Citations

Abstract Background SGI-110 is a second generation HMA formulated as a dinucleotide of decitabine (DAC) and deoxyguanosine. The compound is delivered as a small volume, pharmaceutically stable subcutaneous (SQ) injection which allows longer half-life and more extended DAC exposure than DAC intravenous infusion. This pharmacokinetic profile offers the potential for improved biological and clinical activity and safety over currently available HMAs (Kantarjian et al. ASH, 2012). Methods A randomized Phase 1-2 first-in-human PK/PD-guided, dose-escalation study was conducted in patients with relapsed or refractory intermediate or high-risk MDS or AML. Patients were initially randomized to one of two SQ regimens - Dailyx5 or Weeklyx3, for 28-day courses. Subsequently, a Twice Weeklyx3 regimen (Monday, Thursday) was added for evaluation based on emerging LINE-1 demethylation data from the Weeklyx3 regimen. Results 93 patients (74 AML, 19 MDS) were treated in the dose escalation phase: 44, 34, and 15 patients were treated in the Dailyx5, Weeklyx3, and the Twice Weeklyx3 regimens, respectively. Across the three regimens, median age was 70 years (range, 29–86), 68% male, and 87% had ECOG PS of 0-1. The median number of prior regimens was 3 (range, 1–9) and 68% of patients had prior HMA treatment (59% AML, and 100% MDS). Of the 74 AML patients treated, 31 (42%) had secondary AML including antecedent MDS. Patients received a median of 2 courses of SGI-110 (range, 1-20). LINE-1 demethylation data at the 2 highest dose levels which were well tolerated and evaluated for all 3 regimens (60 and 90 mg/m2) are shown in the figure below. The Dailyx5 regimen demonstrated the most potent average LINE-1 demethylation, while the Twice Weeklyx3 achieved the most prolonged LINE-1 demethylation. The least potent demethylation was seen with the Weeklyx3 regimen. There was no additional demethylation at the 90 mg/m2 dose compared to 60 mg/m2in all 3 regimens. Responses were reported according to the IWG Criteria 2006 (MDS)/2003 (AML). Complete remissions were observed in 5 AML patients (2CRs, 1CRp, and 2CRi). Clinical responses (2 mCR and 3 HI-E, 1 HI-N, 1 HI-P) were observed in 6 MDS patients, all of whom had been previously treated with HMA. All AML responses and both mCR in MDS patients achieved ≥10% LINE-1 demethylation. Safety is reported based on Adverse Events (AEs) as graded by the CTCAE v4 criteria. Across regimens, the Twice Weeklyx3 demonstrated an increased number of related AEs compared to the other regimens. The most commonly reported related AEs ≥ 10% in the Dailyx5 regimen (injection site pain, thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, anemia, fatigue), Weeklyx3 regimen (injection site pain and diarrhea), and Twice Weeklyx3 regimen (injection site pain, injection site reaction, fatigue, dizziness, febrile neutropenia, neutropenia, anemia, and thrombocytopenia). Conclusions SQ SGI-110 is a potent HMA using all 3 regimens evaluated. The most potent hypomethylation was achieved with Dailyx5 dosing and the most prolonged hypomethylation was achieved using the Twice Weeklyx3 regimen. All 3 regimens were well tolerated. Clinical responses were observed in heavily pretreated patients, including those with prior HMA exposure. These results support the ongoing Phase 2 expansion study investigating the Dailyx5 dosing schedule in patients with MDS and AML who are either HMA treatment naïve or previously treated with HMAs. Disclosures: Roboz: Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding. Issa:Astex Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding. Rizzieri:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Stock:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. O'Connell:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Yee:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Tibes:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Griffiths:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Walsh:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Feldman:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Ritchie:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Rao:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Larson:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Garcia-Manero:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Ravandi:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Jabbour:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Cortes:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Schimmer:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Mesa:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Blum:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Chung:Astex Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Research Funding. Naim:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Taverna:Astex Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Employment. Hao:Astex Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Employment. Choy:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Azab:Astex Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Employment. Kantarjian:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 4527 Introduction: The prognosis for pts with intermediate or high risk AML remains dismal, with relapse rates typically in the 60–80% range after treatment with chemotherapy alone. While allo-SCT can decrease the risk of relapse to 10–20%, widespread use of this modality is limited by relatively high rates of non-relapse mortality (NRM), often due to severe acute and/or chronic GVHD. Attenuation of severe GVHD, without a concomitant increase in relapse or NRM, should improve outcomes and result in cure of a larger fraction of AML pts. We therefore investigated the use of in-vivo T-cell depletion with r-ATG in pts with