Lazarus, Hillard M.

Summary Late relapse [>3 years from complete remission (CR)] in acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL), is unusual. Data from the MRC UKALLXII/ECOG E2993 trial are presented to evaluate the incidence and characteristics of late relapse in adult ALL. Of 1,909 patients, 1,752 (92%) achieved CR and among these 757 (43·2%) relapsed; 691 (91·3%) within three years and 66 (8·7%) beyond. Among these 66 patients, median time to relapse was 47 (37–144) months. Relapse beyond three years occurred in 3·8% of all who achieved CR. The cumulative risk of relapse was 40%, 43% and 45% at three, five and ten years respectively. Out of the 1 752 patients who achieved CR, 11·7% underwent autologous and 40·6% allogeneic transplant, while in CR1. Of the autologous patients, 43·2% relapsed early and 3·4% relapsed late. However, among the allogeneic patients, 13·2% relapsed early and only 1·3% late. The five‐year overall survival from relapse was 5·8% and 20% in the early and late relapse patients respectively. In conclusion, late relapse in adults with ALL is not uncommon, and is associated with better outcome after relapse compared to early relapse.

Abstract There is marked paucity of data regarding late effects in adolescents and young adults (AYAs) who undergo myeloablative conditioning (MAC) allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) for acute myeloid leukemia (AML). We evaluated late effects and survival in 826 1-year disease-free survivors of MAC HCT for AYA AML, with an additional focus on comparing late effects based upon MAC type (total body irradiation [TBI] vs high-dose chemotherapy only). The estimated 10-year cumulative incidence of subsequent neoplasms was 4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 2%-6%); 10-year cumulative incidence of nonmalignant late effects included gonadal dysfunction (10%; 95% CI, 8%-13%), cataracts (10%; 95% CI, 7%-13%), avascular necrosis (8%; 95% CI, 5%-10%), diabetes mellitus (5%; 95% CI, 3%-7%), and hypothyroidism (3%; 95% CI, 2%-5%). Receipt of TBI was independently associated with a higher risk of cataracts only (hazard ratio [HR], 4.98; P < .0001) whereas chronic graft-versus-host disease (cGVHD) was associated with an increased risk of cataracts (HR, 3.22; P = .0006), avascular necrosis (HR, 2.49; P = .006), and diabetes mellitus (HR, 3.36; P = .03). Estimated 10-year overall survival and leukemia-free survival were 73% and 70%, respectively, and did not differ on the basis of conditioning type. In conclusion, late effects among survivors of MAC HCT for AYA AML are frequent and are more closely linked to cGVHD than type of conditioning.

SummaryTransplant‐associated thrombotic microangiopathy (TA‐TMA) is a complication of allogeneic transplantation (allo‐HCT). The incidence and risk factors associated with TA‐TMA are not well known. A retrospective analysis from the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) was conducted including patients receiving allo‐HCT between 2008 and 2016, with the primary objective of evaluating the incidence of TA‐TMA. Secondary objectives included identification of risk factors associated with TA‐TMA, and the impact of TA‐TMA on overall survival and the need for renal replacement therapy (RRT). Among 23,665 allo‐HCT recipients, the 3‐year cumulative incidence of TA‐TMA was 3%. Variables independently‐associated with increased incidence of TA‐TMA included female sex, prior autologous transplant, primary disease (acute lymphoblastic leukaemia and severe aplastic anaemia), donor type (mismatched or unrelated donor), conditioning intensity (myeloablative), GVHD prophylaxis (sirolimus + calcineurin inhibitor), pre‐transplant kidney dysfunction and acute GVHD (time‐varying effect). TA‐TMA was associated with higher mortality (HR = 3·1, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] = 2·8–16·3) and RRT requirement (HR = 7·1, 95% CI = 5·7–311·6). This study provides epidemiologic data on TA‐TMA and its impact on transplant outcomes. Increased awareness of the risk factors will enable providers to be vigilant of this uncommon but serious transplant complication. The results will also provide benchmarking for future study designs and comparisons.

