Scott, Bart L.

Abstract Introduction Midostaurin is an orally available multikinase inhibitor that blocks FLT3 kinase activity. FLT3 mutations are associated with more frequent and earlier relapses and worse survival. The phase 3 RATIFY trial showed that midostaurin compared with placebo improved overall and event-free survival in newly diagnosed pts with FLT3-mutated AML when administered in combination with standard chemotherapy and as single-agent maintenance (Stone et al, ASH 2015). The ongoing RADIUS trial (NCT01883362) is investigating whether adding midostaurin to SOC after alloHSCT reduces the risk of relapse in pts with FLT3-ITD-mutated AML. Here we report safety data from the first 56 enrolled pts. Methods RADIUS is a randomized, open-label, phase 2 study comparing SOC vs midostaurin + SOC after alloHSCT in adult pts with AML with FLT3-ITD mutations (planned enrollment, N = 60). Study treatment started 28-60 days after alloHSCT. SOC was dictated by the treating physician. Pts were randomized to either SOC or midostaurin 50 mg twice daily + SOC (hereafter called the midostaurin arm) continuously for ≤ 12 months and will be followed up for ≥ 24 months. The study was designed to look for any safety or efficacy signals and not powered to find differences between study treatments. The primary endpoint is relapse-free survival at 18 months after alloHSCT. Adverse events (AEs) were followed up for 30 days after treatment. Key inclusion criteria are documented FLT3-ITD mutation, age 18-70 years, and first complete remission status. Pts could enroll after the date of engraftment and hematologic recovery to an absolute neutrophil count > 1000/μL and platelet count ≥ 20,000/μL without requiring transfusion. Results Pts were randomized from Feb 5, 2014, to Jun 13, 2016. The 2 arms (n = 28 each) were balanced regarding age, sex, and race. Most pts (93%) had de novo AML. At data cutoff (Jun 3, 2016), data were not mature enough to evaluate efficacy. Median (range) follow-up in the SOC and midostaurin arms was 240 (3-786) and 234 (3-656) days, respectively. Overall, 18 pts (64%) in the SOC arm and 19 pts (68%) in the midostaurin arm stopped treatment. Of these, 10 (36%) and 8 (29%) in the SOC and midostaurin arms, respectively, completed 12 months of treatment. Other reasons for stopping treatment were relapse (2 [7%] and 2 [7%]), death (2 [7%] and 0 [0%]), administrative problems (2 [7%] and 1 [4%]), withdrawn consent (1 [4%] and 3 [11%]), abnormal test results (1 [4%] and 0 [0%]), and AEs (0 [0%] and 4 [14%]). In the 24 pts who received ≥ 1 dose in the midostaurin arm, the median midostaurin dose was 76.2 (range, 25-100) mg daily. In the 15 pts (54%) who required a dose change, the reasons for dose changes were AEs (13 [46%]), dosing error (3 [11%]), re-escalation (3 [11%]), abnormal test results (2 [7%]), per protocol (2 [7%]), use of concomitant strong CYP3A4 inhibitors (1 [4%]), and other reasons (4 [14%]). The most common any-grade (Gr) AEs were fatigue (29%) and AST, headache, nausea and vomiting (all 25%) in the SOC arm and nausea and vomiting (both 64%) and diarrhea (43%) in the midostaurin arm (Figure 1). The most common Gr 3/4 AEs were nausea and hypertension in the SOC arm (all 3 [11%] each) and diarrhea, increased ALT, neutrophil count decreased (all 3 [11%] each) and platelet count decreased (5 [18%]) in the midostaurin arm. No on-treatment deaths occurred in the midostaurin arm. AEs led to discontinuation of midostaurin in 4 pts and included Gr 1 nausea, Gr 2 nausea and vomiting, Gr 3 lung infection, and Gr 2 elevated liver enzymes (n = 1 each). All of these except the lung infection were considered related to midostaurin. Graft-vs-host disease (GVHD) occurred in 16 pts (57%) in the SOC arm and 18 pts (64%) in the midostaurin arm (Figure 2). No stage ≥ 3 organ involvement occurred. Most cases of GVHD (11 [39%] in the SOC arm and 17 [61%] in the midostaurin arm) were acute. The most commonly affected organ was the skin (11 [39%] and 13 [46%], respectively, of which 5 [18%] and 4 [14%], respectively, were stage 2). Conclusions The preliminary safety data in the post-alloHSCT setting was consistent with data from other studies. Rates of Gr 1/2 nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea were higher in the midostaurin arm. Midostaurin did not change rates of GVHD. Because of the limited duration of follow-up, effects on chronic GVHD are unknown. Follow-up is ongoing, with efficacy data anticipated in 2017. Disclosures Maziarz: Athersys: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Scott:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Alexion: Speakers Bureau; Agios: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Deol:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Haines:Novartis: Employment. Bonifacio:Novartis: Employment. Rine:Novartis: Employment. Fernandez:Fate Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; Chimerix: Honoraria; Sanofi: Speakers Bureau.

