Citations

AbstractBackgroundQuantitative methods of Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography (FDG‐PET) interpretation, including the percent change in FDG uptake from baseline (ΔSUV), are under investigation in lymphoma to overcome challenges associated with visual scoring systems (VSS) such as the Deauville 5‐point scale (5‐PS).MethodsIn CALGB 50303, patients with DLBCL received frontline R‐CHOP or DA‐EPOCH‐R, and although there were no significant associations between interim PET responses assessed centrally after cycle 2 (iPET) using 5‐PS with progression‐free survival (PFS) or overall survival (OS), there were significant associations between central determinations of iPET ∆SUV with PFS/OS. In this patient cohort, we retrospectively compared local vs central iPET readings and evaluated associations between local imaging data and survival outcomes.ResultsAgreement between local and central review was moderate (kappa = 0.53) for VSS and high (kappa = 0.81) for ∆SUV categories (<66% vs. ≥66%). ∆SUV ≥66% at iPET was significantly associated with PFS (p = 0.03) and OS (p = 0.002), but VSS was not. Associations with PFS/OS when applying local review vs central review were comparable.ConclusionsThese data suggest that local PET interpretation for response determination may be acceptable in clinical trials. Our findings also highlight limitations of VSS and call for incorporation of more objective measures of response assessment in clinical trials.

9002 Background: KRAS is a key mediator of the RAS/MAPK signaling cascade that promotes cellular growth and proliferation. KRASG12C mutation occurs in ̃14% of NSCLC. Adagrasib, an investigational agent, is a KRASG12C inhibitor that irreversibly and selectively binds KRASG12C, locking it in its inactive state. Adagrasib is optimized for favorable pharmacokinetic (PK) properties, including long half-life (̃24 h), dose-dependent PK, and central nervous system penetration; it has demonstrated objective response and favorable tolerability in the Phase 1/1b setting. Methods: KRYSTAL-1 (NCT03785249) is a multicohort Phase 1/2 study evaluating adagrasib as monotherapy or in combination regimens in patients with advanced solid tumors harboring a KRASG12C mutation. Here we report the first disclosure from all patients enrolled in Cohort A, a Phase 2 cohort with registrational intent, evaluating adagrasib given 600 mg orally BID in patients with NSCLC previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy and anti-PD-1/L1 therapy. Study objectives include evaluating efficacy (objective response rate [ORR], duration of response [DOR], progression-free survival [PFS], overall survival [OS]), safety, PK, and exploratory correlative analyses. Objective tumor response was assessed per RECIST v1.1 by blinded independent central review (BICR). Results: As of the 15 October 2021 data cutoff, 116 patients with NSCLC harboring a KRASG12C mutation were enrolled and treated, with a median follow-up of 12.5 months. Baseline characteristics include median age 64 years, 65% female, and 15.5%/83.6% with ECOG PS 0/1; 98.3% of patients received adagrasib following prior treatment with immunotherapy and chemotherapy, with a median of 2 prior systemic therapies. The ORR (by BICR) was 42.9% (48/112) and the disease control rate was 79.5% (89/112); 31 patients remain on treatment. Median DOR was 8.5 months (95% CI 6.2–13.8), median PFS was 6.5 months (95% CI 4.7–8.4), median OS was 12.6 months (95% CI 9.2–NE). Treatment-related AEs (TRAEs) of any grade occurred in 97.4% of patients, grade ≥3 TRAEs in 45.7%, 2 grade 5 TRAEs, and 8 (6.9%) TRAEs led to discontinuation. The most commonly reported (≥25%) TRAEs (any grade) were diarrhea (62.9%), nausea (62.1%), vomiting (47.4%), fatigue (40.5%), ALT/AST increased (27.6%/25%), blood creatinine increased (25.9%); the most commonly reported (≥5%) TRAEs (grade 3/4) were lipase increased (6%) and anemia (5.2%). Additional subgroup analyses will be presented, including selected demographics, molecular markers and sites of metastases. Conclusions: Adagrasib is well tolerated and demonstrates promising efficacy in pretreated patients with NSCLC harboring a KRASG12C mutation. A Phase 3 trial evaluating adagrasib monotherapy versus docetaxel in previously treated patients with KRASG12C-mutant NSCLC is ongoing (NCT04685135). Clinical trial information: NCT03785249.

Abstract Background: Splenomegaly is a marker of disease progression in MF; larger spleen size (SS) is correlated with poorer survival and debilitating MF symptoms. In a retrospective real-world study of 408 patients (pts) with MF treated with ruxolitinib (RUX), pts with SS ≥ 10 cm below the left costal margin (LCM) were significantly less likely to attain a spleen response than pts with SS &lt; 10 cm (Palandri 2017); this finding has not been reported in clinical trials of RUX. FEDR is a JAK2-selective inhibitor approved in the US, EU, Canada, and elsewhere as first-line (1L) MF treatment (Tx) and in pts previously treated with RUX. FEDR was evaluated as 1L MF Tx in the phase 3, placebo (PBO)-controlled JAKARTA trial, and in the phase 2, single-arm JAKARTA2 trial in pts previously treated with RUX. Pts allocated to FEDR 400 mg/day (d) in these trials reported substantial reductions from baseline (BL) in spleen volume and MF symptom severity after 6 FEDR Tx cycles. It is important to determine whether spleen volume and symptom improvements during FEDR Tx are influenced by degree of pre-Tx splenomegaly. Objective: Investigate the clinical efficacy of FEDR 400 mg/d in pts in JAKARTA & JAKARTA2 with large spleens at BL. Methods: The JAKARTA trial assessed FEDR 400 mg/d, FEDR 500 mg/d, and placebo in pts with JAK-inhibitor-naïve MF, and the JAKARTA2 trial evaluated FEDR 400 mg/d (starting dose) in pts resistant/intolerant to prior RUX. Both studies enrolled pts with intermediate- or high-risk MF, SS &gt; 5 cm from LCM by palpation, platelets ≥ 50 ×10 9/L, and ECOG PS ≤ 2. These analyses include pts in each trial allocated to receive FEDR 400 mg/d in continuous 28d Tx cycles. Too few pts had BL SS &lt; 10 cm by palpation in JAKARTA (n = 21) and JAKARTA2 (n = 12) for meaningful comparison vs SS ≥ 10 cm. Thus, in these post hoc analyses we divided pts according to the median SS (mSS) at BL in each study , and assessed changes from BL in spleen volume and MFSAF total symptom score (TSS) at the end of cycle 6 (EOC6). Spleen volume was assessed by MRI/CT scan; MFSAF TSS was the sum of 6 MF symptom scores: night sweats, early satiety, pruritus, pain under ribs-left side, abdominal discomfort, and bone/muscle pain. Pts must have had spleen volume and/or TSS data at BL and EOC6. R esults: In JAKARTA, 96 pts were randomized to FEDR 400 mg/d; mSS at BL for all pts was 16 cm (range 5-40). Median (range) BL spleen volume was 1771 (316-3396) mL in the &lt; mSS cohort and 3329 (983-6430) mL in the ≥ mSS cohort; median TSS was 13.0 and 17.6, respectively. Spleen volume data were available at BL and EOC6 for 37 (82%) and 38 (75%) pts in the &lt; mSS and ≥ mSS cohorts, respectively. Median spleen volume reduction (SVR) at EOC6 was -38% [95%CI -43%, -31%] in the &lt; mSS group and -40% [-40%, -28%] in the ≥ mSS group (Figure). Changes in MF symptom scores at EOC6 were similar in the &lt; mSS (n = 37) and ≥ mSS (n = 34) cohorts, with median TSS reductions of -49% and -51%, respectively. For individual symptoms, median reductions in abdominal discomfort, bone/muscle pain, and early satiety were similar between BL SS cohorts, whereas changes were greater in the &lt; mSS group for pruritus and pain under ribs-left side, and greater in the ≥ mSS group for night sweats. In JAKARTA2, 97 pts received FEDR 400 mg/d (starting dose); BL mSS for all pts was 18 cm (range 5-36). Median (range) BL spleen volumes were 1937 (737-4305) and 4002 (1821-7815) mL for pts with &lt; mSS and ≥ mSS, respectively; and BL TSS was 17.2 (0.7-48.0) and 23.6 (1.0-44.0). Spleen volume and MFSAF TSS data were available at BL and EOC6 for 41 and 29 pts, respectively, in the &lt; mSS cohort, and for 41 and 22 pts in the ≥ mSS group. At EOC6, median SVR from BL was -35% [95%CI -40%, -29%] for pts with &lt; mSS at BL and -30% [-37%, -17%] for pts with ≥ mSS (Figure). Median TSS changes were -36% and -49% in the &lt; mSS and ≥ mSS cohorts, respectively; pts with ≥ mSS at BL had similar or greater reductions from BL in 5/6 MFSAF symptoms (all except pruritus) vs those with &lt; mSS. Conclusions: These analyses demonstrate that extent of splenomegaly at BL in JAKARTA and JAKARTA2 did not influence the likelihood of achieving improvements in spleen volume or MF symptom severity for pts receiving FEDR 400 mg/d as 1L MF Tx or as post-RUX salvage Tx. For pts who completed 6 FEDR Tx cycles, reductions in spleen volume and TSS at EOC6 in the ≥ mSS cohorts in both studies were similar to those in the &lt; mSS cohorts, even though BL spleen volumes and TSS were higher in the ≥ mSS groups. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Kiladjian: Incyte Corporation: 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; Taiho Oncology, Inc.: Research Funding; PharmaEssentia: Other: Personal fees; AOP Orphan: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Passamonti: BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: 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. Vannucchi: BMS: 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; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Talpaz: Imago: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Constellation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Other: Grant/research support . Cervantes: Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria. Harrison: Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Constellation Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Shire: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead Sciences: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; CTI BioPharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Keros: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Incyte Corporation: Speakers Bureau; Sierra Oncology: Honoraria; Promedior: 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; AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Galacteo: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Geron: 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; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Mesa: AOP: Consultancy; La Jolla Pharma: Consultancy; Sierra Oncology: Consultancy, Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Samus: Research Funding; CTI: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Constellation Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Gilead: Research Funding; CTI: Research Funding; Pharma: Consultancy; Promedior: Research Funding. Mascarenhas: Geron: Consultancy; Merus: Research Funding; Geron: Consultancy, Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Constellation: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; PharmaEssentia: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Prelude: Consultancy; Galecto: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; CTI Biopharm: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Forbius: Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Promedior: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech/Roche: Consultancy, 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; Celgene/BMS: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kartos: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Verstovsek: Promedior: Research Funding; CTI BioPharma: Research Funding; Blueprint Medicines Corp: Research Funding; Protagonist Therapeutics: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Ital Pharma: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; PharmaEssentia: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Consultancy, Research Funding; Constellation: Consultancy; Pragmatist: Consultancy. Devos: Alexion, AstraZeneca Rare Disease Inc.: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb - Celegene: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy. Rose: Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company. Zhang: Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment. Sy: Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment.

Abstract Background Abnormal uterine bleeding requires the investigation of the endometrium. Histology is typically used but there remains room for the improvement and use of cytology. Methods Women presenting for clinically indicated office endometrial biopsy were prospectively enrolled. Tao endometrial brushing and office endometrial biopsy were performed, and surgical procedure if clinically indicated. Tao brush cytology specimens were blindly reviewed by up to three pathologists, consensus obtained, and scored as: benign, atypical (favor benign), suspicious, positive for malignancy, or non‐diagnostic. Cytology and histology were compared to surgical pathology to determine sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive values to detect AH (atypical hyperplasia) or EC (endometrial cancer). Results Clinical indications of 197 enrolled patients included postmenopausal bleeding (90, 45.7%), abnormal uterine bleeding (94, 47.7%), and abnormal endometrium on ultrasound without bleeding (13, 6.6%). Of the 197 patients, 185 (93.9%) had cytology score consensus and a total of 196 (99.5%) had consensus regarding cytology positivity. Surgical pathology diagnoses (N = 85) were 13 (15.3%) FIGO grade 1 or 2 EC, 3 (3.5%) AH, and 69 (81.2%) benign endometrium. Sensitivity and specificity to detect EC or AH were 93.7% and 100%, respectively, via endometrial biopsy; 87.5% and 63.8%, respectively, via endometrial cytology when scores of malignancy, suspicious, or atypical were considered positive. Conclusions In a high‐risk population, Tao brush endometrial cytology showed high sensitivity to detect AH and EC comparable to biopsy histology when considering scores of malignancy, suspicious, atypical, and non‐diagnostic. Revisiting the potential value of endometrial cytology in the contemporary era of endometrial diagnostic workup is warranted.

SummaryFedratinib, an oral Janus kinase‐2 (JAK2) inhibitor, reduces splenomegaly and improves symptom burden in patients with myelofibrosis. Regulatory approval of fedratinib 400‐mg daily was based on results of an updated analysis of the pivotal phase III, placebo‐controlled JAKARTA trial in patients with JAK‐inhibitor‐naïve myelofibrosis. At week 24, spleen volume response rate was 47% and symptom response rate was 40% with fedratinib 400 mg, versus 1% and 9% respectively, with placebo. Common adverse events were diarrhoea, nausea, anaemia, and vomiting. No Wernicke encephalopathy occurred in patients receiving fedratinib 400 mg/day. These updated data support use of first‐line fedratinib in patients with myelofibrosis.

Abstract Androgen receptor (AR) is a major survival factor for prostate cancer. Inflammation is implicated in many cancer types, including prostate cancer. Activation of MAP3K7 (also termed TAK1) and downstream IκB kinase β (IKKβ) by proinflammatory cytokines such as TNFα stimulates NF-κB survival pathways. Paradoxically, MAP3K7 is often deleted in human prostate cancer. Here, we demonstrate that AR protein expression is lower in inflammatory tumor areas compared with non-inflammatory tissues in patients with prostate cancer. Map3k7 knockout increased AR protein levels and activity in the mouse prostate, and MAP3K7 and AR protein levels were inversely correlated in prostate cancer patient specimens. TNFα treatment increased AR protein ubiquitination and proteasomal degradation. Mechanistically, activation of IKKβ by TNFα induced phosphorylation and TRCP1/2 E3 ligase–mediated polyubiquitination and degradation of AR protein. TNFα suppressed prostate cancer proliferation, which could be rescued by blockade of AR degradation. These findings reveal a previously unrecognized tumor suppressive function of the inflammation-activated MAP3K7–IKKβ axis in degrading AR protein. Moreover, they suggest that aberrant elevation of AR protein could be a prognostic biomarker and therapeutic target for MAP3K7-deficient prostate cancer. Significance: This study identifies that MAP3K7–IKKβ signaling plays a tumor-suppressive role in prostate cancer by degrading AR, revealing potential prognostic and therapeutic strategies for MAP3K7-deficient tumors.

Abstract Molecular mechanisms underlying intratumoral androgenesis and aberrant androgen receptor (AR) activation in prostate cancer remain poorly understood. Here we demonstrate that ectopic expression of the E3 ubiquitin ligase adaptor speckle-type poxvirus and zinc finger domain protein (SPOP) stabilizes 17βHSD4. SPOP bound a functional substrate-binding consensus (SBC) motif 315RATST319 in 17βHSD4 and promoted nondegradable K27- and K29-linked polyubiquitination of 17βHSD4. The effect of SPOP was antagonized by serum- and glucocorticoid kinase-3 (SGK3)-mediated phosphorylation of serine 318 (S318) in the SBC and S318 phosphorylation-dependent binding of SKP2 E3 ligase and subsequent K48-linked polyubiquitination and proteasomal degradation of 17βHSD4. Prostate cancer–associated SPOP mutations impaired the SPOP-17βHSD4 interaction, caused 17βHSD4 protein destruction in prostate cancer cells in culture and patient specimens, and increased testosterone production and prostate cancer cell growth in vitro and in mouse models. Thus, we have identified SPOP and SKP2 as two essential E3 ubiquitin ligases that exert opposite effects on 17βHSD4 protein degradation and intratumoral androgenesis in prostate cancer cells. We further demonstrate that SPOP mutations or SKP2 overexpression contribute to prostate cancer progression by decreasing 17βHSD4 expression and increasing intratumoral androgen synthesis. Significance: This study reveals a novel mechanism of aberrant AR activation in SPOP-mutated prostate cancer and uncovers putative biomarkers for effective treatment by AR-targeted therapies.

Significance The multiple-domain protein ZMYND8 is well known as a chromatin reader that recognizes methylated, acetylated, and/or mutated histones. Here we report that ZMYND8 is overexpressed in human ccRCC, and that it preferentially binds T487-phosphorylated EZH2. We show that in hypoxia-stimulated or von Hippel–Lindau–deficient cells, ZMYND8 binding of EZH2 is important for maintenance of EZH2 phosphorylation level, inhibition of PRC2 complex formation, and enhanced interaction between EZH2 and FOXM1. Our results reveal a reader function of ZMYND8 in recognizing a phosphorylation “code” on a nonhistone protein. Our findings also identify ZMYND8 binding as a facet of regulation and function of EZH2 phosphorylation in the Polycomb-dependent to -independent switch of EZH2/PRC2 activities.

BACKGROUND: MF is characterized by anemia, splenomegaly, debilitating constitutional symptoms, and shortened survival. Fedratinib is an oral JAK2 inhibitor approved in the United States for treatment (Tx) of adult patients (pts) with intermediate (INT)-2 or high-risk MF. The randomized, placebo (PBO)-controlled, phase III JAKARTA trial evaluated clinical outcomes with fedratinib in pts with JAK-inhibitor-naïve MF. Initial findings from the JAKARTA study have been reported (Pardanani, JAMA Oncol, 2015). JAKARTA data were recently reanalyzed in preparation for regulatory review. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety with fedratinib 400 mg/day in updated analyses of the JAKARTA study. METHODS: JAKARTA was an international, randomized, double-blind, PBO-controlled study that enrolled pts aged ≥ 18 years with INT-2 or high-risk primary, post-PV, or post-ET MF. Pts were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to fedratinib 400 mg, fedratinib 500 mg, or PBO, administered orally once-daily for ≥ 6 consecutive 4-week cycles ("randomized Tx period"). After completing 6 Tx cycles (or earlier in the case of disease progression), pts randomized to PBO could crossover to fedratinib. The primary endpoint was the spleen volume response rate (SVRR), the proportion of pts who achieved a ≥ 35% spleen volume reduction from baseline (BL) confirmed by MRI/CT at end of cycle 6 (EOC6), confirmed by follow-up scan 4 weeks later. Secondary endpoints included SVRR without 4-week confirmation, durability of spleen response, and symptom response rate (proportion of pts with a ≥ 50% reduction from BL in total symptom score [TSS] on the modified Myelofibrosis Symptom Assessment Form [MFSAF]) at EOC6. An exploratory analysis evaluated proportions of pts with ≥ 50% reductions from BL at EOC6 in individual MFSAF symptom scores: night sweats, pruritus, abdominal discomfort, early satiety, pain under ribs on left side, and bone or muscle pain. These analyses are limited to pts randomized to fedratinib 400 mg (the approved starting dose of fedratinib) or to PBO. Efficacy analyses were performed for the intention-to-treat (ITT) population and safety was assessed in all pts who received ≥ 1 dose of study drug. RESULTS: 96 pts were randomized to fedratinib 400 mg and 96 pts to PBO. In the fedratinib and PBO arms, median ages at BL were 63 (range 39-86) and 66 (27-85) years, respectively, 65% and 60% of pts had primary MF, 76% and 73% had constitutional symptoms, median spleen volumes were 2652 (316-6430) and 2660 (662-7911) mL, and median TSS were 15.3 (0-57) and 12.4 (0-53). Median durations of exposure were 15.5 months in the fedratinib 400 mg arm and 6 months in the PBO arm. With a confirmation scan 4 weeks after EOC6, SVRR was significantly higher in the fedratinib arm (37% [95%CI 27%, 46%]) vs. the PBO arm (1% [0%, 3%]) (P &lt; 0.0001). Without the confirmation scan, SVRR at EOC6 was 47% (95%CI 37%, 57%) in the fedratinib 400 mg arm and 1% (0%, 3%) in the PBO arm (P &lt; 0.0001; Figure). Estimated median duration of spleen response with fedratinib was 18.2 months. Symptom response rate at EOC6 for evaluable pts (ie, with TSS data available at BL and EOC6) was 40% (36/89) with fedratinib and 9% (7/81) with PBO (P &lt; 0.0001). Fedratinib was associated with higher response rates vs. PBO in all 6 MFSAF symptoms: abdominal discomfort (41% vs. 15%, respectively), night sweats (58% vs. 22%), bone or muscle pain (33% vs. 14%), early satiety (51% vs. 18%), pruritus (39% vs. 20%), and pain under the ribs on the left side (42% vs. 24%). The most common Tx-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) during the randomized Tx period were grade 1-2 gastrointestinal events (Table). New or worsening grade 3 anemia and grade ≥ 3 thrombocytopenia laboratory abnormalities were reported in 34% and 12% of fedratinib-treated pts, most (75%) occurring within 3-4 months of Tx initiation. Compared with PBO, fedratinib-treated pts more frequently experienced increased serum creatinine, amylase, and lipase; these were mainly grade 1-2 in severity. TEAEs led to Tx discontinuation for 14% of fedratinib pts and 8% of PBO pts. CONCLUSIONS: Fedratinib 400 mg/day significantly reduced splenomegaly and symptom burden in pts with JAK-inhibitor-naïve MF. Relatively few pts discontinued fedratinib therapy due to TEAEs, suggesting these events are manageable. These data corroborate results initially reported for the JAKARTA trial, and further support the efficacy and safety of fedratinib in this pt population. Disclosures Masszi: AbbVie: 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; Janssen-Cilag: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Drummond:Pfizer: 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, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Astellas: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Blueprint Medicine Corporation: Research Funding; Jazz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Jourdan:Novartis: Honoraria, 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; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Vannucchi: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; 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. Ribrag: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; BMS: 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; nanostring: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; EPZ: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; epizyme (EPZ): Research Funding; argenX: Research Funding; pharmamar: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; servier: Consultancy; gustave roussy comprehensive cancer center: Current Employment. Rambaldi:Abbvie: Honoraria; Jazz: Honoraria; Astellas: Honoraria; Omeros: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; MSD: Honoraria. Rose:Bristol-Myers Squibb Company: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Zhang:Bristol-Myers Squibb Company: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Harrison:Promedior: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Sierra Oncology: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Shire: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Incyte Corporation: Speakers Bureau; Gilead Sciences: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; CTI Biopharma Corp: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau.

Background FDG-PET is used in staging and response assessments in patients (pts) with DLBCL. An analysis of 158 pts with DLBCL receiving R-CHOP or DA-EPOCH-R on CALGB/Alliance 50303 failed to show an association between the interim PET (iPET, after cycle 2 of therapy) visual 5-point scale score (5-PS) by central review and progression-free survival (PFS) or overall survival (OS), but did show a significant association between percent change in FDG uptake from baseline to after cycle 2 (∆SUV) and PFS/OS (Schoder et al. 2020). As central review of FDG-PET is not feasible in routine practice, we retrospectively compared local vs central readings, and determined associations from local imaging data with PFS/OS. Methods 126 pts at baseline and 109 at iPET had local imaging data submitted across 21 institutions. Visual scores 1-3 defined PET- and scores 4-5 defined PET+ disease. ∆SUV was defined as the percent change in the maximum SUV at any site (maxSUV) from baseline to iPET. Continuous ∆SUV and categorized ∆SUV (&lt;66% vs &gt;66%) were analyzed. Differences in quantitative measures were calculated as the local minus central result. The Kappa statistic estimated agreement in PET and ∆SUV groups between local and central review. PFS and OS distributions for local PET and ∆SUV groups were landmarked at iPET, estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method, and compared using the log-rank test. Results At baseline, maxSUV was reported locally and centrally in 118 pts. Median maxSUV was 24.3 (range: 5.9-77.3) by local review and 24.3 (range: 5.9-77.0) by central review. The median difference in maxSUV was 0 (range: -12.9 to 21.9), with 50% of differences between -1.1 and 0.1, and 90% of differences between -7.8 and 4.1. In 106 pts with visual iPET 5-PS results, 52 (49.1%) were PET+ by local review and 37 (34.9%) by central review. Agreement in local and central review was moderate (kappa=0.53), occurring in 81 pts (76.4%; 32 PET+ and 49 PET-). Disagreement occurred in 25 patients, 20 with local PET+ but central PET- and 5 with local PET- but central PET+. iPET maxSUV was reported locally and centrally in 90 pts. Median maxSUV was 3.4 (range: 0-18.3) by local review and 3.3 (range: 1.2-18.2) by central review. The median difference in maxSUV was 0 (range: -8.6 to 2.4), with 50% of differences between -0.3 and 0.4, and 90% of differences between -4.4 and 1.8. ∆SUV was calculated in 87 pts. Median ∆SUV was 84.6% (range: -3.0% to 95.9%) by local review and 85.1% (range: -34.9% to 95.8%) by central review. The median difference in ∆SUV was -0.3 (range: -19.6 to 31.9), with 50% of differences between -2.1 and 1.1, and 90% of differences between -7.1 and 12.3. ∆SUV was &lt;66% in 12 (13.8%) pts by local review and 12 pts by central review. Agreement in local and central review was high (kappa=0.81), occurring in 83 pts (95.4%; 10 with ∆SUV &lt;66%, 73 with ∆SUV &gt;66%). Disagreement occurred in 4 pts, 2 in each direction. Using local data, PFS and OS estimates were numerically lower in pts with iPET+ vs iPET- disease, but did not reach statistical significance (p=0.12 and p=0.15). Two-year estimates for PFS were 79% (95% CI 68-91%) and 89% (95% CI 81-98%), and 2-year estimates for OS were 84% (95% CI 75-95%) and 96% (95% CI 91-100%) in pts with iPET+ and iPET-, respectively. In contrast, ∆SUV groups were significantly associated with PFS and OS (p=0.03 and p=0.002). Two-year estimates for PFS were 56% (95% CI 34-94%) and 87% (95% CI 79-95%) and 2-year estimates for OS were 56% (95% CI 34-94%) and 93% (95% CI 88-99%) in pts with ∆SUV &lt;66% and ∆SUV &gt;66%, respectively. Conclusion Agreement in visual 5-PS at iPET was moderate; most discrepancies arose from a local PET+ result when central review called PET-. Differences in maxSUV and ∆SUV tended to be small. Grouping ∆SUV resulted in only 4 discrepancies (4.6%). Similar to the previous analysis using central data, the separation in PFS and OS curves using local data for ∆SUV was greater than by visual 5-PS. Encouragingly, the agreement in ∆SUV of &lt;66% vs ≥66% was high between local and central review. Overall agreement however may be unduly influenced by the large proportion of pts with ∆SUV ≥66%, with less certainty in agreement for pts with ∆SUV &lt;66%. Larger prospective studies comparing local and central imaging data are warranted to best determine the utility of local imaging in clinical trials. Support: P30 CA008748, U10CA180821, U10CA180882; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00118209 (CALGB 50303) Disclosures Kahl: Acerta: Consultancy, Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BeiGene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche Laboratories Inc: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics LLC: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy; AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Consultancy. Friedberg:Astellas: Consultancy; Acerta Pharma - A member of the AstraZeneca Group, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals.: Other; Portola Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Roche: Other: Travel expenses; Kite Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy. Leonard:MEI Pharma: Consultancy; Sutro: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy; GenMab: Consultancy; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy; Gilead/Kite: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy; Regeneron: Consultancy; Epizyme: Consultancy; Miltenyi: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy. Bartlett:Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Research Funding; Immune Design: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Forty Seven: Research Funding; BMS/Celgene: Research Funding; BTG: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Acerta: Consultancy; Affimed Therapeutics: Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy; Autolus: Research Funding.