Citations

Abstract Context. —The College of American Pathologists (CAP) provides proficiency testing (PT) surveys to laboratories around the world. Objectives. —To compare diagnostic assay methods for serum/plasma cortisol and immunoglobulin (Ig) E in terms of their bias and precision, to determine how well CAP PT specimens simulate human serum, and to reassess proficiency test grading criteria in light of these findings. Design. —A participant-blinded, prospective trial. One vial of pooled fresh frozen serum (FFS) and 4 different admixtures of PT material (PTM) were sent to laboratories participating in PT surveys. Participants. —Laboratories providing cortisol (>1000) or IgE (>230) results among the subscribers to the CAP surveys, Ligand (General) 2003, set K/KN-A and Chemistry 2003, set C-C. Main Outcome Measures. —The main outcome measures were (1) bias among laboratories using the same method (peer groups), defined relative to the median of method means (MedMM); (2) imprecision as measured by the SD and coefficient of variation (CV) about each method mean; and (3) total error across laboratories for the FFS cortisol results, defined as |Bias Relative to Reference Method| + 2 SD. Results. —Cortisol method biases, relative to MedMM, ranged from −22% to 9% for the FFS challenge and from −24% to 36% for comparable PTM challenges. The method biases, relative to the reference method, ranged from −3% to 19% for the FFS challenge. The cortisol method CVs ranged from 4.2% to 13.6% for the FFS challenge and from 4.7% to 12.7% for comparable PTM challenges. Total error across laboratories ranged from 1.4 to 6.9 μg/dL (39 to 190 nmol/L) for the FFS challenge. Immunoglobulin E method biases, relative to MedMM, ranged from −8% to 9% for the FFS challenge and from −7% to 5% for comparable PTM challenges. The IgE method CVs ranged from 3.6% to 6.7% for the FFS challenge and from 3.4% to 9.8% for comparable PTM challenges. Conclusions. —The bias for cortisol results was less with FFS than with PTM, but imprecision was comparable. The FFS MedMM was 8.5% higher than the reference value. Fresh frozen serum and PTM bias and imprecision for IgE methods were each less than 10%. Because some of the methods demonstrated greater bias when analyzing PTM than FFS, peer group grading of both these analytes is appropriate.

Background: The COVID pandemic has resulted in significant changes many aspects of daily living. To understand the impact that COVID-19 has had on the myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN) patient population, we conducted an internet based survey. Methods: Survey: This survey was hosted Mayo Clinic's secured REDCap system for online surveys with a link to the survey alongside a brief description posted via the www.mpnqol.com website, as well as other MPN organizational partners. Survey responses were completely anonymous. Questions included MPN-Total symptom score (TSS), NCCN distress thermometer (NCCN-DT), questions regarding impact on medical care, and questions from CDC COVID-19 community survey question bank regarding the impact of social distancing as well as changes in health behaviors. Distress thermometer, MPN-TSS, and/or questions related to the impact of COVID-19 on MPN treatment were analyzed by: MPN diagnosis, among those with ET, PV, or MF diagnoses; medication status; stay at home order; community spread; and country. Associations were tested using Kruskal-Wallis or Wilcoxon rank sum tests (for continuous variables) or Fisher Exact tests (for categorical variables). Analysis: Results: Patient Demographics (Table 1): 1560 people responded to the survey, 1217 were eligible for analysis. Median age was 62 (range: 21-93), and 298 (24.6%) respondents were male. There were respondents from USA, Australia, Canada, Netherlands, Ireland, and UK. 233 patients (19.2%) have myelofibrosis, 419 (34.6%) polycythemia vera and 543 (44.8%) essential thrombocythemia. At the time of the COVID outbreak, 1026 (84.3%) were on MPN directed medical therapy, including ruxolitinib (15.3%), interferon (14.7%), hydroxyurea (42.7%) and ASA (47.7%). 165 (13.6%) respondents received COVID testing, of which 5 had positive tests. Impact on MPN Care (Table 2): We sought to understand how patient's clinical care changed. Over half respondents who spoke to their MPN doctor had a telemedicine visit after COVID19 (57.1%). 422 (36.5%) patients spaced out visits, of which 99 (22.7%) felt there were consequences. A change in therapy due to COVID-1 occurred in only 5.4% of patients. MPN Symptom Burden and QoL: Data captured on the NCCN-DT had a median of 4 (0-10). MPN-SAF-TSS composite score was collected in 1150 respondents, median score was 26 (0-90). These scores are higher than those previously reported. Pandemic Impact on Lifestyle (Table 1): 595 (49.5%) of patients report living in a community where there is significant COVID-19 spread. 946 (78.9%) reported that COVID-19 has impacted their day to day life. 198 (17.2%) of patients agreed, or strongly agreed that COVID had a significant impact on their finances. 799 (67.8%) had a stay at home order. Of those who quarantined (112), the median duration was 30d (1-120). The majority of people increased hand-washing, and cleaning habits. 954 (81.7%) respondents reported wearing masks in public. 