Litzow, Mark R.

Abstract Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have improved the outcomes of patients with Philadelphia chromosome positive (Ph+) acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). Many older patients (pts) are not good candidates for intensive chemotherapy and are treated with TKIs plus corticosteroids or low intensity chemotherapy. Although the remission rates with this approach have been high, the median disease-free survival (DFS) has been short. Therefore, novel treatment strategies are needed. This trial evaluated the feasibility of combining the TKI dasatinib with prednisone and blinatumomab in older pts with Ph+ ALL. Methods: This trial was activated through the NCTN in January 2015 and closed to accrual in April 2021. Pt eligibility included: age ≥ 65 years; Ph+ or Ph-like ALL (with dasatinib-sensitive fusions or mutations); newly diagnosed or relapsed/ refractory; no evidence of central nervous system (CNS) disease; and adequate organ function. Treatment: For induction, pts received dasatinib 140 mg/d orally (PO) Days 1-56 along with prednisone 60 mg/m 2/d PO Days 1-24. Pts achieving complete remission (CR) or CR with incomplete count recovery (CRi) (Day 28 or Day 56) continued dasatinib until Day 84 followed by 3 cycles of post-remission therapy (PRT) with blinatumomab/ dasatinib. Pts not achieving CR or CRi by Day 56 received re-induction with blinatumomab. Response was assessed at Day 35 of blinatumomab. Pts not achieving CR/ CRi could receive a second cycle of blinatumomab. This was followed by 3 cycles of PRT with blinatumomab/ dasatinib. Maintenance therapy consisted of prednisone 60 mg/m 2/d x 5 days every 28 days for a total of 18 cycles along with dasatinib 140 mg po qd indefinitely. CNS prophylaxis included intrathecal (IT) methotrexate every 4-6 weeks x 8 doses. IT methotrexate was given at least 2 days apart from blinatumomab. Response was assessed at Days 28, 56, 84 and additional time points were dependent on response. Minimal residual disease (MRD) was assessed centrally by multi-color flow cytometry at Day 28. Statistics: 9 eligible/ evaluable pts receiving PRT were to be evaluated before enrolling additional pts. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were defined as: > Grade 3 non-hematologic toxicities with the exception of nausea, vomiting, or diarrhea (if manageable with supportive care measures) or Grade 4 neutropenia lasting > 42 days with possible relationship to dasatinib or blinatumomab. If due to unexpected accrual, 12 pts were evaluable for DLT, the following rules would apply. If > 4 of the 12 pts experienced a DLT, the study would be temporarily closed pending review. Upon re-opening, 8 additional eligible and evaluable pts would be enrolled for a total of 20 pts receiving blinatumomab. Results: Due to rapid accrual, 16 pts enrolled before accrual was paused to assess feasibility and safety. Twelve pts were evaluable for DLT and 4 experienced a DLT: Grade 3 dyspnea and gastrointestinal pain (n=1), Grade 3 hypertension (n=1), Grade 3 dyspnea (n=1), Grade 3 hyperglycemia (n=1). These adverse events were deemed acceptable by the NCI and FDA and the study re-opened. A total of 25 eligible pts were accrued. The median age was 73 years (range 62-87). All pts were newly diagnosed. One pt was Ph-like, with the remainder being Ph+; 89% of Ph+ pts had additional cytogenetic abnormalities. During induction, 2 pts experienced treatment-related non-hematologic Grade 4 toxicities. No Grade 4 or higher treatment-related non-hematologic toxicities occurred during post-remission therapy or maintenance. Twenty-three out of 25 pts (92%) achieved a CR during dasatinib-based and prednisone induction therapy. Four did not receive PRT (2 due to adverse events, 1 to receive transplant, 1 because of insurance issues). Sixteen pts who achieved CR had MRD data. Five out of 16 pts (31%) were MRD negative at Day 28. One pt remains on PRT and 10 are on maintenance. The median follow up for pts who are alive is 1.7 years. The median overall survival (OS) and DFS have not been reached as of July 8, 2021. Kaplan-Meier 3-year estimates of OS and DFS are 85% (95% CI 58%-95%) and 80% (95% CI 55%-92%), respectively (Figure). Conclusions: This trial demonstrates the feasibility of combining dasatinib and blinatumomab in Ph+ ALL. In addition, with 1.7 years of follow up, outcomes are encouraging with high estimated 3-year DFS and OS. Longer follow up will be needed to determine the durability of these results. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Advani: Kite Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Glycomimetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Immunogen: Research Funding; OBI: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding; Macrogenics: Research Funding; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Moseley: BioSight Ltd: Consultancy. Wood: Pfizer, Amgen, Seattle Genetics: Honoraria; Juno, Pfizer, Amgen, Seattle Genetics: Other: Laboratory Services Agreement. Park: Intellia: Consultancy; Kura Oncology: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Affyimmune: Consultancy; Curocel: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Artiva: Consultancy; PrecisionBio: Consultancy; Servier: Consultancy; Kite Pharma: Consultancy; Innate Pharma: Consultancy; Minerva: Consultancy; Autolus: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy. Wieduwilt: Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Reata: Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company. Jeyakumar: Jazz: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding. Atallah: Abbvie: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy. Gerds: PharmaEssentia Corporation: Consultancy; CTI BioPharma: Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Celgene/Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Constellation: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy. O'Brien: Amgen, Astellas, Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen Oncology, Aptose Biosciences Inc., Vaniam Group LLC, AbbVie, Alexion, Verastem, Juno Therapeutics, Vida Ventures, Autolus, Johnson and Johnson, Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, NOVA Research Company, Eli Lill: Consultancy; Kite, Regeneron, Acerta, Caribou, Gilead, Pharmacyclics, TG Therapeutics, Pfizer, Sunesis: Research Funding. Othus: Celgene: Other: Data safety monitoring board; Merck: Consultancy; Biosight: Consultancy; Glycomimetics: Other: Data safety monitoring board; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy. Litzow: Jazz: Other: Advisory Board; Pluristem: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Actinium: Research Funding; Omeros: Other: Advisory Board; Astellas: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Biosight: Other: Data monitoring committee. Stone: Actinium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Consultancy; Arog: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astellas: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BerGen Bio: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Boston Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Elevate Bio: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Foghorn Therapeutics: Consultancy; Gemoab: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy; Innate: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Jazz: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onconova: Consultancy; Syndax: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Syntrix/ACI: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Syros: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Aprea: Consultancy; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Macrogenics: Consultancy. Erba: AbbVie Inc; Agios Pharmaceuticals Inc; ALX Oncology; Amgen Inc; Daiichi Sankyo Inc; FORMA Therapeutics; Forty Seven Inc; Gilead Sciences Inc; GlycoMimetics Inc; ImmunoGen Inc; Jazz Pharmaceuticals Inc; MacroGenics Inc; Novartis; PTC Therapeutics: Research Funding; AbbVie Inc; Agios Pharmaceuticals Inc; Bristol Myers Squibb; Celgene, a Bristol Myers Squibb company; Incyte Corporation; Jazz Pharmaceuticals Inc; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; AbbVie Inc: Other: Independent review committee; AbbVie Inc; Agios Pharmaceuticals Inc; Astellas; Bristol Myers Squibb; Celgene, a Bristol Myers Squibb company; Daiichi Sankyo Inc; Genentech, a member of the Roche Group; GlycoMimetics Inc; Incyte Corporation; Jazz Pharmaceuticals Inc; Kura Oncology; Nov: Other: Advisory Committee.

Abstract Introduction: Therapy-related myeloid neoplasm (t-MN) includes acute myeloid leukemia (AML), myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS), and myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative neoplasms (MDS/MPN) that occur as a complication of DNA-damaging therapies. The World Health Organization recommends considering t-MN as a single entity. Whether t-MDS and t-AML have distinct characteristics and outcomes is not known. The aim of this study was to compare clinicopathological characteristics and outcomes of t-MDS and t-AML. Methods: All patients diagnosed with t-MN based on the World Health Organization criteria were identified. Bone marrow biopsies, cytogenetic, and next-generation sequencing (NGS) were obtained at the treating physician's discretion. Pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants (PV) were called based on the standard criteria. Overall survival (OS) was calculated from the time of t-MN diagnosis until the last follow up using Kaplan-Meier analysis using Wilcoxon test. For survival analysis comparing chemotherapy to best supportive care (BSC) only, patients were censored at the time of allogeneic stem cell transplant (SCT). Multivariate analysis was performed using Cox proportional hazard method and corrected using false discovery rate (FDR). Statistical analysis was performed using JMP (v14.1, SAS Institute) and significance was defined as P<0.05. Results: We identified 554 patients, of which 180 (32.4%), 365 (65.8%), and 9 (1.6%) presented as t-AML, t-MDS, and t-MDS/MPN respectively. t-MDS/MPN patients were excluded from further analysis due to a small number. Clinical and laboratory characteristics of the t-AML and t-MDS cohorts is shown in Table 1. t-AML patients were significantly more anemic and thrombocytopenic at presentation. As expected, t-AML had a higher peripheral blood and BM blast count. There was no difference in proportion of patients with chromosomal abnormalities, though a statistically significantly higher proportion of t-MDS patients had chromosome 5 abnormality, 5q deletion, monosomy 5, chromosome 7 abnormality, monosomy 7 compared to t-AML patients. On other hand, 11q23 (mixed lineage leukemia, MLL) rearrangement was more common in t-AML compared to t-MDS (9.3% vs. 2.8%, P=0.005). A higher proportion of t-MDS patients had PV detected by NGS compared to t-AML (92.9% vs. 85.6%, P=0.038). A higher proportion of t-MDS patients had PV in TP53 (37.6% vs. 21.4%, P=0.004) and ASXL1 (23% vs. 11.7%, P=0.016) genes; whereas a higher proportion of t-AML patients had PV in RAS (18.9% vs. 9.1%, P=0.013) and WT1 (8.1% vs. 2.9%, P=0.05) genes. One hundred twenty-eight (35%) of 365 t-MDS patients progressed to t-AML. The presence of any chromosomal abnormality at t-MDS diagnosis predicted a higher risk of transformation to t-AML (χ 2 3.9, P=0.03). t-AML patients had a significantly shorter OS compared to t-MDS (9.2 vs. 19.7 months, P<0.0001, Figure A). This difference persisted when stratified by no disease modifying therapies (BSC only) 2 vs. 17 months (P<0.0001, Figure B), as well as among those who received at least one line of chemotherapy (14 vs. 24.6 months, P<0.001). Finally, a higher proportion of patients with t-AML underwent SCT and there was a trend towards improved survival for t-AML patients (vs. t-MDS 52.9 vs. 20.7 months, P=0.07) from the time of transplant. Multivariate analysis for OS performed to control for all the variables that were different at presentation (except for blast count), showed that t-MDS (as opposed to t-AML) phenotype at diagnosis, and undergoing SCT were independent predictors of improved survival (Table 2). Conclusion: t-MDS and t-AML have distinct clinical, cytogenetic, and genetic features at presentation. In the absence of disease modifying therapies, t-AML is a more aggressive phenotype, consistently associated with a shorter survival. Even after controlling adverse risk features, t-AML phenotype had a shorter survival compared to t-MDS. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Litzow: AbbVie: Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Actinium: Research Funding; Pluristem: Research Funding; Jazz: Other: Advisory Board; Omeros: Other: Advisory Board; Biosight: Other: Data monitoring committee. Hiwase: Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Abstract Gilteritinib (Gilt), a FLT3 tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), is approved for the treatment of relapsed/refractory (R/R) FLT3-mutated (FLT3 +)acute myeloid leukemia (AML). However, long-term survival is limited by the development of drug resistance mutations in persistent FLT3 + clones. Combination regimens may deepen response and improve outcomes. Venetoclax (Ven), a BCL-2 inhibitor, is approved in combination with hypomethylating agents for newly diagnosed AML not suitable for standard induction therapy. FLT3 + AMLhas been associated with clinical resistance to Ven. Still, FLT3 TKIs + Ven have demonstrated synthetic lethality in preclinical models, prompting this multicenter, open-label, phase 1b trial (NCT03625505) to evaluate Ven + Gilt for R/R AML. Here, we report final response and survival endpoints, and molecular clearance among patients (pts) treated at the recommended phase two dose (RP2D). The study design has been previously described (Daver, et al. ASH 2020, Abstract 333). Pts in the dose expansion cohort received Ven 400 mg + Gilt 120 mg (RP2D) daily in 28-day cycles, following Ven ramp-up. The primary endpoint was mCRc (complete response [CR] + CR with incomplete platelet recovery [CRp] + CR with incomplete blood count recovery [CRi] + morphologic leukemia-free state) to align with the ADMIRAL phase III trial (Perl, et al. NEJM 2019). Baseline co-mutations and serial FLT3 internal tandem duplications (ITD) allelic burden were assessed using the MyAML panel (Invivoscribe, San Diego, CA) and FLT3-ITD MRD assay with sensitivities of 5% and 0.001%, respectively. As of the data cut off of January 31, 2021, 54 pts were treated at the RP2D. Fifty-two pts (as assessed locally) had FLT3 +AML; 41 had FLT3-ITD only, 8 had tyrosine kinase domain only, 3 had both mutations, and 2 were FLT3 wild type (wt). Additional baseline characteristics are in Table 1. Grade 3 or 4 AEs occurred in 51 (94.4%) pts, and 39 (72.2%) pts had serious AEs. Grade 3 or 4 cytopenias occurred in 43 (79.6%) pts. AEs of special interest included tumor lysis syndrome (2 [3.7%]) and QT prolongation (1 [1.9%]). AEs leading to dosing interruptions (Ven, 27 [50%]; Gilt, 26 [48.1%]), reductions (Ven, 3 [5.6%]; Gilt, 4 [7.4%]), and discontinuation (Ven, 7 [13%]; Gilt, 7 [13%]) were reported for both study drugs. There was 1 treatment-emergent death of typhlitis. Among FLT3 + pts with post-baseline assessments (51/52), mCRc was achieved by 38 pts (74.5%; CR/CRp/CRi, 19 [37.3%] pts), with a median follow-up time of 12 mo (range: 0.8 - 20.1). The mCRc in pts with prior TKI (32) or prior Ven (10) use were 78.1% and 60%, respectively. The mOS among all FLT3 +pts was 10 mo (95%CI: 6.6, NE), with a median DoR (mDoR) of 5.4 mo (95% CI: 3.3, 6.6). Pts with FLT3-ITD had a mOS of 10.5 mo (95%CI: 6.8, NE), and a mDoR of 5.6 mo (95% CI: 3.3, 8.3). For the 14 pts who had a transplant, the mOS was not reached (95%CI: 10.0, NE) vs 6.89 mo (95%CI: 3.0, 10.5) for those who did not have a transplant (37). The mOS for pts with prior TKI or Ven was 9.6 (95% CI: 4.3, NE) and 10.5 mo (95% CI: 2.0, NE), respectively, with a mDoR of 9.6 (95% CI: 4.3, NE) and 6.2 mo (95% CI: 2.6, NE), respectively. The 60-day mortality rate was 11.8% (95% CI: 4.4, 23.9). The mCRc for NPM1 + and NPM1wt were 92.3% and 61.1%, respectively. mCRc for DNMT3A + and DMNT3A wt pts were 82.4% and 64.3%, respectively. WT1 + and WT1 wt mCRc were 66.7% and 77.3%, respectively. The mCRc for NPM1 + and DNMT3A + co-mutated pts was 100%. In a post hoc analysis of the 30 analyzable mCRc pts with at least one follow-up MRD assessment, 17 (56.7%) achieved molecular clearance defined as FLT3 allelic burden < 10 -2. The mOS of pts achieving mCRc with FLT3 allelic burden of < 10 -2 vs mCRc with FLT3 allelic burden ≥ 10 -2 (Figure 1) was not reached (95% CI: 9.76, NE) vs 6.83 mo (4.21, NE). Ven + Gilt achieved high mCRc in patients with R/R FLT3 + AML, with or without prior TKI exposure, and an encouraging mOS. FLT3 mutation clearance was seen in a majority of patients and associated with longer OS. Encouraging remission rates were observed across many genotypes and were particularly high among pts with NPM1 + +/- DNMT3A co-mutation. Cytopenias were common but manageable with appropriate Ven or Gilt dosing modifications. Serial NGS molecular data, as well as updated survival data will be presented at the meeting. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Daver: Hanmi: Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Trillium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Trovagene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novimmune: Research Funding; FATE Therapeutics: Research Funding; Glycomimetics: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astellas: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sevier: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; ImmunoGen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Other: Data Monitoring Committee member; Dava Oncology (Arog): Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Syndax: Consultancy; Shattuck Labs: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy; Kite Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; SOBI: Consultancy; STAR Therapeutics: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Newave: Research Funding. Perl: Actinium: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Astellas: Consultancy, Research Funding; Forma: Consultancy; Syndax: Consultancy; Loxo: Consultancy; Fujifilm: Research Funding; Arog: Research Funding; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onconova: Consultancy; Sumitomo Dainippon: Consultancy. Levis: Amgen, Astellas Pharma, Daiichi-Sankyo, FujiFilm, and Menarini: Honoraria; Astellas and FujiFilm: Research Funding; BMS: 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; Takeda: Honoraria; Jazz: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria. Ritchie: Astellas: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene/BMS: Consultancy, Other: travel support, Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Jazz: Consultancy, Research Funding; Protaganist: Consultancy, Honoraria; ARIAD Pharmaceuticals: Ended employment in the past 24 months, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding. Litzow: Astellas: Research Funding; Omeros: Other: Advisory Board; Pluristem: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Actinium: Research Funding; Jazz: Other: Advisory Board; Biosight: Other: Data monitoring committee. McCloskey: Jazz: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Smith: AbbVie: Research Funding; Revolutions Medicine: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; FUJIFILM: Research Funding; Astellas Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria. Schiller: Takeda: Research Funding; Trovagene: Research Funding; Tolero: Research Funding; Ono: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; ASH foundation: Other: Chair-unpaid; Pfizer: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy; Sanofi: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Ariad: Research Funding; Stemline Therapeutics, Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Ono-UK: Consultancy, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Kite/Gilead: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Onconova: Research Funding; Mateon: Research Funding; Sangamo: Research Funding; Samus: Research Funding; Regimmune: Research Funding; PrECOG: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Kaiser Permanente: Consultancy; Cyclacel: Research Funding; MedImmune: Research Funding; Ambit: Research Funding; Agios: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Jazz: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Elevate: Research Funding; Bio: Research Funding; Pharma: Consultancy; Johnson & Johnson: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Biomed Valley Discoveries: Research Funding; Eli Lilly: Research Funding; Sellas: Research Funding; Geron: Research Funding; Genentech-Roche: Research Funding; Gamida Cell Ltd.: Research Funding; FujiFilm: Research Funding; Forma: Research Funding; Delta-Fly: Research Funding; Deciphera: Research Funding; Daiichi-Sankyo: Research Funding; Constellation Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Celator: Research Funding; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Astellas: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Arog: Research Funding; Actuate: Research Funding; Actinium Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Leukemia & Lymphoma Society: Research Funding; Bluebird Bio: Research Funding; Boehringer-Ingleheim: Research Funding; Cellerant: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Kura Oncology: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Research Funding; National Marrow Donor Program: Research Funding; NIH: Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding; Pharmamar: Research Funding; UC Davis: Research Funding; UCSD: Research Funding; Evidera: Consultancy; NCI: Consultancy; Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Bradley: AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Tiu: Astellas Pharma: Current Employment; Eli Lilly and Company: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Ended employment in the past 24 months. Naqvi: Genentech/Roche: Current Employment, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company. Dail: Genentech/Roche: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Siddani: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company. Wang: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company. Chyla: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Lee: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company. Altman: Astellas: Consultancy, Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; Biosight: Consultancy, Other: Travel fees, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Kura Oncology: Consultancy; Syros: Consultancy; Theradex: Consultancy, Other: Advisory boards; GlycoMimetics: Other: Participation on an advisory board; ALZ Oncology: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Aprea: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Boehringer Ingelheim: Research Funding; Fujifilm: Research Funding; Immunogen: Research Funding; Kartos: Research Funding; Kura: Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: Venetoclax is a B-cell lymphoma 2 inhibitor approved in combination with azacitidine, or decitabine, or low-dose cytarabine for the treatment of newly-diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in adults who are age 75 years or older, or who have comorbidities that preclude use of intensive induction chemotherapy. Gilteritinib is a kinase inhibitor indicated for the treatment of adult patients who have relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with an FLT3 mutation as detected by an FDA-approved test.

