Citations

9513 Background: The need for more research in N/V control is exemplified by agents that are costly, interfere with cytochrome P450 metabolism, and inadequately address delayed N/V. Based on pilot data, there was justification for evaluating whether gabapentin could improve the prevention of delayed N/V from highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). Methods: Patients (pts) about to receive HEC were randomized to prophylactic treatment with 20 mg of dexamethasone (dex) and a 5HT3 receptor antagonist (RA) on the day of chemotherapy, followed by either gabapentin (gaba) 300 mg BID and dex or placebo (plac) and dex. Gaba/plac was started the evening of the day of chemotherapy and continued through day 5 of the first chemotherapy cycle. Dex was given at 8 mg BID days 2-3, then 4 mg BID for day 4, in both arms. The primary endpoint was complete response (CR), defined as no emesis and no rescue medications day 2-6, using a nausea and vomiting diary. The percent of CR were compared in each group by Fisher’s exact test. Secondary outcomes included the Functional Living Index-Emesis (FLIE), satisfaction, and a side effect questionnaire. Results: 430 pts were enrolled in this study between 5/2009 and 2/2011. 47% of pts in the gaba arm and 41% in the plac arm had a CR (p=.23). At some time during days 2-6, 30% in the gaba and plac arms experienced emesis, and 45% and 53% in the gaba and plac arms, respectively, took rescue medication. Mean diary nausea scores over days 2-6 ranged from 0.9 – 1.2 (gaba arm) and 1.0-1.3 (plac arm)(7 = the worst); mean number of diary emetic episodes ranged from 0.1 -0.3 (gaba arm) and 0.1-0.2 (plac arm). The FLIE was not significantly different between arms. Mean vomiting satisfaction was 9.1 in both arms and for nausea was 8.3 for gaba, 8.1 for plac (10= totally satisfied). There were no significant differences in toxicities by CTCAE provider grading or by self-report. Conclusions: In this study, gaba did not improve delayed N/V. Overall, there was little emesis and nausea severity was low. Patients were satisfied with the control of their N/V, irrespective of arm. The use of standard prophylactic guidelines that include a 5HT3RA and dex provided good control of N/V for most patients. Clinical trial information: NCT00880191.

LBA9006 Purpose: Many patients who receive EGFR inhibitors develop an acneiform rash, and anecdotal reports suggest tetracycline is effective in treating it. To our knowledge, however, no rigorous trials have ever been published to substantiate this approach. This double- blinded, placebo-controlled trial was conducted to assess the role of tetracycline in preventing EGFR inhibitor-induced rash and/or reducing its severity. Methods: 61 patients were randomly assigned to tetracycline 500 mg orally twice a day×4 weeks versus an identical, similarly prescribed placebo. Eligibility criteria required all patients to have begun an EGFR inhibitor </= 7 days prior with no rash at study entry. Patients were to be followed for 8 weeks. Physician assessments of rash incidence, severity, and adverse events, occurred at 4 and 8 weeks. Patients completed a weekly rash diary, quality of life questionnaire (SKINDEX-16), and EGFR inhibitor compliance questionnaire. Thirty patients per group provides 90% power to detect a difference in rash incidence (the primary endpoint) of 40% between groups and of rejecting the null hypothesis of equal proportions with a type I error of 5% (2-sided). Results: Treatment arms were balanced on baseline characteristics, drop out rates, and rates of discontinuation of the EGFR inhibitor. Rash incidence was comparable across arms. Physicians reported that 16 tetracycline-treated patients (70%) and 22 placebo-exposed patients (76%) developed a rash (p=0.61). However, tetracycline appears to have lessened rash severity. By week 4, physician-reported grade 2 rash occurred in 17% of tetracycline-treated patients (n=4) and 55% of placebo- exposed patients (n=16); (p=0.04). Tetracycline-treated patients reported better scores on certain quality of life parameters (SKINDEX-16), such as skin burning or stinging, skin irritation, and being bothered by a persistence/recurrence of a skin condition. Adverse events were comparable across arms. Conclusion: Tetracycline did not prevent EGFR inhibitor-induced rashes. However, diminished rash severity and improved quality of life suggest this antibiotic merits further study. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