Background: Relapse remains the most common cause of treatment failure after intensive induction and consolidation (CONS) therapy in older adults with AML. We therefore performed a prospective randomized phase II study to determine the safety and impact on DFS (relapse or death) and OS of DAC maintenance using an abbreviated 3-day schedule administered every 4 weeks for 1 year (per Lubbert et al, Haematologica 97:393, 2012) vs. Observation (OBS) after intensive AML therapy, conducted in the large multi-center E-A E2906 Phase III trial in patients (pts) age ≥60 yrs. Methods: The design and primary clinical results for E2906 (n=727) have been reported previously (Foran et al, ASH #217a, 2015), demonstrating superior OS following 'Standard' 7&3 (Daunorubicin 60mg/m2) induction and intermediate dose Ara-C consolidation (CONS) vs. single agent Clofarabine (CLO, provided by SANOFI), despite similar CR/CRi (CR with incomplete CBC recovery) and induction mortality rates. All CR/CRi pts after induction (n=311) were assigned to 2 cycles CONS with either Ara-C (1.5g/m2 x 12 doses; 6 doses if age >/=70 yrs), or single agent CLO, based on induction randomization. Ongoing CR/CRi after recovery from CONS was confirmed with restaging BM biopsy, and eligible pts offered participation in the 'Step 3' maintenance study, a 1:1 randomization (stratified by induction therapy, cytogenetic risk group, age <70 yrs) to either OBS vs. DAC (20mg/m2IV Days 1-3, q4 wks) for 1 year. DAC could be held for up to 4 weeks for delayed hematologic recovery, but dose reductions were not permitted per protocol, and DAC was not continued beyond 12 months. Patients in both arms were evaluated with CBC q4 weeks for 1 year, and surveillance BM biopsy every 3 months (or at the time of suspected clinical relapse) for 2 years. 'Step 3' was designed as a phase II pilot randomized study, with target accrual n=172, allowing 90% power to detect 36% reduction in DFS Hazard Ratio (HR) with DAC maintenance for 1 year (using protocol-specified 1-sided log-rank test significance level of 0.1), assuming 140 events & 2 years of follow-up from randomization. However, further accrual to E2906 was suspended in 2/2015 by independent DSMC due to superior OS observed with standard Arm, so that 'Step 3' completed only 70% of target accrual. P-values reported are two-sided by convention unless specified otherwise. Results: 'Step 3' total accrual was n=120 (of 172 planned) (DAC 61, OBS 59), with median age 69 yrs (range 60-85), and groups were very well balanced for baseline clinical characteristics; most pts had Intermediate risk cytogenetics (74.2%) and ECOG performance status (PS)=0/1 (96%). The median number of DAC cycles received was 6 (range 0-13), and analysis was 'intention-to-treat'. The median follow-up is 49.8 months. There were 90 DFS events (47 OBS, 43 DAC), with 82 deaths (46 OBS, 36 DAC). Univariate DFS and OS are shown in Figure, with associated two-sided p-values; using protocol-prespecified one-sided significance level of 0.1, OS was significant (one-sided p=0.06) for DAC v. OBS, and there was a statistical trend favoring DFS (one-sided p=0.11), particularly for CLO pts (Table). We also performed multivariate Cox model (after adjustment for ECOG PS, sex, secondary AML, and baseline hematologic parameters) which confirmed superior HR for DFS (one-sided p=0.10) & OS (one-sided p=0.07), per statistical design. FLT3-ITD status is available for n=96 pts, and 84 were FLT3-ITD-negative (46 OBS, 38 DAC). Importantly, we observed a significant association of DAC maintenance with superior OS in the large FLT3-ITD-neg subgroup (p=0.039) (Figure). DAC was generally well tolerated apart from grade 3 febrile neutropenia (9%) and reversible grade 4 cytopenias, with no grade 5 events. Conclusions: In this randomized phase II study, DAC maintenance for 1 year after intensive AML therapy was associated with improved HR for OS and a trend for DFS, using protocol-specified statistical design. Furthermore there was a significant impact on OS for the FLT3-ITD-negative population. We acknowledge limitations based on incomplete accrual due to early termination of the parent E2906 study, and inherent to the phase 2 design of this E2906 endpoint, but results suggest an important impact of DAC maintenance on survival. These data strongly support a definitive phase III randomized study of DAC maintenance, particularly focused on the large intermediate risk FLT3-ITD-negative subgroup. Disclosures Foran: Agios: Honoraria, Research Funding. Claxton:Daiichi Sankyo Co. and Ambit Biosciences Corp, Astellas Pharma, Novartis Pharmaceuticals, Incyte Corporation, Cyclacel Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Celegene Corporation, Medimmune, Inc, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Research Funding. Lazarus:Pluristem Therapeutics, Inc: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Speakers Bureau; Biosight: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Actinium Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy, Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Teva Pharmaceuticals: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; CSL Behring: Consultancy. Rowe:BioSight: Consultancy. Altman:Cancer Expert Now: Consultancy; Glycomimetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Data Safety and Monitoring Committee; prIME Oncology: Speakers Bureau; PeerView: Speakers Bureau; Agios: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Theradex: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy; France Foundation: Speakers Bureau; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Biosight: Other: US Lead. Luger:Ariad: Research Funding; Agios: Honoraria; Biosight: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria; Onconova: Research Funding; Kura: Research Funding; Jazz: Honoraria; Genetech: Research Funding; Daichi Sankyo: Honoraria; Cyslacel: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Al-Kali:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Zheng:Pfizer: Research Funding. Pratz:AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Agios: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millenium/Takeda: Research Funding; Boston Biomedical: Consultancy; Astellas Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding. Powell:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Rafael Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding. Tallman:Tetraphase: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Nohla: 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, Research Funding; Rigel: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Delta Fly Pharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Biosight: Research Funding; KAHR: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Orsenix: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BioLineRx: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding; UpToDate: Patents & Royalties; Cellerant: Research Funding; Daiichi-Sankyo: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncolyze: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Off Label Disclosure: Use of maintenance Decitabine in AML

Background Although rituximab‐based high‐dose therapy is frequently used in diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients undergoing autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (auto‐HCT), data supporting the benefits are not available. Herein, we report the impact of rituximab‐based conditioning on auto‐HCT outcomes in patients who have DLBCL. Methods Using the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) registry, 862 adult DLBCL patients undergoing auto‐HCT between 2003 and 2017 using BEAM (BCNU, etoposide, cytarabine, melphalan) conditioning regimen were included. All patients received frontline rituximab‐containing chemoimmunotherapy and had chemosensitive disease pre‐HCT. Early chemoimmunotherapy failure was defined as not achieving complete remission (CR) after frontline chemoimmunotherapy or relapse within 1 year of initial diagnosis. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Results The study cohort was divided into 2 groups: BEAM (n = 667) and R‐BEAM (n = 195). On multivariate analysis, no significant difference was seen in OS ( P = .83) or progression‐free survival (PFS) ( P = .61) across the 2 cohorts. No significant association between the use of rituximab and risk of relapse ( P = .15) or nonrelapse mortality ( P = .12) was observed. Variables independently associated with lower OS included older age at auto‐HCT ( P < .001), absence of CR at auto‐HCT ( P < .001) and early chemoimmunotherapy failure ( P < .001). Older age ( P < .0002) and non‐CR pre‐HCT ( P < .0001) were also associated with inferior PFS. There was no significant difference in early infectious complications between the 2 cohorts. Conclusion In this large registry analysis of DLBCL patients undergoing auto‐HCT, the addition of rituximab to the BEAM conditioning regimen had no impact on transplantation outcomes. Older age, absence of CR pre auto‐HCT, and early chemoimmunotherapy failure were associated with inferior survival.

