi-Sankyo: Other: Advisory board; AROG: Research Funding; Orsenix: Other: Advisory board. Choe:Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership. Wang:Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership. Zhang:Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership. Dai:Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership. Fan:Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership. Yen:Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kapsalis:Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hickman:Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership. Agresta:Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership. Liu:Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership. Wu:Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties. Attar:Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership.

Abstract Background: The few therapies available to treat higher-risk MDS and CMML have limited impact on outcome. We previously reported initial results of S1117, which compared overall response rates (ORRs) of azacitidine (AZA) monotherapy to AZA combined with the histone deacetylase inhibitor vorinostat (VOR), or the immunomodulator lenalidomide (LEN)( ASH 2014 LBA-5). We now report updated response data and overall survival (OS), subgroup analyses, impact of cytogenetics, and effect of treatment center volume/centers of excellence on outcome. Methods: This randomized, Phase II study (ClinTrials.gov # NCT01522976) enrolled higher-risk MDS (International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) Int-2 or High and/or bone marrow blasts ≥5%) and CMML adult patients (pts) with <20% blasts from 3/12-6/14 to receive AZA (75 mg/m2/d on d1-7 of a 28d cycle), AZA + LEN (10 mg/d on d1-21), or AZA + VOR (300 mg BID on d3-9). Pts continued treatment until treatment failure, defined as disease progression, relapse, significant or unresolved toxicity, or lack of response. Dose reductions occurred for grade ≥3 adverse events (per NCI CTCAE) or delayed count recovery. Cytogenetic risk groups were defined per IPSS-R. The primary endpoint was improvement in ORR, by intention to treat and reviewed centrally, of one of the combination arms vs. AZA per 2006 International Working Group MDS response criteria (complete response (CR) + partial response (PR) + hematologic improvement (HI)). OS was from study entry. MDS Centers of Excellence (MCE) were defined per MDS Foundation; center volume was defined as low (1-4 pts enrolled) or high (5-17 pts). Results: Of 277 pts, 92 received AZA, 93 AZA+LEN, and 92 AZA+VOR. Baseline characteristics, previously reported, were similar across arms. Pts received a median of 22 weeks of therapy and were followed for a median of 10 months (range: 0-30). Non-protocol defined dose modification and protocol discontinuation due to toxicity occurred more frequently in combination arms vs. AZA (p=.0014 and p=.018, respectively). Responses are now assessable in all pts (Table 1). ORR was statistically similar for combination arms vs. AZA, with a trend for longer response duration (p=.083) for combinations. Within HI, AZA+LEN pts had higher HI-n than AZA pts (16% vs. 5%, p=.031). ORR for CMML pts was significantly higher for LEN+AZA vs. AZA (63% vs. 29%, p=.04), with a trend for longer response duration for combinations (p=.06); no differences in ORR were seen for therapy-related MDS, IPSS subgroups, or transfusion-dependent pts. Allogeneic transplantation rates were similar. Median OS (Figure) for AZA:AZA+LEN:AZA+VOR was 15:18 (p=.38):17 (p=.17) months; p=.19 for combination arms vs. AZA. Median OS after failure was 7:9 (p=.6):9 (p=.05) months; p=.15 for combination arms after failure vs. AZA. For pts on therapy >6 months, there was a trend (p=.08) for higher ORR for AZA+LEN vs. AZA, though response duration was similar; median OS was 18:21 (p=.44 vs. AZA):21 months (p=.45 vs. AZA). Cytogenetic risk category distribution and ORR was similar across arms. OS (compared to Very Good/Good) was worse for Poor (HR 2.07, p=.022) and Very poor (HR 4.41, p<.001), without significant modification by treatment arm (Table 2). Compared to pts without identified cytogenetic abnormalities (abn), ORR across arms was better for pts with Chr 5 abn (OR 2.38, p=.004); OS was better for normal (HR .42, p<.001) and worse for Chr 5 abn (HR 3.1, p<.001), -7 (HR 2.69, p<.001), and 17p (HR 2.61, p<.001). While small numbers prevented definitive conclusions for treatment arm effect, combinations trended towards improving OS in Normal and Chr 5 abn only. The outcome of all pts and pts on discrete study arms treated at MCE (n=75) or high volume (n=138) sites were similar to non-MCE or