908 (76.8%) reported increased stress from social distancing. The majority of respondents report using healthy coping habits, such as reaching out to friends/loved ones, breathing and relaxation, as well as healthy diet. Less than 15% of patients report unhealthy coping strategies, such as use of opioids, benzodiazepines, alcohol, or cannabis Factors associated with response: There were no differences in responses based on type of MPN. If a patient was on medication, they were more likely to have spoken to their provider (p<0.001). If there was a stay at home order in place, there was a higher MPN-TSS score (p<0.001). If the respondent lived in an area of high community spread, they had a higher NCCN-DT score (p<0.001). Patients in the USA had a higher NCCN-DT score (p=0.001), were more likely to stretch out the duration of time between visits (p<0.001) and less likely to have a telemedicine visit (p<0.001). Although fewer respondents in the USA thought COVID-19 was a serious disease (p=0.02), a higher percentage of respondents wore masks (p <0.001). Conclusions: In our survey of MPN patients, there were many changes noted in clinical care. The use of telemedicine was common, and at least a third had significant changes in their care. Most experienced increased stress, however, employed healthy coping strategies. Only a minority of patients had a COVID test, and only 5 were positive, further data will be needed to understand the impact of COVID infection. Figure 1 Disclosures Harrison: Roche: Honoraria; Incyte Corporation: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Sierra Oncology: Honoraria; Promedior: Honoraria; Shire: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Gilead Sciences: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; CTI Biopharma Corp: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Pemmaraju:Affymetrix: Other: Grant Support, Research Funding; Plexxikon: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Honoraria; Roche Diagnostics: Honoraria; Blueprint Medicines: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; SagerStrong Foundation: Other: Grant Support; DAVA Oncology: Honoraria; Samus Therapeutics: Research Funding; Cellectis: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria; AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding; Stemline Therapeutics: Honoraria, Research Funding; MustangBio: Honoraria; LFB Biotechnologies: Honoraria; Pacylex Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Vannucchi:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Blueprint: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene/BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Gupta:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol MyersSquibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy. Mascarenhas:Celgene, Prelude, Galecto, Promedior, Geron, Constellation, and Incyte: Consultancy; Incyte, Kartos, Roche, Promedior, Merck, Merus, Arog, CTI Biopharma, Janssen, and PharmaEssentia: Other: Research funding (institution). Shimoda:Kyowa Hakko Kirin Co., Ltd.: Research Funding; Pfizer Inc.: Research Funding; Otsuka Pharmaceutical: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria; Perseus Proteomics: Research Funding; PharmaEssentia Japan: Research Funding; AbbVie Inc.: Research Funding; Astellas Pharma: Research Funding; Merck & Co.: Research Funding; CHUGAI PHARMACEUTICAL CO., LTD.: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Takeda Pharmaceutical Company: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Shire plc: Honoraria; Asahi Kasei Medical: Research Funding; Japanese Society of Hematology: Research Funding; The Shinnihon Foundation of Advanced Medical Treatment Research: Research Funding. Kiladjian:AOP Orphan: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Komatsu:AbbVie: Other: member of safety assessment committee in M13-834 clinical trial.; Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Shire Japan KK, Novartis Pharma KK, PharmaEssentia Japan KK, Fuso Pharmaceutical Industries, Ltd., Fujifilm Wako Pure Chemical Corporation, Chugai Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Kyowa Hakko Kirin Co., Ltd., Takeda Pharmaceutica: Research Funding; Meiji Seika Pharma Co., Ltd.: Patents & Royalties: PCT/JP2020/008434, Research Funding; PPMX: Consultancy, Research Funding; Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., PharmaEssentia Japan KK, AbbVie GK, Celgene KK, Novartis Pharma KK, Shire Japan KK, Japan Tobacco Inc: Consultancy; Takeda Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd, Novartis Pharma KK, Shire Japan KK: Speakers Bureau. Abello:Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Dr. Reddy's: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Research Funding. Gomez-Almaguer:Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene/BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: 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, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Scherber:Incyte Corporation: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Mauro:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accommodation, Expenses, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accommodation, Expenses, Research Funding; Sun Pharma/SPARC: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accommodation, Expenses, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accommodation, Expenses, Research Funding. Mesa:Samus Therapeutics: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Genentech: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; CTI BioPharma: Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Consultancy; LaJolla Pharmaceutical Company: Consultancy; Promedior: Research Funding.