intermediate- or high-risk AML but without active leukemia at the time of allo-SCT. Patients and Methods: Pts (n = 43) were included in this retrospective analysis if they were between 18 and 65 years of age and had no evidence of active AML at the time of allo-SCT (see Table). All pts had 1 or more high-risk features: 1) adverse or intermediate risk cytogenetics (without NPM1 mutation if cytogenetically normal); 2) therapy-related or secondary AML; 3) high WBC count at diagnosis; 4) failure to achieve CR after 1 cycle of induction; or 5) not in CR1 at allo-SCT. Among the 43 pts, 10 received grafts from related donors, 14 from 10/10 matched unrelated donors (URDs), and 19 from mismatched URDs (9/10, n = 11; 8/10, n = 8). All pts received r-ATG according to institutional standard operating policy, with doses ranging from 2.5 – 10 mg/kg depending on donor type and degree of mismatch. All transplants were performed using PBSC. Additional GVHD prophylaxis included tacrolimus plus either methotrexate or mycophenolate mofetil. Results: The median age was 47 (range 20 – 65), and median follow-up for surviving pts is 12 (range 1 – 66) months. As of 8/5/11, 39 pts were alive, and 4 had died from multiorgan failure (n = 1), relapse (n = 1), GVHD (n = 1), and veno-occlusive disease (n = 1). The 2-year estimate of PFS is 84.7% (Fig. 1). The 2-year cumulative incidence of relapse is 6.8% (2 pts, days 97 and 147), and of non-relapse mortality 9.4%. Three pts developed severe (grades III-IV) acute GVHD by day 100 (cumulative incidence 4.6% at day 100) with no additional cases of severe acute GVHD beyond day 100. To date, 4 pts have developed moderate/severe chronic GVHD (cumulative incidence 16.8% at 2 yrs), with one death at day 344 related to complications of acute and chronic GVHD. CMV reactivation occurred in 29 pts (56%), with no deaths related to CMV. Three pts have reactivated EBV, with one case of PTLD (all treated with Rituximab). Conclusions: In this retrospective analysis of single center data, the inclusion of r-ATG in the GVHD prophylactic strategy appeared to significantly attenuate the incidence and severity of both acute and chronic GVHD. Although follow-up is relatively early, the incidence of relapse and NRM does not appear to be increased compared to contemporaneous pts treated without ATG. Given that almost half of the pts received grafts from mismatched URDs, this abrogation in risk of GVHD is significant and clinically relevant. While randomized studies are needed, these data suggest that in-vivo T-cell depletion with r-ATG ameliorates severe GVHD, without increasing relapse or non-relapse mortality, in AML pts without overt leukemia at the time of allo-SCT. Using this strategy, cure rates of 70 – 80% may be realistic and attainable for younger (</= age 65) AML patients who achieve a leukemia-free state and who have a reasonably matched related or unrelated donor. Disclosures: Reeder: Celgene: Research Funding; Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 2850 Myelofibrosis (MF), both primary myelofibrosis (PMF) and post essential thrombocytosis/polycythemia vera myelofibrosis (post ET/PV-MF), are chronic myeloproliferative neoplasms characterized by a progressive clinical course that leads to shortened survival. The heterogeneous nature of MF lends itself to a variable clinical course that commonly includes hepatosplenomegaly, constitutional symptoms, and progressive cytopenias. Medical therapy for myelofibrosis has been effective in palliation of common symptoms related to anemia, splenomegaly but allogeneic stem cell transplantation (ASCT) remains the only potentially curative therapeutic modality. The timing of ASCT, choice of conditioning regimen, patient selection and the impact of co-morbidities are critical to optimal use of this modality. We have retrospectively analyzed our experience for patients undergoing ASCT for primary and post ET/PV myelofibrosis at Mayo Clinic across all 3 sites: Scottsdale Arizona; Rochester, Minnesota; and Jacksonville, Florida. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of all patients from 1992 to 2012 with PMF or post ET/PV-MF who underwent an ASCT at Mayo Clinic. This retrospective review included a waiver of informed consent and was approved by the Mayo Clinic Institutional Review Board. Patients that transformed to the MPN blast phase and individuals who underwent a second transplant for either relapse or graft failure were also included. Overall survival was estimated using Kaplan-Meier. Associations between prognostic factors and overall survival were assessed using Cox regression. Results: Baseline Patient Characteristics: Forty-eight patients (29 male) with a median age of 57 yrs (range 31–73) underwent ASCT. DIPSS-plus risk score was low in 2, intermediate 1 in 2, intermediate 2 in 9 and high in 35 patients. Disease type was PMF in 24, PV-MF in 10, ET-MF in 10, and MPN/MDS overlap in 4 pts. Eight patients evolved to the MPN-blast phase prior to transplant. JAK-2 mutation was positive in 27 patients and negative in 12 patients with JAK-2 status unknown in 9 patients. The median time from PV/ET to MF was 136 months (83–189 months) and from MF diagnosis to transplant was 59 months (3–144 months). All but 2 patients were red cell transfusion dependent prior to transplant (96%). Eight patients underwent splenectomy prior to transplant. Transplantation Characteristics: Patients who underwent ASCT received either myeloablative (MA, 13 pts) or reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC, 35 pts) regimen. The graft was from an unrelated donor in 22 pts and related donor in 26 pts with 44 being matched and 4 being mismatched. The myeloablative regimens included Bu/Cy, TBI/Cy, and Bu/Flu. The RIC regimens included flu/mel, Bu/Flu, FBM, and TBI/Flu. GVHD prophylaxis was with