Citations

e19023 Background: Acute GVHD (aGVHD) is a major cause of mortality and morbidity following stem cell transplantation (HCT). In effort to prognostic patients with aGVHD, the Mount Sinai Acute GVHD International Consortium (MAGIC) combined two biomarkers, ST2 and REG3α to generate an algorithm known as the Ann Arbor (AA) biomarker risk. This is now available as a commercial test to help predict risk for severe acute GVHD and non-relapse mortality when done at the onset of symptomatic aGVHD. Our institution began utilizing these lab values and here we report our “real world” experience. The primary aim was to correlate AA risk probabilities with recently defined endpoints including day 28 overall response rate (ORR) and 6 month freedom from treatment failure (6mFFTF) and overall survival (OS). Methods: 58 HCT patients who underwent HCT between October 2018 and November 2019 and had the biomarker assay at the onset of aGVHD were identified from the institutional database and clinical information about disease, transplant and outcomes was obtained from the medical records. Clinical staging of aGVHD was documented per standardized published guidelines. Day 28 ORR was defined as complete response by day 28. 6mFFTF was defined as a patient being alive, without relapse of underlying disease or addition of new systemic therapy for aGVHD, and prior to the development of cGVHD. Results: When comparing low (n = 39), intermediate (n = 11), and high (n = 8) AA risk, there was no difference in age ( p =0.254), primary disease ( p =0.10), DRI ( p =0.994), donor source ( p =0.193), conditioning regimen intent ( p =0.537), GVHD prophylaxis ( p =0.351) ATG use ( p =0.06). Low AA risk was associated with lower grades of aGVHD at onset (grade I = 15%, grade II = 80%, grade III = 5%, grade IV = 0%), whereas high AA risk was associated with higher grades of aGVHD at onset (grade I = 0%, grade II = 50%, grade III = 25%, grade IV = 25%) ( p =0.009). For low, intermediate, and high AA risk the day 28 ORR was 69%, 45% and 29% ( p = 0.083); the 6mFFTF was 82%, 82%, and 25% ( p = 0.0001); 6 month OS was 92%, 100%, and 50% ( p = 0.0006) respectively. Conclusions: Our study shows a high correlation between AA risk and outcomes. High risk AA risk was associated with inferior outcomes This study was limited by the retrospective single institutional experience with relatively small numbers. However, our findings using the commercial assay mirror that seen with the MAGIC studies. Our “real world data” can serve as a foundation and continued validation for institutional implementation of AA risk stratification for aGVHD.

7046 Background: Momelotinib (MMB) is a potent JAK1, JAK2 and ACVR1 inhibitor with clinical activity against the hallmark features of myelofibrosis (MF), namely anemia, constitutional symptoms and splenomegaly, across the continuum of JAKi naïve or previously JAKi treated intermediate/high risk MF patients as demonstrated in the previously conducted Phase 3 SIMPLIFY-1 & -2 clinical trials (S1, S2). S1 enrolled JAKi-naïve patients with MF (n = 432) double-blind randomized 1:1 to MMB or ruxolitinib (RUX). S2 enrolled patients with MF with hematological toxicity during prior RUX therapy (n = 156) randomized 2:1 to open-label MMB or best available therapy (BAT; consisting of RUX in 88% of patients). In both trials, following the 24-week randomized treatment (RT) period, patients could continue MMB (MMB→MMB) and those randomized to RUX/BAT could cross-over to MMB (RUX/BAT→MMB) for extended treatment (ET). Previously published data from the SIMPLIFY studies demonstrate robust overall survival (OS) for MMB-treated patients in S1 and S2 (median not reached and 34.3 months, respectively) with a maximum follow up of approximately 5 years and median of 2.9 years in S1 and 2.3 years in S2. Methods: OS data for patients receiving MMB in S1 and S2 are reported here for subgroups defined by Week 24 (W24) transfusion independence (TI) responders vs non-responders, and also other efficacy endpoints. Survival was estimated using KM analysis with descriptive log-rank tests for comparison applied (all p-values are descriptive). Results: As previously reported, W24 TI rates were higher in the MMB arms of S1 (67% vs 49%) and S2 (43% vs 21%). In S1, W24 TI responders in the MMB group show an OS advantage, with median OS not reached and 3-year survival of 80% (HR = 0.30; p = 0.0001) compared to MMB TI non-responders. Similarly in S2, W24 TI responders in the MMB group show a trend toward better OS compared to TI non-responders (HR = 0.57; p = 0.0652). The HRs in S1 for MMB responders vs non-responders for W24 SRR and TSS were 0.59 (p = 0.0904) and 0.65 (p = 0.1657), respectively. Alternative analyses using OS defined from W24 demonstrated consistent results. Conclusions: These new analyses suggest JAKi naïve patients receiving MMB who maintain or achieve TI at W24 have favorable OS compared to MMB TI non-responders, with a similar trend observed in S2. These findings are consistent with anemia and transfusion dependency being key predictors of shortened OS in MF and suggest that TI response at W24 may become a surrogate for clinical benefit, supporting the clinical relevance of MMB’s differentiated pro-erythropoietic ACVR1 inhibition. Clinical trial information: NCT01969838.