Background: Elevated serum ferritin (SF) is common in patients with myelofibrosis (MF) given the frequent red-cell transfusion requirements and impaired iron metabolism. The dysregulation of iron metabolism is associated with increased hepcidin levels which predict for inferior survival in patients with MF (Pardanani et al AJH 2013). High pre-transplant SF negatively impacts overall survival and non-relapse mortality in patients undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) for hematological malignancies (Chee et al BMT 2017 & Yan et al 2018). However, the impact of elevated pre-transplant SF specifically on post-alloHCT outcomes has not been described in MF. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of patients with MF undergoing allo-HCT at Mayo clinic Rochester, Arizona, and Florida from January 1st 2012 - December 31st 2019. We abstracted demographic and outcome variables to evaluate the impact of pre-transplant ferritin levels on post-transplant outcomes. We used a Receiver Operand Characteristic Curve to identify a pre-transplant serum ferritin (SF) of ≥ 1,123 ng/mL as the cutoff which best correlated with poor survival. Results: We identified 67 patients with MF who underwent allo-HCT during the study period with readily available data. Patients with a pre-transplant ferritin ≥ 1,123 ng/mL (n=18) had a median age of 59.4 years and were predominantly male (n=9, 50%) with primary myelofibrosis (n=12, 67%), had a DIPSS-plus int-2 (n=10, 56%) and high (n=6, 33%) risk categories and received a reduced-intensity conditioning (n=14, 78%) from a matched-unrelated donor (n=7, 50%) Table1. Patients with SF ≥ 1,123 ng/mL had a worse overall survival (OS) (median OS= 12.64 months [95%CI=6.08-19.20 months] vs. not-reached (NR) p=0.001). Patients with elevated SF had an increased non-relapse mortality (NRM) rate at 6 months (16.7%, [95%CI=0.4-37.2%]) vs 8.2%,[95%CI= 2.6-18.1%] p=0.021) and 12 months (33.3% [95%CI=13.0-55.4%] vs 10.4% [95%CI=3.8-21.0%] p=0.021) Patients with ≥ 1,123 ng/mL SF had a non-statistically significant higher rate of acute graft-vs-host disease grades 3-4 (28% vs 12.2% p=0.13) but similar rates of moderate to severe chronic graft-vs-host disease (31% vs 28% p=0.78). In the univariate analysis, SF ≥1,123 ng/mL and a Hematopoietic stem cell transplant comorbidity index (HCT-CI) ≥3 were associated with an increased risk of mortality (Hazard ratio [HR]=4.18 [95%CI=1.64-10.62] p=0.003] and HR=4.42 [95%CI=1.70-11.46] p=0.003, respectively). Both retained significance in multivariate analysis SF ≥1,123 ng/mL (HR= 2.80 [95%CI= 1.0-7.6], p=0.04)] and HCT-CI score ≥ 3 (HR 3.10 [95%CI= 1.12-8.62, p=0.03]) after adjusting for age, DIPSS-plus score, conditioning regimen intensity, donor type, CMV risk, prior use of ruxolitinib, and ABO mismatch. We grouped the patients into low, intermediate and high risk categories using SF level and HCT-CI scores as detailed in Figure 1. The risk category based on SF and HCT-CI was statistically significant in impacting OS and NRM in this cohort. The 12 month OS rate was lower in the high risk category (44.4% [95%CI= 13.6%-71.9%]) when compared to the intermediate (64.6%, [95%CI=39.7%-81.3%]) and low risk (91.9%, [95%CI= 76.9%-97.3%], p=0.0002) categories. Similarly, the 12 month NRM rate was higher in the high risk category (44.4%, [95%CI=11.0%-74.2%]) when compared to the intermediate (25%, [95%CI=8.7%-45.5%]) and low risk (5.3% [95%CI=0.9%-15.9%], p=0.0046) categories. Conclusion: In patients undergoing allogeneic SCT for myelofibrosis, serum ferritin ≥ 1,123 ng/mL is a predictor of high NRM and inferior OS. Combining ferritin serum levels with HCT-CI may help in better patient selection for allo-HCT in MF population. Larger patient cohort is warranted to confirm our findings. Disclosures Kharfan-Dabaja: Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy. Shah:Dren Bio: Consultancy.

Background Activating mutations in JAK2 are the molecular hallmark of PV. However, achieving molecular remission is not a validated endpoint in PV, as its correlation with patient-relevant endpoints, such as thrombotic events or disease progression, is not well established. The expression of MDM2, a negative regulator of wild-type p53, is significantly higher in CD34+ cells from patients with PV vs those from healthy controls. Therefore, MDM2 antagonists such as idasanutlin (idasa) may have selective and potentially disease-modifying effects in PV. This exploratory analysis reports baseline mutational profiling and serial measurements of JAK2 V617F variant allele frequency (VAF) from patients treated with idasa in the Phase II NP39761 study (NCT03287245). Methods Patients with PV, as defined by the 2016 World Health Organization criteria, were eligible for inclusion if their disease was HU resistant/intolerant according to European LeukemiaNet criteria and they were phlebotomy dependent (≥ 1 phlebotomy in the 16-wk period prior to screening). Prior PV therapy with ruxolitinib and/or interferon was allowed. Idasa was given orally once daily on days 1-5 of 28-day cycles for up to 24 mo. The starting dose was 150 mg, but dose increase (to 200 mg) or decrease (to 100 mg) was allowed per protocol-defined criteria. The primary efficacy endpoints were hematocrit control (HTC), defined as maintaining acceptable hematocrit levels with ≤ 1 phlebotomy between cycle 1, day 1 (C1D1) and wk 8 and no phlebotomy after wk 8, and complete hematologic remission (CHR), defined as HTC together with platelets < 400 × 109/L and white blood cell count < 109/L on the day of response assessment (or most recent test). JAK2 V617F VAF was analyzed at screening and at C3D28, C5D28 and wk 32. The JAK2 V617F VAF was determined using quantitative polymerase chain reaction. Baseline blood samples were sequenced using the Foundation Medicine FoundationOne Heme next-generation sequencing panel, which interrogates > 400 DNA-sequenced genes, to explore the genetic landscape of PV beyond JAK2 V617F. Results All 27 patients enrolled in the study harbored JAK2 V617F. Baseline and ≥ 1 later JAK2 VAF measurements were available in 23 patients, allowing for analysis. The median age was 56 y (range, 34-74), and 7 patients (26%) had been previously treated with ruxolitinib. Median treatment duration was 257 days (range, 5-677), and the median number of treatment cycles was 8 (range, 1-22). JAK2 V617F VAFs at baseline were highly variable, ranging from 7% to 96% (median, 66%). A reduction in JAK2 V617F VAF was observed as early as after 3 cycles (median reduction, 39%; n = 19) and was sustained in patients receiving treatment, with a median reduction of 58% at C5D28 (n = 17) and of 76% at wk 32 (n = 13). The median reductions in JAK2 V617F VAF were significantly higher for patients with CHR and HTC than in nonresponders on C3D28 (CHR, P < 0.01; HTC, P = 0.04) and C5D28 (CHR, P < 0.01; HTC, P = 0.03), with a similar trend also at wk 32 (CHR, P = 0.06; HTC, P = 0.19) (Figures). Baseline targeted sequencing (n = 16) identified several additional subclonal mutations. However, no TP53 mutations were detected. Variants in TET2 and ASXL1 were detected in 37% (6 of 16) and 20% (3 of 16) of patients, with VAFs of 2%-51% and 38%-50%, respectively. Notably, 68% of the patients had variants detected in 1 to 3 DNA repair genes, including ATM (VAF, 47%-52%), ATR (VAF, 49%), BRCA2 (VAF, 47%-51%), PARP1 (VAF, 52%), PARP3 (VAF, 48%), FANCM (VAF, 47%-50%), BLM (VAF, 48%) and MSH3 (VAF, 49%). In the absence of sequencing of patient-matched non-hematologic tissue and the VAFs being ≈50%, it is possible some of these variants are germline. Whether such variants predispose to PV is unknown. Conclusions Idasa has relevant clinical activity in patients with PV who are resistant to or intolerant of HU and showed rapid JAK2 V617F VAF reduction in a subset of patients as early as after 3 treatment cycles. The median JAK2 VAF reduction was significantly greater in patients who achieved CHR and HTC after 3 and 5 cycles of idasa treatment, suggesting that early molecular response was associated with higher likelihood of clinical response. Baseline mutations were seen in several genes commonly mutated in PV. A high frequency of variants in DNA repair genes has not previously been reported in PV and may contribute to genomic instability in this disease. Figure Disclosures Passamonti: Roche: Other: Support of parent study and funding of editorial support; BMS: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau. El-Galaly:F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Current Employment, Other: Support of parent study and funding of editorial support. Gerds:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Imago Biosciences: Research Funding; AstraZeneca/MedImmune: Consultancy; Roche/Genentech: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Apexx Oncology: Consultancy; Sierra Oncology: Research Funding. Gupta:Incyte: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol MyersSquibb: 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; Sierra Oncology: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Consultancy. Higgins:Roche: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Other: Support of parent study and funding of editorial support. Huw:Roche: Current Employment, Other: Support of parent study and funding of editorial support. Maffioli:Roche: Other: Support of parent study and funding of editorial support. Mesa:Sierra Oncology: Consultancy; Incyte: Research Funding; Samus Therapeutics: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; CTI BioPharma: Research Funding; LaJolla Pharmaceutical Company: Consultancy; AbbVie: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding. Rambaldi:Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Support of parent study and funding of editorial support. Received travel support., Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Astellas: Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support from Gilead.; BMS/Celgene: Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company). Advisory board and speaker fees from Pfizer.; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company). Research grant from Amgen Inc.; Omeros: Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); University of Milan: Current Employment. Vannucchi:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Blueprint: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene/BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Yacoub:Incyte: Speakers Bureau; Hylapharm: Current equity holder in private company; Cara Therapeutics: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Dynavax: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Agios: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Roche: Other: Support of parent study and funding of editorial support; Ardelyx: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Mascarenhas:Celgene, Prelude, Galecto, Promedior, Geron, Constellation, and Incyte: Consultancy; Incyte, Kartos, Roche, Promedior, Merck, Merus, Arog, CTI Biopharma, Janssen, and PharmaEssentia: Other: Research funding (institution).

