Citations

Introduction: Inherited predisposition to myeloid malignancies in adults may be more common than previously suggested with recent studies suggesting a prevalence of candidate predisposition alleles in 15-20% of patients. An inherited predisposition may not be considered in older AML patients despite significant clinical implications for family members as potential stem cell transplant donors. To better define the role of inherited genetic alterations in older AML patients , we analyzed a unique cohort of newly diagnosed older (>60 years) patients enrolled in) Beat AML® Master Trial(BAMT) for candidate genes associated with a known or putative inherited cancer predisposition. Methods: We analyzed extracted DNA from skin and/or saliva samples compared to paired leukemia samples of 176 AML patients enrolled in the BAMT. All samples underwent genomic profiling using a modified FoundationOne®Heme platform (capture-based) and/or the Oregon Health Sciences University panel (amplicon-based), evaluating 477 and 220 genes respectively, with a known role in hematologic malignancies. Germline(GL) variants were identified by the haplotype-based Bayesian genetic variant detector FreeBayes and using variant allele frequency(VAF) values. The pathogenicity and clinical significance of the variants was interpreted according to the 2015 ACMG/AMP guidelines while the AMP/CAP/ASCO guidelines and various disease databases were used in the somatic variant calls. Results: -The mutational landscape of the 176 newly diagnosed older AML patients is detailed in Table 1. Our cohort has a higher proportion of adverse risk patients, consistent with an older AML patient population. 27 pathogenic or likely pathogenic GL variants were detected in 24 AML patients, with a germline mutation prevalence of 14% in this cohort. Deleterious GL mutations were found in the gene DDX41 (5), followed by SBDS (4), CHEK2 (4), MPL (3), BRCA2 (2), HAX1 (2), DNAH9 (2), FANCA (1), FANCL (1), SAMD9 (1), BLM (1), and ATM (1) (Table 2). The types of mutations included missense mutations (9), nonsense mutations (8), frameshift mutations (7), splice site mutations (2), and an exonic deletion (1). Family history of leukemia was available on 129 patients from this cohort. 12 patients have at least one family member with AML. Of these 12 patients, 2 had a deleterious GL alteration identified. Along with the 14% prevalence of pathogenic/likely pathogenic GL mutations , there were an additional 181 GL variants of unknown significance (VUS) in 102 patients, seen in genes implicated in inherited predisposition to hematologic malignancies, most commonly variants in DOCK8 and CREBBP(>5% VUS) with both genes being implicated in leukemogenesis . As skin and/or saliva samples were collected at the time of AML diagnosis, tumor-in-normal presence was expectedly observed. The median VAF for somatic mutations was significantly lower (p < 0.0001) in skin (median 6%; mean 9%; standard deviation (SD) 10%; N=562 variants) than in saliva (median 17%; mean 21%; SD 16%; N=368 variants). In 37 patients who had both saliva and skin tissue concomitantly ,skin had a significantly lower tumor-in-normal presence (median VAF 5%, mean 8%, SD 8%;) than saliva (median 15%, mean 20%, SD 16%)(p < 0.0001). Conclusions: We found a prevalence of 14% pathogenic/ likely pathogenic GL mutations in cancer predisposition genes in this unique cohort of newly diagnosed older AML patients. This finding has potential clinical implications for patients and family members. We also found a large number of VUS in genes implicated in hematological malignancies. Additional studies linking candidate VUS' to familial predisposition to understand contribution to AML predisposition are needed. We are in the process of comparing the manual curation of ACMG classification of pathogenicity with a computational curation algorithm to assess the potential for automated classification of GL variants. Our study suggests the choice of source for germline DNA in patients with AML is variably impacted by leukemic contamination. Cultured skin fibroblasts are the current standard for tumor-normal paired genotyping, with the caveat of being labor intensive and not routinely performed in clinical diagnostic laboratories. This is a critical consideration for rapid GL screening of patients and family members with hematologic malignancies and suspected cancer predisposition. Disclosures Borate: Novartis: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy. Mims:Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; PTC Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Stein:Agios: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas Pharma US, Inc: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Daiichi Sankyo, Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bioline: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; PTC Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Syros: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Patel:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Dava Oncology: Honoraria; France Foundation: Honoraria. Baer:Astellas: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; AI Therapeutics: Research Funding; Forma: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Kite: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Stock:Agios: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; UpToDate: Honoraria; Daiichi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kite, a Gilead Company: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Research to Practice: Honoraria. Schiller:Bristol Myer Squibb: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Constellation Pharmaceutical: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Agios: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Other, Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; Biomed Valley Discoveries: Research Funding; Eli Lilly and Company: Research Funding; FujiFilm: Research Funding; Genzyme: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; J&J: Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Onconova: Research Funding; Pfizer Pharmaceuticals: Equity Ownership, Research Funding; Sangamo Therapeutics: Research Funding. Blum:AmerisourceBergen: Consultancy; Forma: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; Boehringer Ingelheim: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Astellas,: Research Funding. Shami:JSK Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership; Amgen: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Cantex: Research Funding; Aptevo: Research Funding; Jazz: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Agios: Consultancy, Honoraria; Lone Star Thiotherapies: Equity Ownership. Foran:Agios: Honoraria, Research Funding. Byrd:Acerta: Research Funding; Gilead: Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Research Funding; Novartis: Other: Travel Expenses, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; TG Therapeutics: Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Ohio State University: Patents & Royalties: OSU-2S; BeiGene: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Druker:OHSU (licensing fees): Patents & Royalties: #2573, Constructs and cell lines harboring various mutations in TNK2 and PTPN11, licensing fees ; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Other: PI or co-investigator on clinical trial(s) funded via contract with OHSU., Research Funding; Novartis: Other: PI or co-investigator on clinical trial(s) funded via contract with OHSU., Patents & Royalties: Patent 6958335, Treatment of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors, exclusively licensed to Novartis, Research Funding; Monojul: Other: former consultant; Vivid Biosciences: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Stock options; Beat AML LLC: Other: Service on joint steering committee; Merck & Co: Patents & Royalties: Dana-Farber Cancer Institute license #2063, Monoclonal antiphosphotyrosine antibody 4G10, exclusive commercial license to Merck & Co; Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (antibody royalty): Patents & Royalties: #2524, antibody royalty; Aileron Therapeutics: #2573, Constructs and cell lines harboring various mutations in TNK2 and PTPN11, licensing fees , Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; ALLCRON: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Aptose Biosciences: Consultancy, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Beta Cat: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Stock options; The RUNX1 Research Program: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Patient True Talk: Consultancy; GRAIL: Equity Ownership, Other: former member of Scientific Advisory Board; Cepheid: Consultancy, Honoraria; Blueprint Medicines: Consultancy, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Burroughs Wellcome Fund: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy; Pfizer: Other: PI or co-investigator on clinical trial(s) funded via contract with OHSU., Research Funding; ICON: Other: Scientific Founder of Molecular MD, which was acquired by ICON in Feb. 2019; CureOne: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead Sciences: Other: former member of Scientific Advisory Board. Vergilio:Foundation Medicine, Inc.: Employment; F. Hoffman La Roche, Ltd.: Equity Ownership. Levine:Imago Biosciences: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Prelude Therapeutics: Research Funding; C4 Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy; Lilly: Honoraria; Qiagen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Isoplexis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Loxo: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy.