low-volume sites for ORR, non-protocol defined dose modifications, dose adjustment in first 4 cycles, time to off-protocol (HR 1.2, p=.21 and HR .94, p=.64), and OS (HR .81, p=.3 and HR .77, p=.12). Conclusions: In higher-risk MDS pts, ORR and OS was similar for AZA monotherapy compared to combination arms, while for CMML pts, ORR was significantly higher with AZA+LEN. For cytogenetic subgroups, OS was worse for Chr 5 abn, -7, and 17p, and may be improved by combinations in normal or Chr 5 abn. MCE or treatment at a high volume site did not impact these effects or outcomes. Figure 1. Responses Figure 1. Responses Figure 2. Cytogenetics Figure 2. Cytogenetics Figure 3. Figure 3. Disclosures Sekeres: Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. List:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding. Odenike:Sunesis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Stone:Merck: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy. Gore:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Buckstein:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Fang:Affymetrix: Research Funding. Attar:Agios Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Erba:Ariad: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Sunesis: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Jannsen (J&J): Other: Data Safety and Monitoring Committees ; Ariad: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; GlycoMimetics: Other: Data Safety and Monitoring Committees; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium/Takeda: Research Funding; Millennium/Takeda: Research Funding; Celator: Research Funding; Celator: Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; Sunesis: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; GlycoMimetics: Other: Data Safety and Monitoring Committees; Jannsen (J&J): Other: Data Safety and Monitoring Committees.

Abstract Background: Higher-risk MDS and CMML comprise a spectrum of disorders associated with cytopenias, high risk of transformation to acute myeloid leukemia (AML), and truncated survival. Initial treatment with a hypomethylating agent such as azacitidine (AZA) is considered standard of care. Whether addition of the histone deacetylase inhibitor vorinostat (VOR), which acts synergistically with AZA to reactivate epigenetically silenced genes, or addition of lenalidomide (LEN), which impacts the bone marrow microenvironment, improves response rates compared to AZA monotherapy is unknown. Methods: This Phase II study (ClinTrials.gov # NCT01522976) randomized higher-risk MDS (International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) Int-2 or High and/or bone marrow blasts >5%) and CMML patients (pts) with <20% blasts to receive AZA (75 mg/m2/d on d1-7 of a 28d cycle), AZA + LEN (10 mg/d on d1-21), or AZA + VOR (300 mg BID on d3-9). Eligibility criteria included: >18 years (yrs), no previous allogeneic transplant, no prior treatment with any of the study drugs, and adequate organ function; therapy-related (t)MDS was allowed. Pts continued treatment until disease progression, relapse, unacceptable toxicity, or lack of response. Dose reductions occurred for unresolved grade >3 adverse events (per NCI CTCAE) or delayed count recovery. The primary endpoint was improvement in overall response rate (ORR), by intention to treat and reviewed centrally, of one of the combination arms vs. AZA monotherapy per 2006 International Working Group MDS response criteria (complete response (CR) + partial response (PR) + hematologic improvement (HI)). Relapse-free survival (RFS) was from time of response. The study had 81% power to detect a 20% improvement in ORR from 35% to 55%. Results: Of 282 pts enrolled from 3/12–6/14, 276 are included in analyses (6 ineligible pts excluded): 92 on the AZA arm, 93 on AZA+LEN, and 91 on AZA+VOR. Baseline characteristics were well-balanced across arms (Table). Pts received a median of 23 weeks of therapy: 25 of AZA; 24 of AZA+LEN; and 20 of AZA+VOR and were followed for a median of 9 months (range: 0-26). Numbers of pts with notable adverse events >grade 3 for AZA:AZA+LEN:AZA+VOR included febrile neutropenia (10:13:13); gastrointestinal disorders (4:11:23); infections (2:3:3); and rash (2:12:1). Responses were assessable in 260 pts (94%). ORR for the entire cohort was 33%: 19% CR, 1% PR, and 13% HI, with a median RFS of 7 months. ORR was similar across study arms: 36% for AZA, 37% for AZA+LEN (p=1.0 vs. AZA), and 22% for AZA+VOR (p=.07 vs. AZA). CR/PR/HI rates across arms were also similar: 23%/0%/13% for AZA; 18%/1%/17% for AZA+LEN (CR p=.47 vs. AZA); and 14%/1%/7% for AZA+VOR (CR p=.18 vs. AZA); rates of bone marrow exams to assess response were 76%, 67%, and 73%, respectively. HI-P/HI-E/HI-N rates were 21%/15%/5% for AZA, 26%/14%/15% for AZA+LEN, and 12%/8%/4% for AZA+VOR. HI-N rates were higher in AZA+LEN vs. AZA (p=.05) but otherwise were similar across arms. Median time to best response across arms was 15 weeks in AZA, 16 weeks in AZA+LEN, and 16 weeks in AZA+VOR. ORR did not vary significantly across arms in subgroup analyses for tMDS, baseline red blood cell (RBC) transfusion dependence, and by IPSS risk group. ORR for CMML pts for AZA:AZA+LEN:AZA+VOR was 33%:53%(p=.15 vs. AZA):12%(p=.41 vs. AZA). Allogeneic transplantation rates were: 7 pts on AZA, 6 on AZA+LEN, and 9 on AZA+VOR. For AZA:AZA+LEN:AZA+VOR, median RFS was: 6:8:11 months (log-rank p=.3 for combination arms vs. AZA, Figure); and for pts on therapy >6 months, it was 7:7.5:13 months (log-rank p=.11 for AZA+VOR, .74 for AZA+LEN vs. AZA). Conclusions: In higher-risk MDS pts, ORR was similar for AZA monotherapy compared to AZA-containing combination arms, though some subgroups may have benefitted from combination therapy. Differences in types of response may have resulted from differential rates of follow-up bone marrow assessments. While a non-significant signal of a DFS advantage for combination therapy was observed, longer-term outcome data are being assessed. Table Table. Figure Figure. Disclosures Sekeres: Boehringer-Ingelheim: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Off Label Use: lenalidomide, vorinostat for higher-risk MDS. List:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy. Gore:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding. Attar:Celgene: Consultancy. Erba:Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co.: Research Funding; Astellas Pharma: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau.

Abstract INTRODUCTION Recurrent somatic mutations in the metabolic enzymes isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 and 2 (IDH1/2) confer gain-of-function activity in cancer cells, resulting in accumulation of the oncometabolite, D-2-hydroxyglutarate (2-HG). High levels of 2-HG result in epigenetic changes and impaired cellular differentiation. IDH mutations have been identified in multiple solid tumors and hematologic malignancies. Approximately 6-10% and 9-13% of adults with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) carry mutations in IDH1 (mIDH1) or IDH2 (mIDH2), respectively. AG-120 is a first-in-class, oral, potent, reversible, selective inhibitor of the IDH1 mutant enzyme under evaluation in multiple ongoing single agent and combination clinical trials [NCT02074839, NCT02073994, NCT02632708, NCT02677922]. This is the first report of IDH1 mutation clearance assessed by variant allele frequency (VAF) analysis using next-generation sequencing (NGS) in patients treated on the dose escalation portion of the first-in-human phase 1 study [NCT02074839]. METHODS Patients with advanced mIDH1-positive hematologic malignancies received AG-120 as a single agent orally once daily (QD) or twice daily (BID) continuously in 28-day cycles. Primary objectives were determination of safety, maximum tolerated dose (MTD), and selection of a dose schedule for expansion cohorts and future studies. Secondary objectives included clinical activity assessed by investigators using modified 2003 International Working Group Criteria in AML. Determination of mIDH1 VAF was performed using the FoundationOne® Heme test on mononuclear cells from the bone marrow or peripheral blood at screening and subsequent time points on study. This NGS assay reports IDH1 mutations for samples with VAF ≥1%, with median coverage 500X. Patients with IDH1 mutational clearance (IDH1-MC) were defined as having mIDH1 at baseline and at least one on-study sample with no reported mIDH1. RESULTS Seventy-eight patients were treated in the dose escalation portion, which is now closed to enrollment. As of the data cut-off of May 12, 2016, the median duration on treatment was 3.2 months and 9 (11.5%) patients remain on treatment, with an additional 8 (10.3%) patients transitioned to stem cell transplant. Doses ranged from 300-1200 mg QD with 1 cohort at 100 mg BID. Though the MTD was not reached, the recommended phase 2 dose was determined to be 500 mg QD. The majority of adverse events (AEs) were grade 1 and 2, the most common (≥30%) being diarrhea, fatigue, and nausea; the most common grade ≥3 AEs (≥15%) were febrile neutropenia, anemia, leukocytosis and pneumonia. The most common serious AEs were febrile neutropenia (16.7%) and pneumonia (12.8%). The overall response rate (ORR) was 38.5% (n=30), with 17.9% (n=14) achieving a complete remission (CR). Longitudinal mIDH1 VAF data were available for 51 