Abstract Introduction Myelofibrosis (MF) and Post PV/ET MF represents a group of debilitating hematological disorders in which quality of life (QOL) is severely compromised in most patients as a result of persistent constitutional symptoms, progressive cytopenias, and splenomegaly. Conventional therapeutic modalities have largely focused on symptoms palliation rather than cure. Allogeneic stem cell transplantion (ASCT) remains the only potential curative option for intermediate and high risk disease. Till now, outcome data for MF have historically focused on survival benefit. Until now, few studies have evaluated the QOL, financial burden, and symptom response in MF patients undergoing treatment including ASCT. The development of the Myeloproliferative Symptom Assessment Form Total Symptom (MPN-SAF TSS) score in 2012 allows us to objectively quantify with a standardized tool these crucial aspects of patients care. The Myeloproliferative Neoplasm Quality of Life (MPN-QOL) Study Group aims to objectively quantify symptomatic response to standard available treatments by utilizing the MPN-SAF TSS. We introduce two MPN-QOL prospective trials currently in active enrollment: The MPN Experimental Assessment of Symptoms by Utilizing Repetitive Evaluation (MEASURE) Trial and the Symptoms Yielded in Myelofibrosis Patients after Transplant as Objectified by MPN-SAF TSS (SYMPTOMS) Trial. Our intention with these studies is to quantify the QOL and symptom burden of PMF and post PV/ET MF patients undergoing treatment including ASCT. Methods The MEASURES trial is a prospective questionnaire based study evaluating the responsiveness of the MPN-SAF TSS in detecting symptomatic changes in target symptoms for an anticipated 180 ET, PV and MF (including primary MF, post-ET and post PV MF) patients receiving non-experimental medical therapy (aspirin, hydroxyurea, anagrelide, interferon, busulfan, melphalan, cladribine, thalidomide, lenalidomide, prednisone, danazol, ruxolitinib) and/or phlebotomy. Patients complete the MPN-SAF for seven consecutive days at the time of enrollment and repeat the survey for an additional seven consecutive days between 90 days and six months. Patients also complete the MDASI, EORTC and Global Impression of Change Items on the first day of the second assessment. Physicians acquire demographic, laboratory, physical examination and radiographic data, along with serial response assessments. In parallel, the SYMPTOMS trial is prospective questionnaire based study evaluating the QOL of patients undergoing ASCT utilizing MPN-SAF TSS, the FACT-BMT, Global Impression of Change, and a financial questionnaire. Patients will be evaluated at various time points pre-transplant, day 30, day 100 and 1 year post-transplant. Participants (N=110) will be prospectively enrolled from Mayo Clinic Arizona (MCA) with other centers to soon join. To date we have enrolled 5 patients from MCA on the SYMPTOMS trial and 32 patients on the MEASURES trial. Results Both trials began open enrollment in the summer of 2012 and remain in recruitment phase. Our updated preliminary data will be presented at the ASH 2013 meeting Conclusion Myeloproliferative Neoplasms have been associated with debilitating symptom profile that can significantly impair the QOL. We recognize the burden of this disease and treatment and have therefore initiated two ongoing parallel prospective trials with goals to quantify the QOL and symptom burden of MPN patients. By quantifying degree of burden and impairment in QOL in a standardized format in MPN patients undergoing a range of treatments, we will in the future be better able to inform our patients of the likely benefits and toxicities of the available treatment options. Disclosures: Birgegard: Vifor Pharma: Honoraria.

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.

PurposeAdvanced systemic mastocytosis (SM), a fatal hematopoietic malignancy characterized by drug resistance, has no standard therapy. The effectiveness of allogeneic hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (alloHCT) in SM remains unknown.Patients and MethodsIn a global effort to define the value of HCT in SM, 57 patients with the following subtypes of SM were evaluated: SM associated with clonal hematologic non–mast cell disorders (SM-AHNMD; n = 38), mast cell leukemia (MCL; n = 12), and aggressive SM (ASM; n = 7). Median age of patients was 46 years (range, 11 to 67 years). Donors were HLA-identical (n = 34), unrelated (n = 17), umbilical cord blood (n = 2), HLA-haploidentical (n = 1), or unknown (n = 3). Thirty-six patients received myeloablative conditioning (MAC), and 21 patients received reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC).ResultsResponses in SM were observed in 40 patients (70%), with complete remission in 16 patients (28%). Twelve patients (21%) had stable disease, and five patients (9%) had primary refractory disease. Overall survival (OS) at 3 years was 57% for all patients, 74% for patients with SM-AHNMD, 43% for those with ASM, and 17% for those with MCL. The strongest risk factor for poor OS was MCL. Survival was also lower in patients receiving RIC compared with MAC and in patients having progression compared with patients having stable disease or response.ConclusionAlloHCT was associated with long-term survival in patients with advanced SM. Although alloHCT may be considered as a viable and potentially curative therapeutic option for advanced SM in the meantime, given that this is a retrospective analysis with no control group, the definitive role of alloHCT will need to be determined by a prospective trial.