Abstract Background: Novel therapies are required to improve the outcome of patients with AML. New agents are asked to demonstrate an overall survival (OS) benefit before qualifying for FDA approval. The long duration of clinical trials required in order to achieve this endpoint hampers quick evaluation of candidate therapies, including novel agents. Identification of reliable surrogate endpoints for OS in AML is needed. Here we compare the results of therapy for patients with untreated AML ages 16-60 years on the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 1900 trial (E1900) of induction chemotherapy followed by consolidation and autologous transplant in order to evaluate the validity of an event free survival (EFS) endpoint as a surrogate for OS. Methods:OS was measured from randomization for induction therapy to death from any cause (censored at last contact). EFS was measured from randomization to induction treatment failure, relapse after compete response (CR), or death in remission (censored at last contact). Hazard ratios (HR) were computed using Cox proportional hazards models. The association between EFS and OS was evaluated using the Kendall tau-a rank correlation for censored data. Results:There were657 patients enrolled of which 426 patients relapsed or had induction treatment failure before death or date of last contact. Median EFS and OS were 8.0 months (95% CI, 6.3 to 9.7 months) and 23.6 months (95% CI, 16.9 to 23.6 months), respectively. With a median follow-up of 80.1 months, there is a statistically significant correlation between EFS and OS (Kendall tau-a = 0.467, 95% confidence interval (CI) = (0.425, 0.510), p<0.001). This correlation was similarly significant at a median follow-up of 25.2 months (Kendall tau-a = 0.361, 95% CI (0.323, 0.400), p <0.001) when the E1900 trial was originally reported (Fernandez et al. NEJM 2009). Key findings reported based on the original OS endpoint are similar when analyzed with an EFS endpoint (Table 1). High-dose daunorubicin (90 mg/m2) (DNR 90) confers both an EFS and OS benefit in patients aged < 50 years and patients with intermediate cytogenetic risk, and does not confer an EFS or OS benefit in older patients and patients with unfavorable cytogenetic risk, on univariate analysis. Divergent results are only seen in the small subset of favorable cytogenetic risk patients, where DNR 90 conferred an OS benefit (p=0.027) without an EFS benefit (p=0.32). Both EFS and OS endpoints consistently reflect the impact of mutation status on survival. The presence of a FLT3-ITD or DNMT3A mutation has a negative impact on both EFS and OS while an IDH2 mutation has a favorable impact on EFS and OS. The presence of a NPM1 mutation confers a favorable impact on EFS and OS in patients who received DNR 90 and did not impact EFS or OS in patients receiving standard-dose daunorubicin (45 mg/m2) (DNR 45). The presence of an IDH1 mutation does not impact EFS or OS. Conclusions:The results of E1900 demonstrating superiority of DNR 90 in AML induction in patients up to age 60 are concordant when using an EFS or OS endpoint. This is true for the group as a whole as well as for subgroups for which targeted agents are in development (FLT3/IDH2 inhibitors). Further investigation of whether EFS is a reliable surrogate for OS is warranted in AML. If confirmed, its use as a primary endpoint could be adopted by regulatory agencies in order to allow more rapid completion of clinical trials in AML and bring new therapies to AML patients in a timely fashion. Table 1. Results of E1900 based on an EFS endpoint versus an OS endpoint. Subgroup N OS HR (DNR 90/DNR 45) & 95% CI Wald P EFS HR (DNR 90/DNR 45) & 95% CI Wald P DNR 45 DNR 90 Age < 50 yrs ³ 50 yrs 188 142 172 155 0.66 (0.50, 0.85) 0.81 (0.62, 1.06) 0.002 0.118 0.64 (0.50, 0.82) 0.86 (0.67, 1.10) 0.0004 0.23 Cytogenetic Favorable Intermediate Unfavorable 38 141 59 51 127 63 0.51 (0.28, 0.93) 0.68 (0.50, 0.92) 0.79 (0.54, 1.16) 0.027 0.012 0.225 0.76 (0.44, 1.31) 0.63 (0.47, 0.83) 0.72 (0.49, 1.05) 0.32 0.001 0.09 Subgroup N OS HR (MUT/WT) & 95% CI Wald P EFS HR (MUT/WT) & 95% CI Wald P FLT3-ITD WT MUT 456 147 1.62 (1.31, 2.01) <.0001 1.48 (1.21, 1.82) 0.0002 DNMT3A WT MUT 371 119 1.30 (1.03, 1.65) 0.03 1.23 (0.98, 1.54) 0.07 IDH1 WT MUT 465 36 0.88 (0.59, 1.33) 0.55 0.91 (0.62, 1.34) 0.64 IDH2 WT MUT 451 50 0.63 (0.43, 0.93) 0.02 0.68 (0.48, 0.97) 0.03 NPM1 DNR 45 DNR 90 245 257 0.84 (0.61, 1.16) 0.60 (0.41, 0.89) 0.30 0.01 0.90 (0.66, 1.22) 0.59 (0.41, 0.84) 0.49 0.004 Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract The UKALLXII/ECOG2993 international study for adults with acute lymphoblastic leukeamia (ALL) included a separate, single-arm study (still open) to evaluate the role of etoposide/TBI conditioned allogeneic bone marrow transplantation (BMT) in patients with Philadelphia chromosome positive (Ph pos) disease. Patients received 2 phases of induction, intensification with high dose methotrexate and BMT using unrelated donor stem cells where a matched sibling was not available. 