Abstract Introduction Several studies reported that AML patients who remain in long-term remission after allogeneic transplant (allo-HCT) or autologous transplant (auto-HCT) have a shorter life expectancy, compared to the general population. However, little is known about the life expectancy of adult long-term survivors of AML who were treated with chemotherapy without HCT and, there have been no comparisons with survival among the general population. The current study reports on the life expectancy of AML patients who survived 3 years in complete remission (CR) after treatment without HCT, and compared this to the gender- and age-matched normal population. At 3 years in CR, the incidence of recurrence is exceedingly low (3%; Watts JM, Leuk Res 2014) minimizing the impact of relapse on the long-term survival. Methods Between 1984 and 2008, 3,012 patients, aged 15 years and older, with untreated AML entered 9 consecutive, phase II and III, ECOG-ACRIN trials (E3483, PC486, E3489, E1490, E3993, E4995, E3997, E3999, E1900). Patients in CR and relapse-free at 3 years are included in the analysis . Minimal cytogenetic information was available in the early protocols (E1490, E3483, PC486). A Kaplan-Meier plot was generated for the three groups, allo, auto and no HCT, censoring for patients alive at last contact. Univariate and multivariate cox proportional hazard regression models were generated, considering death as an event. For comparison of long-term outcomes, patients were grouped together by age and matched to a normative population mortality rate. Subjects were also grouped by gender and treatment allowing for separate analysis of these groups with the no HCT group as the main group of interest. The normative population comparator of expected deaths was derived using mortality rates from United State CDC life table data. The median year was derived by calculating the person-years for each calendar year that patients were followed. To calculate the expected deaths for each age group, person-years was calculated by tabulating the years lived in each age group for all subjects. Each year of follow-up for AML patient was counted as one person year, and the tabulated bin corresponded with their age at the time. Person-years was then multiplied by the matching mortality rate. Chi-square statistics were derived using expected and observed deaths and then summed for each gender and treatment. The final comparison was of mortality rates since diagnosis in the 3-year alive and relapse-free AML patient population vs the normative population. To produce plots of mortality from diagnosis, person-years was tabulated for every year since diagnosis by treatment. The person-years were tabulated into 2-year bins. The US life tables from the CDC were used to generate a population mortality rate from diagnosis. Results A total of 503 adult AML patients in 3 year CR with a mean age of 42.9 years (15-79) were identified; 78 underwent allo, 110 auto and 315 did not undergo transplantation. The patients in the groups differed in age (p<.001) and cytogenetics (p=.01). The multivariate model showed equivalent hazards of death to the 3 groups. Observed deaths and person-years were given by age group, gender, and treatment group and each were matched to a mortality rate from the United State CDC life table data that matched the median year of each treatment group. A chi square test for each group compared the derived expected to observed deaths. In every treatment group, patients had a shorter survival compared to their age- and gender- matched general population (p-value of 0.004 for the auto-HCT and <0.001 for both allo-HSCT and no transplant groups). Table 1, selected only for the no HCT group, demonstrates the mortality rates by age and gender. Figure 1 indicates that AML patients who have survived relapse-free for at least 3 years continue to have higher mortality rates compared to the normative population for up to 14 years. This finding is not altered even if the very small number of patients who die from late relapse (>3 years from diagnosis) are removed from the analysis (data not shown) Conclusions Patients with AML who remain in CR at 3 years, do not have a normal life expectancy, even if they do not undergo HCT. The shorter life expectancy observed following an HCT may, at least in part, be related to the prior intensive therapy or other predisposing factors (e.g. CHIP) of the leukemia, rather than the transplant procedure itself. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Luger: Syros: Honoraria; Agios: Honoraria; Daiichi Sankyo: Honoraria; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; Brystol Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Acceleron: Honoraria; Astellas: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Onconova: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Biosight: Research Funding; Hoffman LaRoche: Research Funding; Kura: Research Funding. Lazarus: Bristol Myer Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Douer: Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Servier: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Adaptive: Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company, Speakers Bureau; Jazz: Consultancy. Tallman: Syros: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kura: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Innate Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Biosight: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncolyze: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; KAHR: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Orsenix: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Daiichi-Sankyo: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Research Funding; Rafael Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Glycomimetics: Research Funding; Biosight: Research Funding; Orsenix: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; NYU Grand Rounds: Honoraria; Mayo Clinic: Honoraria; UC DAVIS: Honoraria; Northwell Grand Rounds: Honoraria; NYU Grand Rounds: Honoraria; Danbury Hospital Tumor Board: Honoraria; Acute Leukemia Forum: Honoraria; Miami Leukemia Symposium: Honoraria; New Orleans Cancer Symposium: Honoraria; ASH: Honoraria; NCCN: Honoraria. Litzow: Pluristem: Research Funding; Biosight: Other: Data monitoring committee; AbbVie: Research Funding; Actinium: Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; Omeros: Other: Advisory Board; Jazz: Other: Advisory Board; Amgen: Research Funding.

Abstract Background: CML is managed by life-long TKI therapy in most pts which can be associated with chronic toxicities and substantial costs. Discontinuation of TKI in some pts can result in sustained therapy-free remission (TFR); however only a minority are candidates for discontinuation approaches; of those most still relapse and must restart TKI. High expression of programmed death receptor-1 (PD-1) and its ligand PD-L1 on CML-specific cytotoxic T-cells and CML cells, respectively, suggests that PD-1/PD-L1-mediated immune escape contribute to CML persistence and relapse after TKI discontinuation. We designed the BLAST MRD CML trial (NCT#03516279) to study whether adding anti-PD-1 antibody pembrolizumab to TKI therapy is safe and tolerable and increases rate of conversion to undetectable minimal residual disease (UMRD). We present data from the early safety cohort from this ongoing trial with a data cut-off date June 15th, 2021. Methods: BLAST MRD CML-1 is an ongoing national, ECOG-sponsored, single-arm pilot phase II clinical trial that enrolls adults with chronic phase CML who achieved a major molecular response (MR 3) but not UMRD while on a stable dose of up to three lines of TKI therapy. UMRD was defined as an undetectable BCR-ABL by central RQ-PCR (assay sensitivity of 4.5 [MR 4.5]) on 2 consecutive samples separated by ≥4 weeks. Once enrolled, pts continue on TKI and concurrently receive pembrolizumab 200mg IV on day (D)1 of each 21-D cycle with central MRD assessment every 4 cycles for 17 cycles. Pts who achieve UMRD at or prior to C17 discontinue pembrolizumab, while those with persistent MRD continue TKI + pembrolizumab for another 18 cycles. TKI is discontinued one year following first documentation of UMRD. After TKI discontinuation, BCR-ABL is monitored at defined intervals for 24 months. Primary endpoint is proportion of CML pts on stable-dose TKI who convert to UMRD within 2 years (yrs) of combined TKI + pembrolizumab therapy. Secondary endpoints include rates of TKI discontinuation and proportion of pts achieving 2-year TFR, MRD kinetics, and safety. Immune related and other adverse events (AE) were assessed and graded according to CTCAE v 5.0. Results: As of cut-off date, 6 pts enrolled in safety cohort. Median age was 43 yrs (range 32-65). TKIs received on trial included imatinib (N=2), dasatinib (N=3), and nilotinib (N=1). All 6 pts were on 2 nd line TKI. Median exposure to pembrolizumab was 20 doses (range, 5-36). Five pts were still on combined pembrolizumab + TKI treatment, while the 6 th pt has completed combined therapy for 2 yrs and then continued TKI monotherapy on trial after achievement of UMRD (pt has to be in UMRD for 1 yr before TKI can be discontinued). The combination of TKI and pembrolizumab was safe and well tolerated (Table 1). Only 3 pts experienced grade (G) 1/2 AEs as the worst non-hematologic AE while on trial. Hematologic toxicity reported was also generally minimal with only one G 1/2 anemia AE. The only reported G3 AE was a lipase elevation (283 U/L, normal range 11 - 55 U/L) noted on routine laboratory assessment in a pt receiving nilotinib at 400mg BID dose after 48 weeks of starting on trial combined therapy. Amylase was also elevated at G2. No baseline lipase levels were available as protocol at that time did not require baseline assessments. The pt had no symptoms and CT imaging showed no radiologic evidence of pancreatitis. The lipase and amylase levels normalized with holding of both nilotinib and pembrolizumab for 7 weeks, and the AE did not recur with resumption of combined therapy at same dose of pembrolizumab but with nilotinib reduced to 400mg daily. No G4 or 5 AEs occurred. No other dose-adjustments or treatment discontinuation/interruptions due to AEs occurred. No immune-related AEs (IRAEs) have been reported. Discussion: Data from the early safety cohort suggest that the combination of TKI and pembrolizumab is safe and well tolerated. The AEs observed were mild and generally G1/2. No pt discontinued trial therapy due to AEs. Only one G3 AE (asymptomatic lipase elevation) was reported, which could have been related to nilotinib therapy and could have predated trial entry as no baseline lipase value was available and was fully reversible with a temporary hold of therapy. No IRAEs have been reported to date. Work is ongoing on an amendment to study protocol to enhance accrual. Efficacy results will be reported as they mature. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Zeidan: Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy, Research Funding; Ionis: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy, Other: Clinical Trial Committees; Loxo Oncology: Consultancy, Other: Clinical Trial Committees; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astex: Research Funding; Jasper: Consultancy; Cardiff Oncology: Consultancy, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Aprea: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; BeyondSpring: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy, Other: Clinical Trial Committees, Research Funding; Acceleron: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Other: Clinical Trial Committees, Travel support, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy; Epizyme: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; BioCryst: Other: Clinical Trial Committees; Janssen: Consultancy; Kura: Consultancy, Other: Clinical Trial Committees; Geron: Other: Clinical Trial Committees; Astellas: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding; Agios: Consultancy; Jazz: Consultancy; Pfizer: Other: Travel support, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Other: Clinical Trial Committees, Research Funding. Radich: Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Bhatt: National Marrow Donor Program: Research Funding; Tolero Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding; Jazz: Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Partnership for health analytic research, LLC: Consultancy; Servier Pharmaceuticals LLC: Consultancy; Rigel: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy. Luger: Syros: Honoraria; Agios: Honoraria; Daiichi Sankyo: Honoraria; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; Brystol Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Acceleron: Honoraria; Astellas: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Onconova: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Biosight: Research Funding; Hoffman LaRoche: Research Funding; Kura: Research Funding. Litzow: Omeros: Other: Advisory Board; Astellas: Research Funding; Jazz: Other: Advisory Board; Amgen: Research Funding; Pluristem: Research Funding; Biosight: Other: Data monitoring committee; Actinium: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: Pembrolizumab has not been approved for the treatment of CML

Abstract Background: DDX41 gene is located on chromosome 5q35 and is believed to be a tumor suppressor gene involved in splicing of mRNA. Mutated DDX41 have been identified as germline mutation (m) in families with cases of myeloid neoplasm and have shown to cause acquisition of other somatic mutations resulting in MDS/AML. At the same time, somatic pathogenic DDX41 mutations are known to occur. Variant of unknown significance (VUS) is an intermediate tier between benign and pathogenic (path) mutations (hence uncertain) and can be re-classified based on their clinical impact. In this report we analyzed the clinical impact and relevance of DDX41VUS in patients (pts) being evaluated for myeloid disorders. Methods: We reviewed 4,524 consecutive pts who underwent NGS (MC OncoHeme 42 genes panel) testing between 2018 and 2021 performed on cases of suspected or known myeloid disorders. We identified 58 (1%) consecutive pts with DDX41VUS, among them one pt had proven concurrent DDX41 germline VUS and 7 pts with DDX41VUS had concurrent DDX41path mutation. We analyze clinical characteristics of pts with DDX41VUS and compared it with cohort of 32 DDX41path mutated pts. Results: Baseline characteristics are summarized in Table 1, and Figure 1 illustrates DDX41VUS per case with variant allele frequency (VAF) and observed concurrent mutations. The median VAF for DDX41 VUS was 48 % (range, 14-91%). Co-mutations were found in 14 (28%) pts with VUS, and the reminder (n=44, 72 %) had isolated DDX41VUS. Among them AML (16 [32%]), MDS (14 [28%]), cytopenia (14 [28%]) MPN (3 [6%]), CNL (1 [2%]) and aplastic anemia (1 [2%]) were the commonly occurring myeloid disorder (Table 1, Figure 1). Eleven of 14 pts with isolated cytopenia had isolated DDX41VUS. Conversely, among 15 evaluable pts with isolated DDX41VUS, 13 (87%) pts had normal cytogenetics and 40% of pts had family history of solid or hematological malignancies. We observed a significant difference in hematologic diagnoses: DDX41VUS patients were significantly less often diagnosed with MDS or CCUS, and more often associated with cytopenias NOS. Recurrent, non-random DDX41VUS sequences were observed; most frequent occurring amino acid change among the 58 pts were Gly173Arg (n=6), Met155lle (n=5), Pro258Leu (n=3) Arg479Gln (n=3), Val303Met (n=2), Lys331del (n=2), Arg479His (n=2) and Tyr33His (n=2) (Figure 1). 5 of 6 pts with Gly173Arg had isolated DDX41VUS, and among them 4 were diagnosed with MDS suggesting this could be a clonal event, and possible driver mutation, notable in Figure 1. The median overall survival (OS) of pts with high risk MDS/AML harboring DDX41VUS was not reached (60% alive at 2 years). Between pts with DDX41path and DDX41VUS, proportion of pts with co-mutations (p >0.99), cytogenetic abnormalities (p >0.99), family history of malignancies (p 0.52), time to treatment (p >0.99), MDS progression to AML (p 0.36) and OS (among high risk MDS/AML pts) (p 0.55) was not significantly different, suggesting that phenotypic features of DDX41VUS are similar to DDX41path , and that both carry a similar, more indolent prognosis (Table 1). Conclusion: Our reports demonstrated that DDX41VUS occurs in 1% of patients with myeloid disorders and shares distinct diagnostic features but comparable prognostic features vs. DDX41path, including family history of hematological malignancies. It is possible that many of the cases with 'cytopenias' and DDX41VUS would meet criteria for CCUS if the variant was isolated classified as pathogenic, confirming the importance of extending our understanding of DDX41 variants. Further analysis to characterize the biological impact of DDX41VUS is underway. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Badar: Pfizer Hematology-Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Al-Kali: Novartis: Research Funding; Astex: Other: Research support to institution. Patnaik: Kura Oncology: Research Funding; Stemline Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Stemline Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Litzow: Astellas: Research Funding; Omeros: Other: Advisory Board; Jazz: Other: Advisory Board; Pluristem: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Biosight: Other: Data monitoring committee; Actinium: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding. Foran: boehringer ingelheim: Research Funding; abbvie: Research Funding; takeda: Research Funding; trillium: Research Funding; revolution medicine: Honoraria; bms: Honoraria; servier: Honoraria; novartis: Honoraria; pfizer: Honoraria; aptose: Research Funding; taiho: Honoraria; certara: Honoraria; sanofi aventis: Honoraria; syros: Honoraria; actinium: Research Funding; gamida: Honoraria; OncLive: Honoraria; kura: Research Funding; h3bioscience: Research Funding; aprea: Research Funding; sellas: Research Funding; stemline: Research Funding.

Abstract Background: The DEAD-box helicase 41 (DDX41), an RNA helicase, have been described as a component of the RNA spliceosome (Cheah et al. International Journal of Hematology 2017). Although DDX41 mutations predispose to late-onset higher grade myeloid neoplasms (MN), these patients may have a trend toward favorable prognosis and outcomes. In this work, we describe the clinical characteristics and survival outcomes of isolated and co-mutated DDX41 patients (pts). Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 4,524 consecutive pts who underwent next-generation sequencing (NGS) (OncoHeme 42 genes panel, Mayo Clinic) testing and included 32 pts harboring pathogenic DDX41 mutation and one pt with proven DDX41 germline variant of unknown significance (VUS). Chart review of DDX41-mutated (m) cases between 2009 and 2021 was conducted after IRB approval. We compared overall survival (OS) of unmatched 27 t(8;21)AML and 40 inv(16) AML pts with 10 m DDX41-AML pts. JMP® Pro 14.1.0 Software was used for statistical analysis. Results: DDX41 mutations characteristics: Our cohort included 19 (58%) myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS), 10 (30%) acute myelogenous leukemia (AML), 2 (6%) myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN), one clonal cytopenia of undetermined significance (CCUS) (3%) and one (3%) germline carrier. Germline testing was carried out in 10 pts, 9 of whom (90%) were confirmed to be germline). The start-loss variant (p.M1I) was the most common mutation type (N=10, 31%). Other types were frameshift (N=9, 28%), missense mutation (N=8, 25%), nonsense (N=3, 9%), and splice site mutation (N=2, 2%). Twenty-one (65.6%) DDX41 mutations clustered in the N-terminus (NT), 7 (22%) in the helicase-C domain (HCD), and 4 (12.5%) in the DEAD-box domain. Compared to NT mutations, patients with HCD mutation had no family history of solid tumors and were more likely to have an accompanying additional DDX41-VUS (0% vs 70%; p=.001) and (N=6, 86% vs. N=2,10%; p=.0001); respectively. I solated vs. co-mutated DDX41: Twenty (60%) pts were isolated-DDX41 and 13 (40%) were co-mutated. The median DDX41-VAF was 48% vs. 45% (p= .2) in the isolated compared to the co-mutated cases, respectively. The median number of co-mutations in the 13 co-mutated cases was 1 (range,1-3) with DNMT3A (38%), ASXL1 (30%), JAK2 (N=3, 23%), and EZH2 (N=2, 15%) were the most common co-mutations detected. Isolated DDX41 had more males (85% vs. 54%, p=.05), the p.M1I variant (47% vs. 8%, p=.02), normal cytogenetics (100% vs. 91%, p= .02), and less family history of solid tumors (77% vs. 33%, p= .02) compared to their co-mutated counterparts. However, there was no difference in OS (p=.99). Comparison of clinical characteristics and hematological features of isolated and co-mutated DDX41 pts are reported in (Table 1). Treatment and survival outcomes in DDX41-MDS/AML : Twenty-three (80%) patients were treated, MDS pts received hypomethylating agents (HMA) (N=10, 71%), HMA plus Venetoclax (HMA+VEN) (N=1, 7%), erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (N=2, 14%) and lenalidomide (N=1 ,7%). AML pts were treated with induction chemotherapy (N=6, 67%) and HMA+VEN (N=3, 33%). Overall response rate of MDS/AML patients was 77% and 100% of AML pts achieved complete remission (CR) when treated with induction chemotherapy or HMA+VEN regimen. There was no significant difference in OS between responders vs. non-responders 2-yr-OS (90% vs. 50%; p=.38) and treated vs. untreated 2-yr-OS (83% vs. 100%; p=.52). Comparing m DDX41-AML vs. core binding factor-AML: After a median follow-up of 33.3 months, all m DDX41-AML patients were alive. There was a significantly better OS in mDDX41-AML patients compared to pts with t(8;21) AML with 2-yr-OS (100% vs. 51%; p=.024) and a trend of better survival when compared to inv(16) AML 2-yr-OS (100% vs. 84%; p=.2). Conclusion We describe the characteristics and outcomes of m DDX41 patients. We demonstrated that isolated and co-mutated m DDX41 patients have different features. Isolated DDX41 patients had male predominance, more p.M1I variant, normal cytogenetics and less family history of solid tumors. In this study we found that m DDX41 AML has high response to treatment and has comparable (if not possibly better) OS compared to other "favorable risk" AML. This study, although limited by the small number of patients, supports the universal testing for DDX41 mutation in adults with MN diagnosis. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Al-Kali: Astex: Other: Research support to institution; Novartis: Research Funding. Foran: abbvie: Research Funding; OncLive: Honoraria; boehringer ingelheim: Research Funding; trillium: Research Funding; pfizer: Honoraria; takeda: Research Funding; revolution medicine: Honoraria; bms: Honoraria; gamida: Honoraria; actinium: Research Funding; aptose: Research Funding; novartis: Honoraria; servier: Honoraria; taiho: Honoraria; syros: Honoraria; sanofi aventis: Honoraria; certara: Honoraria; kura: Research Funding; h3bioscience: Research Funding; aprea: Research Funding; sellas: Research Funding; stemline: Research Funding. Badar: Pfizer Hematology-Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Salama: Mayo Clinic: Current Employment, Other: Mayo Clinic had the contractual work for the central pathology review for this study and I was one of the reviewing pathologists; Constellation Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Litzow: Astellas: Research Funding; Biosight: Other: Data monitoring committee; Amgen: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Actinium: Research Funding; Pluristem: Research Funding; Jazz: Other: Advisory Board; Omeros: Other: Advisory Board. Patnaik: Stemline Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kura Oncology: Research Funding; Stemline Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Abstract Introduction: Historically, clinical outcome of patients with myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS), progressing on hypomethylating agents (HMA; azacitidine or decitabine) has been dismal with median overall survival (OS) of less than 6 months (Jabbour et al. Cancer 2010). With recent approval of venetoclax based combinations for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and CPX-351 for AML with MDS related changes (primary or secondary), clinical outcome has improved in sub-set of high-risk patients compared to historical cohorts. Hence, we analyzed clinical outcome of MDS patients progressing on HMA, in the current era of novel therapies. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed clinical outcome of 43 MDS patients who progressed on HMA-based therapy and treated at the Mayo Clinic between February 2015 and February 2021. We describe clinical characteristics of these patients, therapies received after progressing on HMA-based therapy, duration of response attained after 1st line therapy post HMA-based therapy and OS from time of HMA failure till death or last follow up. We also performed Cox regression multivariate analysis for OS after progression on HMA-based therapy. Results: Baseline characteristics are summarized in Table 1.The median age of the patients were 69 years (range [R], 48-93). R-IPSS score in this cohort of patients was very low (2[5%]), low (5[12%]), intermediate (5 [12%]), high (11[26%]) and very high (20 [46.5%]). Forty-nine percent of patients had complex cytogenetics. Most commonly occurring mutations (≥ 5%) were TP53 (42%), splicing mutation (SRSF2/SF3B1/ or U2AF1) (16%), ASXL1 (12%), RUNX1 (7%), DNMT3A (5%) and IDH1/ or IDH2 (5%). The HMA-based therapy patients received were azacitidine (40%), decitabine (30%) and HMA plus venetoclax (30%). The median time to progression from time of initiation of HMA-based therapy was 5 months (R= 1-30). Sixty-three percent (n= 27) of patients progressed to AML after HMA-based therapy. The most common 1 st line therapies post HMA was venetoclax-based (12 [28%]), CPX-351 (12 [28%]), and allogeneic stem cell transplantation (SCT) (4 [9%]). Fifteen (45.5%) patients achieved CR/CRi, 17 (51.5%) patients progressed and 1 (3%) patient had stable disease. The percentage of patients received venetoclax with HMA, 1 st and 2 nd line therapy post HMA were 26%, 28% and 10%, respectively. Overall, 11 (25%) patients received SCT in this cohort of patients. The median duration of response after 1 st line therapy post HMA was not reached (NR; 66% progression free at 1 year) (Figure 1A). The median OS after HMA failure was 12.7 months (95% CI: 3.1-22.2) (Figure 1B). In the univariate analysis for OS after HMA failure, SCT at any time point (p = 0.01) and achieving CR/CRi after 1 st line therapy post HMA (p= <0.001) showed favorable significance for OS. Whereas, R-IPSS high/very high (p= 0.35), treatment with CPX-351 on AML progression (p=0.33), venetoclax-based therapy (p= 0.59) did not show statistical significance. Subsequently, in multivariate analysis, only achievement of CR/CRi after 1 st line therapy post HMA retained significance for favorable OS (HR: 0.19, 95% CI: 0.04-0.86, p= 0.03). Conclusions: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report analyzing outcome of MDS patients progressing on HMA in the recent era. Acknowledging the limitations of retrospective analysis, our report suggests improved outcome of these high-risk patients compared to historical data. Utilizing venetoclax plus HMA combination earlier in patients with high-risk MDS as being evaluated in VERONA trial and consolidation therapy with SCT in eligible patients have potential to improve long term outcome of this group of high-risk patients. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Al-Kali: Astex: Other: Research support to institution; Novartis: Research Funding. Palmer: PharmaEssentia: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Protagonist: Consultancy, Research Funding; CTI BioPharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Consultancy, Research Funding. Murthy: CRISPR Therapeutics: Research Funding. Litzow: Pluristem: Research Funding; Actinium: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Omeros: Other: Advisory Board; Jazz: Other: Advisory Board; Amgen: Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; Biosight: Other: Data monitoring committee. Foran: pfizer: Honoraria; takeda: Research Funding; trillium: Research Funding; boehringer ingelheim: Research Funding; syros: Honoraria; sanofi aventis: Honoraria; revolution medicine: Honoraria; servier: Honoraria; bms: Honoraria; certara: Honoraria; abbvie: Research Funding; OncLive: Honoraria; gamida: Honoraria; taiho: Honoraria; novartis: Honoraria; aptose: Research Funding; actinium: Research Funding; kura: Research Funding; h3bioscience: Research Funding; aprea: Research Funding; sellas: Research Funding; stemline: Research Funding. Badar: Pfizer Hematology-Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Abstract Introduction: Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology A041202 is a NCI National Clinical Trials Network phase 3 study (NCT01886872) comparing BR (Arm 1) with ibrutinib (Arm 2) and the combination of ibrutinib plus rituximab (Arm 3) to determine whether ibrutinib-containing regimens are superior to chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) in terms of progression-free survival (PFS), and whether rituximab adds benefit to ibrutinib therapy. Initial results showed that ibrutinib-containing regimens had superior PFS to CIT, and that rituximab added to ibrutinib did not improve PFS over ibrutinib alone. Pts and Methods: Eligible pts on A041202 were those age ≥ 65 years with previously untreated, symptomatic CLL. Pts had a CrCl > 40 mL/min, bilirubin < 1.5 x ULN, and no significant life-limiting intercurrent illness or need for warfarin treatment. Pts were stratified on Rai stage, Zap-70 methylation performed centrally, and del(17)(p13.1) or del(11)(q22.3) by local interphase cytogenetics and were randomized 1:1:1 to each arm. Pts on Arm 1 who progressed could cross over to Arm 2. Here we present an updated analysis after the third planned interim analysis of Arms 2 and 3 versus Arm 1, and at the second planned interim analysis for Arms 3 vs 2. PFS and OS were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and corresponding hazard ratios with p-values were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models. These data encompass patient visits through April 2020 and were locked 15 February 2021. Results: Between 12/9/2013 and 5/16/2016, 547 pts were randomized (Arms 1: 183, 2: 182, and 3: 182). Baseline characteristics have previously been reported; briefly, median age was 71 years, 53% had unmethylated Zap-70, 61% were IGHV unmutated (performed in 66% of patients), 6% had del(17p) and 20% del(11q) by central FISH. Stimulated karyotype was performed centrally and revealed ≥ 3 abnormalities in 27%, and ≥ 5 in 11% of patients. With median follow-up of 55 months (mo), median PFS was 44 mo (95% CI 38-54) in Arm 1 and has not been reached in Arms 2 or 3 [Arm 2 vs 1 hazard ratio (HR): 0.36, 95% CI 0.26-0.52, p<0.0001; Arm 3 vs 1 HR 0.36, 95% CI 0.25-0.51, p<0.0001; Arms 3 vs 2 HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.66-1.48, p=0.96]. 48-month PFS estimates were 47%, 76% and 76% in Arms 1, 2, and 3 respectively (Figure 1). At this time, there are no significant differences in overall survival (OS) among arms (p=0.49). 48-month OS estimates were 84%, 85%, and 86% in Arms 1, 2, and 3, respectively (Figure 2). The benefit of ibrutinib regimens over CIT, with no additional benefit of rituximab when combined with ibrutinib, was consistent for all subgroups of patients defined by TP53 abnormalities, del(11q), complex karyotype, and IGHV (Figure 3). No significant interaction effects were observed between treatment arm and del(11q), complex karyotype, or IGHV. However, greater benefit of ibrutinib regimens over CIT was observed among patients with TP53 abnormalities than without (p<0.001). Thus in Arm 1, PFS was significantly worse for those with TP53 abnormalities vs without (HR 5.32, 95% CI 3.05-9.27, p<0.0001), but in Arms 2 and 3 combined, there was no significant difference in PFS by presence/absence of TP53 abnormalities (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.51-1.91, p=0.98). Notable adverse events with ibrutinib include atrial fibrillation or flutter (afib) and hypertension (HTN). All grade afib was seen in 11 pts on BR (6%) and 67 pts on ibrutinib (19%). All grade HTN was seen in 95 pts on BR (54%) and 263 pts on ibrutinib (73%). Conclusions: This update of the A041202 trial continues to show that ibrutinib regimens prolong PFS over BR for older patients with treatment-naïve CLL. With longer follow-up, these benefits continue to be seen across subgroups, including those associated with higher risk disease. Strikingly, within the ibrutinib arms, there does not appear to be inferior PFS for patients with abnormalities in TP53, the highest risk feature seen in CLL, and a predictor of inferior PFS with ibrutinib in relapsed CLL. This differentiates ibrutinib (and perhaps BTKi in general) from other targeted therapy paradigms for treatment-naïve CLL. Similar to prior studies, rates of afib and HTN continue to increase with time on therapy. These data support the use of ibrutinib as initial therapy in CLL, and strengthen the rationale for use of ibrutinib for high risk disease. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, U24CA196171, https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org, Pharmacyclics, Inc Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Woyach: Gilead Sciences Inc: Other: Data & Safety; AbbVie Inc, ArQule Inc, Janssen Biotech Inc, AstraZeneca, Beigene: Other: Advisory Committee; AbbVie Inc, Loxo Oncology Inc, a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly & Company: Research Funding; AbbVie Inc, ArQule Inc, AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP, Janssen Biotech Inc, Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company,: Consultancy. Ruppert: Telios Pharma: Consultancy. Ding: Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; DTRM: Research Funding; Octapharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Bartlett: ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy; Seagen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Autolus: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Forty Seven: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding. Brander: Pfizer: Consultancy, Other: Biosimilars outcomes research panel; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Verastem: Consultancy; Juno Therapeutics/Celgene/Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; LOXO: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; MEI Pharma: Research Funding; NCCN: Other: panel member; ArQule/Merck: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; DTRM: Research Funding; BeiGene: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Ascentage: Research Funding; ArQule: Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Other: informCLL registry steering committee, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Barr: Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Bristol Meyers Squibb: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Beigene: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Abbvie/Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Morphosys: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy. Rogers: Pharmacyclics LLC: Consultancy; Innate Pharma: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Acerta Pharma: Consultancy; AbbVie Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Research Funding; ovartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Research Funding. Parikh: Pharmacyclics, MorphoSys, Janssen, AstraZeneca, TG Therapeutics, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, AbbVie, and Ascentage Pharma: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics, AstraZeneca, Genentech, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Verastem Oncology, and AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Coutre: Acerta: Other: Data Safety Monitoring Committee, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Beigene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Data Safety Monitoring Committee, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: 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; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Larson: Epizyme: Consultancy; Astellas: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; CVS/Caremark: Consultancy; Takeda: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Rafael Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Cellectis: Research Funding. Erba: AbbVie Inc: Other: Independent review committee; AbbVie Inc; Agios Pharmaceuticals Inc; ALX Oncology; Amgen Inc; Daiichi Sankyo Inc; FORMA Therapeutics; Forty Seven Inc; Gilead Sciences Inc; GlycoMimetics Inc; ImmunoGen Inc; Jazz Pharmaceuticals Inc; MacroGenics Inc; Novartis; PTC Therapeutics: Research Funding; AbbVie Inc; Agios Pharmaceuticals Inc; Bristol Myers Squibb; Celgene, a Bristol Myers Squibb company; Incyte Corporation; Jazz Pharmaceuticals Inc; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; AbbVie Inc; Agios Pharmaceuticals Inc; Astellas; Bristol Myers Squibb; Celgene, a Bristol Myers Squibb company; Daiichi Sankyo Inc; Genentech, a member of the Roche Group; GlycoMimetics Inc; Incyte Corporation; Jazz Pharmaceuticals Inc; Kura Oncology; Nov: Other: Advisory Committee. Litzow: Jazz: Other: Advisory Board; Pluristem: Research Funding; Actinium: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Omeros: Other: Advisory Board; Biosight: Other: Data monitoring committee. Blachly: INNATE: Consultancy, Honoraria; KITE: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria. Owen: Genentech: Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Merck: Honoraria; Servier: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding. Abramson: Bristol-Myers Squibb Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; C4 Therapeutics: Consultancy; Morphosys: Consultancy; Kite Pharma: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; EMD Serono: Consultancy; Genmab: Consultancy; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy; Kymera: Consultancy; BeiGene: Consultancy; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy; Allogene Therapeutics: Consultancy; Seagen Inc.: Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy. Brown: Abbvie, Acerta/Astra-Zeneca, Beigene, Bristol-Myers Squibb/Juno/Celgene, Catapult, Eli Lilly, Genentech/Roche, Janssen, MEI Pharma, Morphosys AG, Nextcea, Novartis, Pfizer, Rigel: Consultancy; Invectys: Other: Data Safety Monitoring Committee Service; Gilead, Loxo/Lilly, SecuraBio, Sun, TG Therapeutics: Research Funding. Stone: Onconova: Consultancy; Syntrix/ACI: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Syndax: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Elevate Bio: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Boston Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Jazz: Consultancy; Arog: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gemoab: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Innate: Consultancy; BerGen Bio: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Foghorn Therapeutics: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Actinium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Aprea: Consultancy; Syros: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Macrogenics: Consultancy. Byrd: Novartis, Trillium, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Pharmacyclics, Syndax: Consultancy, Honoraria; Vincerx Pharmaceuticals: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Newave: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Abstract Background: TP53 mutations occur in 10-20% of patients with AML, constitute high-risk disease as per ELN criteria, and confer poorer prognosis. Venetoclax combination therapies and CPX-351 were recently approved for AML treatment and lead to improved outcomes in subsets of high-risk AML, however the most effective approach for treatment of TP53-mutated (m) AML remains unclear. In this study we explored the clinical outcome of TP53m AML patients treated over the last 8 years as novel therapies have been introduced to our therapeutic armamentarium. Methods: We conducted a multicenter observational study in collaboration with 4 U.S. academic centers and analyzed clinical characteristics and outcome of 174 TP53m AML patients diagnosed between March 2013 and February 2021. Mutation analysis was performed on bone marrow specimens using 42, 49, 199, or 400 gene targeted next generation sequencing (NGS) panels. Patients with an initial diagnosis of AML were divided into 4 groups (GP) based on the progressive use of novel therapies in clinical trials and their approvals as AML induction therapy during different time periods: 2013-2017 (GP1, n= 37), 2018-2019 (GP2, n= 53), 2019-2020 (GP3, n= 48) and 2020-2021 (GP4, n= 36) to analyze difference in outcome. Results: Baseline characteristics were not significantly different across different GP, as shown in Table 1. Median age of patients was 68 (range [R], 18-83), 65 (R, 29-88), 69 (R, 37-90) and 70 (R, 51-97) years in GP1-4, respectively (p=0.40). The percentage of patients with de novo AML/secondary AML/therapy-related AML in GP1-4 was 40/40/20, 36/29/24, 37.5/37.5/25 and 28/52/20, respectively (p=0.82). The proportion of patients with complex cytogenetics (CG) was 92%, 89%, 96% and 94% in GP1-4, respectively (p=0.54). The median TP53m variant allele frequency (VAF) was 48% (range [R], 5-94), 42% (R, 5-91), 45% (R, 10-94) and 60% (R, 8-82) in GP1-4, respectively (p=0.38). Four (11%), 13 (24.5%), 10 (21%) and 9 (25%) patients had multiple TP53 mutations in GP1-4, respectively (p=0.33). The proportion of patients who received 3+7 (30%, 16%, 6% & 8%; p=0.01), HMA only (11%, 18%, 2% & 8%; p=0.06), venetoclax-based (2.5%, 12%, 48%, & 61%; p <0.01) and CPX-351 induction (16%, 40%, 28% & 5%; p<0.001) were varied in GP1-4, respectively. The rate of CR/CRi was 22%, 26%, 28% and 18% in GP1-4, respectively (p=0.63). Treatment related mortality during induction was observed in 3%, 7%, 10% and 17% of patients in GP1-4, respectively (p=0.18). Overall, 28 (16%) patients received allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (alloHCT) after induction/consolidation: 22%, 15%, 17% and 11% in GP1-4, respectively (p=0.67). In subset analysis, there was no difference in the rate of CR/CRi with venetoclax-based regimens vs. others (39% vs 61%, p=0.18) or with CPX-351 vs. others (25% vs 75%, p=0.84). The median progression-free survival was 7.7, 7.0, 5.1 and 6.6 months in GP1-4, respectively (p=0.60, Fig 1A). The median overall survival (OS) was 9.4, 6.1, 4.0 and 8.0 months in GP1-4, respectively (p=0.29, Fig 1B). In univariate analysis for OS, achievement of CR/CRi (p<0.001) and alloHCT in CR1 (p<0.001) associated with favorable outcome, whereas complex CG (p=0.01) and primary refractory disease (p<0.001) associated with poor outcome. Multiple TP53 mutations (p=0.73), concurrent ASXL1m (p=0.86), extra-medullary disease (p=0.92), ≥ 3 non-TP53m mutations (p=0.72), TP53m VAF ≥ 40% vs. < 40% (p=0.25), induction with CPX-351 vs. others (p=0.59) or venetoclax-based regimen vs. others (p=0.14) did not show significance for favorable or poor OS in univariate analysis. In multivariable analysis, alloHCT in CR1 (hazard ratio [HR]=0.28, 95% CI: 0.15-0.53; p=0.001) retained an association with favorable OS and complex CG (HR 4.23, 95%CI: 1.79-10.0; p=0.001) retained an association with dismal OS. Conclusion: We present the largest experience with TP53m AML patients analyzed by NGS. Although outcomes were almost universally dismal, alloHCT appears to improve the long-term survival in a subset of these patients. Effective therapies are warranted to successfully bridge patients to alloHCT and to prolong survival for transplant ineligible patients. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Badar: Pfizer Hematology-Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Litzow: Omeros: Other: Advisory Board; Pluristem: Research Funding; Actinium: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Jazz: Other: Advisory Board; AbbVie: Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; Biosight: Other: Data monitoring committee. Shallis: Curis: Divested equity in a private or publicly-traded company in the past 24 months. Goldberg: Celularity: Research Funding; Astellas: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Aprea: Research Funding; Arog: Research Funding; DAVA Oncology: Honoraria; Genentech: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Research Funding; Prelude Therapeutics: Research Funding; Aptose: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Atallah: BMS: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding. Foran: revolution medicine: Honoraria; gamida: Honoraria; bms: Honoraria; pfizer: Honoraria; novartis: Honoraria; takeda: Research Funding; kura: Research Funding; h3bioscience: Research Funding; OncLive: Honoraria; servier: Honoraria; aptose: Research Funding; actinium: Research Funding; abbvie: Research Funding; trillium: Research Funding; sanofi aventis: Honoraria; certara: Honoraria; syros: Honoraria; taiho: Honoraria; boehringer ingelheim: Research Funding; aprea: Research Funding; sellas: Research Funding; stemline: Research Funding.