Schwager, Susan M.

Abstract Background: In both polycythemia vera (PV) and essential thrombocythemia (ET), aspirin and/or hydroxyurea therapy provide adequate protection from thrombosis but not from disease transformation into acute myeloid leukemia/myelodysplastic syndrome (AML/MDS) or myelofibrosis (MF). In designing clinical trials with new drugs, including the use of small molecule JAK2 inhibitors, in either ET or PV, it is important to identify patients who are at a higher risk of early transformation into AML/MDS/MF as well as those in whom the long-term risk of these complications is too low to justify exposure to experimental drugs with unknown short-term and long-term toxicity profile. Methods: Information on an institutional database of 1061 patients with either PV (n=458) or ET (n=603) was updated in July of 2007. The World Health Organization criteria were used for diagnosis of PV, ET, AML, MDS, and MF. Two different approaches were used to assess both early and overall risk of AML/MDS/MF development in both ET and PV. In the first approach, three distinct groups were delineated and their presenting features compared; group A was comprised of patients who have remained AML/MDS/MF free after a minimum follow-up of 20 years whereas groups B and C included patients who developed either AML/MDS or MF, respectively, in the first decade of their disease. In the second approach, prognostic factors for AML/MDS/MF-free survival were examined among the entire cohort of 1061 patients. Results : In ET, the number of patients that fulfilled the above-mentioned criteria for inclusion in groups A, B, and C were 40, 12, and 8; the three groups displayed significant differences in the prevalence, at diagnosis, of lower than normal hemoglobin level (8% vs. 58% vs. 38%; p=0.0004), male sex (18% vs. 58% vs. 50%; p=0.01), and arterial thrombosis at diagnosis (p=0.03), respectively. However, only the former two remained significant during multivariable analysis that included age as a covariate. In PV, the number of patients in groups A, B, and C were 23, 18, and 12; the only difference between the three groups was the association between group B and leukocytosis (p=0.02). Cox regression analysis of the entire 1061 ET/PV patients cohort, including 65 AML/MDS/MF events in ET and 36 AML/MDS events in PV, confirmed the inferior AML/MDS/MF-free survival in ET associated with lower than normal hemoglobin and AML/MDS-free survival in PV associated with leukocytosis (Figure). Conclusion : The current study identifies PV patients with leukocytosis as being the most appropriate and ET patients without anemia as the least appropriate for consideration of participation in experimental drug treatment trials. Figure Figure Figure Figure

Abstract Abstract 700 Studies conducted over the last 10 years suggest that 3–5% of the general population over age 40 harbor a clonal population of lymphocytes of CLL phenotype when evaluated using sensitive flow cytometry assays (Rawstron Blood 100:635, 2002; Ghia Blood 103:2337, 2003). This discovery led to creation of the new diagnostic entity, monoclonal B-cell lymphocytosis (MBL; Marti BJH 130:325, 2005), which is considered the precursor state to chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) (Landgren NEJM 360:659, 2009). The current diagnostic criteria for CLL-like MBL specify patients have a clonal B-cell population with appropriate phenotype, an absolute B-cell count <5 × 10^9/L, and no characteristics of a lymphoproliferative disorder (e.g. lymphadenopathy, organomegaly, B-symptoms) while individuals with a clone of CLL phenotype and B-cell count >5 × 10^9/L or who have lymphadenopathy are classified as having CLL (Hallek Blood 111:5446, 2008). The natural history of MBL appears to differ based on the absolute B-cell count. From an epidemiologic perspective, the majority of individuals with MBL have very small clonal lymphocyte populations, B-cell counts within the normal range, and appear to be at low likelihood of developing CLL (Rawstron ASH 2009). Such individuals with “low count” MBL do not appear to be at increased risk of death (Rawstron ASH 2009). From a clinical perspective, most patients with MBL are identified due to lymphocytosis and have B-cell counts between 3–5 × 10^9/L. While such individuals with “high count” MBL progress to require treatment for CLL at a rate of ~1.5% per year (Shanafelt JCO 27:3959, 2009), whether their survival differs from that of age- and sex-matched individuals is unknown. Conceptually, patients with the precursor state to malignancy should have a risk of death similar to those without the precursor state unless they progress to develop malignancy. To determine the impact of clinically “high count” MBL on survival, we compared the survival of 300 patients with clinically recognized MBL to the age- and sex-matched population. In addition, to explore whether the current B-cell threshold used to segregate MBL from CLL optimally classifies risk, we also evaluated the survival of 94 patients with newly diagnosed Rai 0 CLL and a B-cell count between 5–10 × 10^9/L and 218 newly diagnosed Rai 0 CLL patients with an ALC > 10 × 10^9/L to the age- and sex-matched population. Although it appeared slightly lower, the survival of patients with clinical recognized MBL (n=300, median age 68.6) was not statistically different than age- and sex-matched individuals (p=0.14; Figure 1A). In contrast, the survival of patients with newly diagnosed Rai 0 CLL and a B-cell count between 5–10 × 