2075 Background: Multiple variables may impact endpoints used to assess therapeutic efficacy for patients with recurrent gliomas. To identify prognostic factors for each of 3 outcome variables, a master analysis file was constructed by pooling datasets summarizing key baseline factors and outcomes obtained in 15 North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) trials (n=583, 1980–2004) and 12 North American Brain Tumor Consortium (NABTC) trials (n=596, 1998–2002). Methods: In addition to traditional variables (gender, age, performance score (PS), race, extent of primary resection, year of study entry, last known histology, time since initial diagnosis, baseline steroid use, prior chemotherapy (Y/N), prior nitrosoureas, baseline anticonvulsant use), we investigated prior t (TMZ), number of relapses, academic vs. community site and low grade at initial diagnosis. Outcome variables were: (1) overall survival (OS), (2) progression free survival (PFS) and (3) PFS6 = proportion of patients alive and progression-free 6 months after start of treatment. For all 3 endpoints, Classification and Regression Tree (CART) models and bootstrap samples were used to identify prognostic variables and to look for evidence of interactions among the independent variables affecting outcome. Results: For all outcomes the initial CART analysis selected last known grade (4 vs. 3) as the most important variable. Additional factors selected as predicting poor prognosis differed with grade and outcome measure and included prior TMZ, longer time since primary diagnosis, older age and poor PS. Community vs. academic was not a strong predictor in any of the models nor was low grade at initial diagnosis. Additional analyses are planned to better describe the impact of all the variables on outcome, including use of Cox models and logistic models considering all baseline variables with backwards selection. Conclusions: The results from analyses to date are consistent with current thinking that last known histology (grade) is an important factor. Time since initial diagnosis is likely a surrogate for number of relapses. More definitive conclusions await the completion of ongoing analyses. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

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.

Abstract Background The objective of this study was to evaluate the age at onset and frequency of individual pituitary hormone deficiencies (PHDs) in optic nerve hypoplasia (ONH). Methods We performed a retrospective chart review of patients ≤21 years of age evaluated between 1996 and 2014. Patients were included if they had: (1) ONH diagnosed by an ophthalmologist and/or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), (2) documentation of pituitary hormone function on at least two separate occasions and (3) at least one PHD documented or a midline abnormality of the brain on MRI. Results Thirty-two patients (18 females, 14 males) were included (median age, 8 years [range, 1.1–21.0 years]). All patients had ONH (bilateral, n = 31; unilateral, n = 1) and at least one midline abnormality of the brain. At least one PHD was present in 75% of patients (n = 24). The remaining 25% of patients (n = 8) did not develop any PHD at least until the last follow-up (<2–8.6 years of follow-up), despite the presence of ONH and a midline abnormality of the brain. The median age (years) at diagnosis of antidiuretic hormone (ADH), thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH), adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) and growth hormone (GH) deficiencies was 0.5, 0.6, 0.7 and 1.6, respectively. Twenty-three percent of all PHDs were identified during the neonatal period, 56% by 12 months and 72% by 36 months of age. The latest age at diagnosis of GH, ACTH and TSH deficiencies was 9.6, 9.9 and 12.6 years, respectively. Conclusions The majority of the PHDs in ONH develop within the first 3 years of life. We propose evaluation for endocrinopathies at the time of diagnosis of ONH, with repeat assessment for new deficiencies every 3–4 months until age 3 years and at least semi-annually until growth and puberty are complete.