Abstract Venetoclax (Ven) combined with a hypomethylating agent (HMA) has now emerged as an effective treatment regimen for acute myeloid leukemia, in both de novo and relapsed/refractory setting. The current multicenter study retrospectively examined Ven + HMA treatment outcome among 32 patients (median age 69 years; 59% males) with blast‐phase myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN‐BP). Pre‐leukemic phenotype included essential thrombocythemia (ET)/post‐ET myelofibrosis (34%), polycythemia vera (PV)/post‐PV myelofibrosis (38%) and primary myelofibrosis (28%). Twenty‐nine study patients were fully annotated cytogenetically and molecularly (NGS): 69% harbored complex karyotype and/or mutations, including TP53 (41%), IDH1/2 (21%), ASXL1 (21%), N/KRAS (14%), SRSF2 (10%), EZH2 (10%) and U2AF1 (7%). All patients received Ven combined with either azacitidine ( n = 12) or decitabine ( n = 20); either up front ( n = 23) or after failing another induction therapy ( n = 9). Complete remission with (CR) or without (CRi) count recovery was achieved in 14 (44%) patients and was more likely to occur in the absence of pre‐leukemic PV/post‐PV myelofibrosis phenotype ( p < .01), complex karyotype ( p < .01) or K/NRAS ( p = .03) mutations; seven of eight patients (88%) without vs four of 21 (19%) with complex karyotype or K/NRAS mutation achieved CR/CRi ( p < .01); all 11 informative patients with pre‐leukemic PV/post‐PV myelofibrosis phenotype displayed complex karyotype ( p < .01). In contrast, neither TP53 ( p = .45) nor IDH1/2 ( p = .63) mutations affected response. Compared to historical controls treated with HMA alone ( n = 26), the CR/CRi rate (44% vs 4%) and median survival (8 vs 5.5 months) were more favorable with Ven + HMA, but without significant difference in overall survival. Importantly, six patients with CR/CRi subsequently received allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (AHSCT). Note, Ven + HMA produces robust CR/CRi rates in MPN‐BP, especially in the absence of RAS mutations and complex karyotype, thus enabling AHSCT, in some patients.

Abstract Introduction: Amphiregulin (AREG) is an epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) ligand that can restore integrity to damaged intestinal mucosa in murine models of acute graft-versus-host disease (aGVHD). We previously described AREG as a circulating biomarker of late-onset aGVHD, but its relevance combined with clinical risk factors has not yet been tested in a large cohort of patients with aGVHD occurring prior to day 100 post-transplant. We therefore tested samples from two aGVHD first-line treatment trials, Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinical Trials Network (BMT CTN) 0302 and 0802, and identified a clinically relevant threshold level of circulating AREG at aGVHD onset. We then investigated whether incorporating AREG into the refined Minnesota Risk Score could further risk-stratify patients. Patients and Methods: Blood samples were obtained at the onset of systemic aGVHD treatment within BMT CTN 0302 (serum) and BMT CTN 0802 (plasma). All patients with response data and samples for analysis from both trials were included (N=251). We determined the association of AREG with clinical outcomes, including risk stratification by the refined Minnesota criteria, day 28 complete/partial response (CR/PR) to first-line therapy, 2-year overall survival (OS) and 6-month and 2-year non-relapse mortality (NRM). We investigated the effect of AREG on clinical endpoints per a doubling in the value of AREG, defined a clinically relevant threshold level in the AREG values using two-fold cross-validation, and confirmed the clinical relevance of this cut-point in independent samples (N=92) from pooled from drawn from the Chronic GVHD Consortium and the Mount Sinai Acute GVHD International Consortium (MAGIC). Results: In patients enrolled in BMT CTN 0302/0802, AREG levels were 1.7-fold higher in patients with Minnesota high-risk (HR) compared to standard-risk (SR) aGVHD (HR median 53.4 vs SR 31 pg/ml, p&lt;0.01). Every 2-fold increase in AREG was associated with a 33% decrease in the likelihood of day 28 CR/PR (odds ratio [OR] 0.67, p&lt;0.01, table). Clinical factors alone, as determined by the refined Minnesota Risk Score, were associated with day 28 CR/PR (p=0.02, table). Adding AREG to the Minnesota Risk Score could further risk-stratify patients. Minnesota SR patients with elevated AREG ≥ 33 pg/mL showed a 59% lower odds of day 28 CR/PR than SR patients with low AREG (OR 0.41, p=0.02). Patients with Minnesota HR aGVHD with AREG ≥ 33 pg/mL had the worst outcomes, with an 82% lower odds of day 28 CR/PR in comparison to HR with low AREG (OR 0.18, p&lt;0.01). High AREG was associated with worse OS and NRM in both Minnesota SR (hazard ratios 2-year OS 2.3, p&lt;0.01 and 6 month NRM 2.95, p=0.01, respectively) and HR patients (hazard ratios 2-year OS 3.35, p&lt;0.01 and 6-month NRM 9.38, p&lt;0.01 respectively, figure). Finally, in independent samples from the Chronic GVHD Consortium/MAGIC we confirmed that high AREG was associated with worse day 28 CR/PR (55.2% vs. 79.4%, p=0.02) and significantly worse 6-month survival after the onset of aGVHD (57.1% vs. 82.5%, p=0.01). Conclusion: AREG is elevated in patients with poor aGVHD outcomes and adds to the accuracy of risk stratification when combined with the refined Minnesota Risk Score. AREG ≥33 pg/mL at aGVHD onset is associated with lower day 28 CR/PR and higher mortality in samples from 4 multicenter cohorts. The mechanism of elevated circulating AREG in severe aGVHD is not yet known, although we hypothesize the degree of AREG elevation reflects the intensity of immune-mediated tissue injury resulting in AREG release. With accumulating evidence of altered EGFR ligands in aGVHD, further investigation into epithelial repair pathways involving AREG may lead to new adjunctive therapies to overcome poor steroid response in high-risk aGVHD. Disclosures Holtan: Incyte: Other: One-time advisory board member. Khera: Novartis: Consultancy. Lee: Mallinckrodt: Honoraria; Amgen: Other: One-time advisory board member; Bristol-Myers-Squibb: Other: One-time advisory board member; Kadmon: Other: One-time advisory board member. Chen: Immudex: Research Funding. Arora: Takeda Oncology: Consultancy. Flowers: Pharmacyclics: Consultancy. Cutler: Pfizer: Consultancy; Kite: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Astellas: Consultancy. Jagasia: Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Therakos: Consultancy, Research Funding; Mallinckrodt: Consultancy. Hexner: Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Levine: Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. MacMillan: Magenta Therapeutics: Research Funding.

Background: The COVID pandemic has resulted in significant changes many aspects of daily living. To understand the impact that COVID-19 has had on the myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN) patient population, we conducted an internet based survey. Methods: Survey: This survey was hosted Mayo Clinic's secured REDCap system for online surveys with a link to the survey alongside a brief description posted via the www.mpnqol.com website, as well as other MPN organizational partners. Survey responses were completely anonymous. Questions included MPN-Total symptom score (TSS), NCCN distress thermometer (NCCN-DT), questions regarding impact on medical care, and questions from CDC COVID-19 community survey question bank regarding the impact of social distancing as well as changes in health behaviors. Distress thermometer, MPN-TSS, and/or questions related to the impact of COVID-19 on MPN treatment were analyzed by: MPN diagnosis, among those with ET, PV, or MF diagnoses; medication status; stay at home order; community spread; and country. Associations were tested using Kruskal-Wallis or Wilcoxon rank sum tests (for continuous variables) or Fisher Exact tests (for categorical variables). Analysis: Results: Patient Demographics (Table 1): 1560 people responded to the survey, 1217 were eligible for analysis. Median age was 62 (range: 21-93), and 298 (24.6%) respondents were male. There were respondents from USA, Australia, Canada, Netherlands, Ireland, and UK. 233 patients (19.2%) have myelofibrosis, 419 (34.6%) polycythemia vera and 543 (44.8%) essential thrombocythemia. At the time of the COVID outbreak, 1026 (84.3%) were on MPN directed medical therapy, including ruxolitinib (15.3%), interferon (14.7%), hydroxyurea (42.7%) and ASA (47.7%). 165 (13.6%) respondents received COVID testing, of which 5 had positive tests. Impact on MPN Care (Table 2): We sought to understand how patient's clinical care changed. Over half respondents who spoke to their MPN doctor had a telemedicine visit after COVID19 (57.1%). 422 (36.5%) patients spaced out visits, of which 99 (22.7%) felt there were consequences. A change in therapy due to COVID-1 occurred in only 5.4% of patients. MPN Symptom Burden and QoL: Data captured on the NCCN-DT had a median of 4 (0-10). MPN-SAF-TSS composite score was collected in 1150 respondents, median score was 26 (0-90). These scores are higher than those previously reported. Pandemic Impact on Lifestyle (Table 1): 595 (49.5%) of patients report living in a community where there is significant COVID-19 spread. 946 (78.9%) reported that COVID-19 has impacted their day to day life. 198 (17.2%) of patients agreed, or strongly agreed that COVID had a significant impact on their finances. 799 (67.8%) had a stay at home order. Of those who quarantined (112), the median duration was 30d (1-120). The majority of people increased hand-washing, and cleaning habits. 954 (81.7%) respondents reported wearing masks in public. 908 (76.8%) reported increased stress from social distancing. The majority of respondents report using healthy coping habits, such as reaching out to friends/loved ones, breathing and relaxation, as well as healthy diet. Less than 15% of patients report unhealthy coping strategies, such as use of opioids, benzodiazepines, alcohol, or cannabis Factors associated with response: There were no differences in responses based on type of MPN. If a patient was on medication, they were more likely to have spoken to their provider (p&lt;0.001). If there was a stay at home order in place, there was a higher MPN-TSS score (p&lt;0.001). If the respondent lived in an area of high community spread, they had a higher NCCN-DT score (p&lt;0.001). Patients in the USA had a higher NCCN-DT score (p=0.001), were more likely to stretch out the duration of time between visits (p&lt;0.001) and less likely to have a telemedicine visit (p&lt;0.001). Although fewer respondents in the USA thought COVID-19 was a serious disease (p=0.02), a higher percentage of respondents wore masks (p &lt;0.001). Conclusions: In our survey of MPN patients, there were many changes noted in clinical care. The use of telemedicine was common, and at least a third had significant changes in their care. Most experienced increased stress, however, employed healthy coping strategies. Only a minority of patients had a COVID test, and only 5 were positive, further data will be needed to understand the impact of COVID infection. Figure 1 Disclosures Harrison: Roche: Honoraria; Incyte Corporation: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Sierra Oncology: Honoraria; Promedior: Honoraria; Shire: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Gilead Sciences: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; CTI Biopharma Corp: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Pemmaraju:Affymetrix: Other: Grant Support, Research Funding; Plexxikon: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Honoraria; Roche Diagnostics: Honoraria; Blueprint Medicines: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; SagerStrong Foundation: Other: Grant Support; DAVA Oncology: Honoraria; Samus Therapeutics: Research Funding; Cellectis: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria; AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding; Stemline Therapeutics: Honoraria, Research Funding; MustangBio: Honoraria; LFB Biotechnologies: Honoraria; Pacylex Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Vannucchi:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Blueprint: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene/BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Gupta:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol MyersSquibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy. Mascarenhas:Celgene, Prelude, Galecto, Promedior, Geron, Constellation, and Incyte: Consultancy; Incyte, Kartos, Roche, Promedior, Merck, Merus, Arog, CTI Biopharma, Janssen, and PharmaEssentia: Other: Research funding (institution). Shimoda:Kyowa Hakko Kirin Co., Ltd.: Research Funding; Pfizer Inc.: Research Funding; Otsuka Pharmaceutical: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria; Perseus Proteomics: Research Funding; PharmaEssentia Japan: Research Funding; AbbVie Inc.: Research Funding; Astellas Pharma: Research Funding; Merck & Co.: Research Funding; CHUGAI PHARMACEUTICAL CO., LTD.: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Takeda Pharmaceutical Company: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Shire plc: Honoraria; Asahi Kasei Medical: Research Funding; Japanese Society of Hematology: Research Funding; The Shinnihon Foundation of Advanced Medical Treatment Research: Research Funding. Kiladjian:AOP Orphan: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Komatsu:AbbVie: Other: member of safety assessment committee in M13-834 clinical trial.; Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Shire Japan KK, Novartis Pharma KK, PharmaEssentia Japan KK, Fuso Pharmaceutical Industries, Ltd., Fujifilm Wako Pure Chemical Corporation, Chugai Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Kyowa Hakko Kirin Co., Ltd., Takeda Pharmaceutica: Research Funding; Meiji Seika Pharma Co., Ltd.: Patents & Royalties: PCT/JP2020/008434, Research Funding; PPMX: Consultancy, Research Funding; Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., PharmaEssentia Japan KK, AbbVie GK, Celgene KK, Novartis Pharma KK, Shire Japan KK, Japan Tobacco Inc: Consultancy; Takeda Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd, Novartis Pharma KK, Shire Japan KK: Speakers Bureau. Abello:Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Dr. Reddy's: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Research Funding. Gomez-Almaguer:Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene/BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Scherber:Incyte Corporation: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Mauro:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accommodation, Expenses, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accommodation, Expenses, Research Funding; Sun Pharma/SPARC: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accommodation, Expenses, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accommodation, Expenses, Research Funding. Mesa:Samus Therapeutics: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Genentech: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; CTI BioPharma: Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Consultancy; LaJolla Pharmaceutical Company: Consultancy; Promedior: Research Funding.

Background: Elevated serum ferritin (SF) is common in patients with myelofibrosis (MF) given the frequent red-cell transfusion requirements and impaired iron metabolism. The dysregulation of iron metabolism is associated with increased hepcidin levels which predict for inferior survival in patients with MF (Pardanani et al AJH 2013). High pre-transplant SF negatively impacts overall survival and non-relapse mortality in patients undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) for hematological malignancies (Chee et al BMT 2017 & Yan et al 2018). However, the impact of elevated pre-transplant SF specifically on post-alloHCT outcomes has not been described in MF. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of patients with MF undergoing allo-HCT at Mayo clinic Rochester, Arizona, and Florida from January 1st 2012 - December 31st 2019. We abstracted demographic and outcome variables to evaluate the impact of pre-transplant ferritin levels on post-transplant outcomes. We used a Receiver Operand Characteristic Curve to identify a pre-transplant serum ferritin (SF) of ≥ 1,123 ng/mL as the cutoff which best correlated with poor survival. Results: We identified 67 patients with MF who underwent allo-HCT during the study period with readily available data. Patients with a pre-transplant ferritin ≥ 1,123 ng/mL (n=18) had a median age of 59.4 years and were predominantly male (n=9, 50%) with primary myelofibrosis (n=12, 67%), had a DIPSS-plus int-2 (n=10, 56%) and high (n=6, 33%) risk categories and received a reduced-intensity conditioning (n=14, 78%) from a matched-unrelated donor (n=7, 50%) Table1. Patients with SF ≥ 1,123 ng/mL had a worse overall survival (OS) (median OS= 12.64 months [95%CI=6.08-19.20 months] vs. not-reached (NR) p=0.001). Patients with elevated SF had an increased non-relapse mortality (NRM) rate at 6 months (16.7%, [95%CI=0.4-37.2%]) vs 8.2%,[95%CI= 2.6-18.1%] p=0.021) and 12 months (33.3% [95%CI=13.0-55.4%] vs 10.4% [95%CI=3.8-21.0%] p=0.021) Patients with ≥ 1,123 ng/mL SF had a non-statistically significant higher rate of acute graft-vs-host disease grades 3-4 (28% vs 12.2% p=0.13) but similar rates of moderate to severe chronic graft-vs-host disease (31% vs 28% p=0.78). In the univariate analysis, SF ≥1,123 ng/mL and a Hematopoietic stem cell transplant comorbidity index (HCT-CI) ≥3 were associated with an increased risk of mortality (Hazard ratio [HR]=4.18 [95%CI=1.64-10.62] p=0.003] and HR=4.42 [95%CI=1.70-11.46] p=0.003, respectively). Both retained significance in multivariate analysis SF ≥1,123 ng/mL (HR= 2.80 [95%CI= 1.0-7.6], p=0.04)] and HCT-CI score ≥ 3 (HR 3.10 [95%CI= 1.12-8.62, p=0.03]) after adjusting for age, DIPSS-plus score, conditioning regimen intensity, donor type, CMV risk, prior use of ruxolitinib, and ABO mismatch. We grouped the patients into low, intermediate and high risk categories using SF level and HCT-CI scores as detailed in Figure 1. The risk category based on SF and HCT-CI was statistically significant in impacting OS and NRM in this cohort. The 12 month OS rate was lower in the high risk category (44.4% [95%CI= 13.6%-71.9%]) when compared to the intermediate (64.6%, [95%CI=39.7%-81.3%]) and low risk (91.9%, [95%CI= 76.9%-97.3%], p=0.0002) categories. Similarly, the 12 month NRM rate was higher in the high risk category (44.4%, [95%CI=11.0%-74.2%]) when compared to the intermediate (25%, [95%CI=8.7%-45.5%]) and low risk (5.3% [95%CI=0.9%-15.9%], p=0.0046) categories. Conclusion: In patients undergoing allogeneic SCT for myelofibrosis, serum ferritin ≥ 1,123 ng/mL is a predictor of high NRM and inferior OS. Combining ferritin serum levels with HCT-CI may help in better patient selection for allo-HCT in MF population. Larger patient cohort is warranted to confirm our findings. Disclosures Kharfan-Dabaja: Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy. Shah:Dren Bio: Consultancy.

Background Activating mutations in JAK2 are the molecular hallmark of PV. However, achieving molecular remission is not a validated endpoint in PV, as its correlation with patient-relevant endpoints, such as thrombotic events or disease progression, is not well established. The expression of MDM2, a negative regulator of wild-type p53, is significantly higher in CD34+ cells from patients with PV vs those from healthy controls. Therefore, MDM2 antagonists such as idasanutlin (idasa) may have selective and potentially disease-modifying effects in PV. This exploratory analysis reports baseline mutational profiling and serial measurements of JAK2 V617F variant allele frequency (VAF) from patients treated with idasa in the Phase II NP39761 study (NCT03287245). Methods Patients with PV, as defined by the 2016 World Health Organization criteria, were eligible for inclusion if their disease was HU resistant/intolerant according to European LeukemiaNet criteria and they were phlebotomy dependent (≥ 1 phlebotomy in the 16-wk period prior to screening). Prior PV therapy with ruxolitinib and/or interferon was allowed. Idasa was given orally once daily on days 1-5 of 28-day cycles for up to 24 mo. The starting dose was 150 mg, but dose increase (to 200 mg) or decrease (to 100 mg) was allowed per protocol-defined criteria. The primary efficacy endpoints were hematocrit control (HTC), defined as maintaining acceptable hematocrit levels with ≤ 1 phlebotomy between cycle 1, day 1 (C1D1) and wk 8 and no phlebotomy after wk 8, and complete hematologic remission (CHR), defined as HTC together with platelets &lt; 400 × 109/L and white blood cell count &lt; 109/L on the day of response assessment (or most recent test). JAK2 V617F VAF was analyzed at screening and at C3D28, C5D28 and wk 32. The JAK2 V617F VAF was determined using quantitative polymerase chain reaction. Baseline blood samples were sequenced using the Foundation Medicine FoundationOne Heme next-generation sequencing panel, which interrogates &gt; 400 DNA-sequenced genes, to explore the genetic landscape of PV beyond JAK2 V617F. Results All 27 patients enrolled in the study harbored JAK2 V617F. Baseline and ≥ 1 later JAK2 VAF measurements were available in 23 patients, allowing for analysis. The median age was 56 y (range, 34-74), and 7 patients (26%) had been previously treated with ruxolitinib. Median treatment duration was 257 days (range, 5-677), and the median number of treatment cycles was 8 (range, 1-22). JAK2 V617F VAFs at baseline were highly variable, ranging from 7% to 96% (median, 66%). A reduction in JAK2 V617F VAF was observed as early as after 3 cycles (median reduction, 39%; n = 19) and was sustained in patients receiving treatment, with a median reduction of 58% at C5D28 (n = 17) and of 76% at wk 32 (n = 13). The median reductions in JAK2 V617F VAF were significantly higher for patients with CHR and HTC than in nonresponders on C3D28 (CHR, P &lt; 0.01; HTC, P = 0.04) and C5D28 (CHR, P &lt; 0.01; HTC, P = 0.03), with a similar trend also at wk 32 (CHR, P = 0.06; HTC, P = 0.19) (Figures). Baseline targeted sequencing (n = 16) identified several additional subclonal mutations. However, no TP53 mutations were detected. Variants in TET2 and ASXL1 were detected in 37% (6 of 16) and 20% (3 of 16) of patients, with VAFs of 2%-51% and 38%-50%, respectively. Notably, 68% of the patients had variants detected in 1 to 3 DNA repair genes, including ATM (VAF, 47%-52%), ATR (VAF, 49%), BRCA2 (VAF, 47%-51%), PARP1 (VAF, 52%), PARP3 (VAF, 48%), FANCM (VAF, 47%-50%), BLM (VAF, 48%) and MSH3 (VAF, 49%). In the absence of sequencing of patient-matched non-hematologic tissue and the VAFs being ≈50%, it is possible some of these variants are germline. Whether such variants predispose to PV is unknown. Conclusions Idasa has relevant clinical activity in patients with PV who are resistant to or intolerant of HU and showed rapid JAK2 V617F VAF reduction in a subset of patients as early as after 3 treatment cycles. The median JAK2 VAF reduction was significantly greater in patients who achieved CHR and HTC after 3 and 5 cycles of idasa treatment, suggesting that early molecular response was associated with higher likelihood of clinical response. Baseline mutations were seen in several genes commonly mutated in PV. A high frequency of variants in DNA repair genes has not previously been reported in PV and may contribute to genomic instability in this disease. Figure Disclosures Passamonti: Roche: Other: Support of parent study and funding of editorial support; BMS: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau. El-Galaly:F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Current Employment, Other: Support of parent study and funding of editorial support. Gerds:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Imago Biosciences: Research Funding; AstraZeneca/MedImmune: Consultancy; Roche/Genentech: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Apexx Oncology: Consultancy; Sierra Oncology: Research Funding. Gupta:Incyte: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol MyersSquibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Consultancy. Higgins:Roche: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Other: Support of parent study and funding of editorial support. Huw:Roche: Current Employment, Other: Support of parent study and funding of editorial support. Maffioli:Roche: Other: Support of parent study and funding of editorial support. Mesa:Sierra Oncology: Consultancy; Incyte: Research Funding; Samus Therapeutics: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; CTI BioPharma: Research Funding; LaJolla Pharmaceutical Company: Consultancy; AbbVie: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding. Rambaldi:Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Support of parent study and funding of editorial support. Received travel support., Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Astellas: Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support from Gilead.; BMS/Celgene: Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company). Advisory board and speaker fees from Pfizer.; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company). Research grant from Amgen Inc.; Omeros: Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); University of Milan: Current Employment. Vannucchi:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Blueprint: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene/BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Yacoub:Incyte: Speakers Bureau; Hylapharm: Current equity holder in private company; Cara Therapeutics: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Dynavax: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Agios: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Roche: Other: Support of parent study and funding of editorial support; Ardelyx: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Mascarenhas:Celgene, Prelude, Galecto, Promedior, Geron, Constellation, and Incyte: Consultancy; Incyte, Kartos, Roche, Promedior, Merck, Merus, Arog, CTI Biopharma, Janssen, and PharmaEssentia: Other: Research funding (institution).

