Citations

Abstract Background : In primary myelofibrosis (PMF), ̴ 88% of patients harbor one of three "driver" mutations, with mutational frequencies of approximately 60%, 22% and 6% for JAK2, CALR and MPL, respectively. Other "non-driver" mutations have also been described in PMF and some of them and their number have been associated with inferior survival (Leukemia. 2014;28:1804). We applied next generation sequencing (NGS) with a broader panel of MPN-relevant genes, in order to identify additional mutations of prognostic relevance as well as obtain additional information regarding the prognostic value of 'number of mutations'. Methods: Targeted capture assays were carried out on bone marrow or whole blood DNA specimens obtained at time of referral for the following genes: TET2, DNMT3A, IDH1, IDH2, ASXL1, EZH2, SUZ12, SRSF2, SF3B1, ZRSR2, U2AF1, PTPN11, Tp53, SH2B3, RUNX1, CBL, NRAS, JAK2, CSF3R, FLT3, KIT, CALR, MPL, NPM1, CEBPA, IKZF, and SETBP1. Paired-end indexed libraries were prepared from individual patient DNA using the NEB Next Ultra Library prep protocol on the Agilent Bravo liquid handler (NEB, Ipswich, MA/Agilent Technologies Inc, Santa Clara, CA). Capture libraries were assembled according to Nimblegen standard library protocol (Roche Nimblegen, Inc, Basel, Switzerland). Base-calling was performed using Illumina's RTA version 1.17.21.3. Genesifter® software was utilized (PerkinElmer, Danvers, Massachusetts) to analyze targeted sequence data. Nucleotide variants were called using the Genome Analysis Toolkit (GATK-Broad Institute, Cambridge, MA). Specific variants were deemed as mutations if they are associated with a hematologic malignancy (as identified by COSMIC database), or if they have not been associated with a dbSNP. Results: 180 PMF patients were evaluated (median age 63 years; 65% males). DIPSS-plus risk distribution was 32% high, 38% intermediate-2, 17% intermediate-1 and 13% low. Driver mutation distribution was 62% JAK2, 22% CALR, 9% triple-negative and 7% MPL. Karyotype was abnormal in 41% of patients and unfavorable in 12%. Mutations other than JAK2, CALR or MPL (i.e. "non-driver" mutations) were seen in 150 (83%) patients including 88% of "triple-negative" cases. 62 (34%) patients harbored one, 55 (31%) two, 16 (9%) three and 17 (10%) four or more. Mutational frequencies were: ASXL1 36%, TET2 18%, SRSF2 17%, U2AF1 17%, ZRSR2 11%, SF3B1 10%, DNMT3A 9%, CEBPA (9%), Tp53 7%, SETBP1 6%, CBL 5%, IDH1/2 5%, SH2B3 4%, CSF3R 4%, NRAS 4%, RUNX1 3% and ≤2% for SUZ12, KIT, PTPN11, NPM1 and EZH2. DIPSS-plus high/intermediate-2 risk patients displayed higher number of mutations (p=0.0004) and higher mutational frequencies for ASXL1 (p=0.02), SRSF2 (p=0.004) and CBL (p=0.02). Associations noted included JAK2 with U2AF1 (p=0.03), unfavorable karyotype with CBL (p=0.01) and normal karyotype with ZRSR2 mutations (p=0.04). At a median follow-up of 4 years, 111 (62%) deaths were documented. For examination of impact on survival, we considered 'number of mutations' and specific mutations with >2% frequency. Accordingly, in univariate analysis, survival was adversely affected by 'number of mutations' (Figure 1) and presence of ASXL1, SRSF2, IDH1/2, U2AF1, RUNX1 and CBL mutations. For multivariable analysis, we considered three categories (zero, 1-3 and ≥4) for number of mutations based on the results from univariate analysis (Figure 1); the results showed ≥4 mutations, 1-3 mutations, RUNX1, CBL, ASXL1 and SRSF2 mutations were independently associated with shortened survival; the respective HR (95% CI) were 4 (1.4-11.1), 3 (1.3-6.8), 2.9 (1.1-8.1), 2.8 (1.3-6.3), 1.8 (1.2-2.7) AND 1.7 (1.03-2.7). When the multivariable analysis was repeated including only the 150 patients with at least one non-driver mutation, the 'number of mutations' was no longer significant (p=0.35) but ASXL1, CBL, RUNX1 and SRSF2 mutations retained their significance. The prognostic relevance of ASXL1 and CBL continued to be apparent even after the addition of DIPSS-plus and driver mutation profile to the multivariable model. Conclusions: Mutations other than JAK2, CALR or MPL occur in more than 80% of patients with PMF, including those with "triple-negative" driver mutational status. The absence of such mutations is independently favorable for survival while the prognostic effect of their presence is influenced by ASXL1, CBL, RUNX1 and SRSF2 mutations. Figure 1. Figure 1. Disclosures Pardanani: Stemline: Research Funding.