Abstract Background Hot flashes (HFs) negatively affect quality of life among perimenopausal and postmenopausal women. This study investigated the efficacy of oxybutynin vs placebo in decreasing HFs. Methods In this randomized, multicenter, double-blind study, women with and without breast cancer with 28 or more HFs per week, lasting longer than 30 days, who were not candidates for estrogen-based therapy, were assigned to oral oxybutynin (2.5 mg twice a day or 5 mg twice a day) or placebo for 6 weeks. The primary endpoint was the intrapatient change from baseline in weekly HF score between each oxybutynin dose and placebo using a repeated-measures mixed model. Secondary endpoints included changes in weekly HF frequency, HF-related daily interference scale questionnaires, and self-reported symptoms. Results We enrolled 150 women. Baseline characteristics were well balanced. Mean (SD) age was 57 (8.2) years. Two-thirds (65%) were taking tamoxifen or an aromatase inhibitor. Patients on both oxybutynin doses reported greater reductions in the weekly HF score (5 mg twice a day: −16.9 [SD 15.6], 2.5 mg twice a day: −10.6 [SD 7.7]), placebo −5.7 (SD 10.2); P &lt; .005 for both oxybutynin doses vs placebo), HF frequency (5 mg twice a day: −7.5 [SD 6.6], 2.5 mg twice a day: −4.8 [SD 3.2], placebo: −2.6 [SD 4.3]; P &lt; .003 for both oxybutynin doses vs placebo), and improvement in most HF-related daily interference scale measures and in overall quality of life. Patients on both oxybutynin arms reported more side effects than patients on placebo, particularly dry mouth, difficulty urinating, and abdominal pain. Most side effects were grade 1 or 2. There were no differences in study discontinuation because of adverse effects. Conclusion Oxybutynin is an effective and relatively well-tolerated treatment option for women with HFs.

Abstract Background: Checkpoint blockade therapies (CBT) have substantially improved outcomes for patients in a variety of cancers. However, they are associated with a unique spectrum of immune-related adverse events (AEs). Additionally, unlike standard chemotherapy, many patients (pts) remain on CBT for prolonged periods of time, thus immune-related symptomatic AEs may be chronic or low grade therefore important to capture long term tolerability when used as a single agent or in combination with chemotherapy. In this study, we applied the Toxicity over Time (ToxT) analytic approach (Thanarajasingam et al, Lancet Oncol 2016), which incorporates the dimension of time and includes chronic lower grade events, to the first 6 cohorts (A-F) of a Phase 1/2 ECOG-ACRIN sponsored study of the combinations of Brentuximab Vedotin (BV) and the CBT therapies ipilimumab (Ipi) and nivolumab (Nivo) in pts with relapsed or refractory Hodgkin lymphoma (R/R HL). Methods: Pts with confirmed R/R HL were treated with BV 1.8mg/kg + Ipi 1or 3 mg/kg (n=23); or Nivo 3mg/kg + BV: 1.2 or 1.8 mg/kg (n=19). BV was administered every 21 days for 16 cycles; Ipi every 21 days x 4 and then every 3 months for one year and Nivo every 21 days for up to 2 years. Seven symptomatic (subjective) AEs were selected: fatigue, peripheral sensory neuropathy (PSN), nausea/vomiting (NV), rash/skin (RS), diarrhea, ocular-all types, and hair loss. Treatment-related AEs of any grade were investigated by conventional maximum grade toxicity analysis (ToxC) and ToxT methods up to 12 cycles. Using ToxT, mean AE grades over cycles were analyzed for time trend with repeated measures models, time to grade 2 or higher AE (gr2+) was analyzed with time-to-event analysis; AE profile over the entire course of the study was summarized by area under the curve (AUC) analyses. Comparisons were performed between treatment groups: BV/Ipi(A-C arms) and BV/Nivo (D-F arms). Results: 9/23 (BV/Ipi) and 6/19 (BV/Nivo) pts completed 10 cycles. For BV/Ipi vs. BV/nivo, ToxC provides overall incidence rates (any grade): fatigue 52% vs 26% (p=0.09); PSN 61% vs 53%; NV 70% vs 53% ; RS 65% vs. 37% (p=0.07); diarrhea 57% vs. 21% (p=0.02); ocular 17% vs. 21% ; and hair loss 17% vs. 0% (p=0.06), respectively. Gr3 AE occurred in 1 pt (2.4%) each for PSN, NV, diarrhea, and 6 pts (14.3%) for RS, and were similar between BV/ipi and BV/nivo. AUC from ToxT which captures chronic lower grade AEs suggested for BV/Ipi: diarrhea (p=0.02) and NV (p=0.03) are significantly more substantial over time with a trend seen for fatigue (p=0.07), RS (p=0.07) and hair loss (p=0.07) . Additionally, ToxT captures the trajectory of AEs, demonstrated a rising incidence and worsening grade of PSN (BV-related) on BV/Ipi (c1: 9% gr1, c2: 21% gr1 5% gr2, c5: 11% gr1 and c10: 22% gr2 [p=0.005], Fig 1a). In contrast there was a slow but significant decreasing incidence of NV on both combinations; for BV/Nivo (c1:52% gr1, c5: 26% gr1 and c10: 22% gr1) and BV/Ipi (c1: 47% gr1 ,c5: 0% and c10 1% gr1) with p=0.006 (Fig 1b). RS and diarrhea appear early on treatment and are not cumulative (Fig1c and 1d). There is no significant difference in the time to gr 2+ toxicities in any of the 7 AE. Combining all 7 AEs and using the maximum grade as a pilot measure of overall AE burden , ToxC indicates no difference in any grade (100% vs 100%) but a significantly higher gr 3+ incidence (35% vs. 11%) for BV/Ipi. Additionally, ToxT further elucidates that BV/Ipi is associated with significantly higher overall AE over time (Fig 2a, p=0.02) and compared to BV/Nivo a significantly higher risk of developing gr 2+ toxicity ( 57% vs 16% gr2 + event by day 50) (HR=0.41, p=0.02, Fig 2b). Conclusions: The CBT therapies Ipi and Nivo, in combination with BV, are overall both well tolerated over time, although BV/Ipi has a higher overall AE burden. Neither regimen has significant cumulative immune toxicity. Results of this analysis should be interpreted in the context of limited number of pts in both cohorts. A larger scale examination of this analysis is planned to incorporate both phase 1 and the ongoing phase 2 components of E4412. Compared with conventional tox analysis, ToxT delineated important additional and clinically relevant depictions of AEs over time and adds a more comprehensive assessment of the tolerability of chronically administered immune therapies for lymphoma. Disclosures Hong: Merck: Consultancy. Ansell:Regeneron: Research Funding; Merck & Co: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Celldex: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding. Cohen:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Millennium: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Infinity Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Infinity Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BioInvent: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Millennium: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; BioInvent: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Advani:Kura: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Bayer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Participated in an advisory board; Autolus: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Participated in an advisory board; Bristol Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Participated in an advisory board, Research Funding; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Participated in an advisory board, Research Funding; Cell Medica: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Participated in an advisory board; Kyowa: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Participated in an advisory board; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Participated in an advisory board; Millenium: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Participated in an advisory board, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Agensys: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Infinity: Research Funding; Forty Seven Inc.: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Gilead/Kite: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Participated in an advisory board. Barta:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck, Takeda, Celgene, Seattle Genetics, Bayer: Research Funding. Svoboda:Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; KITE: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kyowa: Consultancy. Karmali:AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Speakers Bureau. Witzig:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Dueck:Bayer: Employment; Phytogine: Employment; Pfizer: Honoraria. Kahl:Genentech: Consultancy; Acerta: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Juno: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy; CTI: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy. Diefenbach:Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; Millenium/Takeda: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy; Denovo: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding.

Abstract Background: Bortezomib has efficacy in follicular lymphoma (FL). Though generally well tolerated, it is associated with a few known toxicities, including neurotoxicity. As a chronically administered agent, it is important to investigate the tolerability of bortezomib over time as a single agent and in combination with chemotherapy. The current method of summarizing adverse events (AEs) -focusing on the maximum grade and reporting only grade 3 or higher incidences- fails to capture toxicity that evolves over time or chronic low grade AEs that may occur at significant expense to patients' quality of life. In this study, we applied the Toxicity over Time (ToxT) analytic approach (Thanarajasingam et al, Lancet Oncol 2016), which graphically and analytically depicts AEs longitudinally, to a randomized Phase 2 ECOG-ACRIN sponsored study, E2408, to characterize chronic toxicity of bortezomib (V) when added to standard bendamustine-rituximab (BR) induction in previously untreated high risk FL. Methods: In E2408, patients (pts) were randomized to one of 3 arms at a 1:2:2 ratio: A) BR x 6 followed by maintenance rituximab (MR) x 2 years (yrs) vs B) BVR x 6 (bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2 IV/SQ days 1, 4, 8, 11) then MR x 2 yrs vs C) BR x 6 then MR x 2 yrs + lenalidomide 20mg/day x 1 yr. Pts