Systemic glucocorticoids are the principal treatment for acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), which remains the major cause of non-relapse mortality (NRM) after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). However, there are no validated biomarkers that measure a patient's response to glucocorticoid therapy, and thus response is evaluated by the change in clinical symptom severity. A major weakness in the predictive power of clinical responses is that changes to all organs are weighted equally even though the major driver of NRM is irreversible damage to the crypts of the GI tract. Recent studies from the Mount Sinai Acute GVHD International Consortium (MAGIC) have validated an algorithm probability (MAP) that combines serum concentrations of two biomarkers of GVHD (REG3α and ST2) to generate an estimated probability of 6 month NRM for individual patients. The MAP has been considered a "liquid biopsy" that estimates the damage caused by GVHD to crypts throughout the lower GI tract (Hartwell et al., JCI Insight, 2017; Major-Monfried et al., Blood, 2018). We hypothesized that the change in MAP between start of treatment and 28 days later could serve as a response biomarker for GVHD and might compare favorably to the change in clinical symptoms that measures response to GVHD treatment, which is widely used as a surrogate for long term survival and is the primary endpoint in most GVHD treatment trials (Martin et al., BBMT, 2009; MacMillan et al., Blood, 2010). We prospectively collected serum samples and clinical staging from 368 sequential HCT patients who received systemic treatment for acute GVHD in one of 20 MAGIC centers between January 2016 and February 2018. We measured the serum concentrations of REG3α and ST2 before and after systemic therapy for acute GVHD and computed MAPs, the changes in MAPs, and clinical responses for each patient. MAPs of patients who experienced 6 month NRM showed significantly greater increases than MAPs of patients who survived (p=0.0004). In patients whose MAPs at the start of treatment were low (Ann Arbor 1, MAP < 0.141) or intermediate (Ann Arbor 2, 0.141 ≤ MAP ≤ 0.290), 6 month NRM clustered among those who had the greatest increases in MAP after 28 days (Fig 1A,B). In patients with high MAPs at the start of treatment (Ann Arbor 3, MAP > 0.290), those who survived tended to have the largest decreases in MAP (Fig 1C). These changes in MAP suggested crossing a single threshold could predict risk of mortality. We found that patients whose MAPs rose above a threshold MAP of 0.290 (5% of Ann Arbor 1, 27% of Ann Arbor 2) had significantly worse survival compared to those who remained below it, whereas the large number patients with initially high MAPs that remained above the threshold (66% of Ann Arbor 3) had a large increases in mortality (Fig 2). When measured at day 28, the MAP was significantly more accurate in predicting NRM than the gold standard of the clinical response, with areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.86 and 0.70, respectively (p<0.0001). An algorithm that combined clinical response with biomarkers generated the same AUC as the MAP alone (0.83 v 0.86, p = NS). We next tested whether the same MAP threshold of 0.290 could predict risk within clinical response subsets. A significant minority (10%) of clinical responders had high MAPs and experienced three-fold greater NRM than those with low MAPs (40% v 12%, p<0.0001) whereas the majority (57%) of non-responders had low MAPs and experienced almost three-fold lower NRM than those with high MAPs (24% v 65%, p<0.0001) (Fig 3). Thus the MAP provides important prognostic information over and above the change in clinical symptoms, further stratifying both responders and non-responders at four weeks of treatment. The MAP threshold classified patients both with and without significant lower GI symptoms because the MAP is a more specific measure of irreversible cryptic damage in patients with copious diarrhea and more sensitive in patients with less than 0.5 liters of daily diarrhea (Fig 4). We conclude that the MAP is, to our knowledge, the first validated laboratory test to serve as response biomarker for the treatment for acute GVHD and a more accurate predictor of survival than clinical response after four weeks of treatment. The MAP may serve as a novel endpoint and an important complement to changes in clinical symptom severity in future trials of GVHD treatment. Disclosures Srinagesh: National Institutes of Health: Research Funding. Ozbek:Viracor: Patents & Royalties: Biomarker Patent. Ayuk:Novartis: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding. Aziz:Doris Duke Charitable Foundation: Research Funding. Defilipp:Incyte: Research Funding. Grupp:Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy; GSK: Consultancy; CBMG: Consultancy; Novartis: Research Funding; Kite: Research Funding; Servier: Research Funding; Jazz: Other: study steering committees or scientific advisory boards; Adaptimmune: Other: study steering committees or scientific advisory boards; Cure Genetics: Consultancy; Humanigen: Consultancy. Hexner:novartis: Research Funding. Kitko:Mallinckrodt: Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria. Mielke:EBMT/EHA: Other: Travel support; ISCT: Other: Travel support; Miltenyi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel and speakers fee (via institution), Speakers Bureau; Jazz Pharma: Honoraria, Other: Travel support, Speakers Bureau; IACH: Other: Travel support; Kiadis Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel support (via institution), Speakers Bureau; DGHO: Other: Travel support; Bellicum: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel (via institution); GILEAD: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel (via institution), Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Travel support (via institution), Speakers Bureau. Merli:Sobi: Consultancy; Amgen: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Bellicum: Consultancy. Pulsipher:Amgen: Other: Lecture; Miltenyi: Research Funding; Bellicum: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Jazz: Other: Education for employees; CSL Behring: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Adaptive: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Medac: Honoraria. Qayed:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria. Reshef:Pfizer: Consultancy; Magenta: Consultancy; Kite: Consultancy, Research Funding; Atara: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Shire: Research Funding. Levine:Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding; Biogen: Other: non-financial support; Viracor: Patents & Royalties: biomarker patent; Ironwood: Honoraria; bluebird bio: Consultancy; National Cancer Institute: Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria; Kamada: Research Funding. Ferrara:National Institutes of Health: Research Funding; ViraCor: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; Kamada: Consultancy; Mallinckrodt: Consultancy; Enlivex: Consultancy; Xenikos: Consultancy; CSL Behring: Consultancy.

*equal contribution of AB, RLL, BD and JCB Background: Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is common with increasing age, and older adults with AML rarely achieve long-term remission with chemotherapy. Gene discovery studies in older adults with AML have shown that this malignancy is characterized by a multitude of somatic genomic alterations beginning with initiating somatic events followed by acquisition of collaborative transforming mutations. Despite these important biologic insights, current therapeutic approaches to AML remain limited, particularly in adults ≥ 60 years of age. The Beat AML trial was designed to assess the feasibility of using genetic profiling to assign patients (pts) to molecularly defined, subtype-specific therapies within 7 days of the initial diagnosis in a multi-center clinical trial setting, and to delineate the role of molecularly informed first-line treatment of AML with mechanism based novel therapies. Methods: Treatment-naïve patients with AML were enrolled in this prospective trial which offered accelerated cytogenetic and comprehensive mutational testing within 7 days followed by treatment assignment using these molecular data. Pt eligibility included age ≥ 60 years with non-APML AML, no known CNS leukemia, no prior hypomethylating agent (HMA) therapy and no clinical need for emergent therapy. Eligible pts were profiled by local cytogenetics analysis and using a central next generation sequencing (NGS) assay (Foundation Medicine, Inc.) with all molecular data required for treatment assignment (TA) obtained < 7 days. TA was made centrally using a pre-determined algorithm considering somatic cytogenetic and molecular alterations in the dominant clone, available targeted therapeutics for specific AML subsets, and the likelihood of cure with intensive chemotherapy. Results: From November 2016 to January 2019, 487 pts with a suspected diagnosis of AML had enrolled at 14 clinical sites; 395 were eligible for the study (77% of the patients not eligible for the study had an alternative diagnosis). The median age of eligible patients was 72 years (range: 60 to 92) with 38% being≥ 75 years and 16% with treatment-related AML. From the 395 eligible patients, 374 (94.7%) were centrally assigned to the different cytogenetic/genomic groups within 7 days. The most common groups were TP53 mutated (19%) and marker negative (18%) molecular groups. The Beat AML trial is dynamic by design, thereby allowing different arms to open over time; all trial arms are designed to evaluate for substantial clinical efficacy in small, molecularly defined patient subsets. As shown in Figure 1, 224 patients (57%) had a TA and consented to a BEAT AML sub-study. Of the remaining 171 patients, 103 received standard therapy defined as induction therapy (7+3) or hypomethylation agent (25 before TA and 78 after TA), 28 received an alternative investigational agent (5 before TA and 23 after TA), 38 received palliative care, and 2 had an unknown treatment status and are grouped with the palliative care patients in subsequent analyses; 9 patients died before TA (2 who received standard therapy and 7 in the palliative care group). Demographic, clinical, performance and molecular characteristics were not largely different between pts who elected targeted therapy as part of the BEAT AML trial versus those who elected standard therapy. As shown in Figure 2, the overall survival was significantly longer for patients enrolled in a targeted therapy arm as part of the BEAT AML trial compared to those who elected standard therapy. (p<0.0001). The 30-day estimated death rate was 3.7% (95% CI: 1.9-7.2) for patients electing treatment on a BEAT AML sub-study, 20.4% (95% CI: 13.0-31.2) for those receiving standard therapy, 0% for those receiving an investigational therapy, and 72.6% (95% CI: 57.8-85.7) for the palliative care group. Conclusion: Our data support the feasibility of a rapid precision medicine approach in older patients with previously untreated AML. Patients with AML who elected treatment assigned based upon cytogenetic and molecular alterations in the dominant clone using a novel precision medicine approach had significantly improved overall survival versus those who elected standard of care treatment. Disclosures Levine: Gilead: Consultancy; Prelude Therapeutics: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Isoplexis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding; Qiagen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Loxo: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Imago Biosciences: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; C4 Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria; Lilly: Honoraria. Mims:Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; PTC Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Borate:Novartis: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy. Stein:Agios: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas Pharma US, Inc: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; PTC Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Syros: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Daiichi Sankyo, Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bioline: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Patel:France Foundation: Honoraria; Dava Oncology: Honoraria; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Baer:Takeda: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Kite: Research Funding; Forma: Research Funding; AI Therapeutics: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding. Stock:Daiichi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Research to Practice: Honoraria; UpToDate: Honoraria; Kite, a Gilead Company: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Deininger:Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Ascentage Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria; TRM: Consultancy; Sangoma: Consultancy; Fusion Pharma: Consultancy; Adelphi: Consultancy; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Humana: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Sangamo: Consultancy; Blueprint: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Blum:Boehringer Ingelheim: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Astellas,: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; Forma: Research Funding; AmerisourceBergen: Consultancy. Schiller:Amgen: Other, Research Funding; Agios: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Constellation Pharmaceutical: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Eli Lilly and Company: Research Funding; FujiFilm: Research Funding; Genzyme: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; J&J: Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Onconova: Research Funding; Pfizer Pharmaceuticals: Equity Ownership, Research Funding; Sangamo Therapeutics: Research Funding; Bristol Myer Squibb: Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; Biomed Valley Discoveries: Research Funding. Olin:Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria; Revolution Medicine: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Clovis: Research Funding; Ignyta: Research Funding; MedImmune: Research Funding; Mirati Therapeutics: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Spectrum: Research Funding. Foran:Agios: Honoraria, Research Funding. Lin:Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria. Traer:AbbVie: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy; Astellas: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Notable Labs: Equity Ownership. Odenike:AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; Astex Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Janssen Oncology: Research Funding; Oncotherapy: Research Funding; Agios: Research Funding; CTI/Baxalta: Research Funding. Arellano:Gilead: Consultancy. Vergilio:Roche Holding AG: Equity Ownership; Foundation Medicine: Employment. Brennan:Foundation Medicine: Employment. Vietz:Foundation Medicine: Employment. Druker:ALLCRON: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Research Funding; Aileron Therapeutics: #2573, Constructs and cell lines harboring various mutations in TNK2 and PTPN11, licensing fees , Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Burroughs Wellcome Fund: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Cepheid: Consultancy, Honoraria; The RUNX1 Research Program: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GRAIL: Equity Ownership, Other: former member of Scientific Advisory Board; Patient True Talk: Consultancy; Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (antibody royalty): Patents & Royalties: #2524, antibody royalty; Pfizer: Other: PI or co-investigator on clinical trial(s) funded via contract with OHSU., Research Funding; Merck & Co: Patents & Royalties: Dana-Farber Cancer Institute license #2063, Monoclonal antiphosphotyrosine antibody 4G10, exclusive commercial license to Merck & Co; OHSU (licensing fees): Patents & Royalties: #2573, Constructs and cell lines harboring various mutations in TNK2 and PTPN11, licensing fees ; Amgen: Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Aptose Biosciences: Consultancy, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Beta Cat: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Stock options; Blueprint Medicines: Consultancy, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Vivid Biosciences: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Stock options; Beat AML LLC: Other: Service on joint steering committee; CureOne: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy; Gilead Sciences: Other: former member of Scientific Advisory Board; ICON: Other: Scientific Founder of Molecular MD, which was acquired by ICON in Feb. 2019; Monojul: Other: former consultant; Novartis: Other: PI or co-investigator on clinical trial(s) funded via contract with OHSU., Patents & Royalties: Patent 6958335, Treatment of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors, exclusively licensed to Novartis, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Other: PI or co-investigator on clinical trial(s) funded via contract with OHSU., Research Funding. Byrd:Novartis: Other: Travel Expenses, Speakers Bureau; BeiGene: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Acerta: Research Funding; Ohio State University: Patents & Royalties: OSU-2S; Genentech: Research Funding; Gilead: Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; TG Therapeutics: Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

AbstractIntroductionPeyronie's disease (PD) is characterized by pain, deformity, sexual dysfunction, and psychological bother. Several treatments are available with varying levels of efficacy, and significant limitations exist with the currently available literature.AimTo explore modern-era methodological challenges inherent to PD research as they pertain to intervention studies.MethodsWe performed a critical review of the PD intervention literature to identify common methodological challenges with emphasis on aspects of patient assessment and treatment outcomes, study design, and statistical analysis. The key objective was to provide an impetus on which to build future research protocols, rather than focus on weaknesses with any individual studies.Main Outcome MeasureExpert opinion was used to summarize limitations with commonly reported objective outcomes such as penile curvature, girth, and length along with imaging modalities and objective questionnaires. Appropriate study design and statistical analysis were also reviewed to discuss common pitfalls in the PD literature.ResultsThere are multiple shortcomings inherent to studying objective PD outcomes such as penile curvature, girth, and length. These include lack of standardized protocols for preintervention and postintervention assessment, interobserver and intraobserver variability, and lack of consistent definitions for what defines an objective outcome as clinically “meaningful” for patients. Similarly, imaging studies including penile ultrasound are subject to marked variation, thereby limiting their utility to measure predefined primary or secondary study outcomes including cavernosal artery hemodynamics and penile plaque size. Objective and validated questionnaires such as the Peyronie's Disease Questionnaire and International Index of Erectile Function require that patients have recently engaged in sexual activity, which is challenging for many patients as a result of penile deformity with PD. Finally, careful study design and statistical analysis (including appropriate study power) are imperative to ensure reliable results. Current shortcomings in the majority of studies contribute to the low level of evidence available for most PD interventions.Clinical ImplicationsFuture PD intervention studies should focus on optimizing study design and statistical analysis. Furthermore, authors must incorporate standardized protocols for assessing preintervention and postintervention outcomes.Strength & LimitationsThe current analysis and recommendations for future study are based on the expertise and opinion of the manuscript authors.ConclusionMultiple areas of weakness in study design, statistical analysis, and patient outcomes assessment limit the reliability of data derived from PD intervention studies in the modern era. The global themes identified herein should serve as a basis upon which to build future research protocols.

Background: We examined the association of adult lung transplant candidates’ self-reported affect with transplant-related outcomes, evaluating whether a positive (vs negative) frame of mind might be protective. Method: Consenting waitlisted candidates from 6 centers completed the questionnaires including the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule annually and posttransplant. Univariate logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the association of baseline affect with outcomes of death or delisting. Models were subsequently adjusted for age, marital status, and education. Results: Questionnaires were completed by 169 candidates (77.9% participation). Mean positive affect, negative affect, and positive-to-negative affect ratio (positivity ratio) were similar to expected norms. The scores of the questionnaire did not change significantly over time. Fifteen (8.9%) waitlisted participants died. Candidates who died while waiting had lower positivity ratios compared to those who survived (1.82 vs 2.45; P = .02). A more negative affect was associated with increased death on the waiting list (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.10; P = .021). Conversely, a higher positivity ratio was associated with decreased death while waiting (adjusted OR: 0.45; P = .027). Conclusion: Negative affect may represent a novel risk factor for death on the waitlist. Enhancing positive affect may represent a useful target for psychological optimization in lung transplant candidates.

Key Points The MAGIC algorithm probability, computed from 2 serum biomarkers, predicts mortality in all GVHD grades after 4 weeks of treatment. Dynamic changes in the MAGIC algorithm probability occur within all biomarker risk groups and can guide therapy.

Key Points c-KIT activating mutations cause resistance to PARP inhibitor in AML1-ETO–positive leukemias. c-KIT inhibitor avapritinib downregulates BRCA1/2 and DNA-PK catalytic subunit to restore the sensitivity to PARP inhibitor.

Testicular cancer is relatively uncommon and accounts for <1% of all male tumors. However, it is the most common solid tumor in men between the ages of 20 and 34 years, and the global incidence has been steadily rising over the past several decades. Several risk factors for testicular cancer have been identified, including personal or family history of testicular cancer and cryptorchidism. Testicular germ cell tumors (GCTs) comprise 95% of malignant tumors arising in the testes and are categorized into 2 main histologic subtypes: seminoma and nonseminoma. Although nonseminoma is the more clinically aggressive tumor subtype, 5-year survival rates exceed 70% with current treatment options, even in patients with advanced or metastatic disease. Radical inguinal orchiectomy is the primary treatment for most patients with testicular GCTs. Postorchiectomy management is dictated by stage, histology, and risk classification; treatment options for nonseminoma include surveillance, systemic therapy, and nerve-sparing retroperitoneal lymph node dissection. Although rarely occurring, prognosis for patients with brain metastases remains poor, with >50% of patients dying within 1 year of diagnosis. This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for Testicular Cancer focuses on recommendations for the management of adult patients with nonseminomatous GCTs.