10^9/L (p=0.03) and newly diagnosed Rai 0 CLL patients with an ALC > 10 × 10^9/L (p=0.00018) were both significantly shorter than expected for the age- and sex-matched population. While these data are consistent with the designation of clinically recognized MBL as a premalignant condition, a more nuanced story emerged when the individuals with clinically recognized MBL were stratified by the CD38 status of the B-cell clone. Although the survival of individuals with a CD38- clone (n=213; 78%) was not different than age- and sex-matched individuals (p=0.14), the survival for those with a CD38+ clone (n=59; 22%) was substantially shorter than the age- and sex-matched population (p=0.0002; Figure 1B). Collectively, these data provide additional clinical evidence in support of the 5 × 10^9/L B-cell threshold to distinguish between MBL and CLL as patients with a B-cell count between 5–10 × 10^9/L or higher are at increased risk of death compared to the age- and sex-matched population. However they also suggest that, in addition to absolute B-cell count, biologic characteristics of the B-cell clone influence survival in patients with clinically recognized MBL. Additional studies are needed to determine whether such characteristics should be considered when classifying individuals with B-cell clones <5 × 10^9/L as having a premalignant or malignant condition. Figure 1A: Survival of patients with clinically recognized MBL (n=300) compared to the age- and sex-matched general population Figure 1A:. Survival of patients with clinically recognized MBL (n=300) compared to the age- and sex-matched general population Figure 1B: Survival of patients with clinically recognized MBL by CD38 status compared to the age- and sex-matched general population. CD38- p=0.14, CD38+ p=0.0002 Figure 1B:. Survival of patients with clinically recognized MBL by CD38 status compared to the age- and sex-matched general population. CD38- p=0.14, CD38+ p=0.0002 Disclosures: Shanafelt: Celgene: Research Funding; Hospira: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding. Off Label Use: Lenalidomide. Kay:Celgene: Research Funding; Hospira: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding. Zent:Genzyme: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; G.S.K.: Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 3903 INTRODUCTION: Monoclonal B-Cell Lymphocytosis is an asymptomatic hematologic condition characterized by the presence of small populations of clonal B-cells in the blood or bone marrow occurring in 3–5% of the general population over age 40. Although MBL is considered the precursor state to CLL and other sub-types of indolent non-Hodgkin Lymphoma, most individuals with MBL will not develop a B-cell malignancy. It is unknown, however, whether individuals with MBL may be at risk for other adverse outcomes associated with CLL, such as increased risk of infection. To explore this aspect, we evaluated the risk of hospitalization for infection among patients with clinically recognized MBL and compared this to a cohort of general medicine patients and a cohort of CLL patients. METHODS: The Mayo Clinic Rochester (MCR), a tertiary referral center in rural southeastern Minnesota, is also the primary hematology center for southeastern Minnesota, northern Iowa, and western Wisconsin. There are no metropolitan areas or hematology specialty centers within a 50 mile radius. To explore the natural history of infection in a local, community dwelling cohort of individuals with clinically identified, CLL-phenotype MBL, we used the Mayo Clinic CLL database to identify all patients with newly diagnosed MBL seen in the MCR Hematology Division between January 1999 and December 2009. Analysis was limited to MBL cases who resided within 50 miles of MCR. The comparison cohort consisted of 689 adult patients also resided within 50 miles of MCR who were seen for a general medical examination between September 2002 and December 2009 and who were enrolled as controls in a case-control study of non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Rates of infection among individuals with MBL were also compared to a cohort of 174 patients with newly diagnosed CLL diagnosed in the same time interval and who resided within 50 miles of MCR. All hospitalizations in these 3 groups were audited to document hospitalization with infection including cross-referenced with the electronic Mayo Clinic infection database, which contains all culture results obtained from hospitalized patients at MCR. Serologies and viral assays (e.g. CMV viral load) were also reviewed. Patients whose cultures were negative but who were given a clinical diagnosis of infection (e.g. pneumonia) and who were treated with a full course of antibiotics were considered to have a culture negative infection. Among the cases, only hospitalizations after CLL or MBL diagnosis were considered. RESULTS: In May 2010, there were 524 individuals in the Mayo Clinic MBL/CLL Database with the diagnosis of CLL-phenotype MBL made between January 1999 – December 2009. Of these, 154 (29%) patients resided within a 50 mile radius of Mayo Clinic and were considered a local, community-based cohort of MBL patients. Median age at MBL diagnosis for these 154 patients was 70 years (range 45–94). After median follow-up of 4.2 years (range 0.3–10.6 years), 25 (16%) individuals with MBL were hospitalized with infection as compared to 20/689 (3%) individuals in the control population (odds ratio MBL relative to control=6.5; p<0.001) and 32/174 (18%) in the cohort of patients with newly diagnosed CLL (OR MBL relative to CLL=0.9; p=0.61) (Figure 1). The 25 MBL patients hospitalized for infection were hospitalized a total of 39 times (median 1 hospitalization for infection per individual). A specific infectious organism was identified by cultures or serologies in 8/39 (21%) hospitalizations among individuals with MBL, 10/27 (37%) hospitalizations for infection among controls, and 60 (63%) of the 89 hospitalizations for infection in CLL cases. Finally we performed a pooled multivariable analysis of all patients (n=1017) adjusting for age, sex, presence of MBL, diagnosis of CLL, and whether patients with CLL or MBL received treatment for CLL during follow-up. All factors were independently associated with risk of hospitalization for infection [Age (per year, OR=1.02, p=0.02), sex (male, OR=2.6, p=0.001), presence of MBL (OR=3.3, p<0.001), diagnosis of CLL (OR=3.0, p=0.002), and treatment for CLL (OR=3.3, p<0.001)]. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort study, patients with newly diagnosed clinical-MBL had a 6.5 fold risk of hospitalization for infection relative to the control cohort. MBL was an independent risk factor for hospitalization for infection after controlling for age, sex, and treatment. Disclosures: Zent: GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Genzyme: Research Funding. Kay:Biothera: Research Funding; Clegene: Research Funding; Cephalon: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Glaxo Smith Kline: Research Funding; Hospira: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Supergen: Research Funding; Calistoga: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Emergent Biosolutions (Formerly Trubion): Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Abstract Background: The cytoreductive treatment options for myeloproliferative neoplasms, in those who have indications, may be limited to hydroxyurea and interferon. Busulfan has been reported to have some activity, but used less frequently in the management of BCR/ABL negative MPNs (Haanen CM et al Br J Cancer 1981; Brodsky American J of clinical oncology 1998). One study has shown significant JAK2V617F allele burden reduction with busulfan (Kuriakose ET et al; Haematologica 2013). Ruxolitinib was approved by the FDA for intermediate and high risk myelofibrosis; and as second line therapy for polycythemia vera in those who are intolerant or develop side effect to hydroxyurea. Objective: To assess the utility of busulfan, an old drug, in patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms who are intolerant to other forms of therapy. Methods: The mayo clinic data base from 1970 to 2014 was interrogated using the terms myeloproliferative disorder, polycythemia vera (PV), essential thrombocythemia (ET), myelofibrosis (MF) and busulfan. Patients' follow up information was collected till July 2015. Results : Seventy five patients with full demographic, diagnostic and therapeutic information were identified, and those included 37 patients with ET, 22 with PV, 12 with MF, and 4 with myeloproliferative neoplasms unclassifiable. The median age was 64 (range 31-91) years. After a median follow up of 17 years, 40 patients (53 %) died, and leukemic transformation was documented in 4 (5%). The median time for leukemic transformation was 86 months (12-229). 1. Essential Thrombocytopenia (n=37): Twenty nine (79%) were females, and the median (range) age was 67 (33-90) years. At diagnosis the median (range) hemoglobin (Hgb) (gm/dL), white blood cell count (WBC) (X109/L), and platelet count (X109/L) were 13.6 (9.8-16.9), 10.2 (5-231), 1113 (593-2062) respectively. After a median follow up time of 230 months, 15 patients (41%) died, and leukemic transformation was documented in 1 patient who was also treated with radioactive phosphorous (P32). Leukemic transformation was documented 230 months from date of diagnosis. Follow up complete blood count was available in 20 patients and the median (range) Hgb, WBC and platelet count was 12 (9.9-16), 7.4 (3.1-25), and 267 (126-573) respectively. 2. Polycythemia Vera (n=22): Fourteen (61%) were females, and the median (range) age was 64 (46-91) years. At diagnosis the median (range) Hgb, WBC, and platelet count were 17.5 (15.1-20.8), 11.5 (1.2-26.6), and 669 (185-2370) respectively. After a median follow up time of 188 months 13 (57%) patients died, and leukemic transformation was documented in 2 patients and one of them was given P32. Follow up complete blood count was available in 21 patients and their median (range) Hgb, WBC and platelet count was 12.9 (10-15.2), 7.2 (2.8-20), and 303 (124-833) respectively. 3. Myelofibrosis (Primary and Post-PV and Post-ET myelofibrosis) (n=12) : The median age was 52 (31-75) and 5 were females. The median Hgb, WBC, and platelet count were 13.6, 14.5, and 472. Six (50 %) patients did have splenomegaly (and 5 of them have splenic size reduction after busulfan), 3 underwent splenectomy, and 3 have no palpable spleen. At a median follow up of 208 months, and 39 months (range 78-401) from the start of busulfan, 10 (84%) patients died and no leukemic transformation was documented. Conclusion: Busulfan should be considered as alternative therapy in myeloproliferative neoplasms especially in ET and PV that are intolerant to other forms of cytoreductive therapy. Busulfan may be given as pulse therapy in controlling cell counts. Disclosures Off Label Use: Busulfan as alternative therapy in myeloproliferative neoplasms.

Abstract Abstract 4104 Background: The International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) for primary myelofibrosis (PMF) uses five predictors of inferior survival: age > 65 years, hemoglobin < 10 g/dL, leukocytes > 25 × 109/L, circulating blasts ≥ 1% and constitutional symptoms (Cervantes F et al. Blood 2009; 113: 2895). The dynamic IPSS (DIPSS) utilizes the same prognostic variables but can be applied at any time during the disease course (Passamonti F et al. Blood 2010; 115: 1703). IPSS-independent risk factors for survival have since been described and include unfavorable karyotype, red cell transfusion need and platelets < 100 × 109/L. Objectives: i) To determine if the aforementioned IPSS-independent risk factors for survival in PMF (i.e. unfavorable karyotype, red cell transfusion need and platelets < 100 × 109/L) are also DIPSS-independent. ii) To develop and validate a refined DIPSS model that incorporates DIPSS-independent prognostic factors for survival. iii) To establish a prognostic model for leukemia-free survival in PMF. Methods: The Mayo Clinic database for PMF was used to identify patients in whom bone marrow histologic and cytogenetic information was obtained at the time of their referral. WHO criteria were used for PMF diagnosis and leukemic transformation (Vardiman JW et al. Blood 2009; 114: 937). None of the patients in the current study were included in the original group of patients used to describe DIPSS (Passamonti F et al. Blood 2010; 115: 1703). Results: A total of 793 patients met the above-stipulated criteria. The study population was divided into two groups based on whether or not patients were seen at the Mayo Clinic within (n=428; training set) or beyond (n=365; test set) their first year of diagnosis. i) Objective 1: Multivariable analysis that included DIPSS risk category (low, intermediate-1, intermediate-2 and high risk), karyotype (favorable or unfavorable), platelet count (≥ or <100 × 109/L) and transfusion status (independent or dependent) was performed using the training set and all four variables were found to be significant as independent predictors of survival (p<0.0001, <0.0001, 0.0008 and 0.01, respectively). ii) Objective 2: Using the respective hazard ratios (HR) obtained during the multivariable prognostic analysis in the training set, HR-weighted adverse points were assigned: 3 points for high-risk DIPSS, 2 points for intermediate-2 risk DIPSS, and 1 point each for intermediate-1 risk DIPSS, unfavorable karyotype, platelets < 100 × 109/L or transfusion need. Accordingly, a refined DIPSS model (i.e. DIPSS-plus) was devised using the training set (Figure 1) and subsequently validated in the test set (Figure 2): low-risk (0 adverse points), intermediate-1 risk (1 adverse point), intermediate-2 risk (2-3 adverse points) and high-risk (4-6 adverse points). Considering the entire group of 793 study patients, the respective median survivals were 185, 78, 35 and 16 months (p<0.0001). ii) Objective 3: Multivariable analysis identified platelet count (p=0.0007) and karyotype (p=0.04) but not DIPSS or transfusion status as independent predictors of leukemia-free survival. We used these two variables to classify patients into a low (favorable karyotype and platelets ≥ 100 × 109/L) or high (unfavorable karyotype or platelets < 100 × 109/L) risk category for leukemic transformation; the respective 5- and 10-year risk of leukemic transformation were 6% and 12% vs. 18% and 31%, respectively (p<0.0001; HR 3.3, 95% CI 1.9–5.6). Conclusions: DIPSS-plus effectively incorporates prognostic information from karyotype, platelet count and transfusion status into the DIPSS prognostic model for PMF. Unfavorable karyotype or platelets <100 × 109/L is associated with a significantly higher risk of leukemic transformation in PMF. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Introduction: Ibrutinib has shown remarkable safety and efficacy in CLL. Due to CYP3A4 (3A4) metabolism, the concurrent use of 3A4 inhibitors/inducers with ibrutinib should be avoided. Ibrutinib is also associated with bleeding complications, in part due to effects on collagen-mediated platelet aggregation, thus caution is advised with the simultaneous use of anticoagulant (AC) and antiplatelet agents. It is unknown what proportion of CLL patients starting ibrutinib therapy in routine practice are on these medications. We conducted a retrospective study to evaluate these aspects in a large cohort of CLL pts treated with ibrutinib outside the context of clinical trials. Methods: Following IRB approval, consecutive CLL pts who initiated ibrutinib off-protocol at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN from November 2013 through July 2015 were evaluated. A medication review for drug-drug interactions was performed by a pharmacist on all pts. Baseline characteristics, concomitant medications, and toxicity were recorded. Time to toxicity and ibrutinib discontinuation were analyzed by Kaplan Meier and cumulative incidence methods accounting for competing risk of death, respectively. Results: Ninety-six CLL pts started ibrutinib. Median age was 66 years and 64 (67%) were male. Ibrutinib indications included: relapsed/refractory CLL (n=84), treatment-naïve CLL with del17p (n=8), and CLL with Richter's transformation (n=4). Approximately 80% had unmutated IGHV and 45% had del17p or del11q on FISH. Upon initial pharmacy consult prior to ibrutinib, the median number of concomitant medications was 9 (range, 1-31). Sixty (63%) pts were taking concurrent medications increasing their risk of ibrutinib toxicity and 4 (4%) pts were on drugs potentially reducing ibrutinib efficacy. At ibrutinib initiation, 16 (17%) pts were on concomitant 3A4 inhibitors. This included 9 (9%) on moderate 3A4 inhibitors (fluconazole, diltiazem, imatinib, cyclosporine) and 7 (7%) on strong 3A4 inhibitors (voriconazole, posaconazole, clarithromycin, itraconazole). In 4 pts, the 3A4 inhibitor was switched to another agent or discontinued to allow standard 420 mg daily dosing. Ibrutinib was initiated at 140 mg daily in 7 pts on moderate 3A4 inhibitors and at 140 mg every 48 hours in 5 pts on strong 3A4 inhibitors. Four (4%) pts were on strong 3A4 inducers (carbamazepine, rifampin, rifabutin) at the initiation of ibrutinib. The 3A4 inducer was discontinued prior to ibrutinib start in 3 pts, while the initial ibrutinib dose was decreased to 140 mg every 48 hours in the remaining patient (also on 2 strong 3A4 inhibitors). During the course of ibrutinib, an additional 8 (8%) pts were started on 3A4 inhibitors/inducers which necessitated dose modifications. Upon commencing ibrutinib, 9 (9%) pts were on concomitant AC (6 warfarin, 3 enoxaparin). Due to significant bleeding risk, warfarin was switched to enoxaparin in 2 pts, to aspirin (ASA) in 1 and warfarin was discontinued in 1. In 2 pts, an alternative AC could not be used so ibrutinib was begun at 140 mg daily and titrated upward. Twenty-nine (30%) pts were on ASA (3 [3%] also on clopidogrel) at ibrutinib initiation. Nineteen (20%) pts were on selective serotonin release inhibitors (SSRIs), and 9 (9%) were on NSAIDs. Thirteen (13%) pts were on fish oil and 24 (25%) were on herbal medications; all of which were discontinued prior to starting ibrutinib. Ten (10%) pts had clinically significant bleeding on ibrutinib including 4 (4%) requiring hospitalization (1 subdural hematoma). Of these 4 pts, 1 was on enoxaparin, 2 were on a SSRI and 1 a NSAID. Six pts had minor bleeding necessitating a dose reduction of ibrutinib to 140-280 mg daily. After 16 months follow-up, the risk of bleeding was 21% (95% CI: 1-37%, Figure). After a median follow-up of 7.6 months, 73 (76%) pts remain on ibrutinib. There was no difference in rates of discontinuation of ibrutinib between patients who were on 3A4 inhibitors/inducers versus those who were not. Conclusion: In the "real-world" setting, 2 out of 3 CLL patients commencing ibrutinib therapy is on a concomitant medication with a potentially clinically significant drug-drug interaction with ibrutinib. These findings have implications for the practicing hematologist who must maintain a high degree of vigilance when prescribing ibrutinib to CLL pts. We highly recommend a formal medication review by a clinical pharmacist in all patients initiating ibrutinib. Figure 1. Figure 1. Disclosures Ding: Merck: Research Funding. Kay:Hospira: Research Funding; Tolero Pharma: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Shanafelt:Glaxo-Smith_Kline: Research Funding; Pharmactckucs: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Cephalon: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Hospira: Research Funding; Polyphenon E Int'l: Research Funding.

