ALBERT

Description: Background: Bortezomib-containing combination chemotherapy regimens are effective in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL), although there are limited data on toxicity in the front-line setting for indolent NHL when combined with reduced-dose vincristine-containing chemotherapy. Our group (Sinha et al, Cancer 2012) reported outcomes from a phase I study of bortezomib combined with rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, modified vincristine, and prednisone (VR-CHOP) and found a maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of bortezomib (V) of 1.6mg/m2 with vincristine capped at 1.5 mg with an overall response rate (ORR) of 100%. Herein we report the results of our phase II study of this regimen. Patients and Methods: Eligible patients had untreated indolent NHL (small lymphocytic lymphoma [SLL], marginal zone lymphoma [MZL], or follicular lymphoma [FL] grades 1-3) meeting standard criteria for treatment or with FL international prognostic index (FLIPI) ≥3. Patients received V administered at a dose of 1.6mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 as well as rituximab (R) 375mg/m2, cyclophosphamide 750mg/m2, doxorubicin 50mg/m2, and vincristine 1.4mg/m2 (capped at 1.5mg/dose) on day 1 and prednisone 100mg on days 1-5 of a 21-day cycle. Patients received at least 6 cycles and up to 8 cycles of therapy at the discretion of the treating physician. Patients who achieved a complete response (CR) after induction were assigned to receive maintenance R 375mg/m2 every 12 weeks for 2 years while patients with a partial response (PR) or stable disease received R 375mg/m2 along with V 1.6mg/m2 (VR), both administered weekly for 4 weeks every 6 months for up to 2 years. Response was assessed by Cheson 1999 criteria, and toxicity assessed by CTCAE version 3.0. One FL patient discontinued study therapy after cycle 2 when a central pathology review revised the diagnosis to diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. This patient was not included in the efficacy analysis but is included in the safety reports. CR rate and ORR were determined at the conclusion of induction therapy, and progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated by the Kaplan-Meier method from the date of study entry. Results: Thirty patients received at least 1 treatment of VR-CHOP, including 16 males and 14 females. The median age was 58 (range: 31-71), and histologies included MZL (n=5), SLL (n=4), and FL (Grade 1, n=7; Grade 2, n=12; Grade 3, n=2). FLIPI score for patients with FL were 1 (n=2), 2 (n=4), 3 (n=12), and 4 (n=3). Twenty-nine were evaluable for response, including 19 patients with CR and 10 patients with PR at the conclusion of induction therapy (CR rate of 66%; ORR of 100%). For 20 evaluable patients with FL, the CR rate was 75%. Twenty-five patients proceeded with maintenance therapy, including 6 patients who received VR and 19 patients who received R alone. Three patients with PR to induction converted to CR after maintenance with VR. Four patients received no maintenance due to refusal/lost to follow-up (n=2), toxicity (n=1), and progression (n=1). Three patients with PR received only R due to neuropathy. Four patients have relapsed or progressed on therapy, including 1 patient prior to starting maintenance, 2 patients during VR maintenance, and 1 patient who achieved a PR but was receiving R maintenance. One additional patient progressed after completing R maintenance. With a median follow-up of 39 months, 3-year PFS rate is 85.8%, and the 3-year OS rate is 96.4% (Figure). Grade ≥3 peripheral neuropathy was noted in 2 patients (7%), while grade 1-2 neuropathy occurred in 17 patients (57%). Grade 3-4 hematologic toxicities included neutropenia (n=14, 47%), thrombocytopenia (n=3, 10%), anemia (n=1, 3%), and febrile neutropenia (n=1, 3%). Eight patients experienced additional grade 3 non-hematologic toxicities, including the following which occurred in more than 1 patient: vomiting (n=3, 10%), abdominal pain (n=2, 7%), fatigue (n=2, 7%), hyperglycemia (n=2, 7%), hypokalemia (n=2, 7%), and nausea (n=2, 7%). Conclusion: VR-CHOP is highly efficacious in the front-line setting for management of patients with untreated indolent NHL, and toxicities are expected and manageable. Incidence of grade 3 peripheral neuropathy is low with incorporation of a decreased dose of vincristine, and the PFS compares favorably with previously reported outcomes in FL and indolent NHL for R-CHOP, R-Bendamustine, and R-CHOP plus maintenance R. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Cohen: Janssen: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy. Off Label Use: Bortezomib is not currently approved for follicular lymphoma, marginal zone lymphoma, or small lymphocytic lymphoma and is being evaluated in combination with a standard induction regimen.. Kaufman:Millennium: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy. Nastoupil:TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria; Genentech: Honoraria; Janssen: Research Funding. Lechowicz:Millennium: Consultancy. Lonial:Millennium, Celgene, Novartis, BMS, Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding. Flowers:Gilead, Spectrum, Millennium, Janssen: Research Funding; Celgene, Prescription Solutions, Seattle Genetics, Millennium (unpaid), Genentech (unpaid) : Consultancy.

Description: Background The efficacy and safety of subsequent TKIs in pts who have experienced failure of dasatinib is not fully known. Ponatinib, a pan-BCR-ABL inhibitor, was evaluated in a phase 2, international, open-label clinical trial (PACE). This post-hoc analysis explored the efficacy and safety of ponatinib following failure of dasatinib in CP-CML pts in the PACE trial. Methods The PACE trial enrolled 449 pts, including 270 with CP-CML. Pts had to be resistant or intolerant to dasatinib or nilotinib, or they had to have the T315I mutation at baseline. The primary endpoint in CP-CML was major cytogenetic response (MCyR) at any time within 12 months after treatment initiation. The trial is ongoing. Data as of 1 April 2013 are reported, with a minimum follow-up of 18 months for pts remaining on study. The efficacy and safety of ponatinib (45 mg QD) in 107 CP-CML pts following failure of dasatinib as the most recent prior therapy, irrespective of other TKI therapy, is presented (Group D). Eighteen pts who experienced failure of dasatinib but received ≥1 anticancer therapy, other than hydroxyurea or anagrelide, prior to ponatinib treatment were excluded from the analyses. Data are also presented for 2 subsets of Group D: 52 pts whose only TKI therapy was imatinib followed by dasatinib (Group I-D), and 46 pts whose only TKI therapy was imatinib, then nilotinib, and then dasatinib (Group I-N-D). An analysis of cross-intolerance was also conducted in 69 pts with prior dasatinib treatment at any time who discontinued dasatinib due to intolerance. Results Baseline characteristics are shown in the table. Group I-D tended to be younger, with less time since diagnosis versus Group I-N-D. At the time of analysis, 60%, 65%, and 54% of pts in Groups D, I-D, and I-N-D remained on study. The most common reasons for discontinuation were adverse events (AEs; 16%, 15%, 17%) and progressive disease (9%, 6%, 11%) in Groups D, I-D, and I-N-D. Efficacy end points are shown in the table. In Group D, MCyR was seen in pts with the following dasatinib-resistant mutations at baseline: V299L, 3/4 (75%); T315I, 17/23 (74%); F317L, 3/10 (30%). The most common treatment-related AEs were thrombocytopenia (44%, 37%, 57%), rash (39%, 39%, 39%), and dry skin (39%, 29%, 52%) in Groups D, I-D, and I-N-D. Serious cardiovascular, cerebrovascular, and peripheral vascular AEs occurred in 6%, 3%, and 3% of pts in Group D (treatment-related: 3%, 1%, 0%). Seventy-three of 217 pts receiving prior dasatinib at any time discontinued dasatinib due to intolerance. Of these 73 pts, 27 experienced the same AE(s) with ponatinib that led to dasatinib intolerance; 12 pts had grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia, 6 pts had other grade 3/4 AEs (3 with neutropenia, 1 each with pleural effusion, dyspnea, pulmonary hypertension), 8 pts had grade 1/2 AEs. Six of these 27 pts discontinued ponatinib due to the same AE that led to dasatinib intolerance. Thrombocytopenia was the primary AE involved in cross-intolerance (4 pts); congestive cardiac failure (grade 5) and pleural effusion each occurred once. Conclusions Ponatinib has substantial activity in pts with CP-CML following failure of dasatinib, with a safety profile reflective of this heavily pretreated population. Cross-intolerance between dasatinib and ponatinib was infrequent. Disclosures: Hochhaus: Ariad, Novartis, BMS, MSD, Pfizer: Research Funding; Novartis, BMS, Pfizer: Honoraria. Cortes:Ariad, Pfizer, Teva: Consultancy; Ariad, BMS, Novartis, Pfizer, Teva: Research Funding. Kim:BMS, Novartis,IL-Yang: Consultancy; BMS, Novartis, Pfizer,ARIAD,IL-Yang: Research Funding; BMS, Novartis,Pfizer,IL-Yang: Honoraria; BMS, Novartis,Pfizer: Speakers Bureau; BMS, Pfizer: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Pinilla-Ibarz:Novartis, Ariad: Research Funding; Novartis, Ariad, BMS and Pfizer: Speakers Bureau. le Coutre:Novartis: Research Funding; Novatis, BMS, Pfizer: Honoraria. Paquette:ARIAD, BMS, Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Chuah:Novartis, Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria. Nicolini:Novartis, Ariad and Teva: Consultancy; Novartis & Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Novartis, BMS, Teva, Pfizer, Ariad: Honoraria; Novartis, BMS, Teva: Speakers Bureau; Novartis, Ariad, Teva, Pfizer: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Apperley:Novartis: Research Funding; Ariad, Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis, Pfizer, Teva: Honoraria. Talpaz:Ariad, BMS, Sanofi, INCYTE: Research Funding; Ariad, Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Ariad, Sanofi, Novartis: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. DeAngelo:Araid, Novartis, BMS: Consultancy. Abruzzese:BMS, Novartis: Consultancy. Rea:BMS, Novartis, Pfizer, Ariad, Teva: Honoraria. Baccarani:Ariad, Novartis, BMS: Consultancy; Ariad, Novartis, BMS, Pfizer, Teva: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Müller:Novartis, BMS, Ariad: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis, BMS: Research Funding. Gambacorti-Passerini:Pfizer: Research Funding; Pfizer, BMS: Honoraria. Lustgarten:ARIAD: employees of and own stock/stock options in ARIAD Pharmaceuticals, Inc Other, Employment. Rivera:ARIAD: Employment. Clackson:ARIAD: employees of and own stock/stock options in ARIAD Pharmaceuticals, Inc Other, Employment. Turner:ARIAD: Employment. Haluska:ARIAD: employees of and own stock/stock options in ARIAD Pharmaceuticals, Inc Other, Employment. Deininger:BMS, ARIAD, NOVARTIS: Consultancy; BMS, NOVARTIS, CELGENE, GILEAD: Research Funding; ARIAD, NOVARTIS: Advisory Boards, Advisory Boards Other. Hughes:Novartis, BMS, ARIAD: Honoraria, Research Funding. Goldman:Ariad: Honoraria. Shah:Ariad, Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding. Kantarjian:RIAD, Novartis, BMS, Pfizer: Research Funding.

Description: Abstract 2947 Poster Board II-923 Introduction: DLBCL occasionally presents in leukemic phase, and the prognostic significance of circulating lymphoma cells is unknown. We herein report characteristics and outcomes of newly diagnosed DLBCL presenting in leukemic phase at 2 Institutions. Methods: Flow cytometry database analysis and retrospective chart reviews were carried out with IRB-approval for cases accrued between 2001 and 2008. Leukemic phase DLBCL patients were matched on a 3:1 basis with control DLBCL with no circulating lymphoma cells based on IPI, year of diagnosis, and age ± 10 years. Results: 18 patients, median age 48 years (range 34-80), ECOG PS-1 (22%), 2(38%) and 3(40%), and IPI - 3(56%), 4(40%) and 5(4%) presented in leukemic phase. Extranodal sites included bone marrow (100%), spleen (83%), pleura (61%) and CSF (22%). 61% had B symptoms, and LDH was 6xULN (range, 1-56). WBC was 13,000/microL (range, 7,100-127,400), with 50% lymphoma cells (range, 2-92); these cells were immunophenotypically similar to those in the histologically confirmed DLBCL node, and co-expressed CD19, CD20, CD22, CD38, CD45, HLA-DR and FMC7 in 〉90% of cases, and kappa or lambda light chain restriction in 〉 50%. Karyotype was abnormal and complex in 61%. One patient expired before treatment began. Treatment consisted of R-CHOP (10), R-HCVAD (6), and single agent rituximab (1). 8 (44%) achieved CR (5 R-HCVAD and 3 R-CHOP), 5 (28%) PR, and 4 (22%) had resistant disease. 1 patient was autografted in CR1 and remains in remission. With a median follow-up of 32 months, 2 relapsed in leukemic phase, 1 of whom achieved CR2, but relapsed at the time of conditioning for a consolidative allograft. 10 (56%) patients died from progressive disease, