Citations

Background: Unlike heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, there is no approved treatment for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, the predominant phenotype in women. Therefore, there is a greater heart failure therapeutic deficit in women compared with men. Methods: In a prespecified subgroup analysis, we examined outcomes according to sex in the PARAGON-HF trial (Prospective Comparison of ARNI With ARB Global Outcomes in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction), which compared sacubitril-valsartan and valsartan in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. The primary outcome was a composite of first and recurrent hospitalizations for heart failure and death from cardiovascular causes. We also report secondary efficacy and safety outcomes. Results: Overall, 2479 women (51.7%) and 2317 men (48.3%) were randomized. Women were older and had more obesity, less coronary disease, and lower estimated glomerular filtration rate and NT-proBNP (N-terminal pro–B-type natriuretic peptide) levels than men. For the primary outcome, the rate ratio for sacubitril-valsartan versus valsartan was 0.73 (95% CI, 0.59–0.90) in women and 1.03 (95% CI, 0.84–1.25) in men ( P interaction = 0.017). The benefit from sacubitril-valsartan was attributable to reduction in heart failure hospitalization. The improvement in New York Heart Association class and renal function with sacubitril-valsartan was similar in women and men, whereas the improvement in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire clinical summary score was less in women than in men. The difference in adverse events between sacubitril-valsartan and valsartan was similar in women and men. Conclusions: As compared with valsartan, sacubitril-valsartan seemed to reduce the risk of heart failure hospitalization more in women than in men. Whereas the possible sex-related modification of the effect of treatment has several potential explanations, the present study does not provide a definite mechanistic basis for this finding. Clinical Trial Registration: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01920711.

Background: Serum folate (SF), vitamin B12 (B12), and iron deficiencies (def) are common causes of nutritional anemias. These deficiencies are usually multifactorial, with nutritional and non-nutritional factors playing a role. SF, B12, and iron levels are usually ordered in the setting of anemia, and malnutrition with or without neurologic symptoms. Since folic acid fortification, the prevalence of SF def in the United States (US) is <1% in the general population. B12 def and iron def range between 6-12%, and 1-11% respectively depending on the population studied. The prevalence of nutritional anemias secondary to SF, B12, and/or iron def by racial groups in the US is poorly studied, and most data available focuses on non-Hispanic whites (NHW). We aimed to determine the prevalence of anemia secondary to nutritional deficiencies by racial groups in the US. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients with SF, B12 and iron levels at Mayo Clinic Arizona between 01/2010 and 10/2018. Race was classified according to the NIH criteria. Normal laboratory values were determined according to our lab reference and the US National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) III. SF levels (mcg/Lt) were defined as deficient <4, normal ≥4.0, and excess ≥20. B12 levels (ng/L) as deficient <150, borderline 150-400, normal >400-900, and excess ≥900. Iron def was determined by ferritin levels (mcg/L) as low <24, normal 24-336, elevated ≥336 for men, low <11, normal 11-307, elevated ≥307 for women. Demographics and clinical variables were compared between groups by chi-square test for frequency data or Kruskal Wallis rank-sum test for continuous variables. Multivariable logistic regression was used for a sample-level analysis adjusting for age and gender and using NHW as a reference group. Results: A total of 79,926 SF, 107,731 B12, and 39,827 ferritin samples from 67,683 patients were analyzed. Demographics and sample analysis are presented in Table 1. In the sample-level analysis, 23,008 (25%) had anemia with higher prevalence in the American Indian/Alaskan Native (AI/AN) 49% and African Americans (AA) 43% (p<0.001). The prevalence of SF def was 446/79,926 (0.6%), B12 def 1,548/107,731 (1.4%), and iron def 5,212/39,827 (13.1%). 