Abstract Background : Prognosis in chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) is dire and blast transformation (BT) is a main cause of death. Current risk factors and prognostic models are mostly designed to predict overall (OS) and not leukemia-free (LFS) survival. Established risk factors for OS in CMML include anemia, thrombocytopenia, leukocytosis, monocytosis, presence of circulating immature myeloid cells (IMC), peripheral blood (PB) and bone marrow (BM) blasts, lymphocytosis, ASXL1 mutations, high risk abnormal karyotype and advanced age. In the current study, we examined risk factors for BT in CMML and survival outcome after BT. Methods : All CMML patients seen at our institution and with complete presentation data were considered. Clinical and laboratory variables, including cytogenetic information, at time of CMML diagnosis and also at time of BT were collected. DNA analysis for SRSF2, SF3B1, U2AF1, ASXL1 and SETBP1 mutations was carried out on specimens obtained at time of CMML diagnosis. We used both conventional and revised (see accompanying ASH 2014 abstract) cytogenetic risk models to query their influence in the current study population. Results: Clinical and laboratory features at time of CMML diagnosis: 277 consecutive patients (median age 71 years, range 18-91; 67% males) with WHO-defined CMML were considered. 236 (85%) patients had CMML-1 and the remainder CMML-2. According to the molecular Mayo risk model, 86 (33%) were high, 77 (29%) were intermediate-2, 77 (29%) were intermediate-1 and 24 (9%) were low risk. Mutational frequencies were 40% for ASXL1 (n evaluable =264), 44% for SRSF2 (n evaluable =263), 5% for SETBP1 (n evaluable =263). According to the revised Mayo-French consortium cytogenetic risk model, karyotype was high risk in 5%, intermediate in 21% and low risk in 74%. Risk factors for blast transformation (BT) : At a median follow-up of 16.2 months for all 277 patients from time of CMML diagnosis, 204 (74%) deaths and 38 (14%) BTs were documented. Median time from CMML diagnosis to BT was 13.3 months. In univariate analysis, female sex, younger age, lower hemoglobin, higher leukocyte count, higher absolute monocyte count, higher lymphocyte count, presence of circulating immature myeloid cells (IMC), increased peripheral blood (PB) blast %, increased bone marrow (BM) blast %, BM blasts ≥10%, CMML-2, abnormal karyotype, high risk karyotype per the Spanish or Mayo-French consortium, and higher risk disease per Mayo, MDACC or Dusseldorf models were all associated with higher risk of BT. In contrast, ASXL1 (p=0.84), SRSF2 (p=0.28) or SETBP1 (p=0.97) mutations were not found to be significant. In multivariable analysis, only PB blast % (p<0.0001), presence of PB IMC (p=0.004) and younger age (p=0.03) remained significant. Outcome of blast transformation : At time of BT, karyotype was abnormal in 58% and clonal evolution from time of CMML diagnosis was documented in 13 (36%) of 36 evaluable patients. Among the 38 patients with BT, induction chemotherapy was documented in 12 patients and allogeneic stem cell transplant (ASCT) in 6. At a median follow-up of 4.2 months from time of BT, 34 (89%) of the 38 patients with BT had died. Among the four patients who were alive at the time of this writing, 3 had received induction chemotherapy and two ASCT. Median survival of patients with BT, from time of disease transformation, was 4.5 months with 1, 2 and 3 year survival rates of approximately 30%, 16% and 3%, respectively. In univariate analysis, higher leukocyte count (p=0.01) and not receiving induction chemotherapy (p=0.03) were associated with shortened survival. Neither ASXL1 nor SRSF2 mutations affected survival after BT. Conclusions : Blast transformation in CMML occurs in approximately 14% of patients followed for a median of less than 1.5 years. Presence of circulating immature cells and percentage of peripheral blood blasts are the major determinants of BT in CMML. Genetic risk factors for overall survival did not appear to influence leukemia-free survival. Prognosis of post-CMML BT is dismal with median survival of less than 6 months and a 3-year survival of less than 5%. Outcome was better in patients receiving induction chemotherapy followed by ASCT. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Abstract 3315 The Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) trial, E2902, was a randomized phase III intergroup trial of the Farnesyl Transferase Inhibitor, R115777(Tipifarnib), as maintenance therapy for acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Patients (pts) with AML in remission after requiring salvage therapy (primary induction failure or second or subsequent remission) or over the age of 60 in first remission were eligible. A confirmatory bone marrow exam was required within 2 weeks prior to randomization. Pts were eligible if they were in a complete remission (CR) or morphologic remission (MR). Consolidation or post remission therapy prior to enrollment was allowed but not required. Pts who had received an allogeneic transplant in this remission were ineligible. Adequate blood counts (absolute neutrophil count >= 1000/mm3 and platelet count >=50,000/mm3), and normal renal, and hepatic function were required within 2 weeks of randomization. Pts were randomized to either receive tipifarnib twice daily (BID) or to observation. The main objective of this study was to compare disease free survival in the two groups. Although the study has completed accrual, an insufficient number of events have been recorded at this point to allow for evaluation of the survival data. However, toxicity data are now available. Between August 2004 and December 2009, 144 pts were accrued to the study. The median age of the pts is 70 (range 28–86). Seventy-three pts (51%) were male and 135 pts (94%) were white. Seventy-three pts were enrolled onto the treatment arm (Arm A) and 71 pts were enrolled onto the observation arm (Arm B). When the study was initially opened, pts on Arm A were treated with tipifarnib at a dose of 400 mg BID with dose reductions and interruptions defined per protocol for toxicity. After the first planned interim analysis, based on toxicity data, the ECOG Data Monitoring Committee recommended that the starting dose be decreased to 300 mg BID. The majority of pts enrolled on the study were in first CR (CR1) (Table 2). Among the 30 pts treated with the initial 400 mg BID dose, 23 pts (77%) had their dose held or reduced to a lower dose in the subsequent treatment cycles. For the 41 pts whose initial dose was 300 mg BID, 61% required either dose modification (n=19) or discontinued (n=6) due to toxicity. Table 1: Baseline characteristics Arm A 400 mg BID n=31 Arm A 300 mg BID n=42 Arm B Observation n=71 CR1 16 (52%) 34 (81%) 47 (66%) >CR1 10 (32%) 8 (19%) 16 (23%) Unknown 5 (16%) 16 (11%) Table 2: Toxicity Toxicity Type Arm A 400 mg n=31 Arm A 300 mg n=41 Arm B Observation n=69 Grade (n) Grade (n) Grade (n) 3 4 3 4 3 4 Hemoglobin 1 1 6 1 1 2 Leukocytes 2 4 16 4 3 Neutrophils 5 8 3 7 1 Platelets 4 10 11 11 1 5 Cardiac-ischemia 1 Fatigue 1 Diarrhea 1 Nausea 1 Febrile neutropenia 1 1 Infection w/gr 3-4 neutrophils (ANC) 1 Infection Gr0-2 ANC 1 1 3 GGT 1 Hypokalemia 1 Confusion 1 Agitation 1 Neuropathy-sensory 1 Back pain 1 Worst degree Non Hematologic 4 2 9 1 1 While non-hematologic toxicity was acceptable, significant hematologic toxicity was seen in pts treated at an initial dose of either 400 mg or 300 mg BID (Table 2). Of note, hematologic toxicity was also seen on the observation arm although less frequently than with both treatment doses. Non-hematologic toxicity was much less frequent overall and there were no significant non-hematologic toxicities in the observation arm. Reduction of the initial dose did not ameliorate either the hematologic or non-hematologic toxicity seen on the treatment arms. There was however no fatal toxicity at either dose level. Results of the randomization with respect to efficacy remain essential to determining the utility of this agent as maintenance therapy in AML. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Abstract 430 Background: The Dynamic International Prognostic Scoring System (DIPSS-plus) uses eight risk factors to predict overall survival (OS) in primary myelofibrosis (PMF): unfavorable karyotype, peripheral blood (PB) blast count ≥1%, platelet count <100 × 109/L, white blood cell count (WBC) >25 × 109/L, hemoglobin level <10 g/dL, red blood cell transfusion need, constitutional symptoms, and age >65 years (JCO 2011;29:392). Among these risk factors, karyotype holds a dominant role in predicting both overall (OS) and leukemia-free (LFS) survival (Blood 2011;118:4595). More recently, certain PMF-associated somatic mutations (IDH, EZH2, ASXL1, SRSF2) have been reported (in print or at recent meetings) to carry prognostic relevance for OS or LFS in PMF while other mutations (JAK2, MPL, TET2, SF3B1) did not. The purpose of the current study was to examine the individual and combined prognostic relevance of the former in the context of cytogenetic risk stratification and DIPSS-plus. Methods: An updated Mayo Clinic database of 1008 karyotypically- and DIPSS-plus-annotated patients with PMF was used to identify study patients in whom DNA at time of referral was available for mutation analysis. OS and LFS were calculated from the time of referral, which was also the time of study sample collection. Results: In an ongoing project, a total of 397 PMF patients have so far been studied for IDH1/2 (n=367), SRSF2 (n=355), ASXL1 (n=260) and EZH2 (n=43) mutations. The corresponding mutational frequencies were 5.4% (20/367), 14.4% (51/355), 31.2% (81/260) and 7% (3/43). These mutations were not exclusive of either each other or JAK2 or MPL mutations and a significant clustering was noted between SRSF2 and IDH mutations; IDH mutational frequency was 21% (10/48) in SRSF2-mutated versus 3% (9/279) in unmutated cases (P<0.0001). Mutational hotspots were P95 in exon 1 for SRSF2 and exons 1, 2 and 5 for ASXL1. OS and LFS effect have so far been examined for ASXL1, SRSF2 and IDH 1/2 mutations; in univariate analysis, all three mutations significantly affected OS (ASXL1 RR 1.9, 95% CI 1.4–2.7; SRSF2 RR 1.7, 95% CI 1.2–2.5; IDH 1/2 RR 1.8, 95% CI 1.1–3.1) whereas only IDH 1/2 (RR 5.5, 95% CI 2.5–11.8) and SRSF2 (RR 3.5, 95% CI 1.7–7.0) but not ASXL1 (p=0.29) mutations affected LFS. The observed prognostic relevance for OS was sustained during multivariable analysis that included ASXL1 with either SRSF2 or IDH mutations, as co-variates, whereas both IDH and SRSF2 mutations remained significant for LFS. Based on the above observations, study patients were classified into two groups: i) unmutated for ASXL1, SRSF2 and IDH1/2 (all