tacrolimus/MTX, CSA/MTX, and tacrolimus/MMF. Nineteen patients received ATG. Infectious disease prophylaxis, CMV monitoring, and additional supportive care measures were according to institutional guidelines. A majority of patients received peripheral blood stem cells with only 1 patient receiving bone marrow as the source of stem cells. Outcomes: The median time to neutrophil engraftment was 17.2 days. Two patients received a second transplant for relapsed disease. The incidence of graft failure was 10%. Graft versus host disease both acute and chronic occurred in 33 patients and 15 patients respectively. Day 100 overall survival was 92% and 2 year survival was 62% (95% CI 45–75%). There were no statistically significant associations between individual prognostic factors (DIPSS-plus classification, age, and HLA match) and survival. Conclusions: The Mayo Clinic national experience of ASCT for MF across our geographically diverse Cancer Center is encouraging. Our centers have transplanted 48 patients over the past 10 years with very favorable outcomes. Our results from a multi center practice are consistent with regards to survival, graft versus host disease, and types of transplants being performed compared to currently available published data from large single location transplant centers. This data helps confirm the prevailing knowledge that ASCT is a useful treatment. Disclosures: Mesa: Incyte: Research Funding; Lilly: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; YM Bioscience: Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 1432 Previously we demonstrated that inhibition of anti-apoptotic BCL-2 family members sensitize leukemic cells to 5-Azacytidine (5-Aza), using siRNA and pharmacological inhibition with the BH3-mimetic ABT-737, both in vitro and ex vivo (Bogenberger, JM., et. al. ASH Annual Abstracts 2011;118:Abstract 3513). Crucially, several anti-apoptotic BCL-2 members (e.g. BCL-2 and BCL-XL) required concurrent inhibition for potent and universal sensitization to 5-Aza. Anti-apoptotic BCL-2 proteins block the execution of programmed cell death (apoptosis) by binding to and counteracting two types of pro-apoptotic BCL-2 family proteins: the “BH3-only” proteins, including both activators (BIM and BID) and sensitizers (e.g. NOXA, PUMA, HRK), and the multi-domain effector proteins (BAX and BAK). Cells dependent on anti-apoptotic BCL-2 family members for survival have been defined as “primed for death” (Certo, M., et. al. Cancer Cell 2006 May;9(5):351-65). Importantly, the priming status reflects a dependence on anti-apoptotic BCL-2 family proteins and can be characterized with the BH3 profiling functional assay. This assay measures induction of mitochondrial outer membrane permeabilization (MOMP) in response to treatment with peptides derived from BH3-only proteins (Ni Chonghaile, T., et. al. Science 2011 Nov 25;334(6059);1129-33). Thus, the unique BH3 profile associated with a specific malignant cell population, is a function of the anti-apoptotic BCL-2 family member/s contextual expression in that cell population. Based on our observations of potent 5-Aza sensitization in combination with anti-apoptotic BCL-2 protein family inhibition, we hypothesized that BH3-profiling would predict response to 5-Aza. To address the potential utility of BH3 profiling in predicting response to 5-Aza in myeloid malignancies, we assayed a broad panel of AML-derived cell lines (N=13) by BH3 profiling and correlated BH3 metrics with 5-Aza response. Identical cell line passages were assayed by BH3 profiling and in 5-Aza drug dose response assays. The cell panel comprised lines derived from AML FAB subtypes M7, M6, M5, M4, M2 and M0, as well as diverse cytogenetics such as t(11;21), t(9;11), t(4;11), t(6;11), del 5q, del 7, and a broad spectrum of mutations such as FLT3, N-RAS, CDKN2A, NPM1 and DNMT3A. The panel included a normal karyotype AML cell line (CG-SH) (Munker, R., et. al. Leuk Res 2009 Oct:33(10):1405-8) and a blastic cell line derived from a patient with MDS (MDS-L) (Tohyama, K., et. al. Br J Haematol 1994 Jun;87(2):235-42). Partition modeling using several BH3 metrics discriminates 5-Aza response with statistical significance (N=13, Mann-Whitney p<0.01) between more sensitive (EC50<2uM) and less sensitive (EC50>2uM) AML lines. For instance, the Puma BH3 peptide alone distinguishes more sensitive from less sensitive cell lines (N=13, Mann-Whitney p=0.0046). Several more complex parameters, such as “Puma+Hrk”, “Puma+Noxa,” and “Bim+Puma+Noxa+Hrk,” also significantly discriminate 5-Aza response (Mann-Whitney p=0.0011). Using continuous variable analysis, a Puma+Hrk metric exhibited the strongest correlation with 5-Aza response (R2=0.85, p<0.0001), while an individual Puma metric yielded the second strongest correlation (R2=0.70, p=0.0004). In conclusion, BH3 profiling discriminates 5-Aza response and confirms a central role for anti-apoptotic BCL-2 members in 5-Aza response. Furthermore, HRK priming indicates that BCL-XL is an important, although not the sole, anti-apoptotic component determining 5-Aza response in myeloid cells. These BH3 profiling results are in agreement with our functional 5-Aza RNAi and BCL-XL/BCL-2 inhibitor data in combination with 5-Aza. Based on these results, we are currently evaluating BH3 profiles from 5-Aza responding and non-responding AML and MDS patients to validate BH3 profiling-derived metrics in predicting clinical outcomes to 5-Aza. Disclosures: Pierceall: Eutropics Pharmaceuticals: Employment, Equity Ownership. Lena:Eutropics Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Mesa:Sanofi: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Lilly: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; YM Bioscience: Research Funding. Cardone:Eutropics Pharmaceuticals: Employment, Equity Ownership.