23 had concomitant SF and B12 deficiency, 25 SF and iron def, and 144 B12 and iron def. The SF def prevalence by racial groups was: AI/AN 11 (1.9%), AA 19 (1.1%), NHW 378 (0.6%), Hispanic 28 (0.5%), Asian 4 (0.2%). The B12 def prevalence by racial groups was: Asian 89 (3.4%), NHW 1,274 (1.4%), Hispanic 87 (1.3%), AA 30 (1.3%), AI/AN 10 (1.3%). Iron def prevalence by racial groups: AI/AN 71 (20.5%), Asian 198 (17.6%), AA 180 (16.9%), Hispanic 432 (15.6%), NHW 4,161 (12.4%). In the multivariate sample-level analysis, the presence of anemia was higher in the AI/AN (OR: 4.51, 95%CI: 3.70-5.49, p<0.0001), AA (OR 3.34, 95%CI: 2.99-3.74, p<0.0001), Asian (OR 1.52, 95%CI: 1.35-1.73, p<0.0001) and Hispanic racial group (OR 1.41, 95%CI: 1.30-1.52, p<0.0001). SF def was more common in the AI/AN (OR: 2.94, 95%CI: 1.60-5.39, p<0.001) and AA (OR 1.71, 95%CI: 1.08-1.53, p=0.02). B12 def was more common in the Asian racial group (OR: 2.535, 95%CI: 20.03-3.16, p<0.0001). Iron def was more common in the AI/AN (OR: 1.62, 95%CI: 1.21-2.17, p<0.001), Asian (OR 1.31, 95%CI: 1.0-1.57, p=0.003), and AA racial group (OR 1.26, 95%CI: 1.05-1.52, p=0.001). Conclusions: In our cohort, we show that despite the low prevalence of nutritional anemias in the US, racial disparities exist. Major differences were observed in the prevalence of anemia, SF def and iron def especially among AI/AN and AA. These differences may be linked to medical causes, nutritional practices and other social determinants of health. More research regarding the causes of these disparities and its clinical implications on a population level are needed. Targeted strategies to improve folate, B12 and iron intake in at higher risk populations could decrease adverse outcomes and decrease healthcare disparities caused by nutritional anemias. T able 1. Sample-level comparison by race Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Background Pharyngeal and rectal Neisseria gonorrhoeae and Chlamydia trachomatis play important roles in infection and antibacterial resistance transmission, but no US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)–cleared assays for detection at these sites existed prior to this study. The objective was to estimate performance of assays to detect those infections in pharyngeal and rectal specimens to support regulatory submission. Methods We performed a cross-sectional, single-visit study of adults seeking sexually transmitted infection testing at 9 clinics in 7 states. We collected pharyngeal and rectal swabs from participants. The primary outcome was positive and negative percent agreement for detection of N. gonorrhoeae and C. trachomatis for 3 investigational assays compared to a composite reference. Secondary outcomes included positivity as well as positive and negative predictive values and likelihood ratios. Subgroup analyses included outcomes by symptom status and sex. Results A total of 2598 participants (79% male) underwent testing. We observed N. gonorrhoeae positivity of 8.1% in the pharynx and 7.9% in the rectum and C. trachomatis positivity of 2.0% in the pharynx and 8.7% in the rectum. Positive percent agreement ranged from 84.8% to 96.5% for different anatomic site infection combinations, whereas negative percent agreement was 98.8% to 99.6%. Conclusions This study utilized a Master Protocol to generate diagnostic performance data for multiple assays from different manufacturers in a single study population, which ultimately supported first-in-class FDA clearance for extragenital assays. We observed very good positive percent agreement when compared to a composite reference method for the detection of both pharyngeal and rectal N. gonorrhoeae and C. trachomatis. Clinical Trials Registration NCT02870101.

AbstractAuthentic inclusion and engagement of behavioral health patients in their care delivery and in the process of scientific discovery are often challenged in the health care system. Consequently, there is a growing need to engage with and better serve the needs of behavioral health patients, particularly by leveraging health information technologies. In this work, we present rationale and strategies for improving patient engagement in this population in research and clinical care. First, we describe the potential for creating meaningful patient–investigator partnerships in behavioral health research to allow for cocreation of knowledge with patients. Second, in the context of behavioral health services, we explore the utility of sharing clinical notes to promote patients' agency in care delivery. Both lines of inquiry are centered in a Learning Health System model for behavioral health, where patients are agents in enhancing the therapeutic alliance and advancing the process of knowledge generation. Recommendations include genuinely democratizing the health care system and biomedical research enterprise through patient-centered information technologies such as patient portals. In research and technology development, we recommend seeking and tailoring behavioral health patients' involvement to their abilities, promoting patient input in data analysis plans, evaluating research and informatics initiatives for patients and clinicians, and sharing success and research findings with patients. In clinical practice, we recommend encouraging patients to read behavioral health notes on portals, engaging in proactive communication regarding note content, assessing outcomes including stress and anxiety in response to note content, and working with technology providers to support note-sharing governance and deployment.

Abstract Background: It has been known for approximately 19 years that germline mutations in RUNX1, lead to familial platelet disorder with predisposition to myeloid malignancy (FPD-MM, OMIM 601399). Since that time researchers have identified a broad range of different RUNX1 mutations, in over 100 families. In large families, the diagnosis of malignancy shows variable penetrance among family members with the same mutation; some carriers of RUNX1 mutations do not develop malignancy. The causes of this heterogeneity are currently not known, complicating counselling and risk analysis for individual carriers. Recent advances in genetic sequencing technology applied by many FPD-MM research groups around the world have highlighted their value in understanding the somatic genetic changes that are associated with development of malignancies in germline RUNX1 mutation carriers. Collectively this information could lead to powerful insights essential for more precise risk assessment, monitoring, and therapeutic intervention. Specifically, a growing catalogue of somatic mutations associated with germline RUNX1 malignancy offers the opportunity for informed monitoring of asymptomatic RUNX1 carriers for additional high-risk somatic mutations, in turn providing the possibility for early therapeutic intervention to arrest the leukemic process. The challenge in advancing these goals for FPD-MM is the relative rarity of the disorder in individual populations. Global data sharing in a highly interactive FPD-MM research community offers a solution to this problem that benefits all patients world-wide. Aims: To create a global RUNX1 network through identifying and contacting researchers and clinicians with known and novel germline RUNX1 families, seeking their collaboration to share genomics data. To create a RUNX1.db portal to collectively house and analyse genomics data from germline RUNX1 carriers, with associated phenotype and clinical information, such that researchers have an ongoing means by which to combine their data with those generated by other groups around the world. Methods: RUNX1 network : Through existing collaborative networks, a systematic review of the literature, and referrals from initial contacts, we have identified a global network of researchers managing FPD-MM cases and families. RUNX1.db: We have adapted a custom-built variant analysis platform, VariantGrid, that is a visual web application and database designed to help scientists manage and analyse DNA variants that can be used to aggregate and analyse multiple datasets. Results: Preliminary analysis of aggregated data from the literature suggests there are features of germline RUNX1 syndrome that can be ascertained. These include frequent somatic mutation of RUNX1 in malignancy development, as well as mutations in genes associated with clonal hematopoiesis that may precede development of overt leukemia. This analysis also suggests that different types of germline RUNX1 mutations may be associated with different combinations of somatic mutations in the tumour. To further this analysis, we have identified over 70 groups internationally that either manage RUNX1 families or have identified potential germline carriers through genomics initiatives. This represents a large and growing resource for both scientific studies and clinical programs to benefit individuals with FPD-MM. Many of these groups have generated NGS data sets from patient samples which will be available for analysis through this portal. Further details and activities of the network, and results from the genomics aggregation database will be presented. Conclusion: We have created a global RUNX1 network, aggregated their data, and generated a RUNX1.db genomics portal for the continuous curation of genomics data from germline RUNX1 carriers. A preliminary analysis has already identified specific features of germline RUNX1 mutated malignancies that have clinical importance. Ongoing scientific and clinical studies through the RUNX1 network will enhance the power of aggregated data analysis, with RUNX1.db providing a central link, driving new insights that benefit patients. Disclosures Natsoulis: Imago BioSciences, Inc.: Consultancy, Equity Ownership. Guzman:Cellectis: Research Funding. DiNardo:Bayer: Honoraria; Karyopharm: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Agios: Consultancy; Medimmune: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria. Borate:Novartis: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy. Wei:Amgen: Honoraria, Other: Advisory committee, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Other: Advisory committee; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Advisory committee, Research Funding; Abbvie: Honoraria, Other: Advisory board, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Servier: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Advisory committee, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Other: Advisory committee, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Dokal:MRC, Bloodwise, Telomerase Activator Sciences: Research Funding; The Gary Woodward Dyskeratosis Congenita Trust: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Action