Introduction: MF is a clonal stem cell disorder characterized by progressive bone marrow failure, extramedullary hematopoiesis, and debilitating constitutional symptoms. Approximately 60% of pts develop anemia within a year of diagnosis; pts who are transfusion dependent have worse survival and quality-of-life outcomes (Tefferi A, et al. Mayo Clin Proc 2012;87:25-33). Treatment for MF-associated anemia remains critically unaddressed, with no approved therapies available. Luspatercept is a first-in-class erythroid maturation agent that has been shown to increase hemoglobin and reduce transfusion burden in pts with myelodysplastic syndromes (Fenaux P, et al. N Engl J Med 2020;382:140-51) and β-thalassemia (Cappellini MD, et al. N Engl J Med 2020;382:1219-31). Pts have also achieved multiple response episodes with luspatercept (Fenaux P, et al. Blood 2019;134:841). We previously reported findings from the ongoing open-label, phase 2 ACE-536-MF-001 trial evaluating luspatercept in pts with MF-associated anemia (Gerds AT, et al. Blood 2019;134:557). Here we report updated study results, focusing on response in pts requiring RBC transfusions. Methods: 79 pts with MF and anemia were enrolled (Figure). Of these, 43 were requiring RBC transfusions, defined as 6-12 U/84 d prior to treatment, or 4-12 U/84 d for the 3 expansion cohort pts. Pts in Cohort 3B received a stable ruxolitinib (RUX) dose for ≥ 16 wks (40 wks for expansion cohort pts), whereas Cohort 2 pts did not (Figure). Pts in Cohort 3B received a median RUX dose of 20 mg/d (range 5-40) for a median of 73 wks (range 29-359) prior to treatment. Pts received luspatercept every 21 d at a starting dose of 1.0 mg/kg (1.33 mg/kg for 3 expansion cohort pts in Cohort 3B), with doses escalating up to 1.75 mg/kg; 81% and 50% of pts in Cohorts 2 and 3B escalated to 1.75 mg/kg. Primary endpoint for pts receiving transfusions was RBC transfusion-independence (RBC-TI) for ≥ 12 consecutive wks within the first 24 wks on study. However, as responses were observed that did not fall within the 24-wk response window, additional assessments were conducted for the entire treatment duration for RBC-TI and ≥ 50% decrease in RBC transfusions (minimum 4 RBC U decrease) from baseline. Intent-to-treat data were analyzed as of March 29, 2020. Results: Pts in Cohorts 2 and 3B received a median of 8 cycles of luspatercept (range 1-39), for a median (mean) duration of 24 (31) and 23 (39) wks, respectively. Pts in Cohorts 2 and 3B received a median of 2.7 RBC U/28 d (range 1-5) and 2.7 RBC U/28 d (range 2-4), respectively. For the primary endpoint, 2/21 (10%) and 6/22 (27%) pts receiving transfusions in Cohorts 2 and 3B achieved RBC-TI over any consecutive 12 wks during the first 24 wks. Median time to start of first RBC-TI response period in Cohorts 2 and 3B was 1.5 days and 37 days; median duration of response was 49 wks (range 16-82) and 42 wks (range 12-111), respectively. When assessing the entire treatment period, 4/21 (19%) and 8/22 (36%) pts in Cohorts 2 and 3B achieved RBC-TI ≥ 12 wks, respectively. 25% of the RBC-TI responders in both cohorts experienced 2 separate episodes of RBC-TI ≥ 12 wks. Median cumulative duration of all individual ≥ 12-wk response episodes of RBC-TI was 59 wks (range 24-82) in Cohort 2 and 55 wks (range 12-116) in Cohort 3B. 8/21 (38%) and 10/22 (46%) pts in Cohorts 2 and 3B achieved a ≥ 50% reduction in RBC transfusion burden (minimum ≥ 4 U reduction) over 12 wks; of these, 38% and 20% of responders in Cohorts 2 and 3B experienced 2 separate ≥ 12-wk response episodes, and 1 pt (13%) in Cohort 2 experienced 3 separate responses. 4/15 (27%) and 8/14 (57%) pts in Cohorts 2 and 3B who reached 24 wks of treatment achieved clinical benefit and therefore continued luspatercept on an ongoing basis. Safety is reported for all 79 pts on study. 5 (6%) pts had grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (AEs); these AEs were diarrhea (n = 2), dehydration (n = 1), and hypertension (n = 3). There were no treatment-related deaths. Treatment-related AEs (any grade) occurring in ≥ 5% of pts were hypertension (13%), bone pain (9%), and diarrhea (5%). 8 (10%) pts had ≥ 1 AE leading to discontinuation. 16 (20%) pts remain on treatment. Conclusions: These longer-term findings suggest durable activity of luspatercept in pts with MF-associated anemia. In addition, a quarter of pts receiving transfusions achieved more than one ≥ 12-wk episode of RBC-TI response with luspatercept. The incidence of grade 3-4 AEs with luspatercept was low. Disclosures Gerds: Roche/Genentech: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Research Funding; AstraZeneca/MedImmune: Consultancy; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Apexx Oncology: Consultancy; CTI Biopharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Imago Biosciences: Research Funding. Vannucchi:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Blueprint: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene/BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Passamonti:Novartis: Speakers Bureau; BMS: Speakers Bureau; Roche: Other: Support of parent study and funding of editorial support. Kremyanskaya:Constellation Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Protagonist Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astex Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Gotlib:CTI Biopharma: Research Funding; Kartos: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding. McCaul:BMS: Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Speakers Bureau. Ribrag:argenX: Research Funding; pharmamar: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; servier: Consultancy; nanostring: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AZD: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other; Infinity: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MSD: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; gustave roussy comprehensive cancer center: Current Employment; EPZ: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; epizyme (EPZ): Research Funding. Mead:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene/BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy; CTI: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy. Harrison:Roche: Honoraria; Gilead Sciences: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Incyte Corporation: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; CTI Biopharma Corp: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Sierra Oncology: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Shire: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; Promedior: Honoraria. Mesa:Sierra Oncology: Consultancy; LaJolla Pharmaceutical Company: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Incyte: Research Funding; CTI BioPharma: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Samus Therapeutics: Research Funding. Kiladjian:AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AOP Orphan: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Barosi:Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy. Gerike:Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Shetty:BMS: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Pariseau:Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment. Miranda:Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment. Schwickart:Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Giuseppi:BMS: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Zhang:Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Backstrom:Acceleron Pharma: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; BMS: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Verstovsek:AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma Corp: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; PharmaEssentia: Research Funding; ItalPharma: Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Blueprint Medicines Corp: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Protagonist Therapeutics: Research Funding.

Background Patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) are faced with severe disease-related fatigue among a range of other constitutional and spleen-related symptoms. The MPN-Symptom Assessment Form (SAF) is recommended for use to characterize symptom burden (Scherber R, et al. Blood 2011). Within the SAF, a profile of 18 symptom items are evaluated ranging in severity from 0 (absent) to 10 (worst imaginable). The SAF is often summarized to the MPN-SAF Total Symptom Score (TSS) for analysis purposes - a single computed sum of the 10 most clinically meaningful symptom scores, including fatigue (Emanuel R, et al. J Clin Oncol 2012). Though the SAF includes a fatigue item, initial deployments of the MPN-SAF TSS incorporated a 0-10 scaled fatigue item taken from the Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI; Mendoza T, et al. Cancer 1999). A subsequent version of the MPN-SAF TSS for use within myelofibrosis clinical trials (called the MFSAF v4; Gwaltney C, et al. Leuk Res 2017) employed a harmonized fatigue item. This analysis employing data from two studies was carried out to assess the use of the SAF fatigue item within the MPN-SAF TSS for consistency with the MFSAF v4. Methods Both BFI and SAF fatigue items were included in an initial online survey evaluating disease burden among patients with MPNs. Participants were assigned to survey variants as a function of their age. Survey variants included those to receive 1 instance of either the BFI or SAF fatigue item, instances of both BFI and SAF, or 2 instances of the same fatigue item. Surveying was aimed to assess the worst symptom experience in the patient's last 24 hours. Additionally, an independent survey assessing the impact of COVID-19 among MPN patients was deployed using the SAF fatigue item for the MPN-SAF TSS. This modified version was then used to test internal validity. Pearson correlation (r) and t-tests were used to assess association, Bland-Altman methods were used to evaluate systematic agreement between BFI and SAF fatigue scores, and Cronbach's alpha was used to measure internal consistency. Results There were 229 participants assigned both BFI and SAF fatigue items within the same survey. Among them, 51% (n=117) received the BFI item first and 49% (n=112) the SAF item first. No difference was seen between first and second fatigue scores (mean difference [first-second] = 0.00; 95%CI -0.18, 0.17). BFI and SAF fatigue scores were highly correlated (r=0.88, p<0.001) and showed 88.7% agreement in categorizing severe versus non-severe fatigue (score ≥ 7 versus < 7). Overall concordance in severity category was 73.4% (category [score range]: absent [0]; mild [1-3]; moderate [4-6]; severe [7-10]). Constructing the MPN-SAF TSS using the BFI and SAF fatigue components separately, the original and modified MPN-SAF TSS were nearly identical (r=0.997, p<0.001), and had equivalent internal consistency (both Cronbach's alpha=0.88). The Bland-Altman plot further indicates the 2 fatigue measures have high agreement with no evidence of directional bias and negligible overall bias (Figure 1: regression slope = -0.04, p=0.25; mean difference=0.22; 95%CI 0.05, 0.39). Within the COVID-19 survey (n=1217), the modified version of the MPN-SAF TSS was consistent with known correlates among disease characteristics (Emanuel R, et al. J Clin Oncol 2012). For example, more severe MPN-SAF TSS scores were highly correlated with low quality-of-life (n=1156, r = -0.50, p<0.001), and associated with those reporting spleen enlargement (n=301) versus not (n=617) (p<0.001; mean difference=7.7; 95%CI 5.4, 10.1). Conclusion The BFI and SAF fatigue items are highly consistent in raw score, severity category, and in contribution to the MPN-SAF TSS. There was no order effect seen in which fatigue item was asked first. The independent COVID-19 survey using the modified MPN-SAF TSS was validated and shows high internal consistent. In the ongoing development to capture the symptom experience, this analysis shows disease-related fatigue is equivalently measured using the SAF fatigue survey item in harmonization with the MFSAF v4. Disclosures Mesa: Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; CTI BioPharma: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Samus Therapeutics: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; LaJolla Pharmaceutical Company: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Sierra Oncology: Consultancy.

Background PV is a clonal myeloid neoplasm characterized by activating mutations in JAK2 and increased red blood cell production. Reduction of thrombosis risk through lowering of hematocrit (Hct) and thus blood viscosity is critical, but management of constitutional symptoms is also important. HU is an effective and well-tolerated first-line treatment (tx) for PV, but pts who develop resistance to or intolerance of HU have limited tx options. A Phase I study of idasanutlin, an MDM2 antagonist leading to increased p53 activity, showed encouraging efficacy and potential disease-modifying effects via rapid reduction in JAK2 V617F variant allele frequency in 11 pts with PV. These results prompted the larger, international Phase II study of idasanutlin in HU-resistant/intolerant PV (NCT03287245); data from the initial phase of the study are reported here. Methods Pts meeting the 2016 WHO criteria for PV were eligible for inclusion if they had HU-resistant/intolerant disease according to the European LeukemiaNet (ELN) criteria and were phlebotomy dependent (≥ 1 phlebotomy in the 16-wk period prior to screening). Prior PV tx with ruxolitinib (rux) or interferon was allowed. Idasanutlin was given orally once daily on days 1-5 of 28-day cycles for up to 24 mo. The starting dose was 150 mg; increase to 200 mg was allowed for non-responders at cycle 3, day 28, and reduction to 100 mg was permitted for toxicity and for pts treated beyond cycle 12. Antiemetic prophylaxis was mandatory in cycle 1 throughout the study and later became mandatory in all cycles. The primary endpoint (wk 32) was the composite response of Hct control (HTC) and spleen volume reduction > 35% by CT/MRI in pts with splenomegaly (> 450 cm3) and HTC alone in pts without splenomegaly. Key secondary endpoints included safety, complete hematologic response (CHR; defined as HTC and normalization of platelets/leukocytes) and ELN response. Results A total of 27 pts were included in this study and received tx with idasanutlin. Median age was 56 years (range, 34-74) and 16 pts (59.3%) were male (Table 1). All pts had JAK2 V617F mutation; 7 had previous exposure to rux. Median tx duration was 257 days (range, 5-677); the median number of treatment cycles was 8 (range, 1-23). Dose modifications occurred in 17 pts (63.0%; Table 2). A total of 3 serious AEs occurred: atrial flutter, atrial fibrillation and nausea/vomiting (n = 1 each). The serious cardiac AEs occurred in pts with pre-existing hypertension and a past incident of heart failure not symptomatic upon enrollment, respectively. No deaths, transformation to acute myeloid leukemia, progression to myelofibrosis or thrombotic events occurred during the study. AEs occurring in ≥ 15% of pts are listed in Table 3; gastrointestinal toxicity and fatigue were the most common events. The population for primary endpoint evaluation consisted of pts with response assessed at wk 32 (n = 16). One of 13 pts with baseline splenomegaly achieved a composite response (7.7%; Table 4). Nine of 16 pts (56.3%) among all evaluable pts achieved HTC: 6 of 11 rux-naive pts (54.5%) and 3 of 5 rux-exposed pts (60.0%). Eight of 13 pts (61.5%) among all pts had HTC duration ≥ 12 wk beyond wk 32: 5 of 9 rux-naive pts (55.6%) and 3 of 4 rux-exposed pts (75.0%). At wk 32, 8 of 16 pts (50.0%) achieved a CHR, with 6 of 13 (46.2%) having a CHR duration ≥ 12 wk beyond wk 32. Overall response rates per modified ELN response criteria in pts with baseline splenomegaly, pts without baseline splenomegaly and in all pts were 69.2% (9 of 13), 66.7% (2 of 3) and 68.8% (11 of 16), respectively; 9 of 15 pts (60%) among all pts had a response duration ≥ 12 wk beyond wk 32. Median (range) laboratory value changes at wk 32 were: platelets, −253 × 109/L (−2083 to +175) and leukocytes, −4.8 × 109/L (−25.3 to +3.4). At wk 32, 6 of 14 pts (42.9%) had a ≥ 50% reduction in the Myeloproliferative Neoplasm Symptom Assessment Form Total Symptom Score. Conclusions Idasanutlin showed relevant clinical activity in pts with HU-resistant/intolerant PV and also in a subset of pts with prior rux tx. However, the low-grade gastrointestinal toxicity profile of idasanutlin was not effectively mitigated with antiemetic prophylaxis and led to frequent discontinuations. These results iterate the importance of tolerability of novel therapies administered over the long term for pts with PV. Disclosures Mascarenhas: Celgene, Prelude, Galecto, Promedior, Geron, Constellation, and Incyte: Consultancy; Incyte, Kartos, Roche, Promedior, Merck, Merus, Arog, CTI Biopharma, Janssen, and PharmaEssentia: Other: Research funding (institution). Higgins:Roche: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Other: Support of parent study and funding of editorial support. Anders:Roche: Current Employment, Other: Support of parent study and funding of editorial support. Burbury:Roche: Other: Support of parent study and funding of editorial support. El-Galaly:F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Current Employment, Other: Support of parent study and funding of editorial support. Gerds:Roche/Genentech: Research Funding; Apexx Oncology: Consultancy; AstraZeneca/MedImmune: Consultancy; Pfizer: Research Funding; Imago Biosciences: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding. Gupta:Pfizer: Consultancy; Incyte: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol MyersSquibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sierra Oncology: Consultancy, 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. Kovic:Roche: Other: Support of parent study and funding of editorial support. Maffioli:Roche: Other: Support of parent study and funding of editorial support. Mesa:AbbVie: Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Consultancy; CTI BioPharma: Research Funding; LaJolla Pharmaceutical Company: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Samus Therapeutics: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Incyte: Research Funding. Rambaldi:Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Support of parent study and funding of editorial support. Received travel support., Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company). Advisory board and speaker fees from Pfizer.; Sanofi: Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); BMS/Celgene: Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); University of Milan: Current Employment; Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support from Gilead.; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Omeros: Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Astellas: Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company). Research grant from Amgen Inc.. Vannucchi:AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene/BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Blueprint: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: 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. Yacoub:Roche: Other: Support of parent study and funding of editorial support; Dynavax: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Agios: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Speakers Bureau; Hylapharm: Current equity holder in private company; Cara Therapeutics: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Ardelyx: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company.

Abstract Objective. —To assemble and interpret karyotype data provided as part of the College of American Pathologists/American College of Medical Genetics Cytogenetics Proficiency Testing Program. Data Sources, Extraction, and Synthesis. —The Cytogenetics Resource Committee requested data on all cells analyzed in a 1994 whole-blood specimen challenge. In that study, 287 participating laboratories analyzed a total of 14297 cells derived from a sample drawn from an adult donor with Turner syndrome. This individual had previously been found to have mosaicism, including cell lines with X structural anomalies along with monosomy X, making this an excellent challenge for a multicenter cytogenetic survey. Results and Conclusions. —Analysis of the data from this extensive study revealed mosaicism of up to 10 different sex chromosome complements involving the X chromosome with and without a small ring X or a derivative X chromosome. In the routine cytogenetic analysis performed by the participating laboratories, cell lines observed, in decreasing order of prevalence, included 45,X (n = 8357 cells), 46,X,r(X) (n = 3597), 46,X,der( X )t( X ;X) (n = 2237), 46,XX (n = 93), 47,X,r(X),r(X) (n = 5), 47,X,der( X )t( X ;X),der( X )t( X ;X) (n = 3), 47,XX,r(X) (n = 2), and one observation each of 47,XX,der( X )t( X ;X), 47,X,der( X )t( X ;X),r(X), and 47,XXX. Our molecular cytogenetic data, as well as detailed analysis of G-banded chromosomes, suggest the nomenclature for these 2 abnormal X chromosomes as r(X)(p11.3q21.3) and der( X )t( X ;X)(p11.3;q21.3), and we discuss models for the concomitant formation of these 2 entities. Both the degree of analysis and the extensive mosaicism that was discovered in this study are exceptional, and similar reported cases as well as possible mechanisms for the observed X chromosome instability are reviewed.

467 Background: Recent tumor-agnostic drug approvals have resulted in a paradigm shift in cancer treatment away from organ/histology specific indications to biomarker-guided tumor-agnostic approaches. Pralsetinib is a potent and selective RET inhibitor, which has recently been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of adults with metastatic RET fusion–positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and is under New Drug Application review for RET mutant thyroid cancers by the FDA. RET fusions occur in up to approximately 7‒8% of patients with gastrointestinal malignancies, including pancreatic, liver, and colorectal cancers. There are currently no approved selective RET inhibitors for patients with RET fusion–positive solid tumors other than NSCLC and thyroid cancer. Here, we present data on the clinical activity of pralsetinib in patients with RET fusion–positive solid tumor types other than NSCLC enrolled in the Phase I/II ARROW study (NCT03037385). Methods: ARROW consists of a phase I dose escalation (30–600 mg once [QD] or twice daily) followed by a phase II expansion (400 mg QD) in patients with advanced RET-altered solid tumors. Primary objectives are overall response rate (ORR), per RECICT v1.1 and safety. Results: A total of 13 patients with RET fusion–positive thyroid cancer (12 papillary, 1 poorly differentiated; enrollment cutoff July 11, 2019) and 14 patients with RET fusion–positive solid tumors other than NSCLC and thyroid (3 pancreatic, 3 colon, 2 cholangiocarcinoma, 6 other; enrollment cutoff November 19, 2019) were enrolled in ARROW and received pralsetinib. At the February 13, 2020, data cutoff, the ORR (blinded central review) in response-evaluable patients with RET fusion–positive thyroid cancer was 91% (10/11; 95% CI: 59‒100) and disease control rate was 100% (95% CI: 72‒100). Treatment was ongoing in 7 of 11 patients. In RET fusion–positive solid tumors other than NSCLC and thyroid, ORR (investigator’s assessment) was 50% (6/12; 95% CI: 21‒79) and responses were observed in all patients with pancreatic cancer (3/3) and cholangiocarcinoma (2/2). Treatment was ongoing in 6 of 12 patients, including 2 of 3 patients with pancreatic cancer and 1 of 2 patients with cholangiocarcinoma. Responses were observed across multiple fusion genotypes. In the 27 patients with RET fusion–positive tumors other than NSCLC, most frequent treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were grade 1–2, and included anemia (33%), increased aspartate aminotransferase (33%), decreased white blood cell count (33%), hypertension (30%), increased alanine aminotransferase (26%), hyperphosphatemia (19%), and neutropenia (19%). No patients discontinued due to TRAEs. Conclusions: Pralsetinib demonstrated broad and durable antitumor activity across multiple advanced solid tumor types, regardless of RET fusion genotype, and was well tolerated. The study is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT03037385.