Garcia‐Manero, Guillermo

Abstract Introduction: CMML is a heterogeneous malignancy characterized by peripheral monocytosis and a propensity for AML transformation. Given the low incidence of CMML and its broad range complexity, a large disease-specific data set is necessary to discern independent co-variates predictive of disease behavior. Several prognostic models derived from smaller data sets have been developed to stratify CMML patients into distinct groups that are predictive for OS. However, the validity of these models in a large international data set has never been investigated. Here, we present the largest International CMML data base established to date and report key baseline characteristics predictive for disease outcome. We externally validate and perform a detailed statistical comparison between the International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS), Revised (R)-IPSS, Global MD Anderson Scoring System (MDASC), MD Anderson Prognostic Score (MDAPS), Dusseldorf Score (DS), Mayo, and Spanish Scoring Systems (CPSS). Methods: Data were abstracted by each contributing institution and deposited for central data review at the Moffitt Cancer Center. Manual review of cases was performed to ensure data quality prior to analysis. Only WHO defined CMML was included. The primary objective of this study was to establish an international CMML data set and validate the above models calculated at the time of presentation to each center. All prognostic models were calculated as previously described. The Kaplan–Meier (KM) method was used to estimate median OS and the log rank test was used to compare KM survival estimates with SPSS version 21.0. Random Forest Survival (RSF) and ROC analysis was done with R. Results: Between July 1981 and June 2014, 1832 CMML patients were captured in the International CMML database. Median age at diagnosis was 70 (16-93) years with a male (67%) predominance. By the WHO classification, the majority of patients had CMML-1 (79.9% vs. 20.1%) and most patients were evenly subcategorized as MPN-CMML (49.8%) versus MDS-CMML (50.2%) by FAB criteria. Splenomegaly was demonstrable in 25%. Most patients had favorable cytogenetics by both IPSS (70%) and CPSS (67.6%) classification schemas. Mean BM blast % was 5.6 and mean monocyte count was 4.85x103/dL. Median OS of the entire data set was 31.6 months. All tested prognostic models were valid and able to predict OS (p<0.0001). To compare relative model performance, 1013 complete cases with sufficient data to calculate all risk models were compared using time dependent receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves and their area under the curves (AUC). ROC curves were calculated for OS at 36 months. The R-IPSS model had the highest AUC (0.694) while the DS model had the lowest (0.635). The difference in AUC between the R-IPSS and DS models was statistically significant (p = 0.003) whereas there was no significant difference from other models tested. To determine which models were most vulnerable to reclassification from low-risk to higher risk, we calculated a vulnerability score defined by the number of models able to up-stage low-risk disease in more than 15% of cases. Using this metric, the Mayo and MDASC scores were least vulnerable to up-staging by other models. Lastly, we used an orthogonal method for determination of variable importance (RSF for OS at 36 months). RSF is an ensemble method of classification and regression tree methodology. Ranking of variables by their weighted importance determined by this procedure identified the top five variables were hemoglobin, circulating blasts, platelet count, number of cytopenias, and karyotype. A new risk model was developed using the results of the RSF with an AUC of 0.720, which was comparable but not significantly different than other modern scoring systems. Conclusions: This represents the largest international CMML-specific data set derived from eight unique centers of excellence. All modern prognostic models were valid and performed comparably. Despite novel strategies for variable importance discovery, an improved model could not be constructed. This data suggest that the power of clinical variables has reached an asymptote and highlights the need for incorporation of molecular and other novel biological features. This data set is currently being populated with molecular data and is being leveraged to test published CMML molecular prognostic models which will be disclosed at the time of presentation. Disclosures Garcia-Manero: Epizyme, Inc: Research Funding. Fenaux:Celgene, Janssenm, Novartis: Research Funding. Kantarjian:ARIAD, Pfizer, Amgen: Research Funding. Sekeres:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen Corp: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Boehringer-Ingelheim Corp: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Abstract Background: Combination studies with histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitors plus hypomethylating agents (HMA) have suggested beneficial clinical activity in higher risk MDS and AML, though exceptions have also been reported. Pracinostat is a potent oral HDAC inhibitor selective for class I, II and IV isoforms. A pilot phase Ib study of pracinostat in combination with azacitidine (AZA) in higher risk MDS demonstrated a complete response (CR)/CR with incomplete blood count recovery (CRi) rate of 89% (Proc ASH:3821, 2012). Preliminary data on 33 patients from a multi-center, open-label, single-arm Phase II study of Pracinostat in combination with AZA in elderly AML also reported a high CR/CRi rate (ASH 2014). Herein we report the latest survival and response results for this study. Methods: Eligibility includes previously untreated AML (≥20% bone marrow blasts), age ≥65 years, unsuitable for intensive therapy due to co-morbidities and/or AML related features, and intermediate or high-risk cytogenetics. Study therapy includes pracinostat, 60 mg p.o. 3 alternate days/week for 3 weeks plus AZA, 75 mg/m2) days 1-7 or days 1-5 and 8-9 either s.c. or i.v. with cycles repeated every 28 days until progressive disease, lack of response or intolerance. The primary endpoint is CR+CRi+ morphologic leukemia free state (MLFS) per IWG criteria. Response assessments occur at the end of cycle 1 or 2 then every other cycle or when clinically indicated. A Simon 2-stage statistical design is utilized with the following assumptions: null=0.10, alternate=0.25, a=0.10, power=0.90. Stage 1 n=27 and total stage 2 n=40. Secondary endpoints include overall response rate (ORR; CR+CRi+MLFS+partial response [PR]+PRi), duration of response and overall survival. Results: Between Dec 2013 and Dec 2014, 50 patients from 15 study sites were enrolled. At this time, 50 are evaluable for efficacy. Baseline disease characteristics for all patients include: median age 75 (range 66-84); 32 de novo AML, 13 evolved from AHD, 5 were treatment-related; 28 intermediate-risk and 20 high-risk cytogenetics and 2 unknown; baseline bone marrow blast counts ranged from 20% to 89% with a median of 40%. Thirty-one patients (62%) continue to be followed for survival (range: 8.5 to 18.5 months). Median overall survival has not been reached in the overall study population and neither in patients with high-risk cytogenics or those with AML secondary to MDS or prior anti-cancer therapy. The 1-year overall survival estimate is 60%. The primary endpoint of CR +CRi +MLFS has been observed in 27/50 evaluable patients (54%) to date, including 21/50 (42%) CR. The 60-day all-cause mortality rate is 10% (5/50). Treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) Grade ≥3 seen in >5% of patients: febrile neutropenia 30%; thrombocytopenia 22%; neutropenia 10%; cellulitis 10%; anemia 8%; fatigue 8%; sepsis 6%, and pancytopenia 6%. TEAE's leading to study therapy discontinuation: peripheral motor neuropathy (1), parainfluenza (1), atrial fibrillation/prolonged QTc (1), subdural hematoma after a fall (1), and sepsis (3). Conclusions: Pracinostat plus AZA produces a high rate of durable responses in this AML population. Median overall survival has not been reached; 1-year overall survival is estimated at 60%. Final response data and overall survival estimates will be presented at the meeting. Disclosures Off Label Use: Azacitidine is not approved for use in acute myelogenous leukemia.. Khaled:Sequenom: Research Funding. Arellano:Cephalon Oncology: Research Funding. Butler:MEI Pharma, Inc.: Employment. Ashby:MEI Pharma, Inc.: Employment. Medeiros:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Agios Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria.