Medical Research, European School of Haematology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London,: Employment, Research Funding; Telomerase Activator Sciences: Research Funding; Barts and The London, Queen Mary University of London: Employment; Gary Woodward Dyskeratois Congenita Trust: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Hiwase:Novartis: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Branford:Cepheid: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Qiagen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Kramer:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bayer: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy. Owen:Merck: Honoraria; Teva: Honoraria; AbbVie: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Honoraria, Research Funding. Fitzgibbon:Epizyme: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy. Rienhoff:Imago BioSciences, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kurokawa:Astellas Pharma: Research Funding; Sumitomo Dainippon Pharma: Research Funding; Nippon Sinyaku: Honoraria, Research Funding; Kyowa Hakko Kirin: Honoraria, Research Funding; Eizai: Research Funding; MSD: Honoraria, Research Funding; Ono Pharmaceutical: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Takeda Pharmaceutical: Research Funding; Otsuka Pharmaceutical: Research Funding; Teijin Pharma: Research Funding; Chugai Pharmaceutical: Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction: The most effective initial therapy for older adults with CLL has not yet been established due to the lack of comparison of chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) and targeted therapy with the Bruton's Tyrosine Kinase (BTK) inhibitor ibrutinib. CIT has been the gold standard since studies showing that addition of CD20 antibody to chemotherapy prolongs survival. Bendamustine plus rituximab (BR) is one standard, more aggressive CIT regimen for patients (pts) age 65 or older. While ibrutinib has been FDA approved for untreated CLL since 2016, it has only been compared to chlorambucil, which is relatively ineffective, and never before to aggressive CIT. Additionally, the benefit of the addition of rituximab to ibrutinib in this setting has not been prospectively studied in a phase 3 trial. As part of a randomized phase 3 trial, the Alliance sought to answer these important clinical questions. Pts and Methods: Alliance A041202 is a multicenter NCI National Clinical Trials Network phase 3 study comparing BR (Arm 1) with ibrutinib (Arm 2) and the combination of ibrutinib plus rituximab (Arm 3) to determine whether ibrutinib-containing regimens are superior to CIT in terms of PFS. Additionally, this study sought to determine if adding rituximab to ibrutinib would prolong PFS over ibrutinib alone. At time of progression, pts on Arm 1 could cross over to Arm 2. Eligible pts were those age ≥ 65 years with previously untreated, symptomatic CLL. Pts had a CrCl ≥ 40 mL/min, bilirubin ≤ 1.5 x ULN, and no significant life-limiting intercurrent illness or need for warfarin treatment. Pts were stratified based upon Rai stage, Zap-70 methylation performed centrally, and del(17)(p13.1) or del(11)(q22.3) by local interphase cytogenetics and were randomized 1:1:1 to each arm. With 166 pts per arm, the trial was powered to detect an improvement in 2-year PFS from 61% in Arm 1 to 75% in Arms 2 or 3 (HR=0.586) using two one-sided log-rank tests with type I error rate of 2.5% and 90% power. The Alliance Data and Safety Monitoring Board approved the data release after meeting the protocol-defined efficacy threshold at a planned interim analysis with a one-sided critical value of 0.001538. These data were locked July 2, 2018; updated results will be presented at the meeting. Results: Between 12/9/2013 and 5/16/2016, 547 pts were registered and randomized (Arms 1: 183, 2: 182, and 3: 182). Median age was 71 years and 67% of pts were men. High-risk Rai stage (stage III/IV) was seen in 54%, unmethylated Zap-70 in 53%, and del(17p) or del(11q) by local FISH in 28%. Local vs centralized FISH was performed for del(11q) and del(17p) with agreement between local and central results in 94% (Kappa=0.80) and 97% (Kappa=0.76) of pts, respectively. 525 (96%) pts were eligible and included in the primary PFS analysis (Arms 1: 176, 2: 178, and 3: 171). With median follow-up of 32 months (mo), median PFS was 41 mo in Arm 1 and has not been reached in Arms 2 or 3 (HR comparing Arm 2 to 1 is 0.40 with one-sided p&lt;0.0001; HR comparing Arm 3 to 1 is 0.41 with one-sided p&lt;0.0001; HR comparing Arm 3 to 2 is 1.01 with one-sided p=0.48). 2-year PFS estimates were 74%, 87% in 2, and 88% in Arms 1, 2, and 3 respectively. At this time, there are no significant differences in overall survival (OS) among arms (p=0.87), median OS has not been reached for any arm, and 2-year OS estimates were 95%, 90%, and 94% in Arms 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Adverse events (AEs) were compared among arms using Fisher's exact tests. Grade 3+ treatment-emergent AEs were seen in 428 of 537 evaluable pts with 61%, 41%, and 38% of pts experiencing Grade 3+ heme AEs (p&lt;0.0001) and 60%, 72%, and 71% of pts experiencing Grade 3+ non-heme AEs (p=0.03) in Arms 1, 2, and 3 respectively. Grade 5 AEs were seen in 5 (2.8%), 14 (7.8%), and 14 (7.7%) pts (p=0.07). Unexplained or unwitnessed death over the entire observation period was seen in 2 (1.1%), 7 (3.9%), and 4 (2.2%) pts (p=0.24) in Arms 1, 2, and 3 respectively. Conclusions: This international phase 3 trial demonstrates that ibrutinib produces superior PFS to standard CIT in older pts with CLL and justifies it as a standard of care treatment for pts age 65 and older. The addition of rituximab does not prolong PFS with ibrutinib. While ibrutinib represents a major therapeutic advance, toxicities and also cost justify future efforts to reduce the need for long-term continuous treatment. Support: K23CA178183, R01CA183444, U10CA180821, U10CA180882, U24CA196171, Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01886872 Figure. Figure. Disclosures Ding: Merck: Research Funding. Bartlett:Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; ImaginAB: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Bristol-Meyers Squibb: Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Merck & Co: Research Funding; KITE: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Acerta: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Research Funding; Immune Design: Research Funding; Forty Seven: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding. Brander:BeiGene: Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Other: DSMB; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Teva: Consultancy, Honoraria; Acerta: Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding; DTRM: Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding. Barr:AbbVie, Gilead: Consultancy. Parikh:Gilead: Honoraria; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Research Funding; MorphoSys: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Honoraria, Research Funding. Coutre:Celgene: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Beigene: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding. Lozanski:Novartis: Research Funding; BI: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Stem Line: Research Funding; Coulter: Research Funding; Beckman: Research Funding. Larson:Ariad/Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; BristolMyers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding. Erba:Amgen: Research Funding; Juno: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Research Funding; MacroGenics: Consultancy; Juno: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Juno: Research Funding; Agios: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; MacroGenics: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda/Millenium: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Takeda/Millenium: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; MacroGenics: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Astellas: Research Funding; Glycomimetics: Consultancy, Other: Chair, Data and Safety Monitoring Committee; MacroGenics: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Other: grant; Astellas: Research Funding; Juno: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Research Funding; Agios: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Astellas: Research Funding; Agios: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Other: grant; Pfizer: Consultancy, Other: grant; Astellas: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Agios: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Jazz: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Immunogen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Jazz: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Immunogen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Glycomimetics: Consultancy, Other: Chair, Data and Safety Monitoring Committee; Pfizer: Consultancy, Other: grant; Jazz: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Immunogen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Jazz: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Immunogen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda/Millenium: Research Funding; Glycomimetics: Consultancy, Other: Chair, Data and Safety Monitoring Committee; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Takeda/Millenium: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Research Funding; Glycomimetics: Consultancy, Other: Chair, Data and Safety Monitoring Committee. Owen:Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Merck: Honoraria; Teva: Honoraria. Abramson:Bayer: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy; Humanigen: Consultancy; Juno Therapeutics: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy.