patients; of these, 22% (n=11) achieved a CR. IDH1-MC was observed in 27.3% (3/11) patients who achieved CR (Figure 1). In contrast, only 1/40 patients who did not achieve CR experienced IDH1-MC. This occurred in a patient with an initially low mIDH1 VAF who had clinical progression despite IDH1-MC (Figure 1, bottom right). In all 3 patients with CR who achieved IDH1-MC, an initial increase in mIDH1 VAF, or early peak, was observed prior to IDH1-MC, suggesting that early clonal expansion might have occurred as part of the mechanism of action of AG-120. CONCLUSION This is the first demonstration that treatment with single agent AG-120 can result in mIDH1 clearance as determined by NGS. Further analysis of the mutational profiles is planned. AG-120, a potent, selective, oral inhibitor of mIDH1 continues to demonstrate a well-tolerated safety profile in patients with advanced hematologic malignancies, and induced objective single-agent durable responses. The data continue to support the efficacy and safety of single agent AG-120 and provide evidence that the underlying biology of the disease is altered by treatment. Figure 1. VAF analysis using FoundationOne® Heme NGS assay in 4 AML patients with IDH1-MC treated with AG-120 Figure subscript: Y-axis is mIDH1 VAF, x-axis is days on treatment. Text indicates investigator-assessed clinical response. CR, complete remission; CRi, CR with incomplete neutrophil recovery; CRp, CR with incomplete platelet recovery; R/R, relapsed/refractory; SD, stable disease; PD, progressive disease; *post-transplant sample Figure 1. VAF analysis using FoundationOne® Heme NGS assay in 4 AML patients with IDH1-MC treated with AG-120. / Figure subscript: Y-axis is mIDH1 VAF, x-axis is days on treatment. Text indicates investigator-assessed clinical response. CR, complete remission; CRi, CR with incomplete neutrophil recovery; CRp, CR with incomplete platelet recovery; R/R, relapsed/refractory; SD, stable disease; PD, progressive disease; *post-transplant sample Disclosures DiNardo: Daiichi Sankyo: Other: advisory board, Research Funding; Novartis: Other: advisory board, Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Agios: Other: advisory board, Research Funding. de Botton:Novartis: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Consultancy; Servier: Consultancy; Pierre Fabre: Consultancy. Stein:Agios: Other: advisory board; Celgene: Other: advisory board; Novartis: Other: advisory board. Roboz:Cellectis: Research Funding; Agios, Amgen, Amphivena, Astex, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celator, Celgene, Genoptix, Janssen, Juno, MEI Pharma, MedImmune, Novartis, Onconova, Pfizer, Roche/Genentech, Sunesis, Teva: Consultancy. Pollyea:Alexion: Other: advisory board; Pfizer: Other: advisory board, Research Funding; Ariad: Other: advisory board; Glycomimetics: Other: DSMB member; Celgene: Other: advisory board, Research Funding. Fathi:Bexalata: Other: Advisory Board participation; Agios Pharmaceuticals: Other: Advisory Board participation; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Other: Advisory Board participation, Research Funding; Merck: Other: Advisory Board participation; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding. Altman:Syros: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria. Flinn:Janssen: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; ARIAD: Research Funding; RainTree Oncology Services: Equity Ownership. Foran:novartis: Honoraria; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding; karyopharm: Honoraria; medscape: Honoraria; pfizer: Honoraria; boehringer ingelheim: Research Funding; agios: Research Funding; Cellerant: Research Funding. Pigneux:Sunesis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Agios: Consultancy, Honoraria. Kantarjian:ARIAD: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Pfizer Inc: Research Funding; Delta-Fly Pharma: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Liu:Agios Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Attar:Agios Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Sacolick:Agios Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Yen:Agios Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hurov:Agios Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Choe:Agios Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Wu:Agios Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Stone:Amgen: Consultancy; Sunesis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios: Consultancy; Celator: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Jansen: Consultancy; ONO: Consultancy; Juno Therapeutics: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Xenetic Biosciences: Consultancy.

