Lazarus, Hillard M.

Abstract The ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group Led Trial, E2902, was a randomized phase III North American Leukemia Intergroup trial of the Farnesyl Transferase Inhibitor , R115777(Tipifarnib), as maintenance therapy for acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Patients (pts) with AML in remission after requiring salvage therapy (primary induction failure or second or subsequent remission) or over the age of 60 in first remission were eligible. Pts were eligible if they were in a complete remission (CR) or complete remission without platelet recovery (CRp) as confirmed by bone marrow examination within 2 weeks prior to randomization. Consolidation or post remission therapy prior to enrollment was allowed but not required. Pts who had received an allogeneic transplant in this remission were ineligible. Adequate blood counts (absolute neutrophil count >= 1000/mm3 and platelet count >=50,000/mm3), and normal renal, and hepatic function were required within 2 weeks of randomization. Pts were randomized to either receive tipifarnib twice daily (BID) or to observation. Pts were stratified by remission ( CR1 vs > CR1) and whether or not they received consolidation therapy in the current remission. The main objective of this study was to compare disease free survival(DFS) in the two groups. Between August 2004 and December 2009, 144 pts were accrued to the study. The median age of the pts was 69 (range 28-86). Seventy-three pts (51%) were male and 135 pts (94%) were white. The majority of pts enrolled on the study (70%) were in first CR, and had post remission chemotherapy (56%) prior to randomization. Seventy-three pts were enrolled onto the treatment arm (Arm A) and 71 pts were enrolled onto the observation arm (Arm B). When the study was initially opened, pts on Arm A were treated with tipifarnib at a dose of 400 mg BID with dose reductions and interruptions defined per protocol for toxicity. After the first planned interim analysis, based on toxicity data, the ECOG Data Monitoring Committee recommended that the starting dose be decreased to 300 mg BID. While non-hematologic toxicity was acceptable, significant hematologic toxicity was seen in pts treated at an initial dose of either 400 mg or 300 mg BID. Of note, hematologic toxicity was also seen on the observation arm although less frequently than with both treatment doses. The primary endpoint of the study was analysis of DFS on an intent to treat basis. The median DFS for arms A and B are 8.87 months and 5.26 months respectively ( p=0.058, HR 0.760). When restricted to eligible patients only(n=134 ), the DFS for arms A and B are 10.81 vs 5.26 months, respectively ( p=0.019, HR 0.690). An unplanned subgroup analysis was performed by gender. The median DFS for male pts (n=73) is 5.36 vs 5.91 months for arms A and B respectively (p=0.868, HR 1.320) and 12.09 vs 3.91 months for female pts (n=71)(p=0.0002, HR=0.408) In a multivariate Cox proportional hazards model to adjust for baseline clinical variables, there is a significant interaction between treatment and gender. (Table 1) Similar results were noted for OS (Figure 1). ECOG ACRIN Trial E2902 evaluated the potential role of Tipifarnib ( R115777) in patients with AML in remission with a high risk of relapse. While the primary endpoint for improved DFS was not reached when evaluating all randomized pts, when restricted to eligible patients only, there is a statistically significant improvement in DFS seen. Moreover, an unplanned subgroup analysis by gender demonstrates an improvement in DFS and OS for females who were enrolled on the study which persists on multivariate analysis. Possible explanations include the use of flat dosing rather than BSA based dosing on this study. However futher evaluation of patient and disease characteristics, dosing and toxicity profiles of responders and nonresponders is needed. Given what appears to be a potentially clinically relevant benefit, further evaluation of this agent is warranted. Table 1. Multivariate Cox Proportional Hazards Model for DFS: All Randomized Patients Hazard Ratio (95% CI) P value Arm B vs A 2.559(1.547,4.236) 0.00025 Male vs Female 2.005(1.228,3.274) 0.00544 CR1 vs >CR1 0.447 (0.305,0.656) 0.00004 Figure 1. (A) DFS (B) OS in Female Patients Figure 1. (A) DFS (B) OS in Female Patients Disclosures Rowe: BioSight Ltd.: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy; BioLineRx Ltd.: Consultancy. Larson:Astellas: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Abstract Background: Induction therapy with daunorubicin (Dauno) & cytarabine (Ara-C) [DA] has been the standard of care for eligible older adults (age ≥ 60 years) with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML) for over 2 decades. Single agent Clofarabine (CLO) induction & consolidation (Consol.) therapy has demonstrated important clinical activity in this age group in large phase II studies. Lower induction mortality (IM) & similar reported complete remission rate (CR) & overall survival (OS), as well as notable activity in those with higher risk disease features [including unfavorable cytogenetics, therapy-related AML (t-AML) & prior antecedent hematologic disorder (AHD)] raises the possibility that a non-Ara-C-based regimen could achieve similar or superior OS with lower toxicity. Methods: We performed a randomized United States Intergroup Phase III trial of single agent CLO [30mg/m2 x 5 days induction; 20 mg/m2 re-induction (if indicated) & 2 cycles Consol.] vs. standard DA therapy [Dauno 60mg/m2 D1-3 & Ara-C 100mg/m2 D1-7 induction x 1-2 cycles; 2 cycles Consol. with Ara-C (1.5g/m2 Q12hrs D1-6 age 60-69; once daily if age 70+)] in patients (pts) age ≥ 60 yrs with newly diagnosed AML. Patients with serum creatinine >1.0 (or GFR <60 mL/min) and those with AML-M3 and ECOG performance status >3 (PS>2 if age 70+ yrs) were excluded. Randomization was stratified by age (60-69 vs. 70+), t-AML, & AHD. Pts with HLA-matched donor were eligible for allogeneic transplantation (AlloHCT) after induction, and those completing Consol. were eligible for randomization #2 (R#2) to maintenance decitabine [20mg/m2 x 3D, monthly x 1 year] versus observation. With a target accrual of 747, E2906 was powered to determine non-inferiority [and possible superiority] of CLO vs. standard DA, and primary endpoint was OS. A weighted statistical analysis was performed to account for confounding impact of R#2. AlloHCT patients were censored at transplant in this analysis. Responses & cytogenetics were confirmed centrally and OS & CR rates were monitored by an independent Data Safety Monitoring Committee (DSMC) at pre-specified time points. Results: As of Feb 23, 2015, 727 pts were randomized. Median age was 68 years (range 60-86); 57% were male, and 38% were age ≥70 yrs. Treatment arms are well balanced for all baselineclinical & AML characteristics, & 30% had unfavorable cytogenetics. Of 659 with complete treatment information reported, 30.4% on DA vs. 40.1% on CLO received 2 cycles of induction (p=0.006). Median follow-up of surviving patients is 7.6 months. Table 1. shows early treatment results (CR, toxicity) for the 686 pts randomized as of Dec 23, 2014 (2 months prior to study end, & excluding 90 with ongoing response evaluation). DA CLO p-value CR/CRi 43.8% 42.8% p=0.87 30-day mortality 8.5% 7.9% p=0.89 60-day mortality 14.9% 13.1% p=0.58 Gr 4-5 Non-Heme Tox.Induction 27% 19% p=0.02 Gr 4-5 Non-Heme Tox.Consol. 20% 7% p=0.001 374 pts have died (174, DA; 200, CLO) & significantly inferior OS was observed for CLO vs. DA [Hazard Ratio (HR) 1.41 (95% CI 1.12-1.78)] (Fig. 1). Planned subgroup analyses were performed (Table 2) demonstrating significant differences in OS after CLO for patients age 60-69 yrs, without AHD, & with intermediate risk cytogenetics; but not for those with Unfav. Cytogen. (Fig. 2) or t-AML. Based on the primary weighted analysis, DSMC recommended suspension of new accrual to E2906 on Feb 23, 2015 & all active patients on CLO were transitioned to DA Arm. Table 2.NHR CLO/Standard (95% CI)*Weighted OS7271.41 (1.12-1.78)Unweighted OS7271.23 (1.00-1.50)Age 60-694491.48 (1.10-1.99)Age 70+2781.34 (0.93-1.93)Intermed. Risk Cytogen.3781.77 (1.27-2.47)Unfav. Risk Cytogen.2160.96 (0.65-1.43)No AHD6041.46 (1.13-1.89)AHD1231.22 (0.74-2.00)De novo AML6271.52 (1.18-1.96)Therapy-related AML1000.94 (0.54-1.61) Conclusions: Despite similar CR & IM, OS after single agent CLO is inferior to standard DA therapy for pts age ≥60 years with newly diagnosed AML who are fit for intensive therapy, and DA remains the standard of care. However no difference in OS was observed after CLO in some pre-specified high risk AML subgroups. R#2 & AlloHCT arms continue in E2906 for pts already enrolled. Embedded prospective minimal residual disease study at CR is being performed to identify pts at higher risk after CLO & DA. Figure 1. Weighted Kaplan-Meier Curves for OS Figure 1. Weighted Kaplan-Meier Curves for OS Figure 2. Unfavorable Cytogenetics OS by Therapy Figure 2. Unfavorable Cytogenetics OS by Therapy Disclosures Off Label Use: Use of clofarabine in AML, and maintenance therapy with decitabine in AML. Claxton:Medimmune: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy; Astellas: Research Funding; Cyclacel: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Ambit: Research Funding. Levine:Loxo Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; CTI BioPharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Foundation Medicine: Consultancy. Altman:Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Spectrum: Consultancy; Astellas: Consultancy; Ariad: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy. Al-Kali:Novartis: Research Funding.

Abstract Total body irradiation (TBI)-based conditioning regimens are considered the standard of care for patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). However, due to concerns regarding acute and long-term toxicities, non-TBI regimens, commonly including busulfan (BU), have been increasingly explored. We performed a retrospective cohort analysis with the hypothesis that there would be equivalence of these two myeloablative approaches by reviewing outcomes for adult patients (pts), aged 18-60 years, undergoing a first, well-matched sibling, related or unrelated donor HCT in CR1 or CR2 reported to the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) from 2005-2014. Eight hundred nineteen pts received TBI (63% 9-12 Gy, 37% ≥13 Gy) combined with etoposide (25%) or cyclophosphamide (Cy) (75%) and 299 pts received intravenous BU combined with a second alkylator Cy (15%) or melphalan (Mel) (13%), or a nucleoside analogue fludarabine (Flu) (41%) or clofarabine (Clo)(30%). The majority of the BU-based pts were treated at the Moffitt or MD Anderson Cancer Center. The BU-based regimens were grouped together for analyses since no significant differences in basic outcomes among the different chemotherapy-only regimens were noted. Patients in the BU-containing group were older but had better performance status, took longer to achieve CR1 and longer to receive HCT; more received peripheral blood than marrow grafts, peri-HCT ATG, pre- and post HCT tyrosine kinase inhibitors ( TKI), and were treated more recently than pts in the TBI-based group (Table 1). With median follow-up of 3.6 years for the BU-based group and 5.3 years for the TBI-based group, adjusted 3 year outcomes showed treatment-related mortality (TRM) BU 19% vs. TBI 25% (p=.04); relapse BU 37% vs. TBI 28% (p=.007); disease-free survival (DFS) Bu 45% vs. TBI 48% (p=.35); and overall survival (OS) BU 57% vs. TBI 53% (p=.35) (Figures A-B). Patients in the BU group had significantly more grade II-IV acute GVHD (47% vs. 40%, p=.025), but marginally less chronic GVHD (49% vs. 55% at 3 years, p=.073). In multivariate analysis, the BU group had a significantly higher rate of acute GVHD after day 50 (RR 1.75, 95% CI 1.19-2.58, p=.004), but marginally less chronic GVHD (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.68-1.01 p=.059) and higher risk of relapse (RR 1.46, 95% CI 1.15-1.85 p=.002) compared with TBI-based regimens. Despite the observed higher risks of acute GVHD and relapse, BU-based conditioning led to similar TRM, OS, and DFS following HCT for ALL. Table 1 Table 1. Figure Figure. Disclosures Ciurea: Spectrum Pharmaceuticals: Other: Advisory Board; Cyto-Sen Therapeutics: Equity Ownership. Seftel:Otsuka: Research Funding. Pulsipher:Medac: Other: Housing support for conference; Chimerix: Consultancy; Jazz Pharmaceutical: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Other: Study Steering Committee. Champlin:Ziopharm Oncology: Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties; Intrexon: Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties.

Abstract Background: The results of the primary endpoint of the E2906 North American Intergroup phase 3 trial - demonstrating significantly inferior OS after single agent clofarabine versus standard intensive daunorubicin & cytarabine induction and consolidation - strongly support the use of intensive therapy for patients age ≥60 years with newly-diagnosed AML who are fit for treatment. This result was achieved despite similar CR rates (including CRi - CR with incomplete blood count recovery) and similar early (30- & 60-day) induction mortality between study arms, raising the question as to the importance of achieving CR as an endpoint. Therefore, we performed a follow-up analysis to address the factors that contribute to early mortality, the necessity for 2nd induction cycle to achieve CR, and to assess the survival impact of the quality of remission. Methods: E2906 design, study population and results for the primary objective were reported previously (ASH 2015, abstr. #217a). We performed this updated analysis to evaluate clinical risk factors for early mortality and re-induction, and to assess the impact of response quality on OS. Univariate comparisons were made with Fisher's exact test (category) and t-test (continuous variable), and logistic regression models were used to examine risk factors associated with early mortality, and with requiring a 2nd cycle of induction therapy. We performed a landmark analysis (beginning Day 60 after initiation of therapy) to determine the impact of response quality (CR/CRi, morphologic leukemia-free-state (MLFS), and treatment failure - i.e. residual/refractory AML) on OS. Survival comparisons were performed with log-rank test. Results: A total of n=727 patients were registered to E2906, the median age is 68 years (range 60-86) and the median follow-up of surviving patients is now 18.3 months. Adjusting for treatment, cytogenetic risk group, FAB subtype, WBC count, and secondary AML, increasing age (p=0.06) and performance status (PS) >1 (p=0.05) were associated with 30-day mortality and only PS >1 (p=0.06) with 60-day mortality. Treatment arm (p=0.003), adverse cytogenetic risk group (p=0.02), increasing age (p=0.03) and baseline WBC <10K (p=0.03) were each independently associated with higher risk of receiving 2nd cycle induction, but there was no difference in CR/CRi (44.2% vs. 42.2%, p=0.58) or in median OS (13.8 versus 12.0 months, p=0.11) for those receiving 1 vs. 2 induction cycles, respectively. We next performed a landmark analysis (day 60, n=608 evaluable patients) to evaluate OS in relation to the quality of response (Table). We observed an advantage in achieving CR and CR/CRi, although the benefit of CRi diminished greatly after 12 months, and OS after MLFS appeared more similar to treatment failure (Figure, p<0.001). The relative adverse impact of CRi and MLFS (vs. CR) was most pronounced for patients treated with clofarabine, where median OS was shorter for those achieving CRi (12.2m vs. 22.6m standard therapy, p=0.007) and MLFS (6.6m vs. 13.4m standard therapy, p=0.15). Conclusion: This follow-up analysis confirms the importance of CR regardless of the number of cycles of induction therapy required to achieve remission, and identifies risk factors associated with early mortality and with requiring re-induction. At longer follow-up the OS after CRi appears to be inferior to true CR, particularly after clofarabine. We hypothesize that this may be due to higher rates of minimal residual disease in CRi, and studies to determine this are being performed. MLFS is not associated with a better overall survival than frank treatment failure (i.e. residual disease) and therefore its value as a response category is uncertain. These results highlight the role of standard intensive remission induction therapy with the intent of achieving CR, which remains the standard of care for fit older adults. Table. Table. Figure 1. Figure 1. Disclosures Foran: karyopharm: Honoraria; novartis: Honoraria; medscape: Honoraria; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding; pfizer: Honoraria; boehringer ingelheim: Research Funding; agios: Research Funding; Cellerant: Research Funding. Melnick:Janssen: Research Funding. Altman:Novartis: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Syros: Honoraria. Al-Kali:Novartis: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 132 Late relapse in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) has been infrequently studied and variably defined in the literature. Two series have shown that late relapse of AML ≥5 years after first complete remission (CR1) is uncommon, with rates of 1.19–3% (Medeiros et al, Leuk Lymphoma 2007; Verma et al, Leuk Lymphoma 2010). We searched the long-term data available on 784 adults (<60 years-old) who were treated on 1 of 4 ECOG clinical trials (E3483, PC486, E3489, or E1900) and achieved CR1 for reports of late relapse (defined as recurrence of AML ≥3 years after CR1). Median follow-up for the 553 patients last known alive was 11.1 years. The longest median follow-up was 17.2 years on trial PC486. Outcomes We found that 11 patients (1.4%) relapsed late; of these, 2 were treated on E3483, 1 on PC486, 5 on E3489, and 3 on E1900. Seven patients with late relapse died from their disease and 4 were living at last known follow-up. Only 1 patient (0.13%) had recurrence of AML ≥5 years after achieving CR1. It is possible that more late relapses will occur on E1900 (a more recent study with ongoing follow-up). All of these trials except E3483 treated some patients with autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (autoHCT) as part of post remission therapy. On PC486, no post remission consolidation chemotherapy was administered before autoHCT. Ninety-eight total patients on E3489 and PC486 received autoHCT, and there were no late relapses; on E1900, 2 of the 141 patients treated with autoHCT developed late relapse. No patients who underwent allogeneic (allo) HCT in CR1 experienced late relapse on any of the 4 clinical trials. Nine of the 11 patients with late relapse did not undergo HCT; of these, 5 were consolidated with high-dose cytarabine, 2 received maintenance with low-dose cytarabine and 6-thioguanine, and 2 received unknown post remission therapy. Of the 3 patients with late relapse on E1900, 2 received standard-dose and 1 high-dose daunorubicin with induction. Conclusions Across all 4 trials, only 2 of the 239 patients (0.8%) treated with post remission autoHCT experienced late relapse of AML (≥3 years after CR1), which reinforces previously published data that late relapse after autoHCT is uncommon (Cassileth et al, J Clin Oncol 1993). Furthermore, of the 35 patients treated with autoHCT on PC486, 11 relapsed early and no patients relapsed late, suggesting that post remission chemotherapy may not be necessary before autoHCT. Based on this large AML cohort of nearly 800 patients with long-term follow-up, patients who remain in CCR for at least 3 years have a very low risk of relapse and can be considered cured of their disease. Moreover, given that recurrent AML was extremely rare after 5 years or more of CCR (<0.2%), the risk of therapy-related AML from contemporary induction and post remission strategies including HCT appears to be minimal. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Background Extramedullary disease (EMD) of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) was described decades ago but the incidence of this phenomenon and its prognostic impact are not clear. It is also uncertain whether every site of EMD has the same significance. This study explored these questions using a large cohort of AML patients treated on consecutive Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) frontline clinical trials. Methods For AML patients enrolled into ECOG clinical trials, the presence of EMD was captured at baseline on case report forms. From patients with newly diagnosed AML, age 15 and above, who were treated on 11 consecutive different clinical trials, we identified those with or without EMD, defined by physical examination, laboratory findings and imaging, without necessarily a biopsy. We used descriptive statistics to summarize patient and disease characteristics. Univariate analyses of potential prognostic factors were done. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate median overall survival (OS) within each prognostic category and differences were explored using the log-rank test. Cox proportional hazards models were used to examine the effect of one-unit increases in continuous variables on OS and for multivariable analyses. Multivariate models were built using backward selection. Factors (or groups of factors) significant at the 0.10 level in univariate analyses were tested for inclusion in the model, and retained if they were significant at the 0.05 level. Results Of the 3,522 patients enrolled in 11 different AML clinical trials, we excluded 281; for diagnosis of other types of leukemia (n=220), no EMD evaluation at baseline (n=41) or no survival data (n=20). The overall incidence of EMD was 23.8% (770 out of the remaining 3,241 patients). The sites involved were: lymph nodes 367 (11.3%) patients, spleen 234 (7.2%), liver 173 (5.3%), skin 146 (4.5%), gingiva 104 (3.2%), central nerve system (CNS) 32 (1%), peripheral nerve system (PNS) 8 (0.2%) and other sites 134 (4.1%). In 65 cases (8.4%) EMD was confirmed by biopsy. Most of the patients (64.4%) had only one site of EMD, 163 (21.2%) had 2 sites, 75 (9.7%) - 3 sites, 28 (3.6%) - 4 sites, and 4 patients (0.5%) each had 5 or 6 sites. EMD patients compared to those without EMD; tend to be younger (median age 45.7 vs 52.9 years); male (57.7% vs 52%); poorer ECOG performance status (76.4% with ECOG 0-1 vs 85.9%) and with higher white blood cell count (WBC) at diagnosis (median of 41.6/µl vs 10.2/µl). In univariate analysis, having EMD was associated with a shorter OS (P=0.006). Examination of individual EMD sites revealed that skin (P=0.002), spleen (P=0.0002) and liver (P=0.0007) but not CNS (P=0.35), PNS (P=0.53), nodal involvement (P=0.85) and gingival hypertrophy (P=0.14), were associated with poorer OS. Using proportional hazards models for continuous factors, each additional site of EMD conferred a 9.4% increase in the risk of death. In a multivariable model, after adjusting for known prognostic factors (such as: age, WBC count and cytogenetic risk group), the presence of EMD, number of EMD sites and any specific EMD site were not independently prognostic. Of 165 patients with known favorable cytogenetics EMD was present in only 22 patients (13%). This group appeared to have a worse prognosis, but the numbers are too small for a definitive assessment (figure 1). Conclusions Extramedullary disease is common in newly diagnosed AML with an incidence of almost 24%, but CNS involvement is very rare (0.95%). In contrast to published data, no site of EMD was found to have an independent prognostic impact in multivariate analysis. This large dataset emphasizes the importance of evaluating large number of patients and considering all known risk factors in the multivariate analysis. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract HCT entails substantial TRM justifying continued efforts to better risk stratify patients. Single institutional studies have suggested several clinically available biomarkers of CRP, ferritin and albumin influence TRM if not overall survival (OS). We sought to confirm the independent prognostic value of these biomarkers in a large multi-institutional cohort. The study population consisted of 784 adults with AML in remission (80%) or MDS (20%) undergoing unrelated donor HCT between 2008 and 2010 and available cryopreserved samples through the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) repository. CRP and ferritin were centrally quantified by ELISA from cryopreserved plasma whereas albumin levels obtained from center reported data. Correlation studies for biomarkers required log transformation of CRP and ferritin to produce a normal distribution. Multivariate models were fitted separately for each biomarker applying protocol specified thresholds generated from the literature of CRP > 10 mg/L, ferritin > 2500 ng/mL, albumin < 3.5 g/dL on TRM. Further analysis explored optimal cutpoints for this cohort for all significant clinical variables for TRM. HCT characteristics included a median age of 50 (range 18-78) years, HCT-CI (co-morbidity index) 3 or more in 35%, single allele/antigen mismatch (7/8) in 23%, PB as stem cell source in 83%, and myeloablative conditioning in 72%. Biomarker data were available in 783, 781 and 695 cases for CRP, ferritin and albumin respectively. The median values and ranges for each biomarker were as follows: 5.0 mg/L (0.3 - 316) for CRP, 1148 ng/mL (51 – 14,298) for ferritin and 3.6 g/dL (0.6-5.3) for albumin. Log transformed CRP and ferritin showed a modest correlation (r=0.35, P<0.001), and log CRP was marginally associated with albumin (r=-0.12, P=0.002). HCT-CI had no correlation to CRP and albumin. Higher ferritin was associated with HCT-CI (P=0.014) and disease (P<.001). In the entire population, TRM and overall survival (OS) at 2 years were 23% and 54%, respectively. The table shows the independent association of each biomarker with TRM and OS. Ferritin had no association with these outcomes but only 12% had levels above 2500 by ELISA. The optimal cutpoints for TRM were defined as follows: CRP > 3.67 (HR=1.75, P=0.001); albumin < 3.4 (HR 1.70, P <0.001); and ferritin as a continuous variable (HR 1.30, P = 0.008). A risk score was created modeling optimal biomarker thresholds to predict TRM based on the following formula: risk score = 0.44633*I(CRP>3.67)+0.18330*ln(Ferritin)+0.44730*I(albumin<3.4), where “I” is an indicator function and represent 1 or 0 depending on the presence of the abnormal biomarker level in parenthesis. The risk score included adjustment for HCT-CI. The biomarkers did not influence the incidence of relapse or graft-versus-host disease with any of these models. Elevated CRP and ferritin and decreased albumin prior to HCT were associated with impaired transplant survival, primarily through higher TRM. Integration of a biomarker panel in clinical practice once validated can enhance risk-stratification, improve adjustment for comparative studies and point towards the design of biomarker driven trials. Abstract 422. Table: Multivariate analysis of TRM and OS for biomarkers, and biomarker panel risk score* Abnormal, N (%) Transplant related mortality Overall Survival Biomarker HR 95% CI P HR 95% CI P Protocol defined CRP >10 mg/L 184 (24) 1.52 1.11 – 2.07 0.008 1.22 0.98 – 1.53 0.072 Ferritin >2500 ng/mL 93 (12) 1.26 0.84 – 1.88 0.27 1.15 0.86 – 1.54 0.35 Albumin < 3.5 g/dL 290 (42) 1.48 1.10 – 2.0 0.010 1.39 1.13 – 1.72 0.002 Optimal threshold, combined model ** CRP >3.67 mg/L 497 (64) 1.56 1.11 – 2.19 0.010 1.24 1.00 – 1.55 0.054 Log(Ferritin), linear n/a 1.20 0.99 – 1.46 0.07 1.20 1.04 – 1.38 0.010 <3.4 g/dL 203 (29.5) 1.58 1.16 – 2.15 0.004 1.37 1.10 – 1.72 0.005 Biomarker Score ** N Low (<1.5) 200 1.0 - - 1.0 Intermediate (1.5-2.0) 331 1.66 1.10-2.49 0.015 1.38 1.06-1.80 0.017 High (>2.0) 159 2.72 1.77-4.19 <0.001 2.01 1.51-2.70 <0.001 * biomarkers adjusted for significant covariates of BMI, disease, mismatch, and CMV serostatus and stratified on conditioning regimen ** combined model includes all biomarkers and HCT-CI Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Background: The association of clinical trial participation with outcomes in cancer patients is controversial, with some studies reporting better outcomes for trial participants while others do not. It is possible that the difference in outcomes is due to differences in baseline characteristics of participants and non-participants. The Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinical Trials Network (BMT CTN) 0201 trial was a large randomized, multi-center study comparing peripheral blood (PB) with bone marrow (BM) for hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) from HLA-matched or 1 allele mismatched unrelated donors (URD) in patients with acute leukemia, chronic myeloid leukemia and myelodysplastic syndromes. The trial reported no significant survival differences between PB and BM; there was decreased risk of graft failure but increased risk of chronic graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) with PB grafts (Anasetti et al NEJM 2012). Methods: We compared characteristics of BMT CTN 0201 study participants (n=494) with HCT recipients who did not participate on the trial (n=1384) but were potentially eligible by virtue of known characteristics. These patients received similar conditioning and GVHD prophylaxis as trial participants at 38 United States trial centers during the study time-period. Centers that had no eligible non-trial participants were excluded. Outcomes between patients on and off trial were compared using Cox proportional hazards regression models. Data were obtained from the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) that collects patient data on all trial and non-trial allogeneic HCT recipients through its registry function. Results: Approximately 29% [494/1878] of apparently eligible patients were randomized and analyzed as part of the trial. There were no significant differences between study participants and non-participants in age or sex distribution, disease types, HLA or sex matching, comorbidities, or interval from diagnosis to HCT. Higher proportions of non-participants were Hispanic, had a lower performance status and lower disease risk, and received myeloablative conditioning and antithymocyte globulin (ATG) or Campath than the study participants. PB was used more commonly as the graft source in the non-participants as compared to the study participants (65% vs. 50%, p<0.001). In multivariate models, overall mortality (HR 1.09, 95% CI 0.95-1.25, p=0.22), transplant-related mortality (HR 1.08, 95% CI 0.89-1.32, p=0.42) and risks of acute grade II-IV (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.82-1.12, p=0.57) and chronic GVHD (HR 1.06, 95% CI 0.92-1.23, p=0.41) were comparable between study non-participants and participants. Non-participants were at higher risk for relapse than participants (HR 1.24, 95%CI 1.04-1.49, p=0.02) in the multivariate analysis adjusted for disease risk and other clinical variables. Center effect was examined and was not found to be significant (p=0.10). There was no significant interaction between graft source and trial participation (P=0.22) and the risk of mortality was comparable for BM (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.80-1.22, p=0.90) and PB recipients (HR 1.17, 95% CI 0.97-1.41, p=0.09) whether on trial or off trial. (Figure) Conclusion: Approximately 29% of patients who appeared eligible and were treated with conditioning and GVHD prophylaxis regimens allowed on the trial were enrolled. Despite some differences in clinical characteristics, most of the outcomes of non-trial participants were comparable to trial participants, suggesting that there is no definitive evidence that the outcomes of patients in a clinical trial are superior to those of the non-participants treated in a similar fashion. The comparable outcomes also indicate that the results of this trial were not seriously affected by selection bias and are therefore representative of the larger population. Figure 1: Adjusted overall survival in BMT CTN 0201 trial participants and non-participants Figure 1:. Adjusted overall survival in BMT CTN 0201 trial participants and non-participants Figure 2 Figure 2. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) has a high relapse rate in adults. While the biology of the patient may be responsible for the marked difference in survival seen in comparison to children, variable adherence to complex chemotherapy regimens may also play a role. However, there is very little understanding about the risk factors for delays in therapy and the impact of delays on survival. To study delays in newly diagnosed adult ALL patients, we conducted an observational study using data from ECOG 2993/ MRC_UKALLXII (Rowe, Blood 2005). We analyzed Ph- patients who started intensification after documented complete remission (CR). A long delay (LD) was defined as > 98 days from start of induction to start of intensification (IS), which was >2 weeks delay beyond the 84 days recommended per protocol. A Very Long Delay (VLD) was defined as a >4 weeks delay. Of 2109 patients enrolled, 1247 patients met inclusion criteria for analysis. Of note, 435 Ph- patients who achieved CR after induction but did not proceed to intensification were excluded. In univariate analysis, female sex (p<0.001), Black race (p=0.01), and older age (p<0.001) were associated with increased odds of LD. During induction presence of infection (p=0.01), dose reductions (p=0.001), duration of neutropenia (p=0.007), thrombocytopenia (p<0.001), and hospitalization duration (p<0.001) were associated with LD. In multivariate regression, age, female sex, dose reduction, Black race, and hospitalization duration were significantly associated with LD and VLD (Table I). At 2 years after diagnosis, 801/1247 (64.2%) patients were alive. Of the surviving patients, 181 (22.5%) had VLD, and 620 (77.4%), had delay <4 weeks, p=0.073. Of the alloHCT patients, 333 were alive: 57/333 (17%) had VLD, and 276/333 (83%) had been delayed <4 weeks (p=0.036). As of July 2014, 687/1247 (55%) patients have died, with a median time to death from start of intensification of 13.3 months (range 0.8-231). Survival analysis was stratified by post-remission therapy, with living patients censored at date last seen. Patients who received myeloablative allogeneic HCT (allo HCT) had poorer overall survival from start of intensification (OS-IS) and event free survival (EFS-IS) after LD or VLD. While OS-IS and EFS-IS were significantly worse for alloHCT patients after VLD (p=0.02 and p=0.03) respectively, survival was not worse for non-transplant patients after VLD (p=0.24 and p=0.10) (Figure I). In a multivariate Cox regression, adjusting for other high-risk disease features (age, cell lineage, and white cell count at diagnosis), patients who underwent allo HCT had significantly worse OS-IS (HR 1.4, p=0.02) and EFS-IS (HR 1.4, p=0.02) after experiencing VLD compared to alloHCT patients who experienced <4 weeks delay. When evaluating OS and EFS from diagnosis, VLD was still associated with poorer OS (HR 1.34, p=0.04) and EFS (HR 1.34, p=0.03). There was no difference in OS or EFS in patients who received non-transplant post-remission therapy based on delay. In a comprehensive analysis of the largest adult ALL study ever reported, we identified significant risk factors predictive of LD and VLD (>2 and >4 weeks beyond mandatory rest period). Our findings highlighted that patients were delayed because of chemotherapy toxicity and also identified healthcare disparities. VLD was associated with poorer OS and EFS in patients undergoing alloHCT, but not in patients undergoing non-transplant post remission therapy. Further studies are planned to prospectively identify patient barriers to on-schedule treatment with a goal of earlier intervention. The ability to better predict and intervene on risk factors for delay can improve adherence to protocol and optimize long-term survival. Table I: Multivariate Regression for LD and VLD Risk Factors Variable Odds Ratio 95% Confidence Interval p-value Days in the hospital Phase I Induction 1.01 1.00-1.02 0.04 Duration of Thrombocytopenia, Phase I 1.02 1.01-1.03 0.001 Age by Decade 1.2 1.08-1.31 <0.001 Reduced Dose in Induction 1.54 1.08-2.22 0.019 Sex, Female 1.56 1.22-2.0 <0.001 Race, Black 3.4 1.41-7.96 0.006 Figure 1 Figure 1. p=0.023 Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Abstract 676 Although maintenance therapy has been shown to be of value in Acute Lymphoid Leukemia, its role in non M3 Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) has never been proven. Studies have been limited by issues related to efficacy as well as toxicity. The Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) trial, E2902, was a randomized phase III intergroup trial of the Farnesyl Transferase Inhibitor, R115777(tipifarnib), as maintenance therapy for AML. Patients(pts) with AML in remission after requiring salvage therapy or over age 60 in first remission were eligible. A confirmatory bone marrow exam prior to randomization was required to demonstrate a complete remission (CR) or morphologic remission(MR). Absolute neutrophil count >1000/mm3, platelet count >=50,000/mm3, normal renal, and hepatic function were required. Consolidation or post remission therapy prior to enrollment was allowed but not required. Pts who had received an allogeneic transplant in this remission were ineligible. Pts were randomized to either receive tipifarnib twice daily (BID) or to observation. The main objective of the study was to compare disease free survival (DFS) in the two groups. The study was designed with 84% power to detect a 76% relative increase in the median DFS from 3.4 months to 6 months (mo). The final analysis was to take place when 111 events had taken place. Between August 2004 and December 2009, 144 pts were accrued to the study. The median age of the pts is 70 (range 28–86). The majority of pts enrolled on the study (67%) were in first CR. Seventy three pts were enrolled onto the treatment arm and 71 pts were enrolled onto the observation arm. When the study initially opened, tipifarnib was given at a dose of 400 mg BID with dose reductions and interruptions as per protocol for toxicity. Based on the first interim analysis, toxicity data, the starting dose was decreased to 300 mg BID. Significant hematologic toxicity was seen in patients at both 300 and 400 mg. The majority of patients experienced >=grade 3 neutropenia or thrombocytopenia. There was 1 episode of febrile neutropenia. Non-hematologic toxicities were minimal. At the time of 110 events (90 relapses and 100 deaths), the final analysis of the study was conducted. The relapse rate was 60.3% on tipifarnib vs 64.8% for observation. Median DFS and 10 and 12 mo DFS and overall survival (OS) are documented in Table 1. Kaplan Meier curves for DFS and OS are presented. As the difference in median DFS is not considered significant (9.3 vs 5.8 mo, log rank p value 0.21), in July 2011, pts and physicians were informed of the lack of evidence of benefit so they could decide if they wished to continue drug. However an unplanned analysis of the data demonstrates a statistically significant improvement in OS at 10 months in pts who received tipifarnib. (70% vs 48%, p=0.05). While the benefit is subsequently lost, given a median survival measured in months, an increase in the number of pts alive and/or without disease at 10–12 mo is of value, particularly in the absence of noteworthy toxicity. Future studies are needed to better determine the role of maintenance therapy in pts with AML. Tipifarnib Observation Median DFS (months) 9.3 (95% CI:5.7, 13.3) 5.8 (95% CI: 3.7, 8.8) p=0.21 OS rate at 10 mo 70% (95% CI: 58%, 79%) 48% (95% CI: 36%, 60%) p=0.05 OS rate at 12 mo 59% (95% CI: 47%, 70%) 44% (95% CI: 32%, 55%) p=0.07 DFS rate at 10 mo 47% (95% CI: 36%, 59%) 32% (95% CI: 21%, 43%) p=0.07 DFS rate at 12 mo 39% (95% CI: 28%, 50%) 30% (95% CI: 20%, 41%) p=0.26 Disclosures: Larson: Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy; Ariad: Consultancy, Research Funding.