Abstract Background : Polycythemia vera (PV) is a myeloproliferative neoplasm driven by JAK/STAT activation and is associated with erythrocytosis and a broad symptom burden that may negatively impact patient quality of life (QoL). Hydroxyurea (HU) is often used as first-line therapy for high-risk patients but may not effectively control or reduce symptom burden. RESPONSE is a phase III trial comparing ruxolitinib (RUX) with best available therapy (BAT) in patients with PV who were intolerant of or resistant to HU according to modified European LeukemiaNet (ELN) criteria. The primary study endpoint (a composite of hematocrit control and ≥35% spleen volume reduction at Week 32) was achieved by 21% of patients in the RUX arm vs 1% in the BAT arm (P<0.0001); 77% of patients in the RUX arm achieved at least one component of the primary endpoint. The current analysis was conducted to evaluate the effect of RUX on PV-related symptoms and QoL measures in the RESPONSE trial. Methods : Patients with PV aged ≥18 years, resistant to or intolerant of HU (modified ELN criteria) with splenomegaly, and who required phlebotomy for hematocrit control were randomized 1:1 to receive open-label RUX 10 mg twice daily (BID) or BAT (administered based on investigator judgment). Dose adjustments were permitted (RUX, 5-mg BID increments [25 mg BID max]; BAT was adjusted per investigator judgment). Objectives of this analysis included assessment of improvement in symptom burden as assessed by patient-reported outcomes using the 14-item modified Myeloproliferative Neoplasm Symptom Assessment Form (MPN-SAF), the Pruritus Symptom Impact Scale (PSIS), the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30), and the Patient Global Impression of Change. The 14-item MPN-SAF (graded from 0 [absent] to 10 [worst imaginable]) comprised symptoms related to cytokines (tiredness, itching, muscle ache, night sweats, and sweats while awake), hyperviscosity (vision problems, dizziness, concentration problems, headache, numbness/tingling, ringing in ears, and skin redness), and splenomegaly (abdominal discomfort and early satiety). Changes in total symptom score (TSS; maximum score = 140) and individual symptom scores from baseline to Week 32 were summarized by treatment group. For the EORTC QLQ-C30 Global Health Status/QOL score, the percentage of patients with a minimally important difference (MID) from baseline (10-point change) at Week 32 was summarized. Results : Overall, 222 patients were randomized (RUX, 110; BAT, 112). Median age (range) was similar between arms (RUX, 62.0 [34.0–90.0]; BAT, 60.0 [33.0–84.0]); the RUX and BAT arms were 60% and 71% male, respectively. At Week 32, a higher proportion of patients in the RUX vs the BAT arms had a ≥50% improvement in MPN-SAF TSS (49% vs 5%, respectively) and MPN-SAF symptom cluster scores (cytokine, 64% vs 11%; hyperviscosity, 37% vs 13%; splenomegaly, 62% vs 17%). Median percentage changes in individual symptom scores are presented in the Table. Mean changes from baseline at Week 32 on the 5 items of the PSIS indicated that the severity of pruritus and its interference on daily life improved with RUX (range, −1.5 to −2.2) and was unchanged/worsened with BAT (range, −0.1 to 0.3). Treatment with RUX vs BAT was associated with improved mean changes from baseline at Week 32 on EORTC QLQ-C30 symptom subscales, functional subscales, and Global Health Status/QOL (Table); 46% of RUX patients versus 10% of BAT patients achieved an MID in Global Health Status/QOL (Figure). At Week 32, RUX patients were more likely to rate their global impression of symptom changes as “very much improved” or “much improved” (67%) vs BAT patients (13%). Conclusion : In patients with PV who were resistant to or intolerant of HU, treatment with RUX was associated with greater and clinically meaningful improvements in PV-related symptom burden and QoL measures compared with BAT. Figure 1 Figure 1. Figure 2 Figure 2. Disclosures 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. 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. Verstovsek:Incyte Corporation: Research Funding. Kiladjian:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Masszi:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Durrant:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Harrison:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. He:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Jones:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Parasuraman:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Li:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Employment, Equity Ownership. Côté: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.