267 patients with Ph pos ALL were treated from 1993 onwards, in the pre-imatinib era. The study was amended in 2003 to add imatinib 600mg per day following induction and after BMT for 2 years or until relapse. A subsequent amendment at the end of 2005, added imatinib 600mg per day also to phase 2 of induction. 153 patients have now been treated on the imatinib-containing protocol − 89 received imatinib following induction and 64 started imatinib with phase 2 induction. Complete remission (CR) rate at the end of 2 phases of induction was 91% with imatinib started in induction, 81% with imatinib started in consolidation only & 83% in the pre imatinib era. 128 of the 153 patients treated with any imatinib were eligible for BMT. Of the 98 patients with over 6 months follow-up, 57 (58%) actually received BMT. This transplant rate does not differ from the 62% in the pre-imatinib era although the data pertain mostly to those whose imatinib started later during therapy. Overall survival of the imatinib-treated group as a whole is 23% at 3 years, which does not differ from the 26% pre-imatinib rate as shown in the figure. Hence, imatinib started post-induction does not appear to improve survival. Imatinib given with induction may improve the CR rate, but there is insufficient follow up to assess transplant or survival rates. Earlier imatinib may be optimal but overall, our study does not provide evidence yet that imatinib alters the outcome of this disease. Figure Figure Patient characteristics Pre-imatinib (N=267) Post-imatinib (N=153) Gender: Male 150 (56%) 96 (63%) WBC (x 10 ^9/l) (2 unknown): <30 141(53%) 86 (56%) ≥ 30 124 (47%) 67 (44%) Median (range) 26.8 (1.5–438) 21.0 (0.5–491) Age: median (range) 40 (15–60) 42 (16–64) CNS disease (82 unknown) 14 (8%) 4 (3%)

Background: The use of midostaurin in combination with standard induction chemotherapy has been shown to improve the outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed FLT3 mutated (FLT3m) AML (Stone et al) and allogeneic transplant is often recommended in first remission. While likely to achieve remission with standard induction, the majority of these patients will relapse and die of their disease. Gilteritinib, a potent FLT3 inhibitor, has been approved for use in patients with relapsed or refractory FLT3 mutated AML. In Phase I/II studies, when used as part of induction therapy, gilteritinib has shown promising CR rates. We have designed a trial comparing the outcomes of induction therapy with gilteritinib to those with midostaurin. The hypothesis is that gilteritinib, when added to induction chemotherapy, will produce more FLT3m negative composite complete remission (CRc). The Ratify trial combined midostaurin with daunorubicin 60 mg/m2/d X 3 days and cytarabine X 7 days Daunorubicin 90 mg/m2/d has however been shown to be superior during induction in patients with newly diagnosed FLT3 ITD mutated AML (Luskin et al, Burnett et al) While improved survival is the ultimate goal of any leukemia regimen, it is known that AML patients who proceed to allogeneic transplant with measurable residual disease (MRD) positive disease fare worse than those with MRD negative disease. As such, our goal is to increase the likelihood of an MRD negative state after induction. Study Design This is a randomized, open-label, multicenter phase II study comparing gilteritinib to midostaurin in combination with cytarabine 100 mg/m2 and daunorubicin 90 mg/m2 in newly diagnosed FLT3 mutated AML patients ages 18-65. Central confirmation of FLT3 mutation and other pretreatment studies are required. In order to identify patients without delay, all patients with suspected AML will be able to be prescreened without enrollment to the randomized treatment trial. Patients will be stratified according to TKD vs. ITD FLT3 mutation. Patients with FLT3-ITD mutation will undergo further stratification with NPM1 mutation status (positive vs. negative) and FLT3 ITD to FLT3 wild type signal ratio (high [≥ 0.5] vs. low [<0.5]). Patients will be randomized to receive standard induction treatment (cytarabine and daunorubicin) with either gilteritinib or midostaurin. Mandatory bone marrow samples are required after Induction and Consolidation. Patients who achieve CR or complete remission with incomplete hematologic recovery (CRi) will be assessed for MRD and be eligible at count recovery to go on to receive standard consolidation treatment of high-dose cytarabine with the study drug received during induction (gilteritinib or midostaurin). Patients may proceed to allogeneic transplant after induction or after 0-4 cycles of chemotherapy consolidation and may participate in BMT CTN 1506. Key Eligibility: Newly diagnosed FLT3m AML Primary Objective To evaluate the FLT3m negative (evaluated by polymerase chain reaction [PCR] and capillary electrophoresis) composite complete response (CRc) (includes CR or CRi)rate of patients with FLT3 mutated AML who receive gilteritinib compared to those who receive midostaurin in addition to standard therapy with cytarabine and daunorubicin during induction. Sample Size and Statistical design The accrual goal of this study will be 179 patients. Patients who achieve remission will be followed for survival and relapse. With an allocation ratio of 1:1 to the two arms, the study will have 80% power to detect an improvement of 20% in the FLT3 mutation negative CRc rate in the gilteritinib arm (i.e. from 40% to 60%) at the one-sided significance level of 0.05 based on Fisher's exact test. This study is conducted through PrECOG and is funded by Astellas Pharma. The study is slated to open in the summer of 2019 at 30 US sites. References: Stone R.M., Mandrekar S.J., Sanford B.L., et al. N Engl J Med 2017; 377:454-464 Luskin MR, Lee JW, Fernandez HF et al. Blood 2016 :blood-2015-07-657403; doi: https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2015-07-657403 Burnett AK, Russell NH, Hills RK et al. Blood 2016; Blood 2016 128:449-452; doi: https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2016-04-712091 Figure Disclosures Luger: Genetech: Research Funding; Jazz: Honoraria; Celgene: Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria; Kura: Research Funding; Onconova: Research Funding; Agios: Honoraria; Ariad: Research Funding; Biosight: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Cyslacel: Research Funding; Daichi Sankyo: Honoraria. Loghavi:MDACC: Employment; GLG Consultants: Consultancy; AlphaSights: Consultancy. Lazarus:Genentech: Speakers Bureau; Pluristem Therapeutics, Inc: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy, Honoraria; CSL Behring: Consultancy; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Actinium Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Biosight: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Teva Pharmaceuticals: Speakers Bureau. Rowe:BioSight: Consultancy. Tallman:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Rigel: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Biosight: Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; KAHR: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Nohla: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncolyze: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BioLineRx: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Daiichi-Sankyo: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Delta Fly Pharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Orsenix: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Cellerant: Research Funding; Tetraphase: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; UpToDate: Patents & Royalties. Pratz:Astellas Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Agios: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millenium/Takeda: Research Funding; Boston Biomedical: Consultancy. OffLabel Disclosure: In this study gilteritinib is being studies in newly diagnosed AML.

Background: Patients ≥55 years of age with rel/ref AML who have failed to achieve complete remission (CR) after standard induction & salvage therapies do not routinely undergo allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) due to inability to receive myeloablative conditioning and lack of efficacy. With the advent of recently approved targeted therapies (e.g. venetoclax, IDH inhibitors) more patients achieve CR, however durable responses in heavily pre-treated patient populations remain unsatisfactory with very few patients being transplanted. The SIERRA (Study of Iomab-B in Elderly Relapsed or Refractory AML) trial is a prospective, randomized, phase 3 trial designed to address this unmet need. We present the preliminary analysis of the first 50% of patients and analyze the proportion of patients who fail standard chemo and targeted therapies that can then successfully undergo HCT with Iomab-B-based conditioning. Study continues to enroll (N=150), primary end-point durable CR of ≥180 days. Methods: Eligible patients are ≥ 55 years with rel/ref AML (≥5% blasts), adequate organ function, and related/unrelated 8/8 HLA-matched donors. Patients are randomized (1:1) to receive Iomab-B followed 12-14 days later by reduced intensity conditioning (fludarabine(FLU)/TBI) and HCT, or to conventional care (CC). CC patients may receive investigator's choice of salvage therapy, including newly approved targeted agents such as venetoclax, IDH Inhibitors and may proceed to standard HCT if they achieve CR. If patients do not achieve CR, the study allows cross-over (CO) to Iomab-B with HCT. Results: Preliminary data are available from the first 75 patients enrolled on the SIERRA trial. Median age of 64 years (range: 55-77). All patients had active measurable disease (Table 1). Patients in this trial were heavily pretreated with 85% failing ≥2 induction therapies and 33% failing targeted therapies. Molecular and cytogenetics was 68% adverse risk. (NCCN, v1.2018) Following therapeutic dose of Iomab-B as a single agent, there was significant reduction of circulating blasts by day 3 (99%, p<0.0001), and peripheral blasts became undetectable by day 8 prior to FLU. All patients transplanted on the Iomab-B arm with data available showed median days to engraftment of ANC at 14 (range: 9-22) and platelets at 16 (range: 4-30) (Table 1). After randomization, 82% (31/38) patients in the CC arm failed salvage therapy and did not proceed to standard HCT. Significantly, 32% (12/38) of these patients received targeted therapy. 73% (8/11) of the patients receiving venetoclax with HMA or cytarabine did not adequately respond and did not proceed to standard HCT, 45% (5/11) crossed over to Iomab-B and received HCT. Following standard chemotherapies, 85% (22/26) were evaluated for CO. In total, 63% (19/30) received Iomab-B and HCT. The most common reason preventing crossover was disease progression. All crossover (Iomab-B) patients showed similar engraftment (Table 1). CC patients showed increased incidence of febrile neutropenia with grade 3 prior to CO evaluation or HCT, compared to Iomab-B patients prior to HCT (CC: 34%, Iomab-B: 8%). Iomab-B administration was generally well-tolerated with no grade 4 and 1 grade 3 infusion reaction. There were no Iomab-B-related deaths or 100 day non-relapse transplant related mortality deaths in patients on the Iomab-B arm (Table 1). Conclusion: 100% of the patients receiving HCT on the Iomab-B arm engrafted, despite a median of 29% BM blasts pre-Iomab-B. 82% of the patients on the CC arm failed to be eligible for standard of care transplant, including a high percentage of those receiving targeted therapies. On the CC arm, 63% of eligible patients crossed over to Iomab-B/HCT with robust engraftment despite a median of 35% BM blasts pre-Iomab-B. The incidence of grade 3 febrile neutropenia was higher in patients treated on the conventional care arm with salvage therapy vs. those treated on the Iomab-B arm prior to HCT. In conclusion, despite advanced age, active disease and heavily pre-treated patients, 68% (50/74) of all patients enrolled in the SIERRA trial were able to undergo HCT after reinduction and targeted conditioning with Iomab-B. These results show significant improvements in the current rates of transplantation in this patient population. This SIERRA trial is currently enrolling. For full study details see www.sierratrial.com or clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02665065). Disclosures Gyurkocza: Actinium Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Nath:Astellas: Consultancy; Actinium: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy. Stiff:Amgen: Research Funding; Gamida-Cell: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Unum: Research Funding; Cellectar: Research Funding; Gilead/Kite Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Tomlinson:Actinium Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Other: Travel Support. Abhyankar:Incyte: Speakers Bureau; Therakos: Other: Consulting, Speakers Bureau. Hari:AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Cell Vault: Equity Ownership; Sanofi: Honoraria, Research Funding; Spectrum: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Kite: Consultancy, Honoraria. Al-Kadhimi:Seattle Genetics: Other: Stocks; Celldex Biotech: Other: Stocks. Foran:Agios: Honoraria, Research Funding. Orozco:Actinium Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Van Besien:Miltenyi Biotec: Research Funding. Sabloff:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas Pharma Canada: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; ASTX: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Actinium Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer Canada: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi Canada: Research Funding. Kebriaei:Pfizer: Honoraria; Kite: Honoraria; Jazz: Consultancy; Amgen: Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria; Kite: Honoraria; Jazz: Consultancy; Amgen: Research Funding. Levy:Takeda (Millennium Pharmaceuticals): Consultancy. Lazarus:Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy, Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Actinium Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Teva Pharmaceuticals: Speakers Bureau; Biosight: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pluristem Therapeutics, Inc: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; CSL Behring: Consultancy; Genentech: Speakers Bureau. Giralt:Novartis: Consultancy; Actinium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kite: Consultancy; Miltenyi: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Johnson & Johnson: Consultancy, Research Funding; Spectrum Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Berger:Actinium Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Reddy:Actinium Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Pagel:Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy.