Dezern, Amy Elizabeth

Abstract Among mechanisms underlying cytotoxic drug resistance is activation of diverse DNA damage response (DDR) pathways. Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerases (PARP)-1/2 facilitate both single- and double-strand break (DSB) repair and play a key role in the base excision repair (BER) of chemotherapy-damaged DNA. The PARP inhibitor veliparib (V) potentiates the cytotoxicity of different chemotherapeutics, including temozolomide (TEM). TEM induces distinct alkylating events in neoplastic cells whose ultimate outcome depends on the interaction of BER, mismatch repair (MMR), O(6)-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT), and DSB repair. While clinical activity of TEM has been mainly observed in MGMT-deficient AML, V potentiated cytotoxicity of TEM in leukemia cells in vitro in the setting of MGMT overexpression or deficient MMR pathway (Mol Cancer Ther, 2009). Methods: We conducted a Phase I study to determine maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended Phase II dose (RP2D) of V+TEM, using a 3+3 dose escalation. Patients (pts) ≥60 years (yrs) with newly diagnosed poor cytogenetic-risk AML/ALL who were not candidates for intensive therapy, or ≥18 yrs with relapsed/refractory AML/ALL, secondary AML (therapy-related or arising from MDS or MPN), and CMMoL-2 were eligible. Any number of prior regimens, including allogeneic transplant (alloSCT), were allowed. V was given orally day (d)1 once, then twice a day on d4-12 at one of 6 dose levels (DL) (DL1A-B 20mg; DL2-DL3-DL4-DL5-DL6: 40-80-120-150-200 mg). TEM was given orally once a day on d3-9 (DL1A 150 mg/m2/d; DL1B-DL6 200 mg/m2/d). 28-day cycles (cy) were repeated depending on response/tolerability (4-6 weeks delay allowed) with V on d1-8 and TEM d1-5. TEM was taken on empty stomach with antiemetics and V was taken irrespective of meals. Results: Forty-nine pts with median age 69 yrs (range, 22-88; 47% ≥70) were treated. Of 47 AML pts, 29 (62%) had secondary AML and 27 (57%) adverse karyotype. Median number of prior treatments for AML was 1 (range, 0-6): 18 (38%) had median 1 prior therapy (range, 1-3) for MDS; 30 (64%), 9 (18%), 34 (69%) received hypomethylating agents, alloSCT and intensive chemotherapy, respectively. Overall 42 (85%) pts were refractory to their last treatment. Pts received a median of 1 (range, 1-7) cy of therapy. Two did not complete cy 1, pt withdrawal d5 and progressive fungal pneumonia d9 with death d15 of progressive disease (PD). The MTD/RP2D was defined at V 150 mg and TEM 200 mg/m2; 2 of 4 pts treated at V 200 mg and TEM 200 mg/m2 developed dose-limiting toxicity of grade (gr) 3 oral mucositis/esophagitis. The most frequent drug-related toxicities (NCI CTC v4) were gr 1/2 nausea/vomiting (39%), fatigue (26%), oropharyngeal mucositis (26%), constipation (12%), and diarrhea (10%). Other common toxicities were infectious, including febrile neutropenia (29%), pneumonia (20%), bacteremia (18%). One (2%) pt died ≤d30 and 12 (24%) ≤d60 mainly of PD (1 pt fungal pneumonia before count recovery d31). Overall response rate was 33% (complete remission (CR), hematologic improvement (HI)/stable disease) with 8 (16%) pts achieving CR (1 CRi). Median overall survival was 5.03 months, for all responders 11.58 months, and for CR pts 19.89 months (Fig 1). Responses occurred at all DLs. Three CR pts underwent alloSCT; 2 remain in CR at ~3 yrs. Pharmacokinetics (PK): V or TEM PKs were not altered with co-administration. There was a correlation between the DLT of mucositis and V single (Cmax P=0.005; AUC P=0.009) and multiple dose exposure (Cmax P = 0.02; AUC P=0.03). Pharmacodynamics and pharmacoepigenetics: Four of 39 pts examined had MGMT methylation (3 CR; 75%) and 2 had BRCA-1 methylation (1 HI) in peripheral blood (PB) or bone marrow (BM) mononuclear cells (MC). Defective FancD2 pathway was observed in the BMMC of 19/19 pts using FancD2 ubiquitylation assays but did not correlate with response. V reduced PAR levels by >75% in PBMC of most pts and in the presence of TEM. Induction of γ-H2AX in CD34+ cells was seen upon V/V+TEM treatment. Conclusion: V plus TEM demonstrated safety and activity in this resistant and elderly leukemia population. Response rate was higher in MGMT methylated pts, but responses were also seen in pts who had no MGMT methylation, had failed multiple therapies, had secondary AML and/or adverse karyotype. Future clinical study should aim to identify pts with defective DDR pathways who are most likely to respond to this therapeutic approach. Figure 1. Figure 1. Disclosures Off Label Use: Temozolomide is not approved for AML. Beumer:Millenium: Other: Research support. Gore:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding.

Abstract The diagnostic utility of somatic mutations in the context of cytopenias is unclear: clonal hematopoiesis can be found in healthy individuals, patients with aplastic anemia (AA), clonal cytopenia of undetermined significance (CCUS) and myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). We examined a cohort of 207 well‐characterized cytopenic patients with a 640‐gene next generation sequencing (NGS) panel and compared its diagnostic utility with a “virtual” 41 gene panel. The TET2 , SF3B1 , ASXL1 , and TP53 were the most commonly mutated genes (frequency > 10%). Mutations in the 640‐gene panel show high sensitivity (98.3%) but low specificity (47.6%) for diagnosis of MDS. Notably, mutations of splicing factors and genes in the RAS pathway are relatively specific to MDS. Furthermore, high variant allele frequency (VAF) predicts MDS: when the VAF is set at 20%, the positive predictive value (PPV) for MDS is 95.9%, with a specificity of 95.3%. The presence of two or more somatic mutations with ≥10% VAF showed a PPV of 95.2%. While the “virtual” 41‐gene panel showed a mild decrease in sensitivity (95.7% vs 98.3%), 100% specificity was observed when either VAF was set at ≥20% (100% vs 95.3%), or two or more somatic mutations had VAFs ≥ 10%. Our study shows targeted gene panel sequencing improves the diagnostic approach and accuracy for unexplained cytopenia, with its high sensitivity and high PPV for MDS when applying VAF cutoffs. Furthermore, a 41‐gene panel was shown to have at least comparable performance characteristics to the large 640‐gene panel.

BACKGROUNDTransfusion of blood products is a key component of the supportive management in patients with acute leukemia (AL). However high‐quality trial evidence and clinical outcome data to support specific transfusion goals for blood products for patients with AL remain limited leading to diverse transfusion practices. The primary objective of this study was to determine the spectrum of transfusion patterns in a variety of care settings among providers who treat AL patients.STUDY DESIGN AND METHODSA 31‐question survey queried providers caring for AL patients about the existence of institutional guidelines for transfusion of blood products, transfusion triggers for hemoglobin (Hb), platelets (PLTs), and fibrinogen in various settings including inpatient and outpatient and before procedures.RESULTSWe analyzed 130 responses and identified divergent transfusion Hb goals in hospitalized and ambulatory patients, fibrinogen goals for cryoprecipitate transfusions, and variation in practice for use of certain PLTs and red blood cell products. The least variable transfusion patterns were reported for PLT goals in thrombocytopenia and in the setting of invasive procedures such as bone marrow biopsy and lumbar punctures.CONCLUSIONSThis survey confirmed wide variations in blood product transfusion practices across several clinical scenarios in patients with AL. The findings emphasized the need for large prospective randomized trials to develop standardized evidence‐based guidelines for blood product transfusions in patients with AL with the goal of limiting unnecessary transfusions without compromising outcomes.

Abstract Purpose: In preclinical studies, the PARP inhibitor veliparib enhanced the antileukemic action of temozolomide through potentiation of DNA damage. Accordingly, we conducted a phase 1 study of temozolomide with escalating doses of veliparib in patients with relapsed, refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML) or AML arising from aggressive myeloid malignancies. Experimental Design: Patients received veliparib [20–200 mg once a day on day 1 and twice daily on days 4–12 in cycle 1 (days 1–8 in cycle ≥2)] and temozolomide [150–200 mg/m2 daily on days 3–9 in cycle 1 (days 1–5 in cycle ≥2)] every 28 to 56 days. Veliparib pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics [ability to inhibit poly(ADP-ribose) polymer (PAR) formation and induce H2AX phosphorylation] were assessed. Pretreatment levels of MGMT and PARP1 protein, methylation of the MGMT promoter, and integrity of the Fanconi anemia pathway were also examined. Results: Forty-eight patients were treated at seven dose levels. Dose-limiting toxicities were oral mucositis and esophagitis lasting >7 days. The MTD was veliparib 150 mg twice daily with temozolomide 200 mg/m2 daily. The complete response (CR) rate was 17% (8/48 patients). Veliparib exposure as well as inhibition of PAR polymer formation increased dose proportionately. A veliparib-induced increase in H2AX phosphorylation in CD34+ cells was observed in responders. Three of 4 patients with MGMT promoter methylation achieved CR. Conclusions: Veliparib plus temozolomide is well tolerated, with activity in advanced AML. Further evaluation of this regimen and of treatment-induced phosphorylation of H2AX and MGMT methylation as potential response predictors appears warranted. Clin Cancer Res; 23(3); 697–706. ©2016 AACR.