Abstract Abstract 677 Background: Activating mutations of NRAS and KRAS (‘RAS’) are found in 10–30% of myeloid malignancies. Evidence of constitutive activation of the RAS-RAF-MEK-ERK pathway, however, is more ubiquitous. Trametinib is a potent, selective, allosteric inhibitor of MEK1/2 that inhibits proliferation of myeloid cell lines in vitro. A Phase I/II study of single, daily, oral dosing of trametinib in myeloid malignancies is ongoing. Here we report the results from Phase I/II patients receiving the recommended Phase II dose (RP2D) of 2 mg. Methods: Patient eligibility was limited to patients with relapsed/refractory myeloid malignancies and adequate hepatic, renal and cardiac function. There were no hematologic eligibility criteria. Patients were prospectively screened for KRAS mutations at amino acids 12, 13 and for NRAS mutations at amino acids 12, 13 and 61. Clinical response was assessed using International Working Group (2003 and 2006) criteria for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS), respectively. Pharmacodynamic marker (pERK) analysis was conducted in phase II patients with patient paired (pre/during treatment) blood and bone marrow samples. Results: Eighty-seven (9 in Phase I and 78 in Phase II) patients received 2 mg of trametinib daily: AML (n=66), MDS (n=11), chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) (n=7) or other (n=3) (RAS mutations, n=57; RAS wild type, n=15 and RAS unknown, n=15). Median age was 68 years (range 21–87) and for close to half of the patients, trametinib was 3 3rd line of therapy. Trametinib exhibited a long effective half-life with small peak/trough ratios, and the exposure profile maintained time above preclinical target threshold for the 24-hour dosing period. Results of the pharmacodynamic analysis indicated an on-target effect of trametinib. Responses by RAS mutation status for Phase I/II subjects are summarized in Table 1. Responding patients have continued therapy for median of 16.9 weeks (range, 10.9 – 36.7). Drug-related grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) were encountered in 31/87 (36%) of the Phase I/II patients and there was one grade 5 drug-related AE,cerebrovascular accident. Hepatic toxicities (9%), gastrointestinal disorders (7%) and rash (5%) were the most frequent grade 3/4 AEs. AEs possibly related to inhibition of MEK signaling were blurred vision (total,13%; grade 3, 1%) and decreased cardiac ejection fraction (total, 9%; grade 3, 6%); events were generally reversible. Conclusion: At the RP2D of trametinib (2 mg orally daily), trametinib has shown promising clinical activity and responses (CR/CRp/Marrow CR/MLFS/PR) were almost exclusively seen in patients with refractory myeloid malignancies characterized by somatic RAS mutations. Expansion of the CMML cohort for RAS positive subjects is ongoing. Disclosures: Borthakur: GlaxoSmithKline, Sigma-Tau, Eisai, XBiotech: Research Funding. Off Label Use: Trametinib, to report outcome of clinicla trial to audience at ASH meeting. Foran:GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding. Platzbecker:GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria, Research Funding. Giagounidis:GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria. Ottmann:GlaxoSmithKline: Clinical trial participation Other. Kadia:GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding. Bauman:GlaxoSmithKline: Employment, Equity Ownership. Wu:GlaxoSmithKline: Employment. Liu:GlaxoSmithKline: Employment. Schramek:GlaxoSmithKline: Employment. Zhu:GlaxoSmithKline: Employment. Wissel:GlaxoSmithKline: Employment, Equity Ownership.

Abstract Background: No approved treatment options are available to HR-MDS pts after HMA therapy. Study 04-21 (“ONTIME” trial) was a Phase III, randomized, controlled study of the efficacy and safety of rigosertib, a novel small molecule inhibitor of PI3-kinase and PLK pathways, in a heterogeneous population of MDS pts who had relapsed after, failed to respond to, or progressed during administration of HMAs. The study was conducted at 87 sites in the United States and 5 European countries. Methods:From Dec 2010 to Aug 2013, 299 HR-MDS pts [<30% bone marrow blasts (BMBL)] who had progressed on (37% of total enrollment), failed to respond to (25%), or relapsed after (38%) HMA treatment were stratified on BMBL count and randomized 2:1 to receive rigosertib (199 pts) or BSC (100 pts). Rigosertib was administered at 1800 mg/24 hr for 72-hr as a continuous intravenous (CIV) ambulatory infusion, every 2 weeks for the first 16 weeks, and then every 4 weeks. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), analyzed on an intention-to-treat (ITT) basis using the Kaplan-Meier method stratified on BMBL (5% to 19% vs. 20% to 30%). The trial had a 95% power to detect a 13-wk increase in median OS from 17 wks on BSC, with a 2-sided alpha = 0.05. The following results are based on 242 deaths: 161 in the rigosertib arm and 81 in the BSC arm. Results : Overall, the 2 arms were balanced in terms of baseline characteristics, with the majority of pts being male (66%), and White (82%). Age ranged from 50-90 yrs in the rigosertib arm and 55-86 years in the BSC arm (median, 74 yrs). The majority of pts (85%) had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) score of 0 or 1. The median duration of the last HMA therapy was 8.8 months (mo) in the rigosertib arm and 10.3 mo in the BSC arm; 127 (64%) of rigosertib pts and 57% of BSC pts were classified as “primary HMA failure” (ie, they failed to respond to or progressed during HMA therapy, as defined by Prebet et al, J Clin Oncol, 2011). A 2.3-mo improvement in median OS was found in the overall (ITT) population (8.2 mo rigosertib vs. 5.9 mo BSC) (Figure 1). The ITT survival for rigosertib was similar to that noted in Phase I/II studies (35 weeks). The stratified log-rank p-value was 0.33. The stratified hazard ratio was 0.87, which was quite different from the ratio of medians (5.9/8.2 = 0.72), due to the fact that the 2 survival curves converged at 15 mo. Notably, among the 184 patients with primary HMA failure, the median OS was 8.6 mo in the rigosertib arm (N = 127) vs. 5.3 mo in the BSC arm (N = 57), HR= 0.69, p= 0.040 (Figure 2). Multivariate Cox regression, adjusting for pretreatment prognostic factors, showed little change in the treatment effect. The following subgroups were correlated with better OS: pts with failure of/progression on HMA treatment, pts with duration of HMA treatment ≤ 9 mo, pts < 75 years of age, and pts with very high risk per IPSS-R (Figure 3). Rigosertib was well tolerated, with a median dose intensity of 92%. There were no significant compliance or operations issues related to ambulatory continuous infusion. Protocol-defined dose reductions were reported in 5% of pts, with 24% experiencing dose delays of >7 days, mostly due to unrelated adverse events (AEs). No obvious differences between rigosertib and BSC were found in the incidence of AEs (rigosertib, 99%; BSC, 85%) or of ≥ Grade 3 AEs (rigosertib, 79%; BSC, 68%). In the rigosertib arm, AEs reported by ≥ 20% of pts, irrespective of severity or causality, were nausea (35%), diarrhea (33%), constipation (31%), fatigue (30%), fever (27%), anemia (22%), and peripheral edema (21%). Rigosertib had low myelotoxicity, consistent with previous clinical experience. Conclusions:Although the primary endpoint in this Phase III study of rigosertib vs BSC in pts with HR-MDS did not reach statistical significance in the ITT population, encouraging rigosertib treatment-related improvement in OS was noted in several subgroups of MDS pts, including those with “primary HMA failure and in patients in the IPSS-R Very High Risk category. CIV therapy with rigosertib had a favorable safety profile in this orphan population of elderly pts with MDS. Figure 1 Figure 1. Figure 2 Figure 2. Figure 3 Figure 3. Disclosures Fenaux: Celgene: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Sekeres:Celgene Corp.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Boehringer Ingelheim: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Roboz:Novartis: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Glaxo SmithKline: Consultancy; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy; Sunesis: Consultancy; Teva Oncology: Consultancy; Astex: Consultancy. Wilhelm:Onconova Therapeutics, Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Wilhelm:Onconova Therapeutics, Inc: Employment. Azarnia:Onconova Therapeutics, Inc: Employment. Maniar:Onconova Therapeutics, Inc: Employment.

