Litzow, Mark R.

Background: Clonal cytopenias of Undetermined Significance (CCUS) have a higher risk of progression to myeloid neoplasm (MN) compared to idiopathic cytopenias of undetermined significance (ICUS) (Malcovati et al., Blood, 2017). The implementation of flow cytometric (FC) immune-phenotyping and next generation sequencing (NGS) in clinical practice has improved the diagnosis of these entities but the clinical significance and interaction of these abnormal results are still unknown. In this study we investigated predictive factors that play role in survival and progression to MN in patients with ICUS/CCUS. Methods: Patients (Pts) who had undergone evaluation for unexplained cytopenia and had undergone FC and bone marrow morphological assessment between 3/2015-3/2020 at Mayo Clinic Rochester were included. Pts were excluded if a malignant hematological disorder was diagnosed prior to the time of FC. FC included evaluation of the following parameters: Abnormal expression of HLA-DR/CD13, CD2, CD7, CD45, and CD56 on blasts; and abnormal CD13/CD16 expression and side scatter on granulocytic cells. NGS panel up to 2018 included 34 genes, ASXL1, BCOR, BRAF, CALR, CBL, CEBPA, CSF3R, DNMT3A, ETV6, EZH2, FLT3, GATA1, GATA2, IDH1, IDH2, JAK2, KIT, KRAS, MPL, MYD88, NOTCH1, NPM1, NRAS, PHF6, PTPN11, RUNX1, SETBP1, SF3B1, TERT, TET2, TP53, U2AF1, WT1, and ZRSR2; in 2018, BRAF was omitted and 12 genes were added, ANRD26, DDX41, ELANE, ETNK1, KDM6A, MYD88, NOTCH1, RAD21, SH2B3, SRP72, SMC3, and STAG2. Results: Characteristics: Of 490 consecutive pts, 238 (median age 69 years (range 19-92), 66% males) met our inclusion criteria as ICUS. 86 (36%) pts had CCUS (abnormal cytogenetics and/or tested positive for pathogenic mutations on NGS). After a median follow-up of 28 months (95% CI: 20 to 31 months), 21 (25%) patients developed MN and 23 (27%) died during follow-up. Comparing ICUS vs CCUS: upon comparing CCUS pts to ICUS, several factors were found to be significantly different: CCUS pts were older (p= .02); majority male (p= .04), had more abnormal HLA-DR/CD13 (p <.0001), more side-scattered light by FC (p <.0001), more pancytopenia on follow up (p= .02) and more morphologic atypia (<.0001). Overall survival (OS) outcomes in CCUS: Several covariates were significant in univariate models, and model selection was used to generate a risk score based on abnormal CD7, abnormal CD13/CD16, abnormal HLA-DR/CD13, splenomegaly and history of prior chemotherapy or radiotherapy (range: 0 - 4; HR=2.58, [95 CI: 1.69 - 3.94], p<.0001). Risk scores were grouped as low risk (score=0), intermediate risk (score=1), and high risk (score=2+), with estimated 2-yr-OS of 95%, 84%, 40%, respectively (Figure 1). An extended risk score model including NGS factors added ASXL1 and IDH1 mutation status to the previous model (range: 0 - 6; HR=2.72, [95 CI 1.82 - 4.06], p<0.0001). MN-free survival (MNFS) in CCUS: 37 pts either progressed to MN and/or died with a median follow up time for MNFS of 22.4 months. Similar for OS, model selection approaches yielded a composite risk score: splenomegaly, BCOR mutation status, mutation in RAS signaling pathway, abnormal expression of flow markers CD13/CD16, HLA-DR/CD13 or CD7 (HR=3.23, [95 CI: 1.90 - 5.49], p=<0.0001). Risk scores were grouped as low risk (score=0), intermediate risk (score=1), and high risk (score ≥ 2), with estimated 1-yr MNFS of 84%, 74%, and 31%, respectively (Figure 2). Conclusion: CCUS has unique features compared to ICUS. Several factors, including clinical characteristics, immune-phenotyping by FC, and somatic mutations have important impact on risk of progression to MN and on overall survival. Our findings serve as proof-of-concept that such integrated models could help identify CCUS patients at higher risks for progression to MN or death. They can guide treatment accordingly and should be evaluated further. Disclosures Shah: Dren Bio: Consultancy.

Background: ENA is an oral, selective inhibitor of IDH2 approved for the treatment (Tx) of patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory IDH2 mutated (IDH2m) AML. Here we report the results of a Phase 2 expansion and Phase 1b of the Beat AML Master Trial Phase 2/1b sub-study to assess the efficacy of Tx of newly diagnosed (ND) IDH2m AML pts ≥ 60 years of age with ENA monotherapy (ENAm) and subsequent response-driven addition of AZA Tx. (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03013998). Methods: The study initiated with a 3-outcome, 2-stage Phase 2 design, which enrolled patients on ENAm for up to 5 cycles. Pts without CR/CRi after 5 cycles of ENAm, or progression/intolerance prior to this time, were transferred to Phase 1b to receive ENA + AZA (Figure 1). Key eligibility included ND IDH2m AML pts with age ≥ 60 years and ECOG performance status 0-2. Pts received ENAm 100 mg/day in continuous 28-day cycles and ENA + AZA (75 mg/m2 days 1-7 every 28 days) for Phase 1b. Response was assessed using 2017 ELN AML criteria. The primary endpoint was CR/CRi rate. The 2-stage design required 24 pts and tested the null hypothesis (H0) that CR/CRi rate equaled 20% vs 50% and then expanded to test a revised H0 of 30% vs 50% in 60 pts (conditional alpha=0.025, power=77%). Expansion also allowed further assessment of safety of this treatment regimen. Results: At data cut off (06/18/2020), 60 pts enrolled, received ENAm, and were evaluable for the primary endpoint. Median age was 75 years and 52% were female (Table 1). Median time on ENAm was 4.7 months (mos). At data cut off, 12 pts were still on ENAm Tx. Most common reasons for discontinuing ENAm were Tx failure (defined as no response to treatment) (23 or 38%), disease progression (loss of response to treatment) (7 or 12%) and adverse events (AEs; 6 or 10%). Five pts (8%) went to transplant. CR/CRi was achieved in 28 pts (47%; adjusted 95% CI 28-59, unadjusted exact 95% CI 34-60) (Table 2). Responses were higher (p=0.04) among the 44 pts with IDH2 R140 (55%) as compared to the 16 with IDH2 R172 mutation (25%) further supporting distinct biology between these subsets. After a median follow up of 14.6 mos, the median overall survival (mOS) was 24.4 mos (95% CI 10.6-not reached). The median duration of response was not reached with 12 mos estimation of 57% (95% CI 34-75). Overall, 20 ENA-related serious adverse events (SAEs) occurred in 15 pts, the most common was differentiation syndrome (12 or 20%) and 1 had ENA-related SAE of tumor lysis syndrome (1.7%). One pt had ENA-related Grade 5 AE (renal failure/death). Most common AEs of any grade (in ≥20%) were nausea, anemia, and low potassium (Table 3). The 7-day/30-day/60-day deaths observed with ENAm were 2%/5%/11%, respectively. Phase 1b: Seventeen pts had inadequate response to ENAm and transferred to Phase 1b to receive ENA + AZA. Median time on Tx (including ENAm) was 6.2 mos and median time on Tx after pts started ENA + AZA was 2.1 mos (Table 2). Most common reasons for discontinuing ENA + AZA included Tx failure (5 or 29%), disease progression (2 or 12%), transplant, death and AEs (each 2 or 12%). CR/CRi was 41% (exact 95% CI 18-67). After a median follow up of 12.7 mos, the mOS from start of ENA + AZA combination Tx was 8.9 mos. Four ENA-related SAEs occurred in 3 pts on ENA + AZA Tx and the most common was differentiation syndrome (2 or 12.5%). One dose-limiting toxicity (Grade 3 nausea) related to both Txs was observed. Most common AEs (≥20%) of any grade were anemia, low albumin and vomiting (Table 3). One death occurred at day 13 of ENA + AZA. Conclusions: In newly diagnosed pts ≥60 years old with IDH2m AML, ENA had a low early death rate, high CR/CRi rate (47%, adjusted 95% CI 28-59), and yielded durable remissions. The most common unique toxicity with ENA was differentiation syndrome that occurred in 20% of patients. In pts who did not achieve CR/CRi with ENAm, a subset of patients achieved CR/CRi with addition of AZA. This combined approach of serial therapy with ENA monotherapy followed by AZA addition in pts with sub-optimal response resulted in a mOS exceeding 2 years for pts enrolled on study. Further focus on improving response among patients with IDH2 R172 mutations, identifying subsets of pts not responding to ENA monotherapy, and integrating new targeted agents into this treatment regimen are warranted. Figure 1 Disclosures Stein: Syndax: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Daiichi-Sankyo: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Astellas Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Agios Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bayer: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy; Biotheryx: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; PTC Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Syros: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Consultancy. Borate:Genentech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Daiichi Sankyo: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; AbbVie: Other: Investigator in AbbVie-funded clinical trials; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Baer:Takeda: Other: Institutional research funding; AbbVie: Other: Institutional research funding; Astellas: Other: Institutional research funding; Forma: Other: Institutional research funding; Kite: Other: Institutional research funding; Oscotec: Other: Institutional research funding; Incyte: Other: Institutional research funding. Kovacsovics:Agios: Honoraria; Astella: Honoraria; Pfizer: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Jazz: Honoraria. Schiller:Astellas Pharma: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celator: Research Funding; Constellation: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Actinium: Research Funding; Ariad: Research Funding; Stemline: Speakers Bureau; Cyclacel: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Deciphera: Research Funding; DeltaFly: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Research Funding; Forma: Research Funding; FujiFilm: Research Funding; Gamida: Research Funding; Genentech-Roche: Research Funding; Geron: Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Research Funding; Mateon: Research Funding; MedImmune: Research Funding; Onconova: Research Funding; Pfizer: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Research Funding; Regimmune: Research Funding; Samus: Research Funding; Sangamo: Research Funding; Tolero: Research Funding; Trovagene: Research Funding; Kaiser Permanente: Consultancy; Johnson & Johnson: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Agios: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Ono Pharma: Consultancy; Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Speakers Bureau. Olin:Astellas: Other: Site PI; Genentech: Other: Site PI; Pfizer: Other: Site PI; Daiichi Sankyo: Other: Site PI; Genentech: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy. Foran:Trillium: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; H3Biosciences: Research Funding; Agios: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Research Funding; Boehringer Ingelheim: Research Funding; Actinium: Research Funding; Aprea: Research Funding; Aptose: Research Funding; Kura Oncology: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Revolution Medicine: Consultancy; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Lin:Trovagene: Research Funding; Tolero Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Prescient Therapeutics: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Bio-Path Holdings: Research Funding; Astellas Pharma: Research Funding; Aptevo: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Mateon Therapeutics: Research Funding; Ono Pharmaceutical: Research Funding; Jazz: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Genetech-Roche: Research Funding; Celyad: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Patel:DAVA Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Agios: Consultancy; France Foundation: Honoraria. Foster:Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Bellicum Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Macrogenics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Druker:Leukemia & Lymphoma Society: Research Funding; Henry Stewart Talks: Patents & Royalties; Iterion Therapeutics (formerly Beta Cat Pharmaceuticals): Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Vivid Biosciences: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GRAIL: Consultancy, Current equity holder in private company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Patient True Talks: Consultancy; The RUNX1 Research Program: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Third Coast Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; VB Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millipore (formerly Upstate Biotechnology): Patents & Royalties; MolecularMD (acquired by ICON): Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; McGraw Hill: Patents & Royalties; Merck & Co: Patents & Royalties; Cepheid: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Dana-Farber Cancer Institute: Patents & Royalties; EnLiven: Consultancy, Research Funding; Aptose Therapeutics Inc. (formerly Lorus): Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; ARIAD: Research Funding; Blueprint Medicines: Consultancy, Current equity holder in private company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; ALLCRON: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Aileron Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Research Funding; Oregon Health & Science University: Patents & Royalties. Byrd:Acerta Pharma: Research Funding; Syndax: Research Funding; Vincera: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company, Janssen, Novartis, Gilead, TG Therapeutics: Other; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company, Gilead, TG Therapeutics, Novartis, Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Research Funding; Kartos Therapeutics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Leukemia and Lymphoma Society: Other; Janssen: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company, Gilead, TG Therapeutics, BeiGene: Research Funding. Levine:Loxo: Current equity holder in private company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; C4 Therapeutics: Current equity holder in private company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Imago: Current equity holder in private company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Qiagen: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Prelude Therapeutics: Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria; Astellas: Consultancy; Morphosys: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Isoplexis: Current equity holder in private company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy; Lilly: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria. Mims:Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kura Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Leukemia and Lymphoma Society: Other: Senior Medical Director for Beat AML Study; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Other: Data Safety Monitoring Board; Syndax Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios: Consultancy; Novartis: Speakers Bureau. OffLabel Disclosure: Enasidenib is not approved for the treatment of newly diagnosed AML.

Background Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) has a median age at diagnosis of 67 years. The only curative therapy remains an allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HCT), yet it is complicated by non-relapse mortality (NRM) and ongoing morbidity including graft versus host disease (GVHD) that may impact survival, particularly in older patients. We examined the outcomes and predictors of success in a large cohort of patients aged 60 years and older receiving a HCT for AML in first complete remission (CR1). Methods HCT recipients 60 years or older with AML in CR1 reported to the CIBMTR were included. Cox models were used to compare rates of overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), non-relapse mortality (NRM), relapse, acute GHVD, chronic GVHD in 3 separate age groups: 60-64 years vs. 65-70 years vs. 70+ years (Figure 1A). Results 1,327 patients undergoing HCT from 2007-2017 were included. The three age cohorts (60-64; 65-69; 70+) were comparable in demographic and disease characteristics, except the older cohort had more males, more de novo AML, and a higher incidence of measurable residual disease (MRD) pre-HCT. Fewer had sibling donors and more were performed in recent years. With median follow-up of nearly 3 years, patients aged 60-64 had significantly better OS, DFS and lower NRM than those aged 65-69 and 70+. Those aged 65-69 and 70+ had similar outcomes (Figure 1). Three-year OS for the 3 cohorts was 49.4%, 42.3%, and 44.7% respectively (p=0.026). NRM was higher with increasing age, cord blood as graft source and HCT-CI score of ≥ 3. Conditioning intensity was not a significant predictor of outcomes with HR for OS for 60-69 cohort of 0.46 for RIC and 0.49 for MAC (p=0.38). There was no difference in the relapse rate, incidence of G3/4 acute GVHD, or incidence of moderate-severe chronic GVHD across the age cohorts. Poor risk cytogenetics, presence of MRD prior to HCT, cord blood as graft source, and transplant prior to 2016 were significant predictors of poor OS. Discussion In this large retrospective series of HCT for AML in CR1, age had a small effect OS and NRM after accounting for other predictors. High-risk features such as poor cytogenetics and presence of MRD prior to HCT were significantly associated with relapse and accounted for most of the adverse impact on OS and DFS. Age did not influence the incidence of either acute or chronic GVHD; graft type and associated GVHD prophylaxis were most important. These data suggest that age alone is not a barrier to successful HCT for AML in CR1 and should not exclude patients from HCT. Efforts should focus on minimizing residual disease and better donor selection. Table Disclosures Kebriaei: Ziopharm: Other: Research Support; Novartis: Other: Served on advisory board; Jazz: Consultancy; Amgen: Other: Research Support; Kite: Other: Served on advisory board; Pfizer: Other: Served on advisory board. Weisdorf:FATE Therapeutics: Consultancy; Incyte: Research Funding.

Abstract Objectives SF3B1 mutations are the most common mutations in myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS). The International Working Group for the Prognosis of MDS (IWG-PM) recently proposed SF3B1-mutant MDS (SF3B1-mut-MDS) as a distinct disease subtype. We evaluated the spectrum and molecular landscape of SF3B1-mutated myeloid disorders and assessed the prognostication in MDS harboring SF3B1 mutations (MDS-SF3B1). Methods Cases were selected by retrospective review. Clinical course and laboratory and clinical findings were collected by chart review. SF3B1-mut-MDS was classified following IWG-PM criteria. Results SF3B1 mutations were identified in 75 of 955 patients, encompassing a full spectrum of myeloid disorders. In MDS-SF3B1, Revised International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS-R) score greater than 3 and transcription factor (TF) comutations were adverse prognostic markers by both univariate and multivariate analyses. We confirmed the favorable outcome of IWG-PM-defined SF3B1-mut-MDS. Interestingly, it did not show sharp prognostic differentiation within MDS-SF3B1. Conclusions SF3B1 mutations occur in the full spectrum of myeloid disorders. We independently validated the favorable prognostication of IWG-PM-defined SF3B1-mut-MDS. However it may not provide sharp prognostication within MDS-SF3B1 where IPSS-R and TF comutations were prognostic-informative. Larger cohort studies are warranted to verify these findings and refine MDS-SF3B1 prognostication.

PURPOSE Impaired response to erythropoietin underlies ineffective erythropoiesis and anemia in myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS). We investigated whether treatment with lenalidomide (LEN), which augments erythropoietin receptor signaling in vitro, can restore and improve hemoglobin response to epoetin (EPO) alfa in patients with lower-risk, non-del(5q) MDS who have anemia that is refractory to or have low probability of benefit from treatment with recombinant erythropoietin. METHODS In a phase III, US intergroup trial, we randomly assigned patients to receive either LEN and EPO alfa or LEN alone following stratification by serum erythropoietin concentration and prior erythropoietin treatment. RESULTS A total of 195 evaluable patients were randomly assigned: 99 patients to the LEN-EPO alfa cohort and 96 to LEN alone. After four cycles of treatment, the primary end point of major erythroid response (MER) was significantly higher (28.3%) with the combination compared with LEN alone (11.5%) ( P = .004). Among 136 patients who completed 16 weeks of study treatment, 38.9% and 15.6% achieved MER, respectively ( P = .004). Additionally, minor erythroid response was achieved in 18.2% and 20.8% of patients, for an overall erythroid response rate of 46.5% versus 32.3%. Among LEN nonresponders, 38 crossed over to the addition of EPO alfa with 10 patients (26.3%) achieving a MER. Responses to the combined treatment were highly durable with a median MER duration of 23.8 months compared with 13 months with LEN alone. CONCLUSION LEN restores sensitivity to recombinant erythropoietin in growth factor–insensitive, lower-risk, non-del(5q) MDS, to yield a significantly higher rate and duration of MER compared with LEN alone (funded by the National Cancer Institute; E2905 ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02048813 ).

BackgroundThe availability of novel agents (NAs), including blinatumomab and inotuzumab ozogamicin (InO), has improved the outcomes of patients with relapsed/refractory (RR) B‐cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). Because of the relative effectiveness, it is often a challenge for clinicians to determine how to best sequence these NAs with respect to efficacy and toxicity.MethodsIn this multicenter, retrospective study of patients with RR ALL treated with blinatumomab, InO, or both, their efficacy as a first or second NA was compared.ResultsAmong 276 patients, 221 and 55 received blinatumomab and InO, respectively, as a first NA therapy. The complete remission (CR)/complete remission with incomplete count recovery (CRi) rate was 65% and 67% for the blinatumomab and InO groups, respectively (P = .73). The rate of treatment discontinuation due to adverse events was 4% and 7% in the blinatumomab and InO groups, respectively. Ninety‐two patients (43%) in the blinatumomab group and 13 patients (29%) in the InO group proceeded with allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. The median overall survival (OS) was 15 and 11.6 months in the blinatumomab and InO groups, respectively. A subset analysis was performed for 61 patients who received both NAs (blinatumomab and then InO [n = 40] or InO and then blinatumomab [n = 21]). The CR/CRi rate was 58% for patients who received InO as the second NA and 52% for patients who received blinatumomab as the second NA. The median OS was 10.5 for patients who received InO as the second NA and 5.9 months for patients who received blinatumomab as the second NA (P = .09).ConclusionsAlthough the limited power of this study to detect a significant difference between subgroups is acknowledged, the data suggest that blinatumomab and InO may have comparable efficacy as a first or second NA therapy in RR ALL.

Key Points Systemic immune microenvironment signatures in CMML indicate an altered T- and natural killer cell balance. CMML bone marrow dendritic cell aggregates associate with disease progression and systemic regulatory T-cell phenotypic switch.

Background: Somatic mutations in the IDH genes are common in acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Mutations occur at active site arginine residues in IDH1 (R132) and IDH2 (R140, R172). IDH inhibitors, ivosidenib (IDH1) and enasidenib (IDH2), have shown improved clinical outcomes in patients with relapsed/refractory IDH-mutant AML and are approved for use in this setting, while investigations in combination with chemotherapy are underway in de novo AML. The prognostic significance of IDH mutations remains controversial. We hypothesize that refining our understanding of IDH-mutated AML will contribute to risk-adapted treatment strategies, including optimal use of IDH-targeted agents. The objective of our study was to identify characteristics that affect outcome in de novo IDH-mutated AML across the age spectrum utilizing a large cohort of patients enrolled on several pediatric and adult trials. Methods: The total cohort (N=3588) included patients age <1 month - 88 years. Pediatric and young adult (YA) patients were treated on recent CCG/COG AML trials (CCG2961, COG 03P1, 0531, 1031, N=2231) and YA/adult patients were treated on SWOG S0106 (N=396), ECOG E1900 AML trials (N=398), Beat AML (N=363), or included in the TCGA biology study (N=200; outcomes not evaluated for this group). Patients were analyzed according to three defined age groups: "younger" 0-29 years of age (N=2401), "intermediate" 30-59 years of age (N=819) and "older" 60 years of age and above (N=319). Data regarding clinical characteristics and treatment outcomes were collected and evaluated according to the standard practices of each cooperative or research groups for the respective studies. Mutational profiling was performed by targeted sequencing for patient samples from COG trials, Beat-AML, ECOG, and SWOG; whole-genome or whole-exome sequencing for the TCGA cohort. Prevalence of IDH mutations, co-occurring mutations, and outcomes (5-year event-free survival [EFS]) were analyzed across the defined age groups. Results: The prevalence of IDH mutations among the entire cohort was 8.6% (N=276). Analysis according to mutation type demonstrated that IDH2 mutations comprised 57% (N=158) and IDH1 mutations 43% (N=118). The prevalence of IDH mutations was strongly correlated with increased age (Fig 1A); according to the age-defined cohorts was 4.0% (N=82) in younger, 15.2% (N=126) in intermediate, and 20.3% (N=65) in older patients (p<0.001). The co-occurring mutational profile demonstrated that IDH mutations commonly co-occurred with NPM1,DNMT3A, and FLT3-ITD mutations (Fig 1B). Among IDH-mutant patients, 48% (N=132) harbored dual mutations (IDHmut/NPM1mut); 11.6% (N=32) triple mutations (IDHmut/NPM1mut/DNMT3Amut), the latter particularly prevalent in intermediate-aged adults (N=27/32, 85%). Analysis of the cohort with outcome data (N=2824) demonstrated that IDHmut and IDH-WT patients experienced similar EFS of 39% vs. 40%, respectively (p=0.723). Given the favorable prognostic significance of NPM1, we subsequently analyzed outcomes of this dual mutant group and found that NPM1 mutations retained favorable prognostic impact in the context of IDH mutant patients (Fig 2A). Notably, this effect was age-dependent, as those with IDHmut/NPM1mut had a favorable EFS compared to IDHmut/NPM1-WT for younger (76% vs. 24%, p<0.001) and intermediate patients (43% vs. 15%, p=0.001, Fig 2B) but this favorable effect was lost in older patients (29% vs. 34%, p=0.456, Fig 2C). Among intermediate age patients, outcome was further stratified by DNMT3A status, and IDHmut/NPM1mut/DNMT3Amut patients experienced an inferior EFS of 25% vs. 57% in IDHmut/NPMmut (p=0.003, Fig 2D). Conclusion: Analysis of this large patient cohort provides the most comprehensive description of IDH mutations in AML across the age spectrum. We confirm age-associated prevalence of IDH mutations and frequent co-occurrence with NPM1 mutation in all ages and in further combination with DNMT3A mutation in intermediate-aged adults. We definitively demonstrate that IDH mutation status is not an independent prognostic determinant of outcome in any age group. Co-occurrence of NPM1 and IDH mutations favorably impacts outcome in patients < 60 years of age with AML, particularly in the absence of DNMT3A mutation. Our data support that IDH inhibitors may be of particular interest in older adults and in patients <60 according to co-occurring NPM1 and DNMT3A mutations. Disclosures Othus: Marck: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Glycomimetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Radich:Jazz: Consultancy; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy. Abdel-Wahab:Merck: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Envisagenics Inc.: Current equity holder in private company; H3 Biomedicine Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding. Tallman:UpToDate: Patents & Royalties; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding; BioSight: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Glycomimetics: Research Funding; Rafael: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Bioline rx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Daiichi-Sankyo: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; KAHR: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Rigel: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Delta Fly Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncolyze: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Research Funding; Cellerant: Research Funding; Orsenix: Research Funding. Atallah:Jazz: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy; Novartis Pharmaceutical Corporation: Consultancy. Luger:Daiichi-Sankyo: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Acceleron: Honoraria; Agios: Honoraria; Loxo Oncology: Honoraria; Onconova: Research Funding; Kura: Research Funding; Biosight: Research Funding; Ariad: Research Funding; Hoffman La Roche: Research Funding. Levine:Novartis: Consultancy; Loxo: Current equity holder in private company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Morphosys: Consultancy; Astellas: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Prelude Therapeutics: Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; Lilly: Consultancy, Honoraria; Qiagen: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Imago: Current equity holder in private company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; C4 Therapeutics: Current equity holder in private company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Isoplexis: Current equity holder in private company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Cooper:Celgene: Other: Spouse was an employee of Celgene (through August 2019).

Background: The FMS-like tyrosine kinase 3 (FLT3) inhibitor gilteritinib (Gilt) improves survival compared with standard salvage chemotherapy in relapsed/refractory (R/R) FLT3-mutated (FLT3mut+) acute myeloid leukemia (AML); however, relapses are common and long-term survival remains poor. Combination therapies of FLT3 tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) with agents that induce apoptosis have demonstrated preclinical synthetic lethality and enhanced cytotoxicity against FLT3mut+ clones. This may delay or prevent drug resistance. We present updated data from the dose-escalation and expansion cohorts of an ongoing, multicenter, open-label, Phase 1b trial (NCT03625505) of Gilt in combination with B-cell lymphoma 2 (BCL-2) inhibitor venetoclax (Ven) in patients (pts) with R/R FLT3mut+ AML. Methods: Pts with R/R AML with ≥1 prior line of therapy and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-2 were eligible. The expansion cohort required FLT3mut+ R/R AML at enrollment. Pts received the recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D) of Ven 400 mg in combination with Gilt 120 mg daily in 28-day cycles, following a 3-day ramp-up of Ven. Pts with prior Gilt were excluded from expansion, and none were enrolled in dose escalation; prior Ven or other FLT3 inhibitor was permitted. Concurrent use of moderate or strong CYP3A4 inhibitor was allowed. Interruptions of Ven or both drugs simultaneously were permitted for management of adverse events (AEs), and subsequent cycles could include dose adjustments to minimize myelosuppression or other drug-related AEs. The primary endpoint was modified composite complete remission (mCRc; complete response [CR] + CR with incomplete platelet recovery [CRp] + CR with incomplete blood count recovery [CRi]) + morphologic leukemia-free state (MLFS). Responses were graded by the International Working Group (IWG) for AML criteria (with adapted CRi criteria as presented in the ADMIRAL trial) for comparison with composite CR (CRc) used in Gilt development. All criteria for response used by IWG were maintained in these response definitions. Secondary endpoints included CR + CR with partial hematologic recovery (CRh) and duration of response (DOR) of mCRc. Results: At data cutoff, April 15, 2020, 39 R/R pts started therapy at the RP2D (internal tandem duplications [ITD] only [n=32]; tyrosine kinase domain [TKD] mutation only [n=5]; both TKD and ITD [n=2]). Median age was 63 years (range 23-85) and the majority had an ECOG status of 1-2 (87.2%). Most pts (n=29; 74.4%) had received ≥2 prior lines of therapy, including ≥1 FLT3 TKI (n=25, 64.1%; midostaurin, n=19; sorafenib, n=5; crenolanib, n=1). Twelve pts (30.8%) had prior stem-cell transplant (SCT); 3 (7.7%) had received prior Ven. Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) were reported in 37 pts (94.9%), and 28 (71.8%) reported serious AEs. The only Grade 3/4 nonhematologic TEAE reported in >20% of pts was febrile neutropenia (48.7%). Four pts (10.3%) experienced a fatal AE, including colitis, disease progression, multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, and bronchopulmonary aspergillosis (all n=1). AEs leading to Ven and Gilt interruptions occurred in 19 pts (48.7%) and 18 pts (46.2%), respectively, and AEs leading to dose reductions occurred in 2 pts (5.1%) for each treatment. Six pts (15.4 %) and 5 pts (12.8%) discontinued Ven and Gilt, respectively, owing to AEs. mCRc was achieved by 83.8% of pts (n=31/37; Table). With median duration of follow-up of 2.9 (range 0.8−11.0) months in all pts, median event-free survival was 5.1 (95% confidence interval: 2.8, 8.3) months but administrative censoring after short follow-up for a large number of recently enrolled patients limits interpretation; median DOR has not been reached. Eight pts (21.6%), all ITD only, proceeded to SCT. CR + CRh was achieved by 7 pts (18.9%). Conclusions: Ven plus Gilt achieved a very high overall rate of marrow and blood blast elimination and mCRc rate (84%) in this expansion cohort of heavily pretreated FLT3mut+ pts, the majority of whom had prior FLT3 TKI exposure. Using similar response assessment criteria, the high mCRc rate here suggests substantially greater antileukemic activity from Ven plus Gilt compared with single-agent Gilt. Cytopenias were prominent but manageable with dose interruption/modification on subsequent cycles. Nonhematologic toxicities were modest, and the combination was well tolerated. Disclosures Daver: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Servier: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Astellas: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novimmune: Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Trovagene: Research Funding; Fate Therapeutics: Research Funding; ImmunoGen: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Trillium: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Syndax: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; KITE: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Altman:AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Fujifilm: Research Funding; Astellas: Other: Advisory Board, Speaker (no payment), Steering Committee (no payment), Research Funding; Agios, Theradex, Abbvie: Other: Advisory Board; Astellas, Agios: Honoraria, Research Funding; Glycomimetics: Other: Data safety and monitoring committee; Daiichi Sankyo: Other: Advisory Board - no payment but was reimbursed for travel; Kura Oncology: Patents & Royalties: Scientific Advisory Board - no payment accepted; Biosight: Other: No payment but was reimbursed for travel . Levis:Menarini: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; FujiFilm: Honoraria, Research Funding; Daiichi-Sankyo: Honoraria; Astellas: Honoraria, Research Funding. Ritchie:Abbvie: Honoraria; Sierra Oncology: Honoraria; Incyte: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria; Jazz pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding. McCloskey:Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Jazz: Consultancy, Honoraria. Smith:Abbvie: Other: Research Support, Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria; Astellas Pharma: Honoraria, Other: Research Support, Research Funding; FujiFilm: Other: Research support, Research Funding; Revolution Medicines: Other: Research Support, Research Funding; Daiichi Sanyko: Consultancy, Honoraria. Schiller:Johnson & Johnson: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sangamo: Research Funding; Tolero: Research Funding; Trovagene: Research Funding; Kaiser Permanente: Consultancy; Genentech-Roche: Research Funding; Geron: Research Funding; DeltaFly: Research Funding; Deciphera: Research Funding; Celator: Research Funding; FujiFilm: Research Funding; Ariad: Research Funding; Constellation: Research Funding; Cyclacel: Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Research Funding; Mateon: Research Funding; MedImmune: Research Funding; Astellas Pharma: Honoraria, Research Funding; Actinium: Research Funding; Gamida: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Stemline: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Ono Pharma: Consultancy; Forma: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Onconova: Research Funding; Pfizer: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Research Funding; Regimmune: Research Funding; Samus: Research Funding; Agios: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Sanofi: Speakers Bureau. Bradley:AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Tiu:Astellas Pharma Global Development: Current Employment; Eli Lilly & Company: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Ended employment in the past 24 months. Hong:F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Genentech, Inc.: Current Employment. Tong:AbbVie, Inc.: Current Employment, Other: may hold stock or other options. Qin:AbbVie: Current Employment, Other: may hold stock or other options. Dilley:AbbVie Inc.: Current Employment, Other: may hold stock or stock options. Perl:Leukemia & Lymphoma Society.: Other; AbbVie Inc, Astellas, Actinium, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Daiichi Sankyo Inc, FUJIFILM Pharmaceuticals USA Inc: Research Funding; AbbVie Inc, Actinium Pharmaceuticals Inc, Astellas, Daiichi Sankyo Inc, FORMA Therapeutics, Loxo Oncology Inc, a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly & Company, NewLink Genetics: Other; AbbVie Inc, Arog Pharmaceuticals Inc, Astellas, Daiichi Sankyo Inc: Consultancy; Astellas, AbbVie Inc, Daiichi Sankyo, Actinium, Forma, Syndax, Loxo: Consultancy, Honoraria. 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.