Abstract Abstract 986 In 2011, we described the TEMPI syndrome in three patients, a rare condition characterized by the pentad of (1) Telangiectasias, (2) elevated Erythropoietin and resulting erythrocytosis, (3) Monoclonal gammopathy, (4) Perinephric fluid collections, and (5) Intrapulmonary shunting. Since this publication, two additional living patients have been identified. Of note, all patients carried a diagnosis of unexplained polycythemia for many years to decades prior to the realization that the erythrocytosis was only one part of a more complex syndrome. The underlying pathophysiology of the TEMPI syndrome is unknown. Given that the patients did not exhibit symptoms until their 3rd or 4th decade, we felt that the TEMPI syndrome was more likely to be acquired and less likely to be congenital. We hypothesized that the monoclonal paraprotein may play a role in triggering this very unusual pattern of symptoms. Based on this hypothesis, the patients began empiric treatment with the proteasome inhibitor bortezomib, either alone, or as part of an induction regimen prior to autologous stem cell transplantation. The first patient to receive bortezomib, a 48 year old woman, received 8 cycles of intravenous bortezomib, given in standard fashion. Her telangiectasias, which were concentrated over her lips and torso, disappeared rapidly. Her bilateral perinephric fluid collections disappeared and her serum erythropoietin normalized from a peak of >5000 mIU/ml. By the end of the 8 cycles, her IgG kappa paraprotein became undetectable. Before treatment, she was hypoxic to such a degree that she required a wheelchair and continuous supplemental oxygen. Following treatment, her intrapulmonary shunting resolved, her oxygen saturation normalized, and she has resumed jogging. She remains in a complete remission, now fifteen months after her last dose of bortezomib. The second patient, a 55 year old woman, had undergone surgical fenestration of the renal capsule to allow for drainage of the perinephric fluid into her abdomen. The fluid was produced at such a rate that she required regular paracentesis to remove the resulting ascites. She received 6 cycles of intravenous bortezomib. Her telangiectasias resolved, her serum erythropoietin normalized from a peak of 507 mIU/ml, her paO2 improved, and production of perinephric fluid decreased. However, after four months off treatment, the concentration of her IgG kappa paraprotein began to increase, as did her serum erythropoietin. Furthermore, she has developed pulmonary hypertension, which we suspect may represent a rare paraneoplastic condition seen in some patients with multiple myeloma. The third patient, a 52 year old man, has received ten cycles of intravenous bortezomib. He has tolerated therapy well without side-effects. His serum erythropoietin has decreased from 5500 to 2500 mIU/ml. However, he has not shown the same dramatic reduction in the level of his IgG kappa paraprotein, nor has he shown resolution of his telangiectasias, perinephric fluid, or intrapulmonary shunting. The response of the fourth patient to bortezomib was recently described as a letter to the editor in the New England Journal of Medicine. The fifth patient, a 49 year old woman, was referred for evaluation of unexplained and progressive hypoxia requiring the use of continuous supplemental oxygen. She had been diagnosed at age 34 with polycythemia vera and treated with periodic phlebotomy. Telangiectasias were present on the face, chest, abdomen, and back. Erythropoietin was elevated to >8000 mIU/ml and an IgG-kappa paraprotein was identified. Her cardiovascular shunt fraction was 27%. Given the variable response of the other patients to single-agent bortezomib, she began an induction regimen that included cyoclophosphamide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (CyBorD) with plans for autologous SCT. The efficacy of treatment with bortezomib, as well as the reversible nature of the symptoms, lends support to the hypothesis that the abnormal plasma cell clone and monoclonal gammopathy are the cause of the TEMPI syndrome. Efforts to identify the antigenic target of the paraprotein are underway, using protein microarray and immunohistochemical techniques. We suspect that more patients with the TEMPI syndrome exist. The constellation of the described pentad should raise the potential of this syndrome. We welcome any reader insights into this unusual condition. Disclosures: Raje: Onyx: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Millennium: Consultancy; Acetylon: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Eli-Lilly: Research Funding. Somer:BioPat Holdings, Inc.: Consultancy. Off Label Use: We use bortezomib in the treatment of a newly described syndrome, the TEMPI syndrome.

Background:Mutations in isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) occur in ∼4% of patients with myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) and have been linked with increased transformation to acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Ivosidenib (IVO; AG‐120) is an oral, potent, targeted inhibitor of the mutant IDH1 protein (mIDH1) that is approved for the treatment of adults with mIDH1 relapsed or refractory (R/R) AML. Through inhibition of mIDH1, IVO suppresses production of the oncometabolite 2‐hydroxyglutarate, leading to clinical responses via differentiation of malignant cells.Aims:To report safety and efficacy data from patients with R/R MDS enrolled in the first‐in‐human, phase 1, dose escalation and expansion study of IVO in patients with mIDH1 advanced hematologic malignancies (NCT02074839).Methods:This ongoing study is evaluating the safety, maximum tolerated dose (MTD), pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and clinical activity of IVO. Enrollment was completed on May 8, 2017. In dose escalation, patients received single‐agent IVO orally (dose range, 200–1200 mg daily) in 28‐day cycles. The MTD was not reached and 500 mg QD was selected as the dose for expansion. The overall response rate (ORR) for MDS was defined as complete remission (CR) + partial remission + marrow CR (mCR) according to International Working Group 2006 criteria for MDS. Exploratory biomarker assessments included baseline co‐occurring mutations (next‐generation sequencing panel for hematologic malignancies) and mIDH1 variant allele frequency (VAF) in bone marrow mononuclear cells (BEAMing Digital PCR; lower limit of detection for mIDH1, 0.02–0.04%).Results:Baseline characteristics of the 12 patients with R/R MDS who received 500 mg IVO once daily were: 9 men/3 women; median age 72.5 years (range 52–78), and 42% were ≥75 years of age; median number of prior therapies 1 (range 1–3). As of Nov 2, 2018, 3 of 12 (25.0%) patients remained on treatment; 9 (75.0%) had discontinued (one for allogeneic stem cell transplantation). Median duration of exposure to IVO was 11.4 months (range 3.3–42.5). Adverse events (AEs) of any grade, irrespective of causality, occurring in ≥20% of the 12 patients were diarrhea, fatigue, back pain, rash (n = 4 each, 33.3%), anemia, urinary tract infection, decreased appetite, hypokalemia, arthralgia, dyspnea, pruritus, and hypotension (n = 3 each, 25.0%). No AEs led to permanent discontinuation of treatment. IDH differentiation syndrome was observed in 1 of 12 (8.3%) patients (grade 2). Electrocardiogram QT prolonged was reported in 2 of 12 patients (17%; grade 1 in 1 patient and grade 2 in 1 patient). Five of 12 patients achieved CR (41.7%; 95% CI 15.2%, 72.3%), 1 achieved PR (8.3%), and 5 achieved mCR (41.7%), resulting in an ORR of 91.7% (95% CI 61.5%, 99.8%). The median duration of CR was not estimable (NE) at the time of datacutoff and the median duration of response was 21.4 months (95% CI 2.3, NE). At 12 months, 60.0% of patients remained in CR. Among 5 patients who were transfusion dependent at baseline, 4 became transfusion independent for ≥56 consecutive days on treatment. Baseline co‐occurring mutations and changes in mIDH1 VAF levels will be presented.Summary/Conclusion:In patients with mIDH1 R/R MDS, IVO monotherapy was well tolerated and induced durable remissions and transfusion independence. These findings support the role of IVO as an effective, oral, targeted treatment for patients with mIDH1 R/R MDS.

Abstract Novel treatment strategies are needed for older patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). This randomized phase 2 trial compared the efficacy and safety of 20 mg/m2 of IV decitabine on days 1 to 10 alone (arm A) with those of 1.3 mg/m2 of subcutaneous bortezomib (arm B) on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 for up to 4 10-day cycles followed by monthly 5-day cycles. Previously untreated AML patients age ≥60 years (excluding those with FLT3 mutations and favorable-risk cytogenetics) without restrictions in performance status (PS) or organ function were eligible. Median age was 72.4 years (range, 60.5-92.3 years); 31 patients (19%) had baseline PS ≥2, 35 (22%) had an antecedent hematological disorder, 58 had (39%) adverse cytogenetics, and 7 (5%) and 23 (14%) had abnormal cardiac or renal function. There were no statistically significant differences in overall survival (OS) or responses between the 2 treatment arms. The overall response rate (complete remission + complete remission with incomplete blood count recovery) was 39% (n = 64), with median OS of 9.3 months. Nineteen responders (31%) underwent allogeneic stem cell transplantation. The most common adverse event was febrile neutropenia, and there were no unexpected toxicities. Adding bortezomib to decitabine did not improve outcomes, but responses were better than those in previous trials using 5-day decitabine cycles. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01420926.

Abstract Abstract #2149 Background: Inhibitors of the insulin-like growth factor 1 receptor (IGF-1R) are currently undergoing clinical testing. Preclinical investigations have identified IGF-1 signaling as a key mechanism for breast cancer growth and resistance to clinically useful therapies, including tamoxifen and trastuzumab. Thus, agents targeting IGF-1R have promise in the treatment of breast cancer. Determining mechanisms that can confer resistance to these agents may aid their clinical development.&#x2028; Methods: To understand factors may be important in predicting sensitivity to targeting the IGF-1 signaling pathway, we developed a cell line (MCF-7R4) that is resistant to BMS-554417, a small molecule, dual-kinase inhibitor of IGF-1R and insulin receptor (InsR). Compared with the parental MCF-7 cells, MCF-7R4 cells are 40- to 50-fold resistant to BMS-554417 and cross-resistant to the similar compound BMS-536924. The expression profiles of MCF-7R4 and that of MCF-7 were compared using Affymetrix GeneChip Human Genome U133 Plus 2.0 Arrays. Intracellular concentrations of BMS-536924 were examined by reverse phase high performance liquid chromatography. BMS-536924 cellular accumulation in vitro was visualized by fluorescence microscopy using a DAPI filter set. MCF-7 cells stably transfected with either the empty mammalian expression vector pcDNA (MCF-EV) or full length BCRP (MCF-BCRP) were examined for sensitivity to BMS 536924 by MTS assays.&#x2028; Results: Compared to MCF-7 cells, BCRP expression was increased 9-fold in MCF-7R4, which was highly statistically significant by t-test (p= 7.13E-09). Little change was observed in other ABC transporter proteins, including ABCB1. No change was observed in IGF-1R or InsR expression. BCRP overexpression in MCF-7R4 cells was confirmed by western blotting. MCF-7R4 cells had significantly lower intracellular accumulation of BMS-536924 compared to MCF-7 cells. Confirming these results, MCF-BCRP cells were significantly less sensitive to the cytoxic effects of BMS-536924 cells than MCF-EV cells.&#x2028; Conclusions: BCRP expression was stimulated by prolonged exposure of MCF-7 cells to BMS-554417. Upregulation of BCRP is one of the most significant changes observed in MCF-7R4 cells in comparison to parental cells. BCRP expression decreased cellular exposure to BMS-536924 and was sufficient to confer resistance. These data suggest that BSM-536924 is a substrate for BCRP-mediated efflux. Expression of BCRP may be important in de novo and acquired resistance to benzimidazole –based inhibitors of IGF-1R/InsR. Supported in part by the Mayo Clinic Breast SPORE (CA116201-03), NIH K12 (CA090628-05) and the Mayo Clinic Cancer Center (CA15083). Citation Information: Cancer Res 2009;69(2 Suppl):Abstract nr 2149.

Abstract The insulin receptor (IR) and insulin-like growth factor-1 receptor (IGF1R) are receptor tyrosine kinases that participate in mitogenic and antiapoptotic signaling in normal and neoplastic epithelia. In the present study, immunoblotting and reverse transcription-PCR demonstrated expression of IGF1R and IR isoform A in acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) cell lines as well as in &gt;80% of clinical AML isolates. Treatment with insulin enhanced signaling through the Akt and MEK1/2 pathways as well as survival of serum-starved AML cell lines. Conversely, treatment with BMS-536924, a dual IGF1R/IR kinase inhibitor that is undergoing preclinical testing, inhibited constitutive receptor phosphorylation as well as downstream signaling through MEK1/2 and Akt. These changes inhibited proliferation and, in some AML cell lines, induced apoptosis at submicromolar concentrations. Likewise, BMS-536924 inhibited leukemic colony formation in CD34+ clinical AML samples in vitro. Collectively, these results not only indicate that expression of IGF1R and IR isoform A is common in AML but also show that interruption of signaling from these receptors inhibits proliferation in clinical AML isolates. Accordingly, further investigation of IGF1R/IR axis as a potential therapeutic target in AML appears warranted. [Cancer Res 2009;69(19):7635–43]