Introduction: MF is a clonal stem cell disorder characterized by progressive bone marrow failure, extramedullary hematopoiesis, and debilitating constitutional symptoms. Approximately 60% of pts develop anemia within a year of diagnosis; pts who are transfusion dependent have worse survival and quality-of-life outcomes (Tefferi A, et al. Mayo Clin Proc 2012;87:25-33). Treatment for MF-associated anemia remains critically unaddressed, with no approved therapies available. Luspatercept is a first-in-class erythroid maturation agent that has been shown to increase hemoglobin and reduce transfusion burden in pts with myelodysplastic syndromes (Fenaux P, et al. N Engl J Med 2020;382:140-51) and β-thalassemia (Cappellini MD, et al. N Engl J Med 2020;382:1219-31). Pts have also achieved multiple response episodes with luspatercept (Fenaux P, et al. Blood 2019;134:841). We previously reported findings from the ongoing open-label, phase 2 ACE-536-MF-001 trial evaluating luspatercept in pts with MF-associated anemia (Gerds AT, et al. Blood 2019;134:557). Here we report updated study results, focusing on response in pts requiring RBC transfusions. Methods: 79 pts with MF and anemia were enrolled (Figure). Of these, 43 were requiring RBC transfusions, defined as 6-12 U/84 d prior to treatment, or 4-12 U/84 d for the 3 expansion cohort pts. Pts in Cohort 3B received a stable ruxolitinib (RUX) dose for ≥ 16 wks (40 wks for expansion cohort pts), whereas Cohort 2 pts did not (Figure). Pts in Cohort 3B received a median RUX dose of 20 mg/d (range 5-40) for a median of 73 wks (range 29-359) prior to treatment. Pts received luspatercept every 21 d at a starting dose of 1.0 mg/kg (1.33 mg/kg for 3 expansion cohort pts in Cohort 3B), with doses escalating up to 1.75 mg/kg; 81% and 50% of pts in Cohorts 2 and 3B escalated to 1.75 mg/kg. Primary endpoint for pts receiving transfusions was RBC transfusion-independence (RBC-TI) for ≥ 12 consecutive wks within the first 24 wks on study. However, as responses were observed that did not fall within the 24-wk response window, additional assessments were conducted for the entire treatment duration for RBC-TI and ≥ 50% decrease in RBC transfusions (minimum 4 RBC U decrease) from baseline. Intent-to-treat data were analyzed as of March 29, 2020. Results: Pts in Cohorts 2 and 3B received a median of 8 cycles of luspatercept (range 1-39), for a median (mean) duration of 24 (31) and 23 (39) wks, respectively. Pts in Cohorts 2 and 3B received a median of 2.7 RBC U/28 d (range 1-5) and 2.7 RBC U/28 d (range 2-4), respectively. For the primary endpoint, 2/21 (10%) and 6/22 (27%) pts receiving transfusions in Cohorts 2 and 3B achieved RBC-TI over any consecutive 12 wks during the first 24 wks. Median time to start of first RBC-TI response period in Cohorts 2 and 3B was 1.5 days and 37 days; median duration of response was 49 wks (range 16-82) and 42 wks (range 12-111), respectively. When assessing the entire treatment period, 4/21 (19%) and 8/22 (36%) pts in Cohorts 2 and 3B achieved RBC-TI ≥ 12 wks, respectively. 25% of the RBC-TI responders in both cohorts experienced 2 separate episodes of RBC-TI ≥ 12 wks. Median cumulative duration of all individual ≥ 12-wk response episodes of RBC-TI was 59 wks (range 24-82) in Cohort 2 and 55 wks (range 12-116) in Cohort 3B. 8/21 (38%) and 10/22 (46%) pts in Cohorts 2 and 3B achieved a ≥ 50% reduction in RBC transfusion burden (minimum ≥ 4 U reduction) over 12 wks; of these, 38% and 20% of responders in Cohorts 2 and 3B experienced 2 separate ≥ 12-wk response episodes, and 1 pt (13%) in Cohort 2 experienced 3 separate responses. 4/15 (27%) and 8/14 (57%) pts in Cohorts 2 and 3B who reached 24 wks of treatment achieved clinical benefit and therefore continued luspatercept on an ongoing basis. Safety is reported for all 79 pts on study. 5 (6%) pts had grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (AEs); these AEs were diarrhea (n = 2), dehydration (n = 1), and hypertension (n = 3). There were no treatment-related deaths. Treatment-related AEs (any grade) occurring in ≥ 5% of pts were hypertension (13%), bone pain (9%), and diarrhea (5%). 8 (10%) pts had ≥ 1 AE leading to discontinuation. 16 (20%) pts remain on treatment. Conclusions: These longer-term findings suggest durable activity of luspatercept in pts with MF-associated anemia. In addition, a quarter of pts receiving transfusions achieved more than one ≥ 12-wk episode of RBC-TI response with luspatercept. The incidence of grade 3-4 AEs with luspatercept was low. Disclosures Gerds: Roche/Genentech: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Research Funding; AstraZeneca/MedImmune: Consultancy; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Apexx Oncology: Consultancy; CTI Biopharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Imago Biosciences: Research Funding. Vannucchi:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Blueprint: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene/BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Passamonti:Novartis: Speakers Bureau; BMS: Speakers Bureau; Roche: Other: Support of parent study and funding of editorial support. Kremyanskaya:Constellation Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Protagonist Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astex Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Gotlib:CTI Biopharma: Research Funding; Kartos: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding. McCaul:BMS: Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Speakers Bureau. Ribrag:argenX: Research Funding; pharmamar: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; servier: Consultancy; nanostring: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AZD: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other; Infinity: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MSD: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; gustave roussy comprehensive cancer center: Current Employment; EPZ: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; epizyme (EPZ): Research Funding. Mead:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene/BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy; CTI: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy. Harrison:Roche: Honoraria; Gilead Sciences: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Incyte Corporation: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; CTI Biopharma Corp: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Sierra Oncology: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Shire: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; Promedior: Honoraria. Mesa:Sierra Oncology: Consultancy; LaJolla Pharmaceutical Company: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Incyte: Research Funding; CTI BioPharma: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Samus Therapeutics: Research Funding. Kiladjian:AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AOP Orphan: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Barosi:Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy. Gerike:Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Shetty:BMS: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Pariseau:Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment. Miranda:Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment. Schwickart:Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Giuseppi:BMS: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Zhang:Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Backstrom:Acceleron Pharma: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; BMS: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Verstovsek:AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma Corp: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; PharmaEssentia: Research Funding; ItalPharma: Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Blueprint Medicines Corp: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Protagonist Therapeutics: Research Funding.

Background Patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) are faced with severe disease-related fatigue among a range of other constitutional and spleen-related symptoms. The MPN-Symptom Assessment Form (SAF) is recommended for use to characterize symptom burden (Scherber R, et al. Blood 2011). Within the SAF, a profile of 18 symptom items are evaluated ranging in severity from 0 (absent) to 10 (worst imaginable). The SAF is often summarized to the MPN-SAF Total Symptom Score (TSS) for analysis purposes - a single computed sum of the 10 most clinically meaningful symptom scores, including fatigue (Emanuel R, et al. J Clin Oncol 2012). Though the SAF includes a fatigue item, initial deployments of the MPN-SAF TSS incorporated a 0-10 scaled fatigue item taken from the Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI; Mendoza T, et al. Cancer 1999). A subsequent version of the MPN-SAF TSS for use within myelofibrosis clinical trials (called the MFSAF v4; Gwaltney C, et al. Leuk Res 2017) employed a harmonized fatigue item. This analysis employing data from two studies was carried out to assess the use of the SAF fatigue item within the MPN-SAF TSS for consistency with the MFSAF v4. Methods Both BFI and SAF fatigue items were included in an initial online survey evaluating disease burden among patients with MPNs. Participants were assigned to survey variants as a function of their age. Survey variants included those to receive 1 instance of either the BFI or SAF fatigue item, instances of both BFI and SAF, or 2 instances of the same fatigue item. Surveying was aimed to assess the worst symptom experience in the patient's last 24 hours. Additionally, an independent survey assessing the impact of COVID-19 among MPN patients was deployed using the SAF fatigue item for the MPN-SAF TSS. This modified version was then used to test internal validity. Pearson correlation (r) and t-tests were used to assess association, Bland-Altman methods were used to evaluate systematic agreement between BFI and SAF fatigue scores, and Cronbach's alpha was used to measure internal consistency. Results There were 229 participants assigned both BFI and SAF fatigue items within the same survey. Among them, 51% (n=117) received the BFI item first and 49% (n=112) the SAF item first. No difference was seen between first and second fatigue scores (mean difference [first-second] = 0.00; 95%CI -0.18, 0.17). BFI and SAF fatigue scores were highly correlated (r=0.88, p&lt;0.001) and showed 88.7% agreement in categorizing severe versus non-severe fatigue (score ≥ 7 versus &lt; 7). Overall concordance in severity category was 73.4% (category [score range]: absent [0]; mild [1-3]; moderate [4-6]; severe [7-10]). Constructing the MPN-SAF TSS using the BFI and SAF fatigue components separately, the original and modified MPN-SAF TSS were nearly identical (r=0.997, p&lt;0.001), and had equivalent internal consistency (both Cronbach's alpha=0.88). The Bland-Altman plot further indicates the 2 fatigue measures have high agreement with no evidence of directional bias and negligible overall bias (Figure 1: regression slope = -0.04, p=0.25; mean difference=0.22; 95%CI 0.05, 0.39). Within the COVID-19 survey (n=1217), the modified version of the MPN-SAF TSS was consistent with known correlates among disease characteristics (Emanuel R, et al. J Clin Oncol 2012). For example, more severe MPN-SAF TSS scores were highly correlated with low quality-of-life (n=1156, r = -0.50, p&lt;0.001), and associated with those reporting spleen enlargement (n=301) versus not (n=617) (p&lt;0.001; mean difference=7.7; 95%CI 5.4, 10.1). Conclusion The BFI and SAF fatigue items are highly consistent in raw score, severity category, and in contribution to the MPN-SAF TSS. There was no order effect seen in which fatigue item was asked first. The independent COVID-19 survey using the modified MPN-SAF TSS was validated and shows high internal consistent. In the ongoing development to capture the symptom experience, this analysis shows disease-related fatigue is equivalently measured using the SAF fatigue survey item in harmonization with the MFSAF v4. Disclosures Mesa: Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; CTI BioPharma: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Samus Therapeutics: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; LaJolla Pharmaceutical Company: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Sierra Oncology: Consultancy.

Background PV is a clonal myeloid neoplasm characterized by activating mutations in JAK2 and increased red blood cell production. Reduction of thrombosis risk through lowering of hematocrit (Hct) and thus blood viscosity is critical, but management of constitutional symptoms is also important. HU is an effective and well-tolerated first-line treatment (tx) for PV, but pts who develop resistance to or intolerance of HU have limited tx options. A Phase I study of idasanutlin, an MDM2 antagonist leading to increased p53 activity, showed encouraging efficacy and potential disease-modifying effects via rapid reduction in JAK2 V617F variant allele frequency in 11 pts with PV. These results prompted the larger, international Phase II study of idasanutlin in HU-resistant/intolerant PV (NCT03287245); data from the initial phase of the study are reported here. Methods Pts meeting the 2016 WHO criteria for PV were eligible for inclusion if they had HU-resistant/intolerant disease according to the European LeukemiaNet (ELN) criteria and were phlebotomy dependent (≥ 1 phlebotomy in the 16-wk period prior to screening). Prior PV tx with ruxolitinib (rux) or interferon was allowed. Idasanutlin was given orally once daily on days 1-5 of 28-day cycles for up to 24 mo. The starting dose was 150 mg; increase to 200 mg was allowed for non-responders at cycle 3, day 28, and reduction to 100 mg was permitted for toxicity and for pts treated beyond cycle 12. Antiemetic prophylaxis was mandatory in cycle 1 throughout the study and later became mandatory in all cycles. The primary endpoint (wk 32) was the composite response of Hct control (HTC) and spleen volume reduction &gt; 35% by CT/MRI in pts with splenomegaly (&gt; 450 cm3) and HTC alone in pts without splenomegaly. Key secondary endpoints included safety, complete hematologic response (CHR; defined as HTC and normalization of platelets/leukocytes) and ELN response. Results A total of 27 pts were included in this study and received tx with idasanutlin. Median age was 56 years (range, 34-74) and 16 pts (59.3%) were male (Table 1). All pts had JAK2 V617F mutation; 7 had previous exposure to rux. Median tx duration was 257 days (range, 5-677); the median number of treatment cycles was 8 (range, 1-23). Dose modifications occurred in 17 pts (63.0%; Table 2). A total of 3 serious AEs occurred: atrial flutter, atrial fibrillation and nausea/vomiting (n = 1 each). The serious cardiac AEs occurred in pts with pre-existing hypertension and a past incident of heart failure not symptomatic upon enrollment, respectively. No deaths, transformation to acute myeloid leukemia, progression to myelofibrosis or thrombotic events occurred during the study. AEs occurring in ≥ 15% of pts are listed in Table 3; gastrointestinal toxicity and fatigue were the most common events. The population for primary endpoint evaluation consisted of pts with response assessed at wk 32 (n = 16). One of 13 pts with baseline splenomegaly achieved a composite response (7.7%; Table 4). Nine of 16 pts (56.3%) among all evaluable pts achieved HTC: 6 of 11 rux-naive pts (54.5%) and 3 of 5 rux-exposed pts (60.0%). Eight of 13 pts (61.5%) among all pts had HTC duration ≥ 12 wk beyond wk 32: 5 of 9 rux-naive pts (55.6%) and 3 of 4 rux-exposed pts (75.0%). At wk 32, 8 of 16 pts (50.0%) achieved a CHR, with 6 of 13 (46.2%) having a CHR duration ≥ 12 wk beyond wk 32. Overall response rates per modified ELN response criteria in pts with baseline splenomegaly, pts without baseline splenomegaly and in all pts were 69.2% (9 of 13), 66.7% (2 of 3) and 68.8% (11 of 16), respectively; 9 of 15 pts (60%) among all pts had a response duration ≥ 12 wk beyond wk 32. Median (range) laboratory value changes at wk 32 were: platelets, −253 × 109/L (−2083 to +175) and leukocytes, −4.8 × 109/L (−25.3 to +3.4). At wk 32, 6 of 14 pts (42.9%) had a ≥ 50% reduction in the Myeloproliferative Neoplasm Symptom Assessment Form Total Symptom Score. Conclusions Idasanutlin showed relevant clinical activity in pts with HU-resistant/intolerant PV and also in a subset of pts with prior rux tx. However, the low-grade gastrointestinal toxicity profile of idasanutlin was not effectively mitigated with antiemetic prophylaxis and led to frequent discontinuations. These results iterate the importance of tolerability of novel therapies administered over the long term for pts with PV. Disclosures Mascarenhas: Celgene, Prelude, Galecto, Promedior, Geron, Constellation, and Incyte: Consultancy; Incyte, Kartos, Roche, Promedior, Merck, Merus, Arog, CTI Biopharma, Janssen, and PharmaEssentia: Other: Research funding (institution). Higgins:Roche: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Other: Support of parent study and funding of editorial support. Anders:Roche: Current Employment, Other: Support of parent study and funding of editorial support. Burbury:Roche: Other: Support of parent study and funding of editorial support. El-Galaly:F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Current Employment, Other: Support of parent study and funding of editorial support. Gerds:Roche/Genentech: Research Funding; Apexx Oncology: Consultancy; AstraZeneca/MedImmune: Consultancy; Pfizer: Research Funding; Imago Biosciences: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding. Gupta:Pfizer: Consultancy; Incyte: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol MyersSquibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sierra Oncology: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Kovic:Roche: Other: Support of parent study and funding of editorial support. Maffioli:Roche: Other: Support of parent study and funding of editorial support. Mesa:AbbVie: Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Consultancy; CTI BioPharma: Research Funding; LaJolla Pharmaceutical Company: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Samus Therapeutics: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Incyte: Research Funding. Rambaldi:Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Support of parent study and funding of editorial support. Received travel support., Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company). Advisory board and speaker fees from Pfizer.; Sanofi: Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); BMS/Celgene: Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); University of Milan: Current Employment; Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support from Gilead.; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Omeros: Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Astellas: Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company). Research grant from Amgen Inc.. Vannucchi:AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene/BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Blueprint: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Yacoub:Roche: Other: Support of parent study and funding of editorial support; Dynavax: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Agios: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Speakers Bureau; Hylapharm: Current equity holder in private company; Cara Therapeutics: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Ardelyx: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company.