enrolled 1/2011-5/2015. This analysis focuses on the 6 cycles of induction only, with arms A and C combined. Six AEs of interests were selected, 4 symptomatic (subjective) AEs (peripheral sensory neuropathy (PSN), diarrhea, febrile neutropenia, fatigue); and 2 non-symptomatic (objective) AEs (neutropenia and thrombocytopenia). Treatment-related post baseline AEs of any grade were investigated by conventional maximum grade toxicity analysis (ToxC) and ToxT methods. The mean AE grades over cycles were analyzed by repeated measures models, time to grade 2 or higher (gr2+)AE were analyzed with time-to-event analysis; and AE profile over the entire course of the study was summarized by area under the curve (AUC) analyses. Comparisons were performed between treatment arms (BVR vs. BR). Results: All 280 randomized treated pts (187 on BR, 93 on BVR) were included in the analysis regardless of eligibility status; 87% (163/187 BR, 81/93 BVR) completed all 6 cycles. Analyzing the symptomatic AEs,ToxC indicates that the overall incidence of grade 3+ PSN was significantly higher in BVR (12%) than BR (1%) (p<.0001). Additional, ToxT captures the trajectory, demonstrating a rapid, rising incidence and worsening grade of PSN on BVR vs BR over 6 cycles in a steam plot of mean gr. by cycle (Fig 1a) and bar chart of incidence and grade per cycle (c1: 13% gr1 3% gr2, c6: 36% gr1 12% gr2 6% gr3 on BVR; c1: 3% gr1, c6: 10% gr1 1% gr2 on BR, Fig. 1b). Risk of developing gr2+ PSN was significantly higher in BVR than BR with 28% vs 0.5% by day 100 (HR=0.01, p<.0001, Fig. 1c). ToxC captures a higher incidence of grade 3+ diarrhea on BVR (7% vs. 1% , p=.01) while AUC from ToxT includes chronic lower grade diarrhea, that is substantial over time on BVR vs. BR (p<.0001), but is not cumulative. Furthermore, the risk of developing gr2+ diarrhea affecting drug tolerability is significantly higher on BVR than BR(13% vs 5% by day 100) (HR=0.3, p=.05). Febrile neutropenia appeared to be similar, and fatigue was marginally more severe under BVR (p=.06 by AUC). For objective AEs, ToxC reveals no significant difference in neutropenia or thrombocytopenia BVR vs BR (neutropenia gr 3+: 36% vs 31%, p=.4; thrombocytopenia gr3+: 10% vs. 5%, p=.12). However, ToxT illustrates that neutropenia is cumulative, worsening over repeated exposure to drug (c1: 2% gr1 5% gr2 5% gr 3+ , c6: 7% gr1 10% gr2 12% gr3+ both arms combined; p<.0001) on mean grade over time (Fig. 2a). In contrast, thrombocytopenia does not worsen with continued treatment (Fig 2b, p=.73). Conclusions: Compared with conventional toxicity analysis (ToxC), ToxT delineated important additional and clinically relevant depictions of both symptomatic and laboratory AEs over time for bortezomib added to BR in FL pts. In patients receiving BVR, close monitoring is suggested for PSN, diarrhea and neutropenia for reassessment of risks and benefits, symptom interventions and dose modification. Longitudinal toxicity analyses such as ToxT can guide AE interventions as well as patient and clinician education, and provide a more patient-centered toxicity assessment of chronically administered therapies for lymphoma. Disclosures Hong: Merck: Consultancy. Evens:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Acerta: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Tesaro: Research Funding; Affimed: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmacyclics International DMC: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Advani:Kura: Research Funding; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Participated in an advisory board, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, 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, Other: Participated in an advisory board, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Kyowa: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Participated in an advisory board; Bayer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Participated in an advisory board; Cell Medica: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Participated in an advisory board; Infinity: Research Funding; Gilead/Kite: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Participated in an advisory board; Janssen: Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Participated in an advisory board; Regeneron: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Participated in an advisory board, Research Funding; Forty Seven Inc.: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Millenium: Research Funding; Agensys: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Autolus: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Participated in an advisory board. Gascoyne:NanoString: Patents & Royalties: Named Inventor on a patent licensed to NanoString Technologies. Witzig:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Dueck:Bayer: Employment; Pfizer: Honoraria; Phytogine: Employment. Kahl:Genentech: Consultancy; Acerta: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Juno: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; CTI: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy.