Abstract BACKGROUND: Consistent with the advanced age at diagnosis (median age ~70 years), most patients with CLL have co-existent health problems. These co-morbidities influence the ability of many CLL patients to tolerate aggressive chemotherapy-based treatment and can also contribute to treatment-related side effects. The recent development of novel signaling inhibitors, particularly the Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitor ibrutinib, has been a major treatment advance for patients with CLL. While these agents generally have favorable toxicity profiles relative to standard chemotherapy-based treatments, they are chronic therapies which patients typically stay on for an extended period. Preliminary data suggests ibrutinib may be associated with an increased risk of atrial fibrillation (Afib). In one randomized trial comparing ibrutinib to ofatumumab in patient with relapsed CLL, incident grade 3+ Afib occurred in 3% of ibrutinib treated patients compared to 0% of ofatumumab treated patients (NEJM 371:213). Despite these observations, the baseline frequency of Afib in patients with CLL is not well described - particularly incident atrial fibrillation acquired during the course of the disease. METHODS: We used the Mayo Clinic CLL database to evaluate the prevalence of Afib at the time of CLL diagnosis as well as the incidence of Afib during follow-up. All patients with a new diagnosis of CLL after January 1995 who were seen at Mayo within 12 months of diagnosis were included in the analysis. Afib was identified by chart review and by billing search using ICD9 codes. Data on co-morbid conditions associated with risk of Afib was also abstracted (e.g. hypertension, coronary artery disease [CAD], valvular heart disease, cardiomyopathy, diabetes mellitus, pulmonary disease). RESULTS: A total of 2444 patients with newly diagnosed and previously untreated CLL were seen at Mayo Clinic within 12 months of diagnosis between 1/1995 and 4/2015.Median age at diagnosis was 65 years and 1626 (66.5%) patients were men. A history of Afib was present at the time of CLL diagnosis in 148 (6.1%) patients. Four additional patients had Afib documented in the record but the precise date of onset (e.g. prior to or after CLL diagnosis date) could not be determined. Age, male sex and history of CAD, valvular heart disease, cardiomyopathy, hypertension, and diabetes were associated with a greater likelihood of having a history of Afib at the time of CLL diagnosis (all p&lt;0.01). Among the 2292 patients without a history of Afib at CLL diagnosis, 139 (6.1%) had incident Afib during the course of follow-up for their CLL. The incidence of Afib among patients without a history of Afib at diagnosis was approximately 1%/year (Figure 1A). Considering both Afib present at the time of CLL diagnosis or acquired during the course of the disease, 291 (11.9%) of the 2444 patients in this cohort experienced Afib (median follow-up: 59 months). Among patients without Afib at the time of CLL diagnosis, the following characteristics at the time of CLL diagnosis were associated with an increased risk of incident Afib on multivariate analysis: older age (age 65-74 HR=2.4, p&lt;0.001; age ≥75 HR=3.6, p&lt;0.001), male sex (HR=1.8, p=0.004); valvular heart disease (HR=2.4, p=0.007), and hypertension (HR=1.5; p=0.02). A predictive model for acquired Afib was subsequently constructed based on the independent factors in the Cox regression model. An individual weighted risk score was assigned to each independent factor based on the regression coefficients of the HRs. The Afib risk score (range 0-7) was defined as the sum of the scores of these independent factors. The risk of incident Afib among patients with risk scores of 0-1, 2-3, 4, and 5+ is shown in Figure 1B. Rates for these 4 groups were significantly different (p&lt;0.001), with the 10-year Afib rates (95% C.I.) for those with a score of 0-1, 2-3, 4, and 5+: 4% (2-6%), 9% (6-13%), 17% (11-23%), and 33% (20-43%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: A history of Afib is present in approximately 1 out of every 16 patients with newly diagnosed CLL. Among patients without Afib at diagnosis, the incidence rate of Afib is ~1%/year. The risk of incident Afib in newly diagnosed CLL patients can be predicted based on age, sex, and co-morbid health conditions present at diagnosis. These data provide context to help interpret data on the frequency of Afib in CLL patients treated with ibrutinib and other novel agents. Disclosures Shanafelt: Janssen: Research Funding; Polyphenon E Int'l: Research Funding; Glaxo-Smith_Kline: Research Funding; Cephalon: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Hospira: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Pharmactckucs: Research Funding. Ding:Merek: Research Funding. Kay:Tolero Pharm: Research Funding; Hospira: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Gilead: 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.

Abstract Introduction: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved ibrutinib in February 2014 based on results from a pivotal phase 2 clinical trial that enrolled 85 patients with relapsed/refractory CLL. A subsequent phase 3 trial confirmed the superior progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of ibrutinib compared to ofatumumab in 391 CLL patients. However, there is no information on the efficacy and safety of ibrutinib in CLL patients treated outside the context of clinical trials. Additionally, it is unclear if the reasons for discontinuation of ibrutinib differ in routine clinical practice from those described in patients treated on clinical trials. We conducted a retrospective study to evaluate these aspects in a large cohort of CLL patients treated with ibrutinib off-protocol. Methods: After IRB approval, CLL patients seen at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, and treated with commercial