ALBERT

Description: Introduction: Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is a heterogeneous disease with varied outcomes dependent on patient cytogenetic and mutational status. Thirty percent of adults with newly diagnosed AML have a mutation in the fms-related tyrosine kinase 3 (FLT3) gene. Midostaurin is a small molecule inhibitor that acts on multiple receptor tyrosine kinases, including FLT3. The RATIFY trial showed improved overall survival (OS) and event-free survival in patients treated with daunorubicin and cytarabine (7+3) plus midostaurin (Stone et al, NEJM 2017). In this trial, a dose of daunorubicin 60 mg/m2 was administered. High dose (HD) 90 mg/m2 daunorubicin significantly improved the rate of complete remission and overall survival, including in patients with FLT3-ITD (Luskin et al, Blood 2016). HD daunorubicin has also been shown to be more effective than idarubicin in patients with FLT3-ITD AML (Lee et al, J Clin Oncol 2017). This data raises the question of whether the combination of midostaurin and HD daunorubicin would further improve outcomes of FLT3 mutated AML patients, while maintaining a tolerable safety profile. The objective of this study is to describe the safety and efficacy endpoints of FLT3 mutated AML patients treated with HD daunorubicin plus midostaurin as part of induction therapy. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed clinical and molecular data of patients at Memorial Healthcare System, Moffitt Cancer Center, and Sylvester Cancer Center with newly diagnosed FLT3 mutated AML treated from May 1st, 2017 to July 1st, 2019. Clinical data was abstracted in accordance with institutional review board approved protocol. All patients were induced with HD daunorubicin 90 mg/m2 on days 1-3, cytarabine 100 mg/m2 on days 1-7, and midostaurin 50 mg PO twice daily on days 8-21. Growth factor and antimicrobial support were used per institutional guidelines. Demographics were analyzed using descriptive statistics. OS was analyzed using Kaplan Meier method. Other efficacy outcomes were CR, CRi (assessed according to the European Leukemia Network Criteria for AML), proportion of patients needing re-induction, and proportion of patients who underwent hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT). Safety outcomes were adverse events (AEs) and early (30- and 60-day) mortality. Results: Twenty-six patients were included in the final analysis. Patient characteristics are outlined in TABLE 1. All patients were FLT3 mutated, as confirmed with molecular studies. The FLT3 subtype was ITD (high) in 3 patients, ITD (low) in 16 patients, TKD in 5 patients, and both in 2 patients. Seventy-seven percent of patients achieved a CR/CRi after one induction cycle, and 96.2% attained CR after two induction cycles. Median time to ANC and platelet recovery was 28 and 26 days, respectively. One patient died during the first 60 days, due to Enterococcus sepsis. The most common non-hematological AEs were nausea (77%), diarrhea (62%), mucositis (58%), rash (54%), and increased ALT (54%). Cumulative incidence of relapse in the cohort was 28% (n=7). Four patients relapsed pre-transplant and achieved CR2 with additional therapy. All 7 of these patients had co-occurring mutations of various types. Of the 20 patients who were considered transplant eligible, 13 (65%) underwent HSCT and 4 (20%) are pending transplant. Of the 13 transplanted patients, 3 experienced relapse post-transplant. After a median follow up of 14.5 months, median OS has not been reached. Conclusion: In our multi-center experience, induction with HD daunorubicin, cytarabine, and midostaurin is clinically effective and seems to be well tolerated. Short term mortality was low and AEs were manageable, with no unexpected safety signals. Also, CR/CRi rates were higher than previously reported, suggesting that the combination of HD daunorubicin and midostaurin may improve the outcomes of patients with FLT3 mutated AML. Future analyses with larger patient samples and longer follow up are warranted to further evaluate long-term safety and efficacy for this regimen. Figure Disclosures Sandoval-Sus: Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Bradley:AbbVie: Other: Advisory Board. Talati:Agios: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Astellas: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Daiichi-Sankyo: Honoraria; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Watts:Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Sallman:Abbvie: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Jazz: Research Funding; Incyte: Speakers Bureau; Celyad: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Sweet:Bristol Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Jazz: Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy; Stemline: Consultancy; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Lancet:Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Other: fees for non-CME/CE services ; Agios, Biopath, Biosight, Boehringer Inglheim, Celator, Celgene, Janssen, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Karyopharm, Novartis: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Description: Background: Patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) have dismal overall outcomes and survival is exceptionally poor in patients who experience relapse or are refractory (R/R) to frontline therapy. Since December 2018, combination therapy with hypomethylating agents (HMA) and venetoclax (HMA+Ven) has become standard frontline therapy for older patients or younger unfit patients. Moreover, it has been routinely utilized in patients experiencing relapsed or refractory AML yet response and outcome data is limited in patients with R/R disease. Thus, we investigated outcomes after HMA+Ven in patients with relapsed or refractory AML. Methods: We retrospectively annotated 72 patients who received treatment with HMA+Ven at Moffitt Cancer Center and Memorial Healthcare System between 2017 and 2019. Patients were divided into two subgroups: 1) initial remission therapy and 2) salvage therapy. Clinical and molecular data were abstracted in accordance with the Institutional Review Board approved protocol. Overall response rate (ORR) included patients achieving complete remission (CR), CR with incomplete count recovery (CRi), and morphologic leukemia free state (MLFS). Patients achieving CR, CRi, or MLFS were termed as responders (RES) and patients without CR, CRi, or MLFS were nonresponders (NRES). Fisher's Exact method was used to determine significance for categorical variables. Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed to determine median overall survival (mOS) and log-rank test was utilized to determine significance. All p-values are two-sided. Results: Out of 72 patients, 41 received HMA+Ven as initial therapy and 31 received it in the R/R setting. Baseline characteristics are outlined in Table 1. Median age was 63 years for patients with R/R AML with 58% female. In the R/R cohort, ORR was 34.5% with 0 (0%) patients achieving CR, 8 (27.6%) patients achieving CRi, and 2 (6.9%) achieving MLFS (Table 2). When compared to patients receiving HMA+Ven as initial therapy, ORR was significantly lower in the R/R cohort (64.1% vs. 34.5%, p=0.03). Among 31 patients in the R/R cohort, 6.5% (n=2) proceeded to allogeneic stem cell transplant (allo-SCT) after achieving CRi. European LeukemiaNet (ELN) risk stratification was known in 22 patients in the R/R cohort and ORR were similar in patients in the favorable/intermediate risk group (n=8) compared to adverse risk group (n=14) (37.5% vs. 28.6%, p=1.0). When compared to HMA+Ven used as initial therapy, ORR among the R/R cohort were not different among adverse risk groups (58.3% vs. 28.6%, p=0.10); however, ORR were significantly lower among patients with favorable/intermediate risk (100% vs. 37.5%, p=0.009). At a median follow-up of 7.6 months (mo), mOS was 4.9mo in the R/R cohort with mOS among RES superior to NRES (not reached vs. 2.4mo, p=0.0009) (Figure 1). Moreover, mOS was inferior in R/R patients compared to initial therapy (4.9mo vs. 13.8mo, p=0.0013) (Figure 2). A total of 15 (48.4%) patients had HMA exposure prior to receiving HMA+Ven without apparent impact on mOS (3.7mo (prior HMA) vs. 4.9mo (no prior HMA), p=0.97). The median duration of CR/CRi was 5.2mo and the median time to CR/CRi was 2.4mo. Based on ELN risk groups, mOS was not statistically different among patients with favorable/intermediate risk disease compared to adverse risk disease (8.6mo (fav/int) vs. 2.8mo (adverse), p=0.07). Responses were also analyzed based upon somatic mutations (Figure 2). In patients with isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 and 2 mutations (IDH1/IDH2) compared to patients without IDH1/2, ORR were 60% vs. 25%, respectively (p=0.28) with no significant difference in mOS (7.2mo (IDHmut) vs. 3.1mo (IDHwt), p=0.38). Comparing patients with TP53 mutation to those without TP53 mutations, no significant difference in ORR (25% vs. 33%, p=1.0) or mOS (4.4mo vs. 6.9mo, p=0.0.84) was noted. Conclusion: Although combination therapy with HMA+Ven has yielded impressive responses as frontline therapy, response rates with this combination in the salvage setting are less encouraging with the possible exception of those patients with IDH1/IDH2 mutations. Nevertheless, responders to salvage HMA+Ven had a significant survival benefit compared to nonresponders, suggesting that this combination is a reasonable salvage option in patients with relapsed or refractory AML. Disclosures Padron: Incyte: Research Funding. Kuykendall:Incyte: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy; Abbvie: Honoraria. List:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Lancet:Agios, Biopath, Biosight, Boehringer Inglheim, Celator, Celgene, Janssen, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Karyopharm, Novartis: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Other: fees for non-CME/CE services . Sallman:Celyad: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Komrokji:JAZZ: Speakers Bureau; JAZZ: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy; DSI: Consultancy; pfizer: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy. Sweet:Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas: 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; Agios: 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; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Jazz: Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy; Stemline: Consultancy. Talati:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Daiichi-Sankyo: Honoraria; Astellas: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Agios: Honoraria. OffLabel Disclosure: Venetoclax is approved in combination with hypomethylating agents (azacitidine or decitabine) or low dose cytarabine for treatment of newly diagnosed AML in adults aged 75 years or older, or those who have comorbidities that preclude the use of induction chemotherapy.

Description: Background The therapeutic landscape for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) has become complex with recent drug approvals. CPX-351 has become standard-of-care for patients (pts) with therapy-related AML and AML with myelodysplasia-related changes. Moreover, earlier phase studies combining hypomethylating agents (HMA) and Venetoclax (HMA+Ven) in the frontline setting for elderly patients have demonstrated high response rates and improved survival. Given the overlapping indications, yet lack of comparative outcome data between these therapeutic regimens, treatment decisions have become challenging in the frontline setting. Therefore, we compared the outcomes of newly diagnosed AML pts receiving HMA+Ven vs. CPX-351. Methods We retrospectively annotated 119 pts that received frontline treatment with HMA+Ven and CPX-351 at Moffitt Cancer Center and Memorial Healthcare System between 2013 and 2019. Pts were divided in two cohorts: HMA+Ven (Cohort A) or CPX-351(Cohort B). Via comprehensive chart review of each patient that received HMA+Ven, we further classified a subgroup of pts meeting criteria to receive CPX-351 as CPX-351eligible. Clinical and molecular data were abstracted for each patient in accordance with IRB requirements. Overall response rate (ORR) was the combined total of complete remission (CR), complete remission with incomplete count recovery (CRi), and morphologic leukemia free state (MLFS). Fisher's Exact method was used to determine significance. Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed to estimate median overall survival (mOS) with log-rank test to determine significance. All p-values are two-sided. Results Out of 119 total pts, 41 pts received HMA+Ven (Cohort A) and 78 pts received CPX-351 (Cohort B) with baseline characteristics outlined in Table 1. Among 111 response evaluable pts, ORR was 64.1% in Cohort A, including 28.2% with CR and 28.2% with CRi (Table 2). ORR was 50.0% in Cohort B, comprised of CR in 29.2% and CRi in 18.1%. There was no difference in ORR between Cohort A and Cohort B (64.1% vs. 50%, p 0.17). A significantly greater fraction of pts in Cohort B underwent allogeneic stem cell transplant (allo-SCT) (24.4% vs. 2.4%, p=0.004). ORR was higher in pts with European LeukemiaNet (ELN)-defined favorable/intermediate (fav/int) risk compared to adverse risk group in Cohort A (100% vs. 58.3%, p=0.03), however there was no difference in Cohort B (52.6% vs. 49.1%, p=1.0). ORR was similar among adverse risk groups in both cohorts (58.3% in Cohort A vs. 49.1% in Cohort B, p=0.47). Among responders, median time to best response was significantly longer in Cohort A (61.0 days vs. 40.5 days, p

Description: Background: Gilteritinib is approved for the treatment of relapsed/refractory (R/R) AML and FLT3-mutation (FLT3mut+). However, the gilteritinib phase 3 ADMIRAL study (Perl et al NEJM 2019) enrolled prior to widespread adoption of either midostaurin as a component of standard intensive induction and consolidation or post-transplant FLT3inhibitor (FLT3i) maintenance. Some mechanisms of drug resistance can be shared across FLT3i's, suggesting response to gilteritinib might differ in patients treated with frontline FLT3i. A better understanding of how prior therapy modulates response to gilteritinib is necessary to clarify this novel agent's role in the current FLT3-mutated AML treatment algorithm. Methods: This is an ongoing multi-institutional analysis from 13 US centers identifying patients who received gilteritinib alone or as combination therapy for the treatment of R/R FLT3mut+ AML. Patients who received gilteritinib as a part of an ongoing trial were excluded. Response criteria were identical to the ADMIRAL trial. For patients with available data and a composite complete remission (CRc), we defined clinically measurable residual disease (cMRD) negative status by bone marrow flow cytometry using a cutoff of

Description: Introduction: Adult T cell leukemia/lymphoma (ATLL) is an aggressive mature T cell neoplasm caused by Human T lymphotropic virus type 1/2 (HTLV1/2) infection. HTLV1/2 is endemic in several geographic areas such as Latin America, Japan and intertropical Africa with estimated 5-10 million individuals infected worldwide. There is no standard therapy for ATLL and most patients are treated with regimens used for aggressive lymphomas. We hereby reviewed the outcome of patients treated in two US academic medical centers with a high prevalence of ATLL. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated all of the patients with a confirmed diagnosis of ATLL seen in two academic medical centers in Florida, USA. Baseline characteristics, treatments regimens and clinical outcomes where evaluated. First line therapies were categorized as treatment with CHOP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisone), Intensive chemotherapy (HyperCVAD, VCAP-AMP-VECP, or EPOCH), vs others (Interferon and zidovudine, Gemcitabine Oxaliplatin, Pralatrexate, and Gemcitabine cisplatin dexamethasone). Patient and disease characteristics were compared using Chi-square. Progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for different chemotherapy regimens were compared using log-rank testing. Results A total of 61 patients were included in the analysis. The median age was 58 (32-75) years. Two thirds of the patients were female. The majority were of African American descent (82.5%) (Table 1), and 35.6% were originally from Jamaica, followed by 13.6% from Haiti. Patients were more likely to have CR/PR to CHOP (72%) compared to those treated with intensive chemotherapy or others (27.3% and 29.4% respectively) (p=0.007) (figure 1A). While there was no statistically difference in baseline characteristics in patients receiving the three categories of treatments (i.e. age, stage, ECOG, CD30 status), patients with acute subtype were less likely to be treated with CHOP (21.1% vs 47.4% respectively, p=0.096) which might explain the discrepancies in response. There was no statistical difference in PFS and OS between the three CHOP, Intensive chemotherapy and others (6.4 mo, 3.1 mo, 2.1 mo, p=0.23) and (14 mo, 8.9 mo, 18.5 mo, p=0.14) respectively. Patients responding to first line therapy (CR/PR) had improved OS when compared to those having stable/progressive disease (15.9 mo vs 7.2 mo) (p=0.004) (Figure 1B). Conclusions: Our study results reflect the poor outcomes of ATLL patients, especially in the ones with primary refractory disease to frontline treatments. We also showed the suboptimal activity of frontline regimens for ATLL and lack of unifying therapeutic approach for this lymphoma in the US. Multi-institutional clinical trials exploring novel therapeutic frontline options to improve response rates, which translate in better OS are desperately needed in this population. Disclosures Sandoval-Sus: Massive Bio: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; MorphoSys US: Consultancy; Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Sokol:Kymera Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kyowa/Kirin Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; EUSA Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau.

Description: Introduction There is a substantial underrepresentation of ethnic minorities within oncology studies. Specifically, Black, Asian and Hispanic patients have a low participation rate in US based randomized clinical trials (RCT). Furthermore, patients living with HIV (PLWH) or chronic viral hepatitis are often systematically excluded from these studies. Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is one of the most common malignancies associated with HIV and viral hepatitis. Given these characteristics, it is imperative that studies reporting on safety and efficacy of new treatments mirror real-world populations. Objective: The primary objective of our study was to describe the demographic characteristics of patients who have participated in DLBCL phase II and III randomized US clinical trials; evaluating each group's enrollment fraction compared to US DLBCL prevalence. The secondary objective was analyzing the inclusion of PLWH and chronic viral hepatitis in US based DLBCL RCT. Methods and Measures: We queried PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, as well as ASCO and ASH meeting abstracts for phase II and III RCTs on DLBCL from 2000 to 2020, including chimeric antigen receptor T cells (CAR-T) therapy studies. Trials that did not report race and ethnicity or recruited outside of the US were excluded. We analyzed enrollment data and compared to DLBCL prevalence demographics obtained from the SEER 18 Registries. Enrollment fraction (EF) is defined as the number of trial enrollees divided by the estimated US prevalence of DLBCL. Results: We identified 51 trials between 2000 and 2020 with only 25 (49%) studies reporting race and ethnicity. Only 9 trials enrolled solely in the US which comprised of 763 patients. Compared with an EF of 1.88% among Non-Hispanic whites, lower EF was noted in Blacks (1.08%; P=0.0009), Hispanics (0.71; P=