Abstract Abstract 630 Introduction: Erythropoiesis stimulating agents (ESAs) improve hemoglobin (Hb) levels and reduce red blood cell (RBC) transfusion requirements in patients (pts) with chemotherapy-associated anemia (CAA), but many pts with CAA do not respond to ESAs. Functional iron deficiency due to inflammation-related hepcidin production and pathological sequestration of bioavailable iron may be an important reason for lack of ESA response in iron-replete pts. The common clinical practice of co-administering oral iron with ESAs does not appear to alter the disordered iron processing in CAA. We conducted a prospective trial to evaluate whether parenteral iron might overcome functional iron deficiency and benefit iron-replete pts with CAA undergoing ESA treatment. Patients and Methods: Eligible pts were receiving chemotherapy for a non-myeloid neoplasm and had Hb level <11.0 g/dL, ferritin >20 ng/mL, transferrin saturation <60%, and ECOG performance score ≤2. All pts received darbepoetin alfa (DA) 500 mcg subcutaneously q3wks until Hb reached >11 g/dL, and thereafter DA 300 mcg q3wks; DA was held for Hb >13 g/dL until Hb fell to <12 g/dL, then restarted with 25% dose reduction. Pts were randomized 1:1:1 to receive either sodium ferric gluconate complex in sucrose (Ferrlecit) 187.5 mg intravenously q3wks (total dose 1,125 mg), oral ferrous sulfate 325 mg once daily, or oral placebo. Quality of life (QOL) was measured using the Symptom Distress Scale, Brief Fatigue Inventory, FACT-An, and LASA instruments. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving Hb ≥12.0 g/dL or ≥2.0 g/dL Hb increment from baseline by the end of the 16-week study. Secondary endpoints included transfusion requirements. changes in QOL, changes in iron parameters, and adverse events (AEs). Results: Planned enrollment was 582 pts, but the study met an early stopping rule due to an excess of serious AEs in the IV iron arm; 502 pts enrolled at 14 MCCRC sites between February 2006 and December 2008. The median age of the 490 evaluable pts was 64 years; 65% were female and 94% white; 6% had hematological neoplasms (lymphoma or multiple myeloma), 25% had severe anemia (Hb <9.5 g/dL), 48% received platinum-containing therapy, and 66% completed all 16 weeks of the study. Baseline characteristics were comparable between groups. With respect to the primary endpoint, 69.5% of IV iron-treated pts achieved a Hb response (median Hb increase from baseline to end of study, 2.7 g/dl), compared to 66.9% with oral iron (median increase, 2.4 g/dL) and 65.0% with placebo (median increase 2.3 g/dl) (p=0.73). There were no significant differences in the proportion of patients requiring RBC transfusion (12.8% for IV iron, 12.9% for oral iron, 13.5% for placebo; p=0.87) or QOL changes. A total of 17 pts (3%) died on study–8 in the IV iron arm, 6 oral iron, 3 placebo (p=0.22). Grade 3 or higher AEs occurred in 54% of IV iron pts compared to 43% for oral iron and 45% placebo (p=0.03). The end-of-study ferritin level was higher in the IV iron arm (median 501 ng/mL) compared to the oral iron (229 ng/mL) and placebo (193 ng/mL) arms (p=0.0022). The median total DA dose administered was similar between arms (p=0.71). Conclusions: Co-administration of DA with intravenous ferrous gluconate q3wks did not result in improvement in Hb levels, reduce transfusions, improve QOL endpoints, or allow lower doses of DA, compared with DA + oral iron or DA + placebo. IV iron increased AEs. The reason for discordant results with 5 previous smaller studies is unclear. Disclosure: The study was supported by a grant from Amgen (Thousand Oaks, CA) to the MCCRC. Disclosures: Off Label Use: Ferrlecit, chemotherapy-associated anemia.

Abstract Abstract 3008 Poster Board II-984 Introduction: The erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) epoetin alfa (EA) and darbepoetin alfa (DA) increase hemoglobin (Hb) levels and reduce red blood cell (RBC) transfusion requirements in patients (pts) with cancer chemotherapy-associated anemia (CAA). Extended-interval ESA dosing (i.e., administration less than once weekly) is a common practice with DA, which is FDA approved for dosing once every 3 weeks (q3wks); a previous study of the North Central Cancer Treatment Group suggested that EA can also be given less often than the FDA-approved once weekly schedule (Steensma DP et al, J Clin Onc 2006; 24:1079). The present study compared 2 different q3wks extended-interval EA regimens with weekly fixed-dose EA and with q3wks DA in pts with CAA. Patients and Methods: Eligible pts were receiving chemotherapy for a non-myeloid malignancy and had Hb <10.5 g/dL, ferritin >20 ng/mL, weight >40 kg and <150 kg, and ECOG performance score £2. Pts were randomized 1:1:1:1 to receive EA 40,000 Units subcutaneously (SC) once weekly (40K arm), EA 80,000 Units SC q3wks (80K arm), EA 120,000 Units SC q3wks (120K arm), or DA 500 mcg SC q3wks (DA arm), for 15 weeks. EA and DA were held for Hb >12 g/dL and restarted at a lower dose when Hb fell to '11.5 g/dL. All pts received ferrous sulfate 325 mg orally once daily, if tolerated. Quality of life (QOL) was measured using the Symptom Distress Scale (SDS), Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI), FACT-An, and Linear Analogue Self Assessment (LASA) tools. The primary endpoint was the proportion of pts achieving Hb≥11.5 g/dL or increment of Hb>2.0 g/dL from baseline. Secondary endpoints included RBC transfusion requirements, adverse events (AEs), and QOL. Results: 239 pts (236 evaluable) enrolled at 10 MCCRC sites between Feb. 2007 and Dec. 2008; 62% of pts completed all study interventions. The median age of enrolled pts was 66 years; 42.4% were men, 91.5% had solid tumors, 26.7% had severe anemia (Hb <9.5 g/dL), and 44.9% were receiving platinum-containing regimens. Baseline characteristics were balanced between study arms, with the exception of gender (39% female for 40K, 60% for 80K, 43% for 120K, 26% for DA). There were no significant differences between treatment arms in the proportion of pts achieving a Hb response (68.9% for 40K, 61.7% for 80K, 65.5% for 120K, and 66.7% for DA; p>0.41 for all comparisons), but the median Hb increment from baseline was higher in the 40K and DA arms compared to the 2 extended dosing EA arms (40K-2.8 g/dL, 80K-2.0 g/dL, 120K-2.1 g/dL, DA-2.6 g/dL; p=0.005 for 40K vs 80K). Hb response was achieved more quickly in the weekly EA arm, but the difference was not significant (40K-32 days, 80K-50 days, 120K-49 days, DA-49 days; p>0.13). The proportion of patients transfused was similar between arms (40K-27.9%, 80K-33.3%, 120K-22.4%, DA-29.8%; p>0.49). There were no significant differences in QOL changes. Deaths were also similar between arms (40K-5 pts, 80K-7 pts, 120K-7 pts, DA-1 pt, p>0.10) and were primarily due to disease progression. AEs and serious AEs were comparable between study groups; grade 3/4 AEs were observed in 22% of pts in the 40K arm, 22% on 80K, 17% on 120K, and 13% on DA; p>0.56. The median total dose of EA used was highest in the 120K arm (40K-265,000 U; 80K-240,000 U; 120K-360,000 U; p=0.0009 for 40K vs 120K), while pts on the 40K arm were more likely to omit a dose due to a high Hb (40K-63.9% of pts omitted at least one dose; 80K-30.0%; 120K-34.5%; DA-43.6%, p<0.0001 for 40K vs 80K). Conclusion: Although there was no significant difference in the proportion of responding pts (the primary endpoint), Hb increments from baseline were moderately higher with the 2 FDA-approved regimens – weekly EA 40,000 Units, and q3wk DA 500 mcg – than with the extended dosing regimens. This study was supported by a grant from Centocor Ortho Biotech, Inc. to the MCCRC. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.