ibrutinib from November 2013 through July 2015 were evaluated. The baseline characteristics, time to therapy discontinuation, reasons for discontinuation and survival following discontinuation were abstracted. Results: One hundred thirty-five patients with CLL were treated during the study interval; 124 received ibrutinib for relapsed/refractory CLL and 11 received ibrutinib for treatment-naïve CLL with TP53 disruption (either del17p on FISH or TP53 mutation). Patients with relapsed/refractory CLL (n=124) Patients were high-risk, with a median of 3 prior therapies (range, 1-15), 81% had unmutated IGHV, and 38% had either del11q or del17p on FISH testing. After a median follow-up of 6.4 months, 101 remain on ibrutinib therapy. The estimated proportion of patients continuing ibrutinib at 6 months was 84% (95% CI: 77-92%) and at 12 months was 70% (95% CI: 59-83%). Of the 23 who discontinued ibrutinib therapy, 8 discontinued for progressive disease (2 progressive CLL; 6 Richter's transformation). The remaining 15 discontinued therapy for reasons other than progression, including: infection (n=3), bleeding (n=3), diarrhea (n=1), atrial fibrillation (n=1), rash (n=1), immune thrombocytopenia (n=1), renal dysfunction (n=1), severe edema (n=1), MDS (n=1) and physician preference (n=2). Table 1 shows the reasons for discontinuation of ibrutinib in patients treated on clinical trials (Maddocks, JAMA Oncology, 2015) compared to the current cohort of patients. The estimated cumulative incidence of discontinuation of ibrutinib therapy due to CLL progression/Richter's transformation at 6 and 12 months was 9% (95% CI: 4-17%) and 12% (95% CI: 5-23%), respectively. The estimated cumulative incidence of ibrutinib discontinuation due to reasons other than progression at 6 and 12 months was 10% (95% CI: 5-17%) and 22% (12-34%), respectively (Figure). The median survival after discontinuation of ibrutinib for patients who had CLL progression was 3.5 months, not reached in patients who developed Richter's transformation and not reached in those patients who discontinued ibrutinib due to reasons other than progression. Patients with treatment-naïve CLL (n=11) All patients had evidence of TP53 disruption (9 had del17p, 3 had TP53 mutation, and 1 had both). After a median follow-up of 2.8 months, no patient has had progression of CLL, and 2 patients have discontinued ibrutinib therapy for reasons other than CLL progression (atrial fibrillation, n=2). The estimated proportion of patients continuing ibrutinib at 6-months was 71% (95% CI: 45-100%). All 11 are still alive, and no patient has undergone allogeneic stem cell transplantation. Conclusion: This is the first study that describes the outcomes of a large cohort of CLL patients treated with ibrutinib outside the context of clinical trials. Patients treated in routine practice appear more likely to discontinue ibrutinib for reasons other than progression of disease, compared to those participating in clinical trials. Our results confirm the poor survival of CLL patients who progress on ibrutinib. Table 1. Comparative analysis of reasons for discontinuation of ibrutinib in patients with relapsed/refractory CLL: Characteristic Current Study (%) Maddocks (JAMA Oncology 2015) (%) No. of patients 124 308 Median follow-up (months) 6.4 20 Reasons for Discontinuation Progression of disease CLL 2 (2) 13 (4) Richter's transformation 6 (5) 15 (5) Non-progression of disease Infection 3 (2) 28 (9) Other 12 (10) 17 (5) Figure 1. Figure 1. Disclosures Ding: Merek: Research Funding. Kay:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Hospira: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Tolero Pharm: Research Funding. Shanafelt:Cephalon: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Glaxo-Smith_Kline: Research Funding; Polyphenon E Int'l: Research Funding; Hospira: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Pharmactckucs: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 1909 Poster Board I-932 Background: The International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) for primary myelofibrosis (PMF) utilizes five independent predictors of inferior survival; of these, a hemoglobin level <10 g/dL has the highest impact on survival (Cervantes et al. Blood 2009;113:2895). In the current study, we examined the additional prognostic impact of transfusion need at diagnosis or becoming transfusion-dependent in the first year of diagnosis. These events were also correlated with JAK2 or TET2 mutational status. Methods: Patients were selected from the Mayo Clinic PMF database based on availability of bone marrow histology and IPSS-relevant information at diagnosis and follow-up transfusion history at one year from diagnosis. WHO criteria were used for PMF diagnosis. Patients who underwent allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation were censored at time of transplant. Patient records were updated in July, 2009. Survival curves were constructed using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared by the log-rank test. Multivariable survival was analysed using Cox regression model. Results: A consecutive cohort of 254 patients was studied (median age 59 years; range 28-87; 159 males). IPSS risk category was low, intermediate (int)-1, int-2 and high in 75, 71, 62 and 46 patients, respectively. JAK2V617F was present in 118 (62%) of 192 patients and TET2 mutations in 6 (13%) of 45 patients evaluated. Transfusion need at diagnosis was documented in 62 patients whereas an additional 22 patients became transfusion-dependent during the first year of their diagnosis. The remaining 170 patients remained transfusion-independent for at least one year post-diagnosis. To date, 139 patients have died. In patients who are alive, median follow-up was 5.3 years. Median survivals in IPSS high, Int-2, Int-1 and low risk patients were, 3, 3.9, 6.8 and 12.8 years, respectively (p<0.0001). Median survival for patients requiring transfusions at diagnosis was similar to that of patients who became transfusion-dependent in their first year of diagnosis, and both were significantly shorter than the median survival seen in patients who remained transfusion-free during the first year post-diagnosis: 2.9, 2.2 and 9.7 years, respectively (p<0.0001; figure). Multivariable analysis confirmed the IPSS-independent prognostic value of transfusion status-based risk stratification. Neither JAK2 nor TET2 mutational status correlated with transfusion need. Conclusions: In PMF, becoming transfusion-dependent in the first year of diagnosis is prognostically as detrimental as requiring transfusions at initial presentation. These events are not affected by JAK2 or TET2 mutational status and confer an IPSS-independent adverse prognosis. The ability to identify Int-1 risk patients with shortened survival (Figure) holds major treatment implications. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Background: PRCA is characterized by severe normochromic normocytic anemia, reticulocytopenia, and markedly reduced bone marrow erythroid precursors with intact leukocytic and megakaryocytic lineages. There is limited information about the prevalence and outcomes of PRCA in CLL, with the vast majority of information derived from case reports and small series comprising <10 patients. Here, we describe the clinical features, therapy, and outcomes of CLL patients with PRCA seen at our institution. Methods: The Mayo Clinic CLL Database includes all patients with a diagnosis of CLL evaluated at Mayo Clinic Rochester, MN between January 1995 and December 2014. We identified patients diagnosed with PRCA per the following diagnostic criteria: those who presented with normocytic anemia, had decreased erythroid precursors on bone marrow examination, and reticulocytopenia that could not be explained by any other cause besides PRCA. The baseline demographics, clinical characteristics, therapy, and outcomes were abstracted from the electronic medical records. We generated descriptive statistics and calculated overall survival (OS) from diagnosis date (PRCA, autoimmune cytopenia [AID], or CLL) to last known alive or death date. OS was plotted using Kaplan Meier curves and compared between groups using log-rank statistic. The Mayo Clinic IRB approved this study. Results: Of the 3945 CLL patients seen during the study interval, we identified 30 patients who met the diagnostic criteria of PRCA as described in the Methods section. The baseline characteristics, etiology and therapy for PRCA are shown in Table 1. The median time to PRCA from CLL diagnosis was 4.5 years (range-0.1-14 years). Of the 13 patients with IGHV results available, 12 (92%) were IGHV unmutated. Twenty-one (70%) were male and their median age at PRCA diagnosis was 67 years (range 40-81 years). Parvovirus testing was positive in 6 of 24 (25%) patients who were tested; 3 of these patients were treated with IVIG, 2 were treated with prednisone and IVIg, and 1 was treated with prednisone and rituximab. Eight patients (27%) had both PRCA and autoimmune hemolytic anemia (AIHA), and 1 patient (3%) had concomitant PRCA and immune thrombocytopenia (ITP). Of the 27 patients for whom we have treatment data, 10 required only one treatment regimen and 17 required 2-6 treatment regimens, with two patients requiring splenectomy for concomitant AIHA. The median survival of CLL patients after a diagnosis of PRCA was 4.6 years (Figure 1). There was no difference in survival between PRCA cases with and without parvovirus (p=0.92). Compared to newly diagnosed CLL Rai stage III/IV patients, there was no difference in OS (p=0.53). There was no statistically significant difference in survival from an AID cytopenia diagnosis when comparing PRCA, ITP, AIHA, and Evans syndrome (Figure 1; median 5 years for PRCA and 6 years for other groups; p=0.17). Conclusion: PRCA is a rare complication in CLL, occurring in <1% CLL patients seen at our institution over the past 20 years. Parvovirus was the etiologic factor in ~25% of patients and did not influence outcomes. There appears to be no significant difference in outcomes of PRCA patients compared to patients with other AID in CLL. Table 1. Patient Characteristics Characteristic N [range] or (%) Number of patients 30 Males 21 (70) IGHV status* · Unmutated · Mutated 12 (92) 1 (8) FISH results at CLL diagnosis* · 17p- · 11q- · Trisomy 12 · 13q- · Negative 0 (0) 1 (10) 3 (30) 3 (30) 3 (30) At PRCA Diagnosis Median age 67 [40 - 81] Median hemoglobin (gm/dL)* [normal range 12-15.5 gm/dL] 8.2 [3.5 - 10.8] Median absolute reticulocyte count (x 109/L)* [normal range: 38 - 113 x 109/L] 3.5 [0.0 - 25.3] Patients treated for CLL prior to PRCA diagnosis 25 (83) Etiology of PRCA Parvovirus (n = 24) 6 (25) Therapy-related: · Fludarabine · Alemtuzumab/rituximab · Pentostatin/cyclophosphamide/rituximab 3 (10) 1 (3) 1 (3) Autoimmune (neither therapy nor parvovirus related) 19 (63) Initial Therapy of Non-Parvovirus Related PRCA Steroids alone 2 (8) Steroids and Rituximab 3 (13) Steroids in combination with: · IVIG, Chlorambucil · Cyclosporine · Rituximab, IVIg · IVIg, splenectomy 1 (4) 2 (8) 1 (4) 1 (4) Monoclonal Ab alone · Alemtuzumab · Rituximab 1 (4) 4 (17) Cyclosporine 1 (4) Cyclophosphamide 2 (8) RCP (Rituxan, Cyclophosphamide, and prednisone) 2 (8) IVIg 1 (4) Not available 3 (13) *Not available for all patients Figure 1. Figure 1. Disclosures Ding: Merck: Research Funding. Kay:Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Hospira: Research Funding; Tolero Pharma: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding. Shanafelt:Cephalon: Research Funding; Hospira: Research Funding; Glaxo-Smith-Kline: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Jannsen: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Polyphenon E International: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding.