Citations

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.

Abstract PAC203 is a randomized dose-finding study of pacritinib, an oral JAK2/IRAK1 inhibitor, in patients with advanced myelofibrosis who are intolerant of or resistant to ruxolitinib. Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to pacritinib 100 mg once per day, 100 mg twice per day, or 200 mg twice per day. Enhanced eligibility criteria, monitoring, and dose modifications were implemented to mitigate risk of cardiac and hemorrhagic events. Efficacy was based on ≥35% spleen volume response (SVR) and ≥50% reduction in the 7-component total symptom score (TSS) through week 24. Of 161 patients, 73% were intolerant of and 76% had become resistant to ruxolitinib; 50% met criteria for both. Severe thrombocytopenia (platelet count <50 × 103/μL) was present in 44%. SVR rates were highest with 200 mg twice per day (100 mg once per day, 0%; 100 mg twice per day, 1.8%; 200 mg twice per day, 9.3%), particularly among patients with baseline platelet counts <50 × 103/μL (17%; 4 of 24). Although TSS response rate was similar across doses (100 mg once per day, 7.7%; 100 mg twice per day, 7.3%; 200 mg twice per day, 7.4%), median percent reduction in TSS suggested a dose-response relationship (–3%, −16%, and −27%, respectively). Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic modeling based on all available data showed greatest SVR and TSS reduction at 200 mg twice per day compared with lower doses. Common adverse events were gastrointestinal events, thrombocytopenia, and anemia. There was no excess of grade ≥3 hemorrhagic or cardiac events at 200 mg twice per day. Pacritinib 200 mg twice per day demonstrated clinical activity and an acceptable safety profile and was selected as the recommended dose for a pivotal phase 3 study in patients with myelofibrosis and severe thrombocytopenia. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT03165734.

AbstractActivation of the P53 pathway through inhibition of MDM2 using nutlins has shown clinical promise in the treatment of solid tumors and hematologic malignancies. There is concern, however, that nutlin therapy might stimulate the emergence or expansion of TP53-mutated subclones. We recently published the results of a phase 1 trial of idasanutlin in patients with polycythemia vera (PV) that revealed tolerability and clinical activity. Here, we present data indicating that idasanutlin therapy is associated with expansion of TP53 mutant subclones. End-of-study sequencing of patients found that 5 patients in this trial harbored 12 TP53 mutations; however, only 1 patient had been previously identified as having a TP53 mutation at baseline. To identify the origin of these mutations, further analysis of raw sequencing data of baseline samples was performed and revealed that a subset of these mutations was present at baseline and expanded during treatment with idasanutlin. Follow-up samples were obtained from 4 of 5 patients in this cohort, and we observed that after cessation of idasanutlin, the variant allele frequency (VAF) of 8 of 9 TP53 mutations decreased. Furthermore, disease progression to myelofibrosis or myeloproliferative neoplasm blast phase was not observed in any of these patients after 19- to 32-month observation. These data suggest that idasanutlin treatment may promote transient TP53 mutant clonal expansion. A larger study geared toward high-resolution detection of low VAF mutations is required to explore whether patients acquire de novo TP53 mutations after idasanutlin therapy.

Abstract Comparative outcomes of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) for BCR-ABL1− myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) in blast phase (MPN-BP) vs de novo acute myeloid leukemia (AML), and AML with prior myelodysplastic syndromes (MDSs; post-MDS AML), are unknown. Using the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) database, we compared HCT outcomes in 177 MPN-BP patients with 4749 patients with de novo AML, and 1104 patients with post-MDS AML, using multivariate regression analysis in 2 separate comparisons. In a multivariate Cox model, no difference in overall survival (OS) or relapse was observed in patients with MPN-BP vs de novo AML with active leukemia at HCT. Patients with MPN-BP in remission had inferior OS in comparison with de novo AML in remission (hazard ratio [HR], 1.40 [95% confidence interval [CI], 1.12-1.76]) due to higher relapse rate (HR, 2.18 [95% CI, 1.69-2.80]). MPN-BP patients had inferior OS (HR, 1.19 [95% CI, 1.00-1.43]) and increased relapse (HR, 1.60 [95% CI, 1.31-1.96]) compared with post-MDS AML. Poor-risk cytogenetics were associated with increased relapse in both comparisons. Peripheral blood grafts were associated with decreased relapse in MPN-BP and post-MDS AML (HR, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.57-0.86]). Nonrelapse mortality (NRM) was similar between MPN-BP vs de novo AML, and MPN-BP vs post-MDS AML. Total-body irradiation–based myeloablative conditioning was associated with higher NRM in both comparisons. Survival of MPN-BP after HCT is inferior to de novo AML in remission and post-MDS AML due to increased relapse. Relapse-prevention strategies are required to optimize HCT outcomes in MPN-BP.

AbstractBackgroundPhiladelphia chromosome negative myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs), including essential thrombocythemia, polycythemia vera, and myelofibrosis, have severe function‐limiting symptom burden that is experienced by the majority of patients. Previous studies have suggested that depression may be present in over a quarter of MPN patients, but to date no studies have evaluated the relationship between depression and other variables such as symptoms.MethodsA 70‐item internet based survey regarding fatigue and mood symptoms was developed by a multidisciplinary team of MPN investigators, patients and patient advocates including Patient Health Questionnaire and the Myeloproliferative Neoplasm Symptom Assessment Form was completed by over 1300 patients with MPN diagnosis.ResultsThere were 309 respondents (23%) with PHQ‐2 scores ≥ 3. In this analysis, we found worse systemic symptom burden in individuals reporting depressive symptoms.ConclusionThis analysis suggests the importance of depression in contributing to as well as confounding symptomatology in MPN patients, and suggests that this critical variable should also be addressed by clinicians and researchers alike when comprehensively assessing symptom burden etiologies.

TPS6641 Background: Hydroxyurea is widely used to treat patients with high-risk PV and ET. However, some patients are either clinically resistant to hydroxyurea or have unacceptable side effects, supporting the need for active therapeutic options in this setting. SAR302503 is an orally administered selective JAK-2 inhibitor that reduced symptom burden and provided a durable clinical benefit, including a reduction in the JAK2V617F allele burden, with an acceptable safety profile in a Phase 1/2 trial of patients with primary myelofibrosis (MF), post-PV MF, or post-ET MF (J Clin Oncol 2011;29:789; Pardanani, ASH 2011; Abs 3838). Based on the results in MF, in October 2011 we initiated a Phase 2 trial to evaluate SAR302503 for the treatment of patients with PV and ET who are resistant or intolerant to hydroxyurea (NCT01420783; ARD12042). Methods: Eligibility criteria include age of at least 18 years, ECOG PS 0–2, and hydroxyurea resistant PV or ET as defined by European LeukemiaNet Consensus Criteria (Blood 2009;113:4829). Patients are being randomized (1:1:1) to receive 100, 200, or 400 mg of SAR302503 orally once daily in consecutive 28-day cycles for at least 8 cycles in the absence of progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end points will be assessed after the completion of 8 cycles and are: for PV, the proportion of patients maintaining a hematocrit below 45% without phlebotomy for at least 3 months; for ET, the proportion of patients with a platelet count lower than 400 × 109/L for at least 3 months. Secondary objectives include safety, response rate, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics as measured by JAK2V617F allele burden and STAT3 phosphorylation inhibition, assessment of disease-related symptoms, and quality of life. Enrollment of the planned total of 90 patients is ongoing at approximately 45 sites globally. Twelve patients have been enrolled as of January 2012.

Treatment of polycythemia vera (PV) with the Murine Double Minute 2 (MDM2) antagonist, idasanutlin, in a phase 1 trial was reported by our group to be well tolerated with a high overall response rate (Mascarenhas et al, Blood. 2019 Jun 5). A global, phase 2 trial is currently underway evaluating idasanutlin in hydroxyurea (HU) resistant/intolerant PV patients (NCT03287245). MDM2, a negative regulator of TP53 is upregulated in PV CD34+ cells and inhibition of MDM2 targets PV hematopoietic stem/progenitor cells (HSPC) (Lu et al, Blood. 2014;124(5):771-90). Additional trials of MDM2 antagonists have shown promise, however, there is concern that these agents have the potential to induce TP53 mutations or promote expansion of TP53 mutated clones. Resistance to MDM2 inhibitors has been evaluated in solid tumor cell lines and attributed to either the emergence of de novoTP53 mutations or the selection of TP53 mutated clones. (Michaelis et al, Cell Death Dis. 2011;2:e243; Skalniak et al, Cancers. 2018;10(11)). The effect of MDM2 inhibition on TP53 mutant clones is of particular interest in myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs). TP53 mutations have been reported with a low allele burden in ~15% of chronic MPN patients (Kubesova et al, Leukemia. 2018;32(2):450-61), however, TP53 loss of heterozygosity and rapid expansion of TP53 mutant clones is associated with transformation to blast phase (Lundberg et al, Blood 2014,123:2220-8). As reported, in the idasanutlin PV trial, 1/13 patients were identified to have a baseline pathogenic TP53 mutation in hematopoietic cells (VAF 5.5%), using a deep sequencing assay with a limit of detection (LOD) of VAF 0.5%. This patient was a non-responder to idasanutlin and upon treatment had an increasing JAK2V617F and TP53 mutant VAF. End of study hematopoietic cell specimens of all patients were deep sequenced (LOD 0.1%) and revealed that 4 additional patients harbored detectable TP53 mutations after idasanutlin treatment with VAF ranging from 1-12%. In each sample, 1-5 unique TP53 mutations were identified, all within the hotspot domain of the TP53 gene. Deeper sequencing of baseline and follow-up samples revealed these mutations were present at a subclonal level (VAF 0.1-5.5%) and increased over time, indicating that treatment with the MDM2 antagonist promoted expansion of already existing TP53 mutant clones (Table 1, Figure 1). None of the patients who lacked a TP53 mutation at baseline developed a TP53 mutant clone with idasanutlin treatment. There was no clear association of presence of TP53 mutations with prior HU, anagrelide or interferon exposure. There has been careful monitoring of patients to determine whether the expanding TP53 clone has clinical ramifications. Patients were on study for a median of 54 weeks (23-131). The only patient who exemplified resistance to idasanutlin was the single patient with a high burden TP53 mutation (37%). All other patients were taken off study due to patient choice/toxicity. Furthermore, all TP53 mutant and non-mutant patients have had stable disease with no evidence of progression to MF or AML. Sequencing of 2 patients post-discontinuation of idasanutlin revealed that the VAF of the TP53 mutant clones decreased since the agent was discontinued. Updated patient molecular data post-treatment discontinuation will be reported at the meeting. To investigate whether idasanutlin induces de novo TP53 mutations in PV myeloid cells we performed long term HSPC cultures. Mononuclear cells from 6 distinct PV patients were treated continuously with idasanutlin (500 nM) over ~6 weeks and DNA from both treated and untreated colonies were analyzed using next generation sequencing with a LOD of 2% VAF and no TP53 mutations were detected. The combined in vitro and clinical data reveals that treatment with an MDM2 antagonist is not associated with the emergence of de novoTP53 mutations but rather the expansion of prior existing TP53 clones. This does not appear to have clinical repercussions, however, close monitoring of these patients is essential. We recommend that patients be screened for TP53 mutations prior to treatment with an MDM2 antagonist and that if present the TP53 mutant VAF be followed during their treatment course. Resistance to MDM2 inhibition is likely dependent on the TP53 mutant VAF and further studies will need to clarify the ideal dosing schedule of MDM2 antagonists and/or combinatorial therapy to prohibit TP53 mutant clonal expansion. Disclosures Houldsworth: Cancer Genertics: Other: stock in; Sema4: Employment. Rossi:Sema4: Employment. Kiladjian:AOP Orphan: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding. Rampal:Agios, Apexx, Blueprint Medicines, Celgene, Constellation, and Jazz: Consultancy; Constellation, Incyte, and Stemline Therapeutics: Research Funding. Mascarenhas:Incyte: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Merus: Research Funding; Pharmaessentia: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Hoffman:Merus: Research Funding.

Introduction: Approximately two-thirds of patients with primary or post-essential thrombocythemia/polycythemia vera myelofibrosis (MF) have anemia, many of whom require red blood cell (RBC) transfusions. In this heavily transfused population there are severely limited treatment options; effective treatment for anemia in MF is a critically unmet medical need. Luspatercept is a first-in-class erythroid maturation agent which binds to select TGF-β superfamily ligands to reduce aberrant Smad2/3 signaling and enhance late-stage erythropoiesis. Here we report the interim results of the ongoing open-label, phase 2 trial evaluating luspatercept in patients with MF and anemia. Methods: Seventy-four patients with MF and anemia were enrolled, including 41 not receiving concomitant ruxolitinib at study entry who received either no RBC transfusions (n = 20; Cohort 1) or 2-4 RBC U/28 d in the 12 wks prior to treatment (n = 21; Cohort 2). Thirty-three enrolled patients were receiving a stable dose of ruxolitinib for at least 16 wks, of which 14 were not receiving RBC transfusions (Cohort 3A) and 19 were (Cohort 3B). Patients in Cohorts 3A and 3B received a median dose of ruxolitinib of 20 mg/d (range, 5-50 mg/d) for a median of 41 and 43 wks, respectively. Patients received luspatercept every 21 d at a starting dose of 1.0 mg/kg in doses escalating up to 1.75 mg/kg. The primary endpoint in patients not receiving transfusions was a hemoglobin (Hb) increase ≥ 1.5 g/L at every assessment from baseline for ≥ 12 consecutive wks, within the first 24 wks on study. In patients receiving RBC transfusions, the primary endpoint was RBC transfusion-independence (RBC-TI) for ≥ 12 consecutive wks, within the first 24 wks on study. Additional endpoints included proportion of patients achieving mean Hb increase ≥ 1.5 g/dL in Cohorts 1 and 3A, and ≥ 50% decrease in RBC transfusions (minimum 4 RBC U decrease from baseline) in Cohorts 2 and 3B, with both responses lasting ≥ 12 consecutive wks, within 24 wks of study entry. Intent-to-treat (ITT) data were analyzed as of May 10, 2019. Results: Median age was 71 y (range, 50-88 y) and 42 (57%) were male. Median interval from MF diagnosis to study entry was 3.3 y (range, 19 d-13.5 y). Seven patients were Dynamic International Prognostic Scoring System (DIPSS) intermediate-1, 58 were intermediate-2, and 8 were high risk. Median Hb concentration at study entry was 8.8 g/dL (range, 6.7-9.8 g/dL) for Cohort 1 and 8.6 g/dL (range, 6.7-9.1 g/dL) for Cohort 3A. Patients in Cohort 2 received a median of 2.7 RBC U/28 d (range, 1-5 U/28 d) and patients in Cohort 3B received a median of 2.3 RBC U/28 d (range, 2-4 U/28 d). Patients received a median of 8 cycles of luspatercept (range, 1-24 cycles). Efficacy data are displayed in the Table, per ITT data. Two of twenty (10%) and 3/14 (21%) patients in Cohorts 1 and 3A, respectively, achieved an absolute Hb increase ≥ 1.5 g/dL at every measurement from baseline over any consecutive 12 wks. Two of twenty-one (10%) and 6/19 (32%) patients in Cohorts 2 and 3B, respectively, achieved RBC-TI over any consecutive 12 wks. Median duration of Hb response was 20 wks (range, 12-27 wks) in Cohort 1 and 12 wks (range, 12-13 wks) in Cohort 3A. Median duration of RBC-TI was 23 wks (range, 16-31 wks) in Cohort 2 and 32 wks (range, 12-65 wks) in Cohort 3B. Three (15%) and 8 (57%) patients in Cohorts 1 and 3A, respectively, achieved a mean Hb increase of ≥ 1.5 g/dL. Eight (38%) and 10 (53%) patients in Cohorts 2 and 3B, respectively, achieved a ≥ 50% reduction in RBC transfusion burden from baseline. Ruxolitinib exposure remained stable throughout the 24-wk treatment period in both Cohorts 3A and 3B. There was no difference in spleen size between responders and non-responders. Four (5%) patients had grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (AEs). There were no treatment-related deaths. Treatment-related AEs occurring in ≥ 3% of patients were hypertension (11%), bone pain (8%), and diarrhea (4%). Seven (9%) patients had ≥ 1 AE resulting in treatment discontinuation; 23 (31%) remain on study. Conclusions: The initial results from this ongoing study suggest clinically significant activity of luspatercept in patients with MF-associated anemia, including those receiving concomitant ruxolitinib. A minority of AEs were grade 3-4 in severity, consistent with previous studies in MDS and beta-thalassemia. Disclosures Gerds: CTI Biopharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy; Imago Biosciences: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Research Funding. Vannucchi:Italfarmaco: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; CTI: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene Corporation: 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. Passamonti:Roche: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Kremyanskaya:La Jolla: Consultancy; Incyte, Celgene, Constellation, Protagonist.: Research Funding. Gotlib:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Promedior: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kartos: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Research Funding. Ribrag:BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AZ: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; argenX: Research Funding; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Infinity: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Epizyme: Honoraria, Research Funding; MSD: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Mead:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; CTI: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel/accommodation expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers-Squibb: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy. Harrison:Sierra Oncology: Honoraria; Gilead: Speakers Bureau; CTI: Speakers Bureau; Roche: Honoraria; Promedior: Honoraria; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; AOP: Honoraria; Shire: Speakers Bureau. Mesa:Shire: Honoraria; Promedior: Research Funding; Genotech: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses; LaJolla: Consultancy; AbbVie: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; CTI: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Samus: Research Funding; Baxalta: Consultancy; Galena Biopharma: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Consultancy; PharmaEssentia: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy; Pfizer: Research Funding; AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses; Incyte: Other: travel, accommodations, expenses, Research Funding. Kiladjian:AOP Orphan: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy. Gale:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Laadem:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Pariseau:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Gerike:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Zhang:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Linde:Abbott Laboratories, Inc.: Equity Ownership; Acceleron Pharma: Employment, Equity Ownership; Fibrogen, Inc.: Equity Ownership. Reynolds:Acceleron Pharma: Employment, Equity Ownership. Verstovsek:Gilead: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; CTI BioPharma Corp: Research Funding; Genetech: Research Funding; Blueprint Medicines Corp: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Research Funding; Pharma Essentia: Research Funding; Astrazeneca: Research Funding; Ital Pharma: Research Funding; Protaganist Therapeutics: Research Funding; Constellation: Consultancy; Pragmatist: Consultancy; Roche: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: Luspatercept is an investigational therapy that is not approved for any use in any country. Luspatercept is currently being evaluated for potential use in patients with anemia due to myelodysplastic syndromes, beta-thalassemia, or myelofibrosis.

Abstract Background: Polycythemia vera (PV) is characterized by erythrocytosis and overactive JAK/STAT activity. The RESPONSE trial compared ruxolitinib (RUX), a JAK1/JAK2 inhibitor, with best available therapy (BAT) in patients (pts) with PV intolerant of or resistant to hydroxyurea according to modified European LeukemiaNet criteria. RUX was superior to BAT in achieving the primary endpoint (21% vs 1%; P<0.0001), and 60% of pts randomized to RUX achieved protocol-defined hematocrit (HCT) control through Wk 32 vs 20% of pts randomized to BAT (J Clin Oncol32:5s, 2014; suppl, abstract 7026). However, the actual phlebotomy rate between Wks 8−32 was only 20% in pts randomized to RUX compared with 62% in pts randomized to BAT, and 85% of pts in the RUX arm continued to receive treatment at the median 81-wk follow-up, suggesting most pts derived some benefit from RUX. Therefore, an analysis was conducted to evaluate the clinical efficacy of RUX in pts who did and did not achieve protocol-defined HCT control. Methods: Phlebotomy-dependent PV pts with splenomegaly, aged ≥18 years, and resistant to or intolerant of HU were enrolled. Pts were required to have HCT between 40%−45% 14 days prior to randomization; those who did not could enter a phlebotomy control period to achieve a HCT in this range within 14 days of randomization. Eligible pts were randomized 1:1 to RUX or BAT. BAT pts could cross over to receive RUX from Wk 32 if they had not met the primary endpoint, or after Wk 32 due to protocol-defined disease progression. The primary composite endpoint comprised HCT control and a ≥35% reduction from baseline in spleen volume (SV) at Wk 32. HCT control was defined as lack of phlebotomy eligibility between Wks 8−32 with no more than 1 phlebotomy eligibility between randomization and Wk 8. Phlebotomy eligibility was based on protocol-defined HCT values (regardless of receipt of phlebotomy), and pts with missing data or assessments outside of protocol-defined time windows were considered non-responders. In pts who were HCT control non-responders (HCT-N) as defined by protocol, time to second phlebotomy eligibility was evaluated. For this analysis, pts without phlebotomy eligibility were excluded and phlebotomies in the first 8 wks were not considered. Patient-reported outcomes were evaluated in both HCT control responders (HCT-R) and HCT-N, including the 14-item modified Myeloproliferative Neoplasm Symptom Assessment Form (MPN-SAF) and the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC). Results: Of 222 randomized pts (RUX, n=110; BAT, n=112), most were male (RUX, 60%; BAT, 71%) and the median age (range) was similar between treatment arms (RUX, 62.0 [34.0–90.0]; BAT, 60.0 [33.0–84.0]). Although pts had a HCT between 40% and 45% within 14 days prior to randomization (with or without phlebotomy), 24% of pts had a HCT >45% on Day 1 (similar between treatment arms) illustrating that many pts have poor HCT control over short intervals of observation. RUX treatment resulted in long-term benefits on HCT levels, even in pts who did not achieve protocol-defined HCT control through Wk 32. Among the RUX HCT-R group, the probability of maintaining HCT response was 97% at 48 wks and 87% at 80 wks. Most BAT pts crossed over to receive RUX immediately after the Wk 32 visit (84% between Wks 32 and 48). In the RUX HCT-N pts, the median time to subsequent phlebotomy eligibility was 52 wks, compared with 21 wks for BAT HCT-N pts (Figure). Compared with the entire BAT group, more RUX-R and RUX-N pts had a ≥50% improvement in the MPN-SAF total symptom score at Wk 32 (RUX-N, 38%; RUX-R, 40%; BAT, 4%). Median changes from baseline at Wk 32 in key symptoms such as tiredness (RUX-N; −50%; RUX-R, −49%; BAT, −4%), itching (RUX-N, −88%; RUX-R, −97%; BAT, −2%), and night sweats (RUX-N, −100%; RUX-R, −97%; BAT, 4%) were also greater among RUX-R and RUX-N pts than BAT pts. RUX-N and RUX-R pts were also more likely to consider their symptoms to be “much improved” or “very much improved” on the PGIC compared with BAT pts (RUX-N, 57%; RUX-R, 74%; BAT, 13%). Conclusion: Among pts receiving RUX who did not achieve protocol-defined HCT control, the median time to subsequent phlebotomy eligibility was 1 year. In contrast, pts on BAT had a median time to subsequent phlebotomy eligibility of 21 wks. Furthermore, pts in the RUX arm achieved meaningful improvements in PV-related symptoms, regardless of meeting the endpoint of HCT control, while pts treated with BAT showed worsening or no improvement. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Verstovsek: Incyte Corporation: Research Funding. Off Label Use: Ruxolitinib is a JAK1/JAK2 inhibitor approved for the treatment of patients with intermediate or high-risk myelofibrosis, including primary myelofibrosis, post polycythemia vera myelofibrosis, and post-essential thrombocythemia myelofibrosis. Kiladjian:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Mesa:Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; CTI: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Eli Lilly: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Jones:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. He:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Li:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Employment, Equity Ownership. Habr:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Employment, Equity Ownership. Vannucchi:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.