Litzow, Mark R.

Abstract Background Familial myeloid neoplasms are rare causes of myeloid malignancies. Over the last few years germline mutations involving RUNX1, JAK2, GATA1, GATA2 and CEBPA genes have been associated with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS), myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) and acute myeloid leukemia (AML). We carried out this study to describe the spectrum of familial myeloid neoplasms seen at our institution. Methods After due IRB approval, the myeloid neoplasms data base (1990-2012) at the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota was queried for patients presenting with, or having a strong family history of myeloid neoplasms. Selective sequencing of germline DNA was done in appropriate patients. Germline mutations that were screened for included; RUNX1, JAK2, GATA1, GATA2 and CEBPA. In one family with none of the aforementioned gene mutations, exome sequencing was performed. Families with chromosomal breakage and primary telomere disorders were excluded. All patients had bone marrow and cytogenetic studies at diagnosis. Results We identified six families with familial myeloid neoplasms (table one). There were two with germline GATA2 mutations (no.1 and 2); one with a novel c1339A>C, pS447R, non-zinc finger gene abnormality. In this family nine members have developed MDS/AML. All members had profound B/NK cell deficiency, viral warts and one member had primary lymphedema (Embergers syndrome). Three of the 6 seen at the clinic have successfully undergone allo- SCT. The second GATA2 mutated family had a less extensive history of myeloid neoplasms. There was one patient (no.5) who presented with long standing thrombocytopenia, clinically diagnosed as ITP. She eventually developed MDS with trisomy 8. She had three first degree relatives with myeloid neoplasms. Germline sequencing identified a RUNX1 mutation. Platelet electron microscopy identified characteristic ultrastructural changes. There was one family (no.4) with a germline JAK2V617F mutation. The propositus was diagnosed to have primary myelofibrosis and then demonstrated clonal evolution to a concomitant BCR-ABL1 p190 driven chronic myeloid leukemia. His sister and mother have essential thrombocytosis (ET) and his brother has a detectable JAK2 mutation (no evidence for disease). The patient has successfully undergone an allo-SCT. The patient with a GATA1 mutation (no.3) presented with congenital anemia and had craniofacial anomaly, atrial septal defect and developmental delays. Red cell and platelet ultrastructural abnormalities lead to the diagnosis with an additional family member having chronic anemia and suspected MDS. One family (no.6) presented with seven first degree relatives affected by MDS/AML. Germline sequencing for the aforementioned genes was negative. Exome sequencing has been performed and results should be available at the time of the meeting. The prepositus has successfully undergone allo-SCT. Conclusion Familial myeloid neoplasms are uncommon but warrant early recognition. Clues to diagnosis include strong family history, associated primary immunodeficiency states, morphological/skeletal abnormalities and platelet ultrastructural defects (RUNX1, GATA2, and GATA1). Exome and whole genome sequencing is an exciting prospect for further discoveries. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Background Predictors of outcomes after reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) stem cell transplantation (SCT) in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) are not well established. The Dana Farber (DF) investigators (Brown et al, leukemia 2013) developed a prognostic scoring model for overall survival (OS) and disease free survival (DFS) that assigned one point to each of comorbidity index, absolute lymphocyte count, LDH and disease status. The goals of the present study were to 1) validate the DF model 2) identify additional predictors of outcomes after SCT. Methods This study is a retrospective review of the Mayo Clinic CLL database and was approved by the Institutional Review Board. All CLL patients that underwent RIC-SCT were included. The prognostic significance of prognostic factors at time of RIC-SCT were analyzed, including the DF model. Survival was estimated and compared using the Kaplan Meier and Log Rank tests. Results From 2006 to 2012, 50 patients with CLL underwent RIC-SCT at the Mayo Clinic. Of these, 33 were male (66%) and the median age was 56 (29-69) years. The median time from diagnosis to RIC-SCT was 4.7 years (0.6-22.9). Indications for RIC-SCT were 17p deletion in 24 (48%) patients and purine nucleoside analogue (PNA) refractory disease in 26 (52%) patients. Transplant related mortality was 6% and non-relapse mortality at 5 years was 14%. Acute graft versus host disease (GVHD) developed in 30 (60%) patients and chronic (c) GVHD was noted in 32 patients (64%). The 5-year relapse rate was 38%. The DF prognostic score stratified three categories for OS (score of 0, 1-2, ≥ 3), but was not associated with DFS in this cohort. We next evaluated the impact of other patient, disease, and transplant characteristics on clinical outcome. Development of cGVHD post-transplant was the dominant predictor of both DFS (HR 0.26, 95% CI=0.10-0.69, P=0.006) and OS (HR 0.04, 95% CI=0.01-0.19, P<0.0001, figure 1). The presence of 17p deletion at time of RIC-SCT was associated with shorter DFS (HR 3.99, 95% CI=1.43-11.18, P=0.008), but did not impact OS. Developing cGVH but not DF score remained an independent predictor of OS on a multi-variate analysis including both factors. Given these findings, we evaluated what pre-treatment patient, disease, and transplant characteristics predicted for subsequent development of cGVHD. Patients with higher scores on DF prognostic model were less likely to develop cGVHD (score 0=66%, 1-2=76%, ≥3=31%; P=0.01). Three CLL characteristics (complete or partial remission at time of RIC-SCT, absence of 17p deletion, and absence of ZAP70 overexpression) were predictors for development of cGVHD while alemtuzumab exposure ≤3 months prior to RIC-SCT decreased likelihood of cGVHD. On multivariate modeling using these four predictors, only ZAP70 overexpression was an independent negative predictor of developing cGVHD (Table 1). Rates of cGVHD post RIC-SCT in ZAP 70 positive and ZAP70 negative patients were 50% and 92%, respectively (p=0.03). Conclusion This study found that while the DF prognostic score is an effective way to predict outcome prior to RIC-SCT, development of cGVHD post-transplant is ultimately the most significant predictor for both OS and DFS after transplant in patients with CLL. Pretransplant characteristics that predict subsequent cGVHD include DF prognostic score and ZAP70 status. This is the first report to identify biologic characteristics of CLL B-cells associated with development of cGVHD post-transplant. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Background Activating mutations in FLT3 - and in particular FLT3-ITD (internal tandem duplication) - are common in younger patients with AML, and are associated with relapse and with inferior overall survival (OS), however their prevalence and impact in older adults remains uncertain. We performed an analysis of FLT3-ITD mutations in patients age ≥60 yrs in the large prospective multicenter ECOG-ACRIN (E-A) E2906 Phase III trial. Methods Eligible patients (pts) age ≥60 yrs (n=727) were randomized to 'Standard' therapy with 7&3 (Dauno 60mg/m2) induction, and 2 cycles of intermediate dose Ara-C (1.5g/m2 x 12 doses; 6 doses if age ≥70yrs) consolidation (Arm A); or single agent clofarabine (CLO) induction and consolidation (2 cycles) (Arm B). As previously reported (Foran et al, ASH #217a, 2015), there was superior overall survival (OS) with standard therapy. AML diagnostic samples collected prospectively in the central E-A Leukemia Translational Research Lab (LTL) were used to detect mutations in the FLT3 gene by PCR using cDNA from total RNA. LTL investigators were blinded to treatment assignment. Patients with no RNA available or blast count <10% (threshold of sensitivity for the PCR assay) on the submitted sample were excluded. Statistical analysis was performed using X2 (categories) and Wilcoxon rank sum (continuous) tests to compare baseline patient and disease characteristics. Log-rank tests and multivariate Cox models stratified by treatment arm and adjusted for patient and disease variable (including WBC, cytogenetics, sex, performance status, secondary AML) were used to examine FLT3-ITD effect on OS and disease-free survival [DFS; relapse or death after complete remission (CR)/CRi (CR with incomplete CBC recovery)]. Results In the first 231 pts tested, FLT3-ITD mutations were identified in 43 (18.6%) pts, and the remainder were FLT3-ITD-negative (i.e. non-ITD). The proportion with FLT3-ITD was the same for patients age 60-69 yrs (18.8%) vs. ≥70 yrs (18.3%). In comparison to non-ITD, FLT3-ITD+ pts had significantly higher WBC (median 18.1 vs. 6.3, p=0.002) and BM blasts (80% vs. 51.5%, p=0.0004) at AML diagnosis, and were more likely to have intermediate risk (79.1% vs. 59%) vs. unfavorable risk (7.0 % vs. 31.4%) cytogenetics (p=0.002). There was no difference in CR/CRi rate overall (p=0.40), however standard (Arm A) pts with FLT3-ITD had a significantly higher CR/CRi rate (78.9% vs. non-ITD 51.5%, p=0.04). With median follow-up 53.5 months, FLT3-ITD patients tended to have worse OS (HR 1.24, 95%CI 0.85-1.81) but this was not statistically significant (Figure 1, p=0.26), and results were similar for both Arms A/B. DFS similarly tended to be worse overall for FLT3-ITD (HR 1.44, 95%CI 0.65-2.43) (p=0.17), and DFS was significantly worse for FLT3-ITD+ Arm A/Standard pts (Figure 2, p=0.033), while Arm B/CLO pts had a worse DFS regardless of FLT3 mutation status (Arm B, FLT3-ITD vs. non-ITD, p=0.93). More patients with FLT3-ITD underwent allogeneic transplantation (25.6% vs. non-ITD 19.7%), although this was not significant (p=0.41). Conclusions FLT3-ITD mutations are prevalent in older and elderly (age ≥70 yrs) patients with AML, and while they occur at somewhat lower rates than reported for younger adults, FLT3-ITD+ AML in this population has a leukemia phenotype similar to that reported in younger patients. Despite significantly higher CR/CRi rates with Standard therapy, older pts with FLT3-ITD also have significantly worse DFS following intensified Ara-C consolidation therapy than non-ITD pts. These results support routine assessment of FLT3-ITD status in older AML patients, and the incorporation of novel post-remission treatment strategies to improve outcome in FLT3-ITD+ pts ≥60 yrs. Disclosures Foran: Agios: Research Funding; Xencor, Inc.: Research Funding. Lazarus:Pluristem Ltd.: Consultancy. Tallman:BioSight: Other: Advisory board; AbbVie: Research Funding; Daiichi-Sankyo: Other: Advisory board; Cellerant: Research Funding; Orsenix: Other: Advisory board; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding; AROG: Research Funding.

Abstract Background. Gene mutation profiling is increasingly employed for diagnosis, risk stratification, and clinical management in patients with MDS. However, current World Health Organization MDS classification is still based on histologic findings (with the exception of SF3B1 for MDS-RS), and guidelines generally suggest that clinical decisions be guided by clinico-pathologic risk stratification tools such as Revised International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS-R). We sought to study beliefs and patterns of practice with respect to gene mutation profiling among health care providers who manage patients with MDS. Methods. A link to a 23-question web-based survey was emailed to members of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG)-ACRIN Cancer Research Group, Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology (Alliance), and the Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG), and the Cancer Trials Support Unit (CTSU) on 5/1/2018 with 6 subsequent weekly reminders. The Qualtrics survey platform was used to record anonymous responses. We used descriptive statistics to analyze the data. No incentive was provided for responses. Results. Of 371 received responses, 262 were received from providers who did not manage MDS patients or lacked analyzable data and therefore were excluded. Of 109 eligible responses, 108 responders were from institutions representing 31 US states (one respondent was from South America). Median age of respondents was 48 years (range, 33-75); 43 (39%) were women. A third of responders (32%) worked at a university hospital, while 25%, 17%, and 5% worked at a community hospital, private practice, or other settings, respectively. While 37% of participants worked at institutions with guidelines for clinical care of MDS patients, 28% reported that their institutional guidelines recommended MDS-specific gene mutation profiling. Such testing was performed at institutions of 13% participants; institutions of 26% of responders tested a general AML panel that included MDS-specific genes. The total number of respondents whose institutions sent out either an MDS-specific gene panel or a general AML gene panel with MDS-specific genes was similar, 25% and 12%, respectively (Fig. 1). Of those who routinely perform molecular testing, 94% do so at diagnosis, 56% at relapse, 33% during preparation for stem cell transplant, 31% after the failure of hypomethylating agents (HMA), 24% during screening for a clinical trial, and 15% at initial treatment (Fig. 2). MDS gene mutation profiling was felt to be most helpful in diagnosis (rarely 11%; sometimes 49%; often 30%; always 9%), risk stratification (sometimes 31%; often 51%; always 15%), and prognosis (sometimes 31%; often 51%; always 14%); its role was more limited in response assessment (never 12%; rarely 25%; sometimes 44%; often 14%) and to predict responses to HMAs (never 5%; rarely 28%; sometimes 52%, often 14%) (Fig. 3). Various types of evidence were used to stratify MDS risk and prognosis: genetic mutations were used by nearly everyone (95%); 70% relied on morphologic findings, while gene expression/transcriptome profiling was used by 40%. Eighty-four percent of responders reported relying on conventional prognostic models like IPSS-R to identify high-risk patients for whom they would consider intensive treatment options. For this purpose, 62% would also rely on mutation profiling, and 32% would also consider higher frequency of gene mutations. While mutations in the p53 pathway were felt to be helpful in terms of risk stratification and treatment decisions by 70% of responders, 43%, 39%, 31%, 26% 23%, 20%, and 3% considered mutations in spliceosome, DNA methylation, transcription factors, histone modification, signaling, RAS pathway, and cohesin genes, respectively, to be useful as well. Approximately 31% of responders were not certain as to which mutations would affect risk stratification and management choices and said they needed to review literature. The respondents also cited multiple limitations to wider clinical use of MDS gene mutation profiling (Fig. 4). Conclusions. Our survey demonstrates widespread use of gene mutation profiling in the management of patients with MDS, but also reveals substantial variability in beliefs, practices, testing logistics, and interpretation of molecular profiling. Our findings emphasize the need for high-quality data to develop consensus evidence-based guidelines for gene profiling of MDS patients. Disclosures Sekeres: Opsona: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Opsona: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Bejar:AbbVie/Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Foundation Medicine: Consultancy; Astex/Otsuka: Consultancy, Honoraria; Modus Outcomes: Consultancy; Takeda: Research Funding; Genoptix: Consultancy. Gore:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding. Zeidan:Ariad: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy; Incyte: Employment; Celgene: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy.

Abstract Background : Pre-treatment determinants of survival in adult acute myeloid leukemia (AML) include performance status, age, karyotype, the distinction between primary and non-primary AML and FLT3-ITD/NPM1 mutational status. Current literature on AML natural history and risk factors is often based on information derived from stringent protocol studies. In the current series of 1,123 adult patients seen at the Mayo Clinic between 2004 and 2017, we examined long-term survival specified by a number of primarily established risk factors. Methods: Diagnosis of AML and its sub-classification was according to World Health Organization criteria. Study subjects were recruited from the Mayo Clinic AML database. Conventional response criteria were used for CR and CRi assignment; the latter met all criteria for CR with the exception of platelet count <100 x 109/l or absolute neutrophil cunt <1 x 109/l. Standard statistical methods were used for analysis of overall survival, calculated from the initial diagnosis of AML to date of death or last follow-up; analyses were performed both in the absence and in the presence of censoring of survival at time of allogenic stem cell transplant (ASCT). The JMP® Pro 13.0.0 software from SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA, was used for all calculations. Results: 1,123 adult patients (median age 65 years, range 18-94; 61% males) with non-APL AML were considered; 61% were age >60 years. 351 (31%) patients were seen between 2004 and 2009 and 772 (69%) between 2010 and 2017. AML subcategories were primary (56%), post-myelodysplastic syndromes (post-MDS; 24%), therapy-related (10%), post-myeloproliferative neoplasm (post-MPN; 8%) and post-MDS/MPN (3%). Cytogenetic risk distribution, according to the European LeukemiaNet classification, was favorable in 47 (4%), intermediate in 650 (58%) and adverse risk in 426 (38%) patients. FLT3, NPM1 and CEBPA mutation information was available in 462 (24% mutated), 393 (27% mutated) and 228 (11% mutated) patients, respectively. Treatment included intensive chemotherapy (IC) in 766 (68%) patients, less aggressive chemotherapy, including the use of hypomethylating agents in 144 (13%) and supportive care alone in 213 (19%) patients. ASCT was utilized in 258 (23%) cases, almost all performed after achieving CR/CRi. Complete remission (CR) and CR with incomplete count recovery (CRi) were listed in 333 (30%) and 248 (22%) patients, respectively; the corresponding rates in IC-treated patients were 43% and 32%. Almost all cases of CR/CRi occurred in IC-treated patients; 2 (1.4%) CRs were listed for less aggressive chemotherapy. After a median follow-up of 11 months, 798 (71%) deaths were recorded. Median survival for all 1,123 patients was 14 months with 1-, 3- and 5-year survival rates of 54%, 29% and 23%, respectively; a slight but significant (p=0.01) improvement in survival was apparent in more recent years (Figure 1a). Figures 1b, 1c and 1d depict analysis stratified by AML subcategories, treatment received and response obtained, respectively. Similarly, figures 2a, 2b and 2c depict analysis stratified by karyotype, use of ASCT and age. Multivariable analysis of pre-treatment parameters evaluable in all 1,123 patients identified age >60 years (HR 2.2, 1.9-2.6), adverse karyotype (HR 2.9, 1.9-4.9), intermediate-risk karyotype (HR 1.6, 1.02-2.6), post-MPN AML (HR 1.9, 1.5-2.4) and other secondary AML (HR 1.3 (1.1-1.6), as risk factors for shortened survival; the inclusion in the model of FLT3/NPM1 mutational status in 392 informative cases confirmed the adverse prognostic effect of age >60 years (HR 1.8, 1.4-2.5), adverse karyotype (HR 3.7, 1.4-15.3), post-MPN AML (HR 2.8, 1.6-4.6), other secondary AML (HR 1.4, 1.0-1.9) and FLT3+NPM1- (HR 2.8, 1.6-4.9) and FLT3-NPM1- (HR 1.7, 1.2-2.7) profile. Results were unchanged when survival was censored at time of ASCT. Additional prognostic interaction with treatment strategy and ASCT is further elaborated in an accompanying abstract to be presented. Conclusions: The current study, the largest coming from a single institution, provides practically useful information that should assist with patient consultation on AML prognosis and treatment. The study confirms the primary prognostic importance of age, karyotype and FLT3/NPM1 mutational status, in real-life practice. Novel observations included comparable value of CRi vs CR and the particularly worse prognosis associated with post-MPN AML. Disclosures Al-Kali: Novartis: Research Funding.

Abstract Background: We previously reported successful treatment of myeloma with an oncolytic virus, MMV-NIS. Preexisting immunity against measles made use of that virus unsatisfactory. The Indiana strain of Vesicular Stomatitis Viruses (VSV) are being developed as anticancer drugs for the treatment of a variety of malignancies. To ensure tumor selective replication and spread, we designed the VSV to encode interferon beta. Expression of IFNβ also serves as a STING agonist to activate host immunity against the cancer. The sodium iodide symporter (NIS) is inserted as a reporter gene into the viral genome to enable noninvasive monitoring of viral spread using PET/CT imaging. We report a Phase I clinical trial of intravenous administration of VSV-IFNβ-NIS for relapsed hematological malignancies including MM, AML, and TCL. Methods: Arm A consisted of patients with low tumor burden. Arm B included patients with high tumor burden. Both arms consisted of a classical 3+3 phase I trial, starting at 5x10^9 TCID50 (dose level 1) through 5x10^11 TCID50 (dose level 4), given as a single IV dose. In order to obviate potential toxicity from high interferon levels, Arm B received ruxolitinib 15 mg twice daily for 10 days beginning on day -1. The primary objective was determining the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of VSV-IFNβ-NIS alone and in combination with ruxolitinib; secondary objectives include estimating the safety profile and preliminary efficacy. Correlative objectives include monitoring the pharmacodynamics of viral replication through SPECT/CT imaging with NIS gene, viremia, virus shedding, changes in the immune profile of peripheral blood leukocytes, and immunohistochemistry for immune cell infiltrates in tumors. Adverse events (AEs) are reported herein based on CTCAE v4 with the exception of cytokine release syndrome (CRS) which is based on Lee (Blood 2014; 124(2):188-195) criteria. Results: To date, 10 patients have received IV VSV-IFNβ-NIS; 8 in Arm A and 2 in Arm B. In Arm A, 3 patients were treated at dose level 1, 3 at dose level 2 and 2 at dose level 3. At dose level 1, there were three grade 3 hematologic AEs (neutropenia [1], lymphopenia [2]), and no grade 3+ non-hematologic AEs. At dose level 2, there were two grade 3 hematologic AEs (anemia [1], lymphopenia [1]), and two grade 3 non-hematologic AEs (nausea [1], dehydration [1]). A grade 2 CRS by Lee criteria was also observed. At dose level 3, 2 patients have been enrolled and data are maturing for DLT evaluation. In Arm B (VSV + rux), 2 patients have been enrolled and data are maturing for dose limiting toxicity (DLT) evaluation. Other grade 1 and 2 toxicities have included fever, hypertension, headache, electrolyte abnormalities, nausea, vomiting, transient elevation of liver function tests and creatinine. All grade 1 and 2 toxicities resolved within 72 hours. Among the 6 patients evaluable for response, there was one partial remission (TCL patient treated at dose level 2), and 5 with progressive disease. Multiple cytokines increased at 4h post infusion of virus, but most returned to baseline levels by 24h.Viremia was detectable in all patients at the end of infusion, and to varying levels at 30 mins, 1, 2, 4, 24, 48h or 72 hours post virus infusion. No persistent viremia was observed. No infectious virus was recovered in buccal swabs or urine and neutralizing anti-VSV antibodies were present by day 29. Extensive immune phenotyping and ELIspot assays for shared antigens are ongoing. Conclusion: In the lowest dose levels tested to date, VSV-IFNβ-NIS has not led to any observed dose limiting toxicity. Dose escalation is ongoing and updated results will be reported. Disclosures Lacy: Celgene: Research Funding. Peng:Vyriad: Equity Ownership. Russell:Vyriad: Equity Ownership. Dueck:Bayer: Employment; Phytogine: Employment; Pfizer: Honoraria. Witzig:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Dispenzieri:Celgene, Takeda, Prothena, Jannsen, Pfizer, Alnylam, GSK: Research Funding. Gertz:spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; Ionis: Honoraria; janssen: Consultancy; Medscape: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; Apellis: Consultancy; Prothena: Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy; annexon: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Research to Practice: Consultancy; Teva: Consultancy; Alnylam: Honoraria. Dingli:Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding. Kapoor:Celgene: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Al-Kali:Novartis: Research Funding. Naik:Vyriad: Equity Ownership. Kumar:AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction B progenitor acute lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL) is a leading cause of childhood cancer death. Many chimeric genes have been identified and led to a refined classification of B-ALL and tailored therapies. Still, up to 30% of B-ALL cannot be classified into established subtypes, and the outcome for many is poor. Methods To identify novel subtypes of B-ALL, we performed integrative genomic analysis including transcriptome sequencing (RNA-seq) of 1,988 cases from St. Jude, Children's Oncology Group and adult cooperative group studies and analyzed chromosomal rearrangements, gene-expression profiles (GEP), somatic mutations and chromosome-level copy-number alterations. Cases lacking known or putative subtype-defining alterations underwent whole genome sequencing. Effects on proliferation and transformation of novel lesions were assessed by retroviral expression in cell lines and point-mutation knock-in mice using CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing. Results Using integrated genetic alterations and gene expression profiling, we classified 23 B-ALL subtypes (Table and Figure). Three groups included cases with similar GEP as canonical subtypes (ETV6-RUNX1, KMT2A-rearranged, and ZNF384-rearranged), but lacking the expected drivers (e.g., ETV6-RUNX1-like, n=42). Eighteen cases (0.9%) had rearrangements of BCL2, MYC and/or BCL6 showing a distinct GEP; they were mostly adults (n=16) with very poor outcome. These alterations, rarely seen in ALL, are identical to those observed in "double/triple hit" lymphoma, and are of pre-B immunophenotype. Eight cases with tightly clustered GEP comprised a novel subtype defined by IKZF1 N159Y missense mutation. N159Y is in the DNA-binding domain of IKZF1, and is known to perturb IKZF1 function, with distinct nuclear mislocalization and induction of aberrant intercellular adhesion. We identified two subtypes with distinct GEP characterized by PAX5 alterations. One, herein termed PAX5 altered (PAX5alt), comprised 148 (7.4%) cases, was characterized by diverse PAX5 alterations including rearrangements (n=57), sequence mutations (n=46) and/or focal intragenic amplifications (n=8). These PAX5 alterations were found in 73.6% of PAX5alt cases and different alteration types were mutually exclusive. Other PAX5 alterations, including deletions and large-scale amplifications were also assessed using SNP array, but were not enriched in the PAX5alt group. Clinically, PAX5alt pediatric and adult patients had favorable (96.8±3.2%) and intermediate (42.1±10.2%) 5-year overall survival (OS), respectively. The other GEP distinct subtype comprised 44 cases, all with PAX5 P80R missense mutations. In 30 of these cases, PAX5 P80R was homozygous due to deletion of the wild-type (WT) PAX5 allele or copy-neutral loss of heterozygosity. Of the other 14 cases with heterozygous PAX5 P80R mutations, 13 had a second frameshift (n=7), nonsense (n=2) or deleterious missense (n=4) PAX5 mutation. Four of the remaining 1,944 cases also had the PAX5 P80R mutation, but all were heterozygous with preservation of a WT PAX5 allele, consistent with the notion that homozygous or compound heterozygous PAX5 P80R mutation is the hallmark of this subtype. Adult PAX5 P80R cases (n=14) showed better 5-year OS (61.9±13.4%) than those in PAX5alt subtype (42.1±10.2%). To examine the effects of PAX5 P80R on B-cell maturation, WT PAX5, PAX5 P80R, V26G and P34Q were expressed in Pax5-/- lineage-depleted bone marrow cells. Expression of WT PAX5, PAX5 V26G and P34Q resulted in near complete rescue of B cell differentiation; however, expression of PAX5 P80R blocked the differentiation at the pre-pro-B stage of B-cell maturation. Further, Pax5 P80R heterozygous or homozygous mice developed pre-B-ALL with a median latency of 166 and 87 days, respectively, with heterozygous mice acquiring alterations on the second allele. In contrast, Pax5+/- mice, and those harboring G183S mutation observed in familial leukemia, do not spontaneously develop B-ALL. Conclusions These results show the utility of transcriptome sequencing in defining subtypes and founding genetic alterations in B-ALL, provide a revised taxonomy of the disease across the age spectrum, and reinforce the central role of PAX5 as a checkpoint in B lymphoid maturation and leukemogenesis. Disclosures McKay: ImmunoGen Inc.: Employment. Tallman:Orsenix: Other: Advisory board; AROG: Research Funding; BioSight: Other: Advisory board; Cellerant: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Daiichi-Sankyo: Other: Advisory board; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding. Stock:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Konopleva:Stemline Therapeutics: Research Funding. Relling:Shire Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Mullighan:Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas: Consultancy; Amgen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Research Funding; Loxo Oncology: Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

Abstract Abstract 4804 Background: Chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) is one of the classic myeloproliferative neoplasms characterized by a reciprocal translocation of BCR and ABL t(9;22)(q34;q11). Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) have revolutionized the management of CML in inducing rapid and prolonged responses. However; clonal evolution (CE) is considered a poor prognostic factor and a criterion for accelerated phase (AP) CML by the World Health Organization (WHO). Deletion of chromosome Y (−Y) is frequently considered an age-related abnormality and the exact prognostic value has not yet been determined. Aim: To determine if –Y carries an impact on the clinical outcome of male pts with CML. Methods: All male patients diagnosed with chronic phase CML in our institution between 1993 and 2011 were screened for -Y. Data were collected in a retrospective manner and compared (using t-test) to male patients with sole BCR-ABL translocation after excluding patients with advanced stages (accelerated phase, blast phase). Demographics, laboratory tests, cytogenetic analysis, molecular testing and survival data were abstracted. Kaplan-Meier estimates of overall survival were used via JMP software v9.0. Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval was obtained for this study in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration. Results: 20 of 162 (12%) males with CML were found to have –Y abnormality (group 1). CML male patients with sole Philadelphia chromosome abnormality were the control cohort (group 2). In group1; the median age was 57 years, BMI 27.7, hemoglobin 12.2 g/dL, white blood cell count (WBC) 32.8 x109/L, platelet 270 x109/L, and peripheral blood blasts 1%. Sokal risk was low in 30%, intermediate in 65% and high in 5% of pts. Nine pts (45%) were treated with interferon (IFN) prior to TKI. In group 2; the median age was 54 years, hemoglobin 12 g/dL, WBC 57 x109/L, and platelet 282 x109/L. Sokal risk was low in 37%, intermediate in 47%, and high in 16%. 46 of 142 patients (32%) had received previous interferon therapy. All patients in both groups had chronic phase CML at the time of diagnosis, with a median bone marrow cellularity of 95%. In group 1, 14 of 20 pts (70%) received imatinib, all of whom achieved a complete hematological response (CHR), 7 of 14 pts (50%) had partial cytogenetic response, 2 of 14 pts (14%) achieved a complete cytogenic response (CCyR);1 (7%) pt achieved CCyR within 12 months and an additional 1 (7%) by 18 months). Two pts of 12 (16%) achieved at least a major molecular response (MMR); one of whom (8%) achieved a complete molecular response (CMR). In comparison, 107of 142 pts (75%) in group 2 received imatinib, all of whom achieved CHR. Twenty-one pts (20%) achieved partial cytogenetic remission. CCyR was more frequently achieved than group 1 (48/107 pts (45%), p 0.026); 24 pts (22%) achieved CCyR within 12 months of therapy and an additional 10 pts by 18-months. MMR and/or CMR was higher in group 2 compared to group 1 (34 /101 (34%), p 0.18); 16 (16%) of which were CMR. In group 1; 6 (30%) pts had disease progression; 4 of 20 pts (20%) progressed to blast phase (BP) and 2 pts (10%) progressed to AP, compared to 32 (22%) pts in group 2 (p 0.17); 22 (15%) of whom progressed to BP and 10 (7%) patients progressed to AP. Median overall survival was 110 months in group 1 compared to 155 months in group 2 (log rank p=0.48). On multivariate analysis, CCyR was an independent factor for a better OS (p 0.03), but not –Y (p 0.7). Conclusion: Loss of the Y chromosome in chronic myelogenous leukemia is an infrequent phenomenon (12%). Although patients with –Y had a statistically significant less chance to achieve CCyR, loss of the Y chromosome did not affect the progression rate or overall survival. Larger scale studies are needed to confirm our observations Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Background: Overall survival (OS) remains the definitive primary efficacy endpoint to evaluate previously untreated acute myeloid leukemia (AML) therapies, but it requires prolonged follow-up. An earlier endpoint assessed post-treatment would expedite clinical trial conduct and accelerate patient access to effective new therapies. Our objective was to formally evaluate event-free survival (EFS) as a surrogate endpoint for OS in untreated AML. Methods: Individual patient data were analyzed from 2,475 patients (pts) from 4 multicenter, randomized controlled phase III trials of active treatment in previously untreated AML using anthracycline and cytarabine induction chemotherapy as the concurrent control (CALGB 10201, n=506, enrollment period 2003-2006, age 60-88 years (y); CALGB 10603, n=717, enrollment period 2008-2015, age 18-60 y, FLT3-mutated pts only; SWOG 0106, n=595, enrollment period 2004-2009, age 18-60 y; ECOG-ACRIN 1900, n=657, enrollment period 2002-2008, age 17-60 y). Individual patient-level surrogacy examines the association between the individual patients' EFS and OS time after adjusting for treatment effect, and was assessed using the copula bivariate survival model (Kendall's tau). Trial-level surrogacy measures how precisely the treatment effect on OS can be predicted on the basis of observed treatment effect on EFS, and was evaluated using both linear regression (R2WLS) weighted by trial size and Copula bivariate (R2Copula) models. Pre-specified criteria for surrogacy required either R2WLS or R2Copula ≥0.80, neither below 0.7, with either lower bound 95% Confidence Interval (CI) >0.60. Sensitivity analyses were conducted using different EFS definitions (Table 1). Results: With a median follow-up of 50.2 months for the 896 patients still alive, the median OS and EFS across all four trials were 20.9 months (95% CI: 19.0-22.7) and 5.6 months (95% CI: 4.5-6.4), respectively. Trial-level surrogacy for EFS was strong (R2WLS=0.79; R2Copula=0.89), indicating a high correlation of treatment effect between EFS and OS. At the individual patient-level, however, EFS showed weak association with OS (tau= 0.52), compared to the strength of trial-level surrogacy. The discrepancy between patient-level EFS and OS was greatest among patients who did not achieve a CR, followed by those who achieved a CR but relapsed (Figure 1). Sensitivity analysis on alternative EFS definitions showed that the trial-level surrogacy was similar, but individual patient-level surrogacy varied across different EFS definitions (Table 1). This is consistent with what we previously reported (ASH 2016): EFS estimates differed considerably based on the definition of induction failure (IF) in a single arm setting, but this had minimal impact on the estimation of the treatment effect using EFS in randomized trials. In addition, when considering only relapse and death as events (definition 4), both individual patient- and trial-level correlations were high. Conclusions: Correlation between EFS and OS was impacted by patients not achieving CR during induction. Despite the lack of patient-level correlation, a strong correlation between hazard ratios for treatment effects was observed between EFS and OS on the trial level. Hence, it remains debatable whether EFS represents a clinical benefit in itself for patient with untreated AML considering the strong correlation in treatment effects. Further validation is needed due to the small number of trials included and the heterogeneity across trials. Acknowledgment: We gratefully acknowledge the important contributions of the late Dr. Stephen H. Petersdorf, SWOG S0106 Study Chair. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, U10CA180794, U10CA180820, U10CA180888; Clinicaltrials.gov Identifiers: NCT00085124 (10201), NCT00651261 (10603), NCT01253070 (11001), NCT00085709 (SWOG S0106), and NCT00049517 (ECOG-ACRIN E1900) Disclosures Uy: Curis: Consultancy; GlycoMimetics: Consultancy. Larson:Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; BristolMyers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Ariad/Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Abstract The International ALL trial, conducted jointly by the MRC in the UK and ECOG in the US (UKALL XII/E2993), recruited 1929 patients between 1993 and 2006. All patients aged 16 to 64 years with newly diagnosed ALL, received the identical two phases of induction therapy. Patients with an HLA-identical sibling were assigned to a sibling allogeneic transplant and those who were Ph-positive could also get an unrelated-donor transplant. Patients who did not have a donor were to be randomized between a single autologous transplant, after conditioning with etoposide/total body irradiation, versus consolidation/maintenance therapy for 2.5 years. Following randomization, but prior to receiving the assigned or randomized therapy, all patients received intensification with 3 cycles of high-dose methotrexate. After excluding patients assigned to an allogeneic transplant, 1028 patients were eligible for randomization but, as in other major transplant studies, only 457 were randomized. The rationale underlying the randomization was based on the fact that protracted consolidation/maintenance therapy in adults, extrapolated from the pediatric experience, had never been prospectively evaluated in the era of intensive chemotherapy. Given that the mortality from autotransplant is not higher than chemotherapy (Goldstone et al. Blood. 2008), it was postulated that if a single autologous transplant is at least as good as standard protracted chemotherapy that may make it the preferable option, except possibly in females in whom fertility may be an issue. The overall survival and the event-free survival were significantly superior among the chemotherapy patients (p = .05) as previously reported (Goldstone et al. Blood. 2008). Because the literature contains reports suggesting a trend in favor of autologous transplantation in some patients with ALL (Dhédiu et al. Leukemia, 2006), an analysis was performed to see if any subgroup of patients could be identified in whom: 1. chemotherapy may not be superior to autologous transplant and 2. autologous transplant may be superior. The table lists a detailed analysis of overall survival looking at various age groups, B- versus T-lineage, the rapidity with which a complete remission was achieved –after phase I or only after phase II of induction. Detailed analysis was also performed by cytogenetics looking at those with standard risk versus those with high risk abnormalities [ t(9;22), t(4;11), t(8;14)] and low hypodiploidy/near triploidy or a complex karyotype (Moorman et al. Blood. 2007)]. In all groups, the chemotherapy group was at least as efficacious as the autograft group, and in some was even significantly superior to autologous transplantation. There is no evidence that other risk factors, such as relapse rate or treatment-related mortality, influenced these overall survival data. In addition, the tests for heterogeneity were not significant across any group. In conclusion, the overall survival was longer in patients randomized to chemotherapy, although the superiority was not statistically significant in most of the groups. There is no clinical indication for autologous transplantation at any age and particularly this should not be considered for patients over age 50, those with high-risk cytogenetics or T-lineage, and late remitters, for whom it might appear most attractive. Overall Survival (OS) at 5 years in 457 Randomized Patients Chemo Auto Subgroups n OS n OS P (log rank) Age (years) < 20 50 58% 43 46% > 0.1 20–29 61 52% 70 43% > 0.1 30–39 46 39% 46 32% > 0.1 40–49 38 31% 35 31% > 0.1 50 + 33 38% 35 31% > 0.1 B-lineage 169 46% 158 35% 0.03 T-lineage 45 54% 54 49% > 0.1 Time to CR phase I 193 48% 190 41% 0.1 phase II 26 36% 29 19% 0.08 Cytogenetics standard-risk 109 51% 122 44% > 0.1 high-risk 29 23% 27 7% 0.02