unmutated; n=146) and ii) mutated for at least one of the three mutations (one or more mutated; n=130); the latter group constituted 62%, 52%, 18% and 27% of DIPSS-plus high, intermediate-2, intermediate-1and low risk patients, respectively (p<0.0001). The corresponding rates for patients with favorable and unfavorable karyotype were 47% and 43% (p=0.7) and for normal vs. abnormal karyotype were 53% and 36% (p=0.008). The “all unmutated group”, compared to the “one or more mutated group” enjoyed a significantly superior OS (RR 0.5, 95% CI 0.4–0.7) and LFS (RR 0.3, 95% CI 0.2–0.7) that was DIPSS-plus-independent for OS (p=0.03) and karyotype-independent for LFS (p=0.004). The prognostic value of distinguishing “all unmutated” from “one or more mutated” patient groups was most evident for DIPSS-plus intermediate-2 or lower risk groups (p=0.002) and its added value for high-risk group was limited (p=0.23) (Figure). Conclusions: A concomitant analysis strategy reveals that SRSF2, ASXL1 and IDH mutations carry inter-independent prognostic relevance for overall or leukemia-free survival in PMF. Any one of these three mutations is more likely to occur in patients with normal karyotype and such an event predicts shortened survival that is not accounted for by DIPSS-plus and a higher risk of leukemic transformation that is independent of karyotype. The current study suggests that such information might be useful in treatment decisions involving intermediate-2 or lower risk patients. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Abstract 1875 Recent experimental evidence suggests that acute myeloid leukemia (AML) originates from hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells (HSPC) following the acquisition of multiple genetic or epigenetic changes that initially give rise to pre-leukemic HSPC (pre-LSC) and then to fully transformed leukemia stem cells (LSC). Relapse continues to be the major cause of death in most subtypes of AML, suggesting that current therapies are largely ineffective in eliminating LSC and pre-LSC. Cellular heterogeneity and the recent observation that LSC are contained within different phenotypic cellular compartments are challenges for the identification of pathways contributing to the initiation and maintenance of AML. To address these challenges we employed a novel strategy of parallel transcriptional analysis of multiple phenotypic HSPC populations from individuals with AML with normal karyotype (N=5), -7/7q- (N=6) and complex karyotype (N=5), including long-term HSC, short-term HSC, and granulocyte-monocyte progenitors (GMP), and comparison to corresponding cell populations from age-matched healthy controls (HC) (N=6). Specifically, we sorted Lin−/CD34+/CD38−/CD90+ (LT-HSC), Lin−/CD34+/CD38−/CD90− (ST-HSC), and Lin−/CD34+/CD38+/CD123+/CD45RA+ (GMP), and hybridized RNA to Affymetrix GeneST 1.0 expression arrays. Differential gene expression was determined within each compartment by direct comparison of AML LT-HSC vs. HC LT-HSC, AML ST-HSC vs. HC ST-HSC, and AML GMP vs. HC GMP. Subsequent intersection of all differentially expressed genes revealed that only a relatively small number of 6 to 11 genes were consistently dysregulated in all examined leukemic stem and progenitor cell compartments. Interleukin 1 receptor accessory protein (IL1RAP) was one of the most significantly upregulated genes in LT-HSC, ST-HSC, and GMP in all examined subtypes of AML. IL1RAP is a transmembrane protein required for signaling through several receptors of the IL1 family, including IL-1R1 and ST2. We detected significant overexpression of IL1RAP protein on HSC and progenitor cells of AML patients. Interestingly, CD34+/Lin+ precursor cells showed only a marginal increase of IL1RAP at the protein level in AML, underscoring the importance of purifying HSPC with stringent lineage depletion. We performed fluorescence in situ hybridization in sorted IL1RAP+ and IL1RAP− cells from -7 AML. We observed that the -7 clone was restricted to IL1RAP+ cells, while IL1RAP- cells did not display monosomy 7, demonstrating that IL1RAP overexpression is a distinguishing feature of the cells of the -7 clone. Patients with normal karyotype AML showed a wider range of IL1RAP expression levels; some were as high as in -7 AML and others were as low as in HC. We asked whether IL1RAP expression levels were associated with known clinical or molecular parameters. We analyzed two published datasets of patients with normal karyotype AML (Metzeler, Blood. 2008;112:4193–4201; Tomasson, Blood. 2008;111:4797–4808). Patients with high IL1RAP levels showed inferior overall survival than patients with lower IL1RAP (p=2.2×10−7; median survival: 7.82 mo. for IL1RAP high, 20 mo. for IL1RAP low). Multivariate analysis using a Cox regression model showed that high IL1RAP status was an independent prognostic factor (p=0.002), and even stronger than FLT3 mutation status (p=0.006). In addition, we analyzed data from 183 patients with MDS and found IL1RAP expression to be specifically elevated in cases with RAEB-2, suggesting a role of IL1RAP in MDS and in the progression to AML. Downregulation of IL1RAP protein expression in 4 AML cell lines (THP1, OCI-AML3, HL60, HEL) led to a significant 45–98% decrease in clonogenic growth and increased apoptosis in vitro. To assess the effects of IL1RAP downregulation in vivo, we performed xenotransplants into immunodeficient NOD/SCID/IL2Rg-null mice. THP-1 AML cells showed a 92% reduced proliferation and infiltration of hematopoietic organs upon IL1RAP knockdown in comparison to a non-silencing control in vivo. Genetic studies to assess the role of IL1RAP in the initiation and maintenance of AML in an IL1RAP−/− mouse model are currently ongoing. In summary, our study provides a map of consistently dysregulated transcripts across multiple fractionated stem and progenitor cell types from patients with AML, and identifies IL1RAP as a putative new therapeutic and prognostic target in stem cells in AML and MDS. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Abstract 676 Although maintenance therapy has been shown to be of value in Acute Lymphoid Leukemia, its role in non M3 Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) has never been proven. Studies have been limited by issues related to efficacy as well as toxicity. The Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) trial, E2902, was a randomized phase III intergroup trial of the Farnesyl Transferase Inhibitor, R115777(tipifarnib), as maintenance therapy for AML. Patients(pts) with AML in remission after requiring salvage therapy or over age 60 in first remission were eligible. A confirmatory bone marrow exam prior to randomization was required to demonstrate a complete remission (CR) or morphologic remission(MR). Absolute neutrophil count >1000/mm3, platelet count >=50,000/mm3, normal renal, and hepatic function were required. Consolidation or post remission therapy prior to enrollment was allowed but not required. Pts who had received an allogeneic transplant in this remission were ineligible. Pts were randomized to either receive tipifarnib twice daily (BID) or to observation. The main objective of the study was to compare disease free survival (DFS) in the two groups. The study was designed with 84% power to detect a 76% relative increase in the median DFS from 3.4 months to 6 months (mo). The final analysis was to take place when 111 events had taken place. Between August 2004 and December 2009, 144 pts were accrued to the study. The median age of the pts is 70 (range 28–86). The majority of pts enrolled on the study (67%) were in first CR. Seventy three pts were enrolled onto the treatment arm and 71 pts were enrolled onto the observation arm. When the study initially opened, tipifarnib was given at a dose of 400 mg BID with dose reductions and interruptions as per protocol for toxicity. Based on the first interim analysis, toxicity data, the starting dose was decreased to 300 mg BID. Significant hematologic toxicity was seen in patients at both 300 and 400 mg. The majority of patients experienced >=grade 3 neutropenia or thrombocytopenia. There was 1 episode of febrile neutropenia. Non-hematologic toxicities were minimal. At the time of 110 events (90 relapses and 100 deaths), the final analysis of the study was conducted. The relapse rate was 60.3% on tipifarnib vs 64.8% for observation. Median DFS and 10 and 12 mo DFS and overall survival (OS) are documented in Table 1. Kaplan Meier curves for DFS and OS are presented. As the difference in median DFS is not considered significant (9.3 vs 5.8 mo, log rank p value 0.21), in July 2011, pts and physicians were informed of the lack of evidence of benefit so they could decide if they wished to continue drug. However an unplanned analysis of the data demonstrates a statistically significant improvement in OS at 10 months in pts who received tipifarnib. (70% vs 48%, p=0.05). While the benefit is subsequently lost, given a median survival measured in months, an increase in the number of pts alive and/or without disease at 10–12 mo is of value, particularly in the absence of noteworthy toxicity. Future studies are needed to better determine the role of maintenance therapy in pts with AML. Tipifarnib Observation Median DFS (months) 9.3 (95% CI:5.7, 13.3) 5.8 (95% CI: 3.7, 8.8) p=0.21 OS rate at 10 mo 70% (95% CI: 58%, 79%) 48% (95% CI: 36%, 60%) p=0.05 OS rate at 12 mo 59% (95% CI: 47%, 70%) 44% (95% CI: 32%, 55%) p=0.07 DFS rate at 10 mo 47% (95% CI: 36%, 59%) 32% (95% CI: 21%, 43%) p=0.07 DFS rate at 12 mo 39% (95% CI: 28%, 50%) 30% (95% CI: 20%, 41%) p=0.26 Disclosures: Larson: Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy; Ariad: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 423 Background: Cytogenetic abnormalities at diagnosis are seen in 20–70% of patients with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS). The International Prognostic Scoring System -revised (IPSS-R) classifies these cytogenetic abnormalities into five prognostic groups: very good (del(11q), ΠY with overall survival (OS) of 61 months); good (normal, del(20q), del(5q), del(12p) with OS 49 months); intermediate (+8,7q-, i(17q),+19,+21 with OS 26 months); poor (der(3)q21/q26, −7, complex with 3 abnormalities with OS 16 months); and very poor (complex with >3 abnormalities with OS of 6 months) (Schanz J, JCO 2012, Greenberg P, Blood 2012). Monosomal karyotype (MK) is defined as the presence of two or more autosomal monosomies or a single monosomy associated with a structural abnormality. We have previously shown that MK identifies a prognostically worse subgroup of MDS patients with a complex karyotype (Patnaik M, Leukemia 2010). Objectives: Methods: The Mayo Clinic database for MDS was used to identify patients in whom bone marrow histologic and cytogenetic information was obtained at the time of diagnosis. WHO criteria were used for MDS diagnosis and leukemic transformation. Results: i) Patient characteristics: A total of 1,014 patients met the above-stipulated criteria. Median age of the cohort was 71 years (range: 18–98 years) with 684 (67%) males. 819 patients (81%) had primary MDS with 195 cases (19%) of therapy-related MDS. 759 patients (75%) are dead at a median follow-up of 18 months (range: 0–223 months) with leukemic transformation documented in 125 cases (12%). IPSS-R risk distribution was as follows: very low (n=149, 15%), good (n=261, 26%), intermediate (n=221, 22%), high (n=131, 13%), and very high (n=252, 25%). ii) IPSS-R karyotype (Entire cohort; n=1,014): The five cytogenetic groups by IPSS-R were as follows: very good (n=43, 4%), good (n=577, 57%), intermediate (n=187, 18%), poor (n=83, 8%), and very poor (n=124, 12%). We evaluated the prognostic impact of the above groups by Kaplan Meier and Cox proportional hazards analysis. OS for the five cytogenetic groups was as follows: good (36 months), very good (28 months), intermediate (20 months), poor (13 months), and very poor (6 months) (Figure 1). OS of patients with very good karyotype was significantly better than patients with very poor and poor karyotype (p<0.0001, RR 3.2 and p=0.04, RR 1.6 respectively) but similar to patients with intermediate and good karyotype (p=0.22 and 0.28 respectively). iii) IPSS-R karyotype (Primary MDS; n=819): Cytogenetic risk groups by IPSS-R were as follows: very good (n=38, 5%), good (n=512, 63%), intermediate (n=153, 19%), poor (n=46, 6%), and very poor (n=70, 9%). OS of the five groups was as follows: good (39 months), very good (23 months), intermediate (21.5 months), poor (14.5 months), and very poor (6.5 months). OS of patients with very good karyotype was significantly better than patients with very poor karyotype (p=0.0002, RR 2.5) but similar to patients with poor, intermediate and good karyotype (p=0.23, 0.26 and 0.18 respectively). iv) Monosomal karyotype: MK was identified in 153 (15%) cases of which 4 cases were intermediate, 42 poor, and 107 very poor by IPSS-R. OS of patients with MK was similar to those with very poor karyotype (6 months). In addition, OS of patients with very poor without MK was akin to patients with poor without MK (p=0.21). Furthermore, among primary MDS we identified 83 (8%) cases of MK of which 4 were intermediate, 21 were poor, and 58 very poor by IPSS-R. We confirmed that OS of patients with MK was similar to patients with very poor karyotype (6.5 months). Moreover, survival of patients with very poor without MK was similar to patients with poor without MK (p=0.51). Conclusions: In this independent analysis of 1,014 patients with MDS, IPSS-R cytogenetic risk characterization failed to discriminate between very good, good and intermediate prognostic groups. In addition, patients with very poor without MK have a similar prognosis to patients with poor without MK and should be included in the poor category whereas the presence of MK should warrant inclusion into the very poor risk category. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Abstract 1038 The relationships of inherent disease-related characteristics and of treatment to the nature of APL cell clones that emerge at disease relapse are poorly understood. We studied these relationships in 45 patients who relapsed after ATRA/chemotherapy treatment on the non-arsenic trixoxide arm of intergroup phase III trial C9710 (Powell, et al. Blood, Epub). Four variably-expressed APL cell clonal markers were assessed: PML-RARA ligand binding domain mutations (LBD-M), FLT3 internal tandem duplication mutations (ITD), FLT3 receptor tyrosine kinase mutations (D835; RTK-M) and additional chromosome abnormalities (ACA), i.e., in addition to the hallmark t(15;17). The methods for mutation analysis of PML-RARA and FLT3 have been reported and were RNA transcript-initiated supplemented by selected quantitative FLT3 mutation analyses initiated from DNA. Karyotype data were derived by standard cytogenetic methods. Four patients were excluded from analysis because the sample level of PML-RARA, as determined by quantitative RT-PCR, was insufficient to exclude possible false-negative mutation results. In 41 evaluable patients, the marker incidences were: LBD-M, 44%; ITD, 37%; RTK-M, 12%; ACA (22 tested), 59%. At presentation, the corresponding incidences were: LBD-M, 0% (by high-sensitivity testing a minor subclone of the relapse mutation was found in 2/7 patients tested); ITD, 43% (37 tested); RTK-M, 22% (37 tested); ACA, 24% (34 tested). The low frequency of RTK-M impeded further analysis. The other markers, using relapse determinations, were assessed for potential associations between the markers and with the following parameters: age, sex, presenting WBC count, PML-RARA type, time to relapse, relapse on or off ATRA treatment (on = taking or within 30 days of discontinuing) and post-relapse survival. The most essential positive findings are summarized below:Association of Marker with Parameter or Other MarkerCases with ParameterCases without Parameterp-valuePretreatment parameters: LBD-M with WBC count < 5,000/uL12/18 (67%)7/23 (30%)0.030 ITD with WBC count >10,000/uL10/15 (67%)5/26 (19%)0.006 ITD with S-form PML-RARA15/15 (100%)10/26 (38%)<0.0001Relapse parameters: ITD with lack of ACA1/7 (14%)12/15 (80%)0.007 LBD with relapse On-ATRA11/18 (61%)7/23 (30%)0.064 Off-ATRA only: LBD with lack of ITD0/7 (0%)9/16 (56%)0.019 The results confirm reports, which tested pretreatment samples, of a strong association between FLT3ITD mutations present at relapse and high WBC count and S-form PML-RARA. At relapse, there was, also, divergent selection of ITD-harboring vs ACA-harboring clones. LBD-M occurred more frequently in patients with low presenting WBC counts. They, also, occurred in patients who relapsed while on ATRA, consistent with an ATRA selective role for clones harboring LBD mutations. A significant segregation of patients with LBD-M or ITD was observed after relapse off ATRA treatment (p = 0.019), while no segregation was observed in overall relapse patients (p = 0.346) or after relapse on ATRA (p = 0.316). In 2 patients who relapsed on ATRA, quantitative analysis indicated that LBD-M and ITD mutations must be present in the same APL cell clone. There were no significant survival differences related to any clonal marker (post-relapse survival = 66%). Although the small number of cases is cautionary, the overall data suggest that LBD-M may have an overriding, dominant APL clone selection role in relapse that occurs on ATRA therapy. Other inherent clinicopathologic characteristics of APL may predispose to divergent molecular pathways of disease progression and relapse in patients alternatively harboring clones with LBD-M or ITD after the termination of ATRA selection pressure. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Abstract 1802 Poster Board I-828 Background Heterogeneity in multiple myeloma (MM) leads to disparate outcomes with a wide variation in overall survival (OS). Based upon the evidence predominantly gathered from newly diagnosed patients treated with standard chemotherapy and/or transplantation, the current Mayo (mSMART) prognostic model uses a combination of metaphase cytogenetics, fluorescence in-situ hybridization (FISH) and plasma cell labeling index (PCLI) for risk-stratification at diagnosis of MM. The objective of our study was to evaluate the significance of this stratification model in the era of novel therapies, and to assess the independent prognostic value of each of the components in the model. Methods Data were abstracted from a cohort of 1556 consecutive patients with MM who presented to our institution between January 1999 and March 2009 within ninety days of diagnosis of MM A total of three hundred and eighty six patients had been evaluated with conventional cytogenetics near diagnosis in addition to interphase FISH. Out of this cohort, three hundred and sixty six patients had availability of all the three tests, including the slide-based PCLI. High-risk MM was defined as presence of any one or more of the following: cytogenetics: hypodiploidy, monosomy of chromosome 13 or deletion 13q ; FISH: deletion of p53 (locus 17p13) or immunoglobulin heavy chain (IgH) translocations, t(4;14) (p16.3;q32) or t(14;16)(q32;q23); PCLI ≥3%. Survival estimates were created using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared by log-rank tests. The impact of each of the three tests was assessed by a multivariate (MV) analysis using Cox proportional hazards model. Results The median OS of the cohort of 366 patients was 65 months from presentation. One hundred and twelve (31%) patients were deemed high risk by any one or more of the three tests: Metaphase cytogenetics, FISH or PCLI (current mSMART definition of high-risk MM). The median OS of high risk patients was 52 months versus 71 months for standard-risk (P=0.007). We then studied the prognostic value of the three tests separately. Patients classified as high risk by FISH had a median OS of 35 months versus 65 months for the standard risk, HR= 2.3, P<0.001. Similarly, cytogenetics alone was also able to classify patients into high and standard risk with a comparable HR of 2.1 (P=0.008, median survival 37 vs. 64 months). In contrast, PCLI did not have a significant prognostic value (HR =1.41, P=0.32). This was confirmed on multivariate analysis in a model that included all 3 tests. FISH (HR=2.36, P=0.001) and cytogenetics (HR=1.99; P=0.017) emerged as independent determinants of prognosis in the multivariable analysis, while PCLI (HR=1.03, P=0.93) did not provide additional prognostic value. We then examined whether the prognostic value of FISH contributed additionally in patients classified into high and standard risk by conventional cytogenetics, and vice versa. Those classified as high risk by cytogenetics (n=44, 11 %), were further categorized into 2 groups by additional prognostic information obtained by FISH (median survival 18 vs. 52 months; P=0.005). Similarly, those classified as standard risk by cytogenetics (n=342, 89 %), were further categorized into 2 groups (median survival 52 vs. 71 months; P=0.017) by additional FISH-based stratification. Similarly, high-risk patients defined by FISH (n=65, 17 %) were further classified into 2 groups with significant difference in median OS (18 vs. 52 months, P=0.004), based on the presence or absence of high-risk features on cytogenetics. In contrast, no additional prognostic information was gained by cytogenetics in patients who were stratified as standard risk by FISH alone (n=321, 83%). Conclusion Our study validates high risk features defined by FISH and conventional cytogenetics in the mSMART risk stratification model among patients treated after the introduction of novel therapies. Either test identifies a high risk cohort with a hazard ratio of approximately 2 (median survival ∼37 versus ∼65 months). In patients known to have high risk disease by one of the two tests, knowledge of the other appears to add additional prognostic value. Disclosures Fonseca: Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Otsuka, Genzyme and Medtronic: Consultancy. Gertz:celgene, millennium: Honoraria. Dispenzieri:celgene: Research Funding. Kumar:celgene, genzyme, millennium, novartis, bayer: Research Funding; genzyme: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Abstract Abstract 3790 Background: Chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) is a clonal stem cell disorder characterized by: persistent peripheral blood (PB) monocytosis (>1 × 10(9)/L), absence of BCR-ABL1 fusion, absence of rearrangement of the PDGFRA/B genes, <20% bone marrow (BM) & PB blasts, and dysplasia involving one or more myeloid cell lines. It is clinically considered to be an overlapping syndrome with myelodysplastic and myeloproliferative features. The natural history and prognostic features of CMML are not well defined with the MD Anderson prognostic score (MDAPS) and the Spanish risk stratification by cytogenetics being the two major prognostic tools currently being used in clinical practice. Methods: 227 patients with WHO defined CMML were seen at the Mayo Clinic from 1997 through 2007. All patients underwent bone marrow (BM) examination and cytogenetic evaluation at diagnosis. We evaluated the prognostic relevance of several clinical and laboratory parameters including those previously identified by the MDAPS (Blood 2002;99:840) and the Spanish cytogenetic risk stratification (Haematologica 2011;96:375). Results: Among the 227 study patients, 153 (67%) were males and median age was 71 years (range, 17–90 years). There were 192 (85%) patients with CMML-1 & the remainder had CMML-2. At a median follow-up of 15 months, 166 (73%) deaths and 33 (14.5%) leukemic transformations were documented. Median survivals were 22 months for CMML-1 and 14 months for CMML-2. In univariate analysis, significant risk factors for survival included decreased hemoglobin level, decreased platelet count and increased levels of white blood cells (WBC), absolute neutrophils (ANC), absolute monocytes (AMC), absolute lymphocytes (ALC), PB blasts, BM blasts and presence of circulating immature myeloid cells (IMC; inclusive of PB blasts). However, on multivariable analysis that included the aforementioned Spanish cytogenetic risk stratification, only increased AMC (>10 × 10(9)/L, RR 2.5, 95% CI 1.7–3.8), presence of circulating IMC (RR 2.0, 95% CI 1.4–2.7), decreased hemoglobin (<10 g/dL; RR 1.6, 99% CI 1.2–2.2), and decreased platelet count (<100 × 10(9)/L; RR 1.4, 99% CI 1.0–1.9) retained significance. Using these four independent risk factors, we prepared a new prognostic risk model that performed better than both the MDAPS and the Spanish cytogenetic risk models (Figure). The Mayo risk model was also predictive of leukemic transformation: high risk RR 4.9 (95% CI 1.9–12.8) and intermediate risk RR 2.6 (1.1–5.9). Individual parameters of independent significance for leukemic transformation included PB blast count and AMC >10 × 10(9)/L. Conclusions: Absolute monocyte count is the strongest predictor of survival in CMML. Other independent risk factors include circulating immature myeloid cells, anemia and thrombocytopenia. A risk model based on these four risk factors is effective in predicting both overall and leukemia-free survival and outperforms both the MDAPS and risk stratification by cytogenetics. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.