Abstract Abstract 424 Background: Azacitidine for injection has been shown to prolong overall survival in patients (pts) with higher-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) compared with conventional care regimens (CCR) (Lancet Oncol, 2009). An oral formulation of azacitidine (CC-486) is in development. Oral azacitidine may maximize convenience, eliminate injection-site reactions, and if administered in extended dosing schedules, may enhance and prolong the therapeutic effects of azacitidine. Oral azacitidine administered once-daily (QD) for 7 days (d) of repeated 28d cycles has been shown to be bioavailable, biologically and clinically active, and well-tolerated in pts with MDS and acute myeloid leukemia (Garcia-Manero, J Clin Oncol, 2011). Preliminary evidence suggests that extending oral azacitidine dosing to 14d or 21d of the 28d cycle may enhance pharmacodynamic and epigenetic activity (Laille, Leuk Res, 2011). Purpose: To evaluate hematologic response and safety associated with extended dosing regimens of oral azacitidine in pts with lower-risk MDS. Methods: This ongoing, multicenter, phase 1 study, enrolled pts with lower-risk (IPSS Low or INT-1) MDS who were RBC transfusion dependent (TD) and/or thrombocytopenic (average platelet count ≤50,000 within 56d prior to the first dose) at baseline. Pts were sequentially assigned to receive oral azacitidine 300mg QD for either 14d or 21d of repeated 28d cycles. Hematologic assessments were made every 2 weeks. Hematologic response was assessed using IWG 2006 criteria (Cheson, Blood, 2006). Adverse events (AEs) were graded using NCI-CTCAE version 3.0. Results: At data cut-off (May 18, 2012), 53 pts with lower-risk MDS had enrolled (300mg oral azacitidine QDx14d, n=26; QDx21d, n=27). Demographic and disease characteristics at baseline were similar in the 14d and 21d treatment cohorts (Table 1). Median (range) hematology counts at baseline were Hgb 8.7 g/L (6.0–13.0), ANC 1.6×109/L (0–30.3), and platelets 56.0×109/L (6.0–564.0). At study entry, 40% of pts had received no prior MDS treatment (except transfusions), 45% had received erythropoiesis-stimulating agents, and 15% had received WBC growth factors. The number of oral azacitidine treatment cycles received ranged from 1 to 12 (median numbers of oral azacitidine cycles were 6 in the QDx14d and 4 in the QDx21d cohorts). Four pts in the 21d cohort and 1 pt in the 14d cohort received reduced oral azacitidine doses (200mg QD). Overall, 10 pts discontinued the study, including 6 pts (3 pts in each cohort) who discontinued due to AEs that may have been treatment-related (gastrointestinal [n=2] or intracranial [n=1] hemorrhage, febrile neutropenia [n=1], pneumonia [n=1], thrombocytopenia [n=1]). Overall response rates (ORR), which included complete (CR) and partial remission (PR), any hematologic improvement (HI), and transfusion independence (TI), ranged from 38.5% in the QDx14d cohort to 29.6% in the QDx21d cohort, and RBC TI was achieved by 47% and 33%, respectively, of pts who were RBC TD at baseline (Table 2). For pts who received at least 4 cycles of oral azacitidine (14d, n=19; 21d, n=14), ORR was 47.4% in the 14d and 50.0% in the 21d cohorts, and RBC TI rates in RBC TD pts (n=16) were 67% in the 14d and 57% in the 21d cohorts. The most frequent (≥5%) grade 3/4 hematologic AEs in the QDx14d cohort were anemia (11.5%), thrombocytopenia (11.5%), and neutropenia (7.7%); and in the QDx21d cohort were neutropenia (14.8%), anemia (7.4%), and febrile neutropenia (7.4%). Most frequent grade 3/4 non-hematologic AEs were gastrointestinal, including vomiting (7.7%) in the QDx14d cohort, and diarrhea (11.1%) and vomiting (7.4%) in the QDx21d cohort. Conclusions: Oral azacitidine 300mg QD administered in extended dosing schedules of 14d or 21d of repeated 28d cycles was effective and well-tolerated in these pts with lower-risk MDS. Beside hematologic AEs, the most frequently observed AEs with oral azacitidine were gastrointestinal and were manageable. Efficacy and safety outcomes with 300mg QD oral azacitidine were generally comparable between the 14d and 21d extended dosing regimens. Based on these data, oral azacitidine administered once-daily in extended dosing schedules is active and well-tolerated and warrants further investigation in randomized, controlled trials. Disclosures: Garcia-Manero: Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Gore:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding. Scott:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Hetzer:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kumar:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Skikne:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership.

Abstract Abstract 414 Background: SGI-110 is a dinucleotide of decitabine (DAC) and deoxyguanosine formulated as a low volume and pharmaceutically stable SQ injection allowing more extended decitabine exposure than DAC IV infusion. The anticipated differentiated PK profile offers the potential of improved biological and clinical activity and safety over currently available HMAs. Methods: A randomized Phase 1–2 FIH Pharmacokinetics/Pharmacodynamics (PK/PD)-guided, dose-escalation study has been conducted in patients with relapsed/refractory intermediate or high-risk MDS or AML. The objective of the first stage (dose escalation) is to determine safety and tolerability and to establish the Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD) and Biologically Effective Dose (BED). Patients were randomized to one of two SQ regimens (dailyx5 or once weeklyx3, 28-day courses). PD is evaluated by LINE-1 global DNA hypomethylation. The second stage (dose expansion) is to determine the clinical activity and safety in AML and MDS using the established BED and MTD. We report here the results of the dose escalation phase which has completed enrolment. Results: 78 patients (64 AML, 14 MDS) were enrolled in the dose escalation phase: 44 patients in the dailyx5 regimen and 34 in the weeklyx3 regimen. Median age was 69 years (range 29–86), 65% were male, and 82% had ECOG PS of 0–1. Median number of prior regimens was 3 (range 1–9), 59% of patients had prior HMA treatment (50% of AML patients, and 100% of MDS patients). Six patients are still ongoing treatment. The PK profile demonstrated efficient conversion of SGI-110 to decitabine as predicted from the SGI-110 rational design, resulting in longer decitabine exposure window (beyond 8 hrs) compared to DAC IV (3–4 hrs). At SGI-110 dose range of 60–125 mg/m2, observed mean decitabine AUCs (88–231 ng*hr/mL) reach or exceed the therapeutic range seen with 20 mg/m2 DAC IV (115 ng*hr/mL) while achieving only a small fraction of the Cmax (26–64 ng/mL vs 146 ng/mL for DAC IV). The effective half-life for decitabine after SQ SGI-110 injection appeared to be prolonged (up to 4-fold or ∼2.4 hrs) compared to DAC IV (0.58 hrs). Decitabine exposures (AUC) increased in a dose-proportional manner regardless of the regimen and no accumulation was observed. Dose-related LINE-1 hypomethylation was observed in patients treated with the daily regimen between 18 and 60 mg/m2; a plateau in maximum average hypomethylation (∼25%) was evident at higher daily doses (90-125 mg/m2) and therefore the BED for the dailyx5 schedule is established at 60 mg/m2. The 25% average hypomethylation of LINE-1 compares favorably with that observed historically after DAC IV at the dose of 20 mg/m2 dailyx5. The extent of LINE-1 hypomethylation after weeklyx3 SGI-110 was inferior as the maximum average hypomethylation plateaued at ∼8% from baseline. Starting at 36 mg/m2 daily and 60 mg/m2 weekly (44 AML, and 7 MDS patients), clinical responses were observed: 2CRs, 1CRp, and 1CRi in heavily pretreated AML patients; 1 mCR and 1 HI in MDS patients previously treated with azacitidine. All responses were in patients who achieved >10% LINE-1 hypomethylation. The most common Adverse Events (AEs), regardless of relationship to SGI-110, were diarrhea (21%), febrile neutropenia (17%), fatigue/injection site pain/nausea at 15% each. The most common drug-related AEs were injection site pain (15%), fatigue (8%), nausea (6%), and thrombocytopenia (5%). MTD was not reached with the weekly regimen up to 125 mg/m2 weeklyx3. With the daily regimen, 125 mg/m2dailyx5 resulted in 2 Dose-Limiting Toxicities (DLTs) of febrile neutropenia in 3 MDS patients (1 associated with bacteremia, and the other with sepsis and thrombocytopenia Grade 4) while none of the 9 patients with AML had DLT at that dose. Conclusions: SGI-110 is well tolerated at doses higher than BED which is established at 60 mg/m2 dailyx5 where average hypomethylation of ∼25% was achieved. MTD estimated to be 90 mg/m2 dailyx5 for MDS and 125 mg/m2dailyx5 for AML patients. SQ administration of SGI-110 achieved efficient conversion to decitabine resulting in an improved PK profile over DAC IV. Clinical responses were observed in this heavily pretreated population and they seem to correlate with the extent of LINE-1 hypomethylation. Study is currently enrolling patients in the dose-expansion Phase 2 stage. Disclosures: Kantarjian: Astex Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Roboz:Astex Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Rizzieri:Astex Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Stock:Astex Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. O'Connell:Astex Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Griffiths:Astex Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Yee:Astex Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Tibes:Astex Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Garcia-Manero:Astex Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Ravandi:Astex Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Walsh:Astex Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Feldman:Astex Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Ritchie:Astex Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Rao:Astex Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Decastro:Astex Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Schimmer:Astex Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Mesa:Astex Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Syed:Astex Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Choy:Astex Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Oganesian:Astex Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Taverna:Astex Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Azab:Astex Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Chung:Astex Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Issa:Astex Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Research Funding.

Abstract Pracinostat, a potent oral pan-histone deacetylase inhibitor with modest single-agent activity in acute myeloid leukemia (AML), has shown synergistic antitumor activity when combined with azacitidine. This single-group, multicenter phase 2 study assessed the safety and efficacy of pracinostat combined with azacitidine in patients who were at least 65 years old with newly diagnosed AML and who were ineligible for standard induction chemotherapy. Patients received pracinostat 60 mg/d, 3 d/wk, for 3 consecutive weeks, plus azacitidine 75 mg/m2 daily for 7 days in a 28-day cycle. Primary endpoints were complete remission (CR), CR with incomplete count recovery (CRi), and morphologic leukemia-free state (MLFS) rates of the combination. Secondary endpoints included safety, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) of the regimen. Fifty patients (33 de novo, 12 secondary, and 5 therapy-related AML) were enrolled. Twenty-six patients (52%) achieved the primary endpoint of CR (42%), CRi (4%), and MLFS (6%). Median OS and PFS were 19.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 10-26.5 months) and 12.6 months (95% CI, 10-17.7 months), respectively, with a 1-year OS rate of 62%. Forty-three patients (86%) experienced at least 1 grade 3 or worse treatment-emergent adverse event with the combination, with infections (52%), thrombocytopenia (46%), and febrile neutropenia (44%) reported as the most common toxicities. The 30- and 60-day all-cause mortality rates were 2% and 10%, respectively. DNA sequencing revealed somatic mutations at baseline, and clearance rates correlated with response to treatment. Pracinostat plus azacitidine is a well-tolerated and active regimen in the frontline treatment of older patients with AML unfit for intensive therapy. A larger controlled trial is ongoing. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01912274.

e18521 Background: The FDA-approved drug trabectedin is a DNA minor groove binder (MGB) with activity against translocation-associated sarcomas. Lurbinectedin is a next-generation MGB, with activity against myeloid leukemia cells. A phase I clinical trial was initiated to determine recommended doses in MDS/AML. Further assessment of its safety, tolerability, and pharmacogenetics were studied. Methods: In total, 42 patients with relapsed/refractory MDS/AML received lurbinectedin, using a 3+3 study design. It was administered as a 1-hour IV infusion first at 3.5, 5, 6, and 7mg per dose on days 1 and 8. Subsequently, it was administered on days 1, 2, and 3, using 1, 1.5, 2, or 3mg per dose per patient. Results: Three patients had dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), which were rhabdomyolysis (up to gr 4), hyperbilirubinemia (gr 3), and oral herpes (gr 3). All DLTs occurred in the 6 and 7mg cohorts. Adverse events included febrile neutropenia/infections (n = 3), GI (n = 6) and pulmonary (n = 2) toxicity, hyperhidrosis (n = 1), and QT prolongation (n = 1). Overall, 33 of 42 patients (79%) had reduction of blasts in peripheral blood (PB) or bone marrow (BM) at nadir, including 23 (55%) with > 50% reduction in PB blasts alone (n = 18) or both BM and PB blasts (n = 5). One patient had PR, 2 patients had morphologic leukemia-free survival, and most (n = 30) were discontinued for progressive disease. Early deaths occurred from disease-related causes, not attributable to lurbinectedin. Thirty-two patients treated at MD Anderson were analyzed for clinical characteristics and responses. Notably, among patients with follow-up bone marrow biopsy, those with a cytogenetic abnormality at chromosome 11q21-23 had significantly greater bone marrow blast reduction than those without such abnormality (change in percentage blasts: -31±14% [n = 4] vs. 8±8% [n = 16], respectively; P= 0.04). Conclusions: Lurbinectedin is generally safe and tolerated at dose levels tested. While no sustained remissions > 3 cycles were observed in these highest-risk patients, single-agent lurbinectedin was transiently leukemia suppressive for some patients, including some with abnormal chr11q or TP53 mutation. Rational combinations and situational uses of lurbinectedin are under consideration. Clinical trial information: NCT01314599.