Abstract Introduction: Hematologic response (HR) particularly complete response (CR) is critical in patients (pts) with AL since it improves overall survival (OS) because of organ response (OrgR). Bor based therapies especially in combination with cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone (CyBorD) have shown to be an active regimen in AL. So far, there have been no comparative studies studying the effect of treatment with B-based regimens prior to SCT (Bor-SCT) versus SCT upfront or SCT preceded by non-Bor therapies (non-Bor-SCT). We present a retrospective analysis of data with an aim to compare the OS, OrgR and HR in the two cohorts. Methods: Charts were reviewed for the pts who underwent SCT for AL since 2004 until 2015 at Mayo Clinic in Arizona. HR and OrgR were determined using the consensus criteria from International Society of Amyloidosis.1 HR were noted at 3, 6 and 12 months from SCT. Results: Patients and disease characteristics: 63 pts were identified who underwent SCT for AL, of which 34 were in Bor-SCT and 29 were in the non-Bor-SCT cohort. Median age at diagnosis was 59.5 (range, 39 - 72) and 63 (range, 38 - 76) years and at SCT was 60 (range, 40 - 72) and 63 (range, 39 - 76) years for Bor-SCT and non-Bor-SCT, respectively. There were 13 (38%) females in Bor-SCT and 9 (31%) in non-Bor-SCT. Mean bone marrow involvement of plasma cells at diagnosis was 18% (SD±16.5) in Bor-SCT and 6.8% (SD±7.8) in non-Bor-SCT (p = 0.004). All pts had an ECOG performance score of better than 3 at the time of SCT. Fifteen (44%) pts had single organ involvement at diagnosis and 9 (26.5%) had 2-organ involvement in Bor-SCT. In non-Bor-SCT, 21 (72%) pts had single and 6 (21%) had 2-organ involvement (p = 0.04). More than 2 organs were involved in 10 (29%) pts in Bor-SCT and 2 (7%) in non-Bor-SCT. Heart was involved in 18 (53%) pts in Bor-SCT and 8 (28%) in non-Bor-SCT (p = 0.04) while kidney involvement was seen in 27 (79%) in Bor-SCT and 23 (79%) in non-Bor-SCT (p = 0.99). Median creatinine was not significantly different in the 2 groups at diagnosis or at the time of SCT. In Bor-SCT, no pts were on hemodialysis at the time of diagnosis or SCT. In non-Bor-SCT, 1 pt at diagnosis and 3 pts at SCT progressed to need hemodialysis. Lambda light chain was involved in 27 (82%) and 22 (76%) (p = 0.56) with a mean level of involved light chains being 59(SD±88.7) g/dL and 43.3 (SD±64.6) g/dL (p=0.4539) in Bor-SCT and non-Bor-SCT, respectively. Treatment: Thirty-one (91%) out of 34 pts in Bor-SCT group got treatment with CyBorD while 2 (6%) got Bor with dexamethasone and 1 (3%) got Bor with pegylated liposomal doxorubicin. In the non-Bor-SCT group, 20 (69%) out of 29 got no treatment, 4 (14%) got melphalan prednisone, 2 (7%) got dexamethasone alone, 1 (3%) got vincristine dexamethasone and 2 (7%) got lenalidomide dexamethasone prior to SCT. Transplant factors: Median time from diagnosis to SCT was 226.5 (range, 65 - 1108) days in Bor-SCT and 150.5 (48 - 1139) days in non-Bor-SCT (p=0.32). Full dose of melphalan (200 mg/m2) was used in 21 (62%) pts in Bor-SCT and 13 (34%) pts in non-Bor-SCT (p <0.001). Mean dose of cells used for SCT was 4.6 (SD±0.9) and 4.8 (SD±2.2) x 106/kg in Bor-SCT and non-Bor-SCT, respectively. Median time to neutrophil and platelet engraftment was 13 (range, 10 - 27) and 16 (range, 8 - 28) days in Bor-SCT while 11 (range, 7 - 16) and 13 (range, 10 - 25) days in non-Bor-SCT. Responses: HR at 3, 6 and 12 months from SCT and OrgR by the time of last follow up is described in table 1. Survival: Median OS was not reached in Bor-SCT as compared to 53.4 months in non-Bor-SCT (p =0.001), Figure 1. Conclusions: Our study suggests a benefit in HR, OrgR as well as OS by reduction of disease burden by Bor-based therapy prior to SCT. This benefit was observed despite a higher percentage of pts with cardiac involvement, more than 2 organ involvement and mean bone marrow plasma cells at diagnosis in Bor-SCT. Currently, it is not standard practice to use Bor-based therapy prior to SCT. A prospective study with larger number of pts would be required to confirm these findings. References: 1. Gertz MA et al. Definition of Organ Involvement and Treatment Response in Immunoglobulin Light Chain Amyloidosis (AL): A Consensus Opinion From the 10th International Symposium on Amyloid and Amyloidosis. Am J Hematol. 2005;79(4):319-328. Disclosures Dueck: Bayer: Honoraria. Mikhael:Abbvie, Celgene, Onyx, Sanofi: Research Funding. Bergsagel:Amgen, BMS, Novartis, Incyte: Consultancy; Novartis: Research Funding. Reeder:Novartis, Millennium, BMS and Celgene: Research Funding. Stewart:celgene: Consultancy. Fonseca:AMGEN: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; Millennium, a Takeda Company: Consultancy; Millennium, a Takeda Company: Consultancy; AMGEN: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Patent: Patents & Royalties: Prognostication of MM based on genetic categorization of FISH of the disease; Patent: Patents & Royalties: Prognostication of MM based on genetic categorization of FISH of the disease; Patent Pending: Patents & Royalties: The use of calcium isotopes as biomarkers for bone metabolisms; AMGEN: Consultancy; AMGEN: Consultancy; Patent: Patents & Royalties: Prognostication of MM based on genetic categorization of FISH of the disease; Patent Pending: Patents & Royalties: The use of calcium isotopes as biomarkers for bone metabolisms; Millennium, a Takeda Company: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Millennium, a Takeda Company: Consultancy; Patent: Patents & Royalties: Prognostication of MM based on genetic categorization of FISH of the disease; Patent Pending: Patents & Royalties: The use of calcium isotopes as biomarkers for bone metabolisms; Patent Pending: Patents & Royalties: The use of calcium isotopes as biomarkers for bone metabolisms; Celgene: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy.

Abstract Background: Donor cell chimerisms are tested at frequent intervals after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (alloHSCT). However, the predictive value of this testing in patients with myelofibrosis (MF) is not well-defined. In this study, our primary objective is to evaluate the correlation of day 30 and day 100 donor cell chimerism and overall survival (OS) in patients (pts) who undergo alloHSCT for MF. Methods: Charts were reviewed for pts who underwent alloHSCT for MF at Mayo Clinic in Arizona, Minnesota and Florida between January 2005 and December 2015. Patients who died within 30 days of alloHSCT were excluded. Chimerism studies were evaluated in the peripheral blood for CD3 and CD33 fractions at day +30 (D30) and day +100 (D100). Cut-off value of 100% and less than 100% was used because of limited variability below 100%. Standard statistical methods were used to compare continuous and categorical variables. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to provide survival curves. Results: Baseline characteristics: Sixty three consecutive patients who underwent alloHSCT for MF since January 2005 until December 2015, and had D30 and/or D100 chimerism studies available were included in the study. Of these, 24 (38%) were female. Median age at diagnosis was 56 years (range, 19 - 73 years) and median age at AHSCT was 58 years (range, 19 - 73 years). Dynamic International Prognostic Scoring System-Plus (DIPSS-Plus) risk category at the time of alloHSCT was high in 31 (49%), intermediate-2 in 30 (48%) and intermediate-1 in 2 (3%) pts. JAK2 V617F mutation status was available in 61 pts and was positive in 35 (57%) pts. Nineteen (30%) pts had been treated with a JAK2 inhibitor prior to alloHSCT. Fifty-two (83%) pts had at least grade-2 fibrosis in bone marrow at the time of HCT. Transplantation: Median time from diagnosis to AHSCT was 12.9 months (range, 2.3 - 248.2 months). Fifty-five (87%) received a reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) regimen while 8 (13%) received myeloablative conditioning regimen. Of these 55 pts, RIC regimens used were busulfan fludarabine based regimen in 15 (27%), fludarabine melphalan based regimen in 18 (33%) and fludarabine melphalan carmustine in 22 (40%) pts. Donor source was matched related in 30 (48 %), matched unrelated in 28 (44%), single-antigen mismatched related in 4 (6%) and mismatched unrelated in 1 (2%). Peripheral blood stem cells were used in all AHSCTs. Outcomes: Median follow-up was 24.4 months (range, 1.5 - 83.6 months). Amongst pts who had <100% donor chimerism at D30 in CD33 fraction, 2 had 90%, 1 had 80% and 2 had zero% donor chimerism. At D100, 1 pt had 95%, 1 had 90%, 1 had 60%, 2 had 5% and 1 had zero% donor chimerism. Eighteen out of 57 (32%) pts who had 100% donor chimerism in CD33 fraction at D30 had died at the time of analysis compared to 4 out of 5 (80%) patients with less than 100% (p=0.03). Eight out of 38 pts (21%) who had 100% donor chimerism in CD33 fraction at D100 died versus 3 out of 6 (50%) with less than 100% (p=0.12). There was no significant survival effect of CD3 chimerism (p values=0.68, 0.59). Of the 23 deaths that had occurred at the time of analysis, cause of death was disease progression or relapse in 8 (35%), graft versus host disease in 6 (26%), transplant related (sepsis / engraftment failure) in 5 (22%) and unrelated causes in 4 (17%). Survival analysis: As depicted in the Kaplan Meier curve (figure 1), median overall survival (OS) for pts with 100% donor chimerism in CD33 fraction at day 30 was not reached while for <100% donor chimerism was 16 months (p=0.04). Survival at 3 years for patients with 100% CD33 donor chimerism at D30 was 65% while it was 40% for pts with less than 100%. Also, survival at 3 years for patients with 100% CD33 donor chimerism at day 100 was 75% compared to 50% for patients with less than 100%. Conclusions: In our study, 100% donor chimerism in CD33 fraction is associated with improved survival after alloHSCT for MF compared to pts with less than 100%. Further understanding regarding the reason for this relationship is critical. Larger studies to replicate these results would be imperative to validate these findings. Disclosures Mesa: Incyte: Research Funding; Ariad: Consultancy; Promedior: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Celgene: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Research Funding; Galena: Consultancy.

Abstract Background: Rigosertib (RIG) is a RAS-mimetic interacting with the RAS-binding domains of RAF kinases, preventing their binding to RAS and inhibiting the RAS-RAF-MEK pathway. Rigosertib also binds to the RAS-binding domains of Ral-GDS and PI3Ks (Athuluri-Divakar, et al, Cell 165:643, 2016). Mutations of RAS are involved in proliferative processes important in neoplastic transformation (Gil-Bazo, et.al, Cancer Biology and Therapy 17:719, 2016). As of May 2016, 557 patients with MDS or AML received IV (N=335) or oral (N=222) rigosertib. All IV rigosertib was administered as monotherapy. Oral rigosertib was administered as monotherapy (N=168) or in combination with injectable azacitidine (AZA; N=54). Safety results across this rigosertib development program have not been presented. Methods: We reviewed all treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) among patients with MDS/AML treated with rigosertib IV monotherapy, rigosertib oral monotherapy, or in combination therapy, overall and by grade of severity, and serious TEAEs and TEAEs leading to discontinuation. Due to the unexpected observation of urinary AEs, including occasional gross hematuria, we analyzed urinary AEs in greater detail. Results: Rigosertib IV monotherapy: The most common TEAEs were fatigue (33%), nausea (33%), diarrhea (27%), constipation (25%), anaemia (24%) and pyrexia (24%). The most common ≥Grade 3 AEs were anaemia (21%), febrile neutropenia (13%), pneumonia (12%) and thrombocytopenia (11%). The most common serious AEs were febrile neutropenia (10%), pneumonia (9%), and sepsis (7%). The most common AEs leading to discontinuation of IV rigosertib were sepsis and pneumonia (3% each) (Table 1). Rigosertib oral monotherapy: The most common TEAEs were pollakiuria (increased urinary frequency) (35-%), fatigue (32%), diarrhoea (26%), dysuria (29%) and haematuria (24%). The most common ≥Grade 3 AEs were anaemia (17%), thrombocytopenia (5%), haematuria (4%) and urinary tract infection (4%). The most common serious AE was pneumonia (6%). The most common AEs leading to discontinuation of patients receiving oral rigosertib as monotherapy were (dysuria [8%], urinary tract pain [7%], haematuria [5%] and urinary frequency [5%] (Table 2). Rigosertib oral in combination with azacitidine (AZA): The most common TEAEs were nausea (41%), fatigue (39%), diarrhea (37%), constipation (37%) and dysuria (28%). The most common serious AEs were pneumonia (11%) and febrile neutropenia (7%). The most common AEs leading to discontinuation were AML (4%) and pneumonia (4%) (Table 3). In patients fully evaluable for gross hematuria the cause of bleeding was bladder inflammation. Urinary and plasma concentration of RIG were examined to assess dose relationship. According to the azacitidine package insert, the incidence of gross hematuria of any grade with single agent azacitidine is 6.3 % and Grade 3-4 of 2.3%. Evaluations performed of hematuria among 5 studies of oral rigosertib (4 monotherapy and 1 in combination with AZA) in patients with MDS/AML (Table 4). Conclusions: Rigosertib IV or oral formulations were generally well tolerated in clinical trials in over 500 patients with MDS/AML. Gastrointestinal AEs were most frequently reported with IV rigosertib and genitourinary AEs were seen more often with oral than IV dosing. The greater rate of urinary AEs in the oral than in the IV studies indicates a need for close monitoring of these patients and proactive risk management, such as adequate hydration, timing of administration of the second dose, and bladder emptying prior to sleep. Studies are being designed to optimize dosing and schedule to maximize efficacy and minimize hematuria of single agent oral rigosertib. A randomized trial of oral rigosertib/azacitidine versus azacitidine will be required to optimize the clinical benefit and safety in the management of higher-risk patients with MDS. Disclosures Fenaux: Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Astex: Research Funding; Teva: Honoraria, Research Funding. Al-Kali:Celgene: Research Funding; Onconova Therapeutics, Inc.: Research Funding. Navada:Onconova Therapeutics, Inc.: Research Funding. Roboz:Agios, Amgen, Amphivena, Astex, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celator, Celgene, Genoptix, Janssen, Juno, MEI Pharma, MedImmune, Novartis, Onconova, Pfizer, Roche/Genentech, Sunesis, Teva: Consultancy; Cellectis: Research Funding. Santini:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Onconova: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Astex: Consultancy. Platzbecker:Onconova, Teva, Celgene, Janssen, Novartis, Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding. Petrone:Onconova Therapeutics, Inc.: Employment. Brownstein:Onconova Therapeutics, Inc.: Consultancy. Zbyszewski:Onconova Therapeutics, Inc.: Employment. Maniar:Onconova Therapeutics, Inc.: Employment. Silverman:Onconova Therapeutics, Inc.: Patents & Royalties: Co-Patent holder for the combination of azacitidine and rigosertib, Research Funding.

Abstract Background: Patients (pts) withHR-MDS have a median OS of 4 to 6 months (mo) after HMA failure (Prebet et al, J Clin Oncol 2011) and no approved salvage therapy. Development of new therapeutics for this population will benefit from the availability of surrogate endpoints and markers that can predict survival. Gore et al established response to azacitidine (Vidaza®) in first-line therapy for HR-MDS as a reasonable surrogate to predict survival (Gore et al, Haematologica 2013). Rigosertib, a novel dual PI3K/PLK pathway inhibitor, has been shown to reduce bone marrow blasts (BMBL) in these pts (Seetharam et al, Leuk Res 2012). Silverman et al described complete or partial bone marrow (BM) response, or stabilization after 4-8 weeks (wks) of treatment with rigosertib as a potential surrogate for predicting survival in pts with HR-MDS after failure of primary HMA therapy (Silverman et al, Hematol Oncol 2014). We tested this hypothesis in the context of a randomized Phase III trial. Methods:Pts with HR-MDS were randomly assigned 2:1 to rigosertib or best supportive care (BSC) after progressing on, failing to respond to, or relapsing after HMA treatment. BM aspirates were assessed pretreatment, at 4 weeks and at 8-week intervals thereafter. Central slide review was undertaken in a representative population of samples. The BMBL response at each time point was assessed using the following definitions: bone marrow complete response (mCR) = BMBL ≤ 5% and decrease of ≥ 50% from baseline; bone marrow partial response (mPR) = BMBL decrease from baseline of ≥ 50%, but BMBL still > 5%; stable disease (SD) = BMBL decrease or increase from baseline of < 50%; progressive disease (PD) = BMBL increase from baseline of ≥ 50% by an absolute minimum of 5%; Not evaluable (NE). Results:Bone marrow assessment was carried out in 156 patients (pts) on the rigosertib arm and 24 pts on the BSC arm at 4 wks after enrollment, and in 86 and 20 pts, respectively, at 12 wks. The invasive BM procedure was optional on the BSC arm, which accounts for the low number of assessments in this group. BM responses at the 2 time points are presented in Table 1. Since no difference in overall survival was noted between pts who had objective BM response and those who did not progress (ie, stable disease), a landmark analysis was conducted that separated pts who were alive at the 4-wk landmark time into two 4-wk response categories: BM response + SD vs. PD. Results of this analysis in rigosertib-treated patients were statistically significant at p = 0.011, with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.62 and a median OS (from 4 wks onward) of 9.8 months in the mCR + mPR + SD group vs. 4.6 months in the PD group (Figure 1). Another landmark analysis was conducted at 12-wks. Results of this analysis were also significant (p < 0.001) in rigosertib-treated patients, with an HR of 0.39 and a median OS (from 12 wks onward) of 10.4 months in the mCR + mPR + SD group vs.7.5 months in the PD group (Figure 2). A time-dependent Cox regression of OS by 4-wk BMBL response reinforced the validity of the 4-wk and 12-wk BM assessments as surrogate biomarkers for survival (Table 2). Conclusions: These data suggest that BMBL response at 4 or 12 weeks was correlated with OS in this population of pts with HR-MDS treated with rigosertib after HMA failure and are consistent with previous observations in Phase II studies. Table 1 4- and 12-week Bone Marrow Blast Response (Intention-to-Treat Population) Number (%) of Patients 4-wk BMBL Response 12-wk BMBL Response Rigosertib N = 199 BSC N = 100 Rigosertib N = 199 BSC N = 100 Pts with BMBL assessment 156 (78) 24 (24)* 86 (43) 20 (20)* BM complete response (mCR) 22 4 11 5 BM partial response (mPR) 8 2 9 2 Stable disease (SD) 77 9 32 8 Progressive disease (PD) 49 9 34 5 * Bone marrow assessment was not required on the BSC arm. Figure 1 Figure 1. Figure 2 Figure 2. Table 2 Time-dependent Cox Regression of Overall Survival by Bone Marrow Blast Response Analysis Rigosertib BSC Wald P-value Hazard Ratio (95% Confidence Interval) Wald P-value Hazard Ratio (95% Confidence Interval) By 4-wk BMBL response 0.051 0.72 (0.51 - 1.00) 0.56 0.83 (0.45 - 1.54) By 12-wk BMBL response 0.0005 0.55 (0.39 - 0.77) 0.16 0.68 (0.39 - 1.17) *Stratified by pretreatment BMBL: 5%-19% vs. 20%-30% Disclosures Fenaux: Celgene: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Sekeres:Celgene Corp.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Boehringer Ingelheim: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Wilhelm:Onconova Therapeutics, Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Azarnia:Onconova Therapeutics, Inc: Employment.

Abstract Background : Polycythemia vera (PV) is a myeloproliferative neoplasm characterized by erythrocytosis, and in many cases leukocytosis and thrombocytosis. PV is driven by activating mutations in the JAK/STAT pathway, primarily JAK2V617F. For high-risk patients, a commonly used first-line therapy is hydroxyurea (HU); however, a subgroup of patients become intolerant of or resistant to HU. The phase 3 RESPONSE trial compared ruxolitinib (RUX) and best available therapy (BAT) in patients with PV who were intolerant of or resistant to HU (modified European LeukemiaNet criteria). Patients randomized in the BAT arm were permitted to cross over to receive RUX from Week 32 of the study. The results of the primary analysis comparing RUX to BAT prior to crossover have been reported, in which RUX was superior to BAT in achieving hematocrit control, reductions in spleen volume, and improvements in PV-related symptoms. This current analysis was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of RUX treatment in patients who crossed over from BAT relative to their original BAT treatment and relative to those originally randomized to RUX. Methods : Enrollment criteria included PV diagnosis, age ≥18 years, resistance to or intolerance of HU, splenomegaly, and phlebotomy requirement to control hematocrit. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive open-label RUX 10 mg BID or BAT administered based on investigator judgment. BAT may have included HU, interferon/pegylated interferon, pipobroman, anagrelide, immunomodulators (eg, lenalidomide or thalidomide), or no medication. The protocol allowed for dose modifications (RUX, 5-mg BID increments [25 mg BID max]; BAT was adjusted per investigator judgment). Patients in the BAT group could cross over to RUX from Week 32 if they had not met the primary endpoint, or after Week 32 due to protocol-defined disease progression. The primary study endpoint was a composite of hematocrit control and a ≥35% reduction in spleen size at Week 32. Hematocrit was assessed at screening, every 2 weeks from Day 1 to Week 12, followed by every 4 weeks until Week 32, and 2, 4, 6, 8, 16, 24, and 32 weeks following crossover. Spleen volume was assessed by magnetic resonance imaging at screening and study Weeks 16, 32, 48, 64, 80 and every 32 weeks thereafter. The number of phlebotomy procedures was evaluated over time in each group. Results : A total of 110 patients were randomized to RUX and 112 to BAT; study discontinuation by Week 32 (before crossover was permitted) was 11% in both groups. However, most patients in the BAT arm crossed over to receive RUX treatment immediately after the Week 32 visit (84% between Weeks 32 and 48); only 3% of patients remained in the BAT arm compared with 85% in the RUX arm at the time of the data analysis (median 81-week follow-up). With up to 32 weeks on BAT therapy, 25% of patients in this group did not require a phlebotomy; in contrast, with up to 32 weeks on RUX, 79% of patients after crossover and 74% of patients initially randomized to RUX did not require phlebotomy. The number of phlebotomy procedures adjusted for 100 patient-years during BAT therapy was 196.8 vs 38.5 after crossover to RUX and 34.1 on randomized RUX treatment. Reduction in spleen volume from baseline at any visit occurred in 49% of patients receiving BAT, vs 73% of patients after crossover to RUX and 88% of patients initially randomized to RUX. The proportion of patients achieving at least a 35% reduction in spleen volume (best percentage change) was 1.8% during BAT treatment vs 38.5% after crossover to RUX and 60.0% during randomized RUX treatment. Conclusion : Treatment with RUX after crossover from BAT resulted in improved clinical outcomes compared with original BAT treatment. These findings support the primary RESPONSE results and further validate the efficacy of RUX in this patient population. Disclosures Kiladjian: Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, 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. Vannucchi:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Masszi:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Durrant:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Harrison: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. Verstovsek:Incyte Corporation: Research Funding.