Abstract Intensification of therapy for adults with ALL using pediatric regimens with intensive asparagine depletion is feasible. Targeted therapies are improving outcomes. We hypothesized that the UCSF 8707 regimen (Linker et al.JCO 2002;20:2462) could be safely intensified with the addition of pegylated asparaginase (peg asp), cyclophosphamide, rituximab, dasatinib, and intrathecal liposomal cytarabine. Methods: Patients (pts) enrolled at 4 centers. The primary objective was 3-year (yr) EFS (goal >55%). Eligible pts were age 18-60 yrs with untreated ALL or LBL. Treatment consisted of induction Course 1A (C1A): daunorubicin 60 mg/m2 IV d1-3, vincristine (VCR) 1.4 mg/m2 (2 mg if age >50 yrs) IV day 1,8,15,22, prednisone 60 mg/m2 orally (PO) d1-28, peg-asp 2,000 IU/m2 (cap 3,750 IU; 1,000 IU/m2 if age >50 yrs) IV d15, cyclophosphamide 750 mg/m2 IV d1,15 (or 500 mg/m2 IV q12h d15,16 if d14 marrow M2 or M3). ALL pts in CR/CRi and LBL pts in CR or PR proceeded to post-remission Course 1B (C1B): methotrexate (MTX) 220 mg/m2 IV bolus then 60 mg/m2/hr CIV for 36 hrs d1,15 with leucovorin rescue, 6-mercaptopurine (6-MP) 60 mg/m2 PO d1-7, 15-21, peg-asp 2,000 IU/ m2 (cap 3,750 IU; 1,000 IU/m2 if age >50 yrs) IV d16. Course 1C (C1C) consisted of cytarabine 2,000 mg/m2 IV d1-4 and etoposide 500 mg/m2 IV d1-4. Courses A-C repeated once then a third course B given. Maintenance POMP (6-MP 60 mg/m2 PO daily, VCR 1.4 mg/m2 (2 mg age >50 yrs) IV monthly, MTX 20 mg/m2 PO weekly, prednisone 60 mg/m2 PO d1-5) repeated monthly for 12 months then POMP with every other month VCR and prednisone for 12 months. Peg asp was given d16 of maintenance month 1. If B-ALL (+/- CD20 expression), rituximab 375 mg/m2 IV was given every 2 weeks for 8 doses starting day 1 of C1A. If Ph+ ALL, dasatinib 140 mg PO daily was given but held during high-dose MTX then restarted when serum [MTX] was </= 0.1 μM. CNS prophylaxis was liposomal cytarabine 25 mg intrathecal C1A d1,15, C2A d1,15 then 50 mg monthly for 4 doses in maintenance. Bone marrow biopsies were performed C1A d14 and after C1A, C1B, C3B, and maintenance. Measurable residual disease (MRD) was evaluated centrally by multi-parameter flow cytometry. BCR-ABL1 QPCR was performed locally. EFS is the time from start of therapy to failure of response by induction day 28, relapse, or death censored for HCT. RFS is the time from response to relapse or death censored for HCT. OS is the time from start of therapy until death. Survival was estimated by the method of Kaplan and Meier. Toxicity was graded with NCI CTCAE version 4.0. Results: Between 4/2014 and 2/2017, 31 pts enrolled and 29 were eligible. Median age was 28 yrs (20-54), 62% were male, 52% were Hispanic, and 86% had ALL. The end induction ORR (CR + PR) was 90% (2 ALL with PR, 1 early death). ORR for LBL was 100% (n= 4). The CR rate for ALL was 88%. For Ph- B-ALL (n=16), the CR rate was 86% with MRD <0.1% and <0.01% in 90% and 80% of CR pts, respectively. For Ph+ B-cell ALL (n=7), the CR rate was 88% (1 early death) with MRD <0.1% and <0.01% in 100% and a CMR rate of 67% at CR. The 2 T-ALL pts achieved CR with MRD >0.1%. Five pts underwent allogeneic HCT in first CR to study therapy. With a median follow up of 32 months (16-44), the 2- and 3-yr EFS were 59%. EFS was similar for B-ALL, T- ALL, LBL, Ph- B-ALL, and Ph+ B-ALL. Five pts relapsed. The 2- and 3-yr RFS were 66%. Concomitant marrow and CNS relapse occurred in 1 pt. No isolated CNS relapses occurred. Transplant-censored 2- and 3-yr OS were 80% and 72%. Uncensored 2- and 3-yr OS were 75% and 70%. Among eligible pts, 8 died: 4 after relapse, 1 in induction from infection, 2 in CR from infection, and 1 from allogeneic HCT complications. Three reversible grade 3-4 events were attributed to liposomal cytarabine, all grade 3: syncope, pseudotumor cerebri, and headache. Grade 3-5 possible peg asp toxicities were transaminitis (58%), hyperbilirubinemia (42%), hyperglycemia (29%), hypertriglyceridemia (26%), elevated GGT/alkaline phosphatase (19%), thrombosis (19%, 1 cerebral venous), hypoalbuminemia (10%), hypersensitivity (6.5%), elevated lipase (6.5%), pancreatitis (3.2%), encephalopathy (3.2%), and avascular necrosis (3.2%). One pt died from encephalopathy. Conclusions: Intensification of UCSF 8707 is feasible and effective. Post-induction remissions were deep with high MRD-negativity rates. EFS, RFS, and OS are favorable with follow up and accrual ongoing (NCT02043587). Strategies to limit peg asp toxicity are needed. Disclosures Wieduwilt: Amgen: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Shire: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Reata Pharmaceuticals: Equity Ownership; Leadiant: Research Funding. Schiller:Astellas Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; bluebird bio: Research Funding. Mannis:AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios: Research Funding; NKarta: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Curtin:Amgen: Research Funding; Onconova: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Andreadis:Genentech: Consultancy, Employment; Bayer: Consultancy; Astellas: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Juno: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kite: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy. Logan:Adaptive Biotech: Consultancy; Napajen: Consultancy; Shire: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy; Astellas: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Kite: Research Funding. Damon:Actelion: Other: spouse's relationship with company; Boston Scientific: Other: spouse's relationship with company; Novartis: Other: spouse's relationship with company; Gilead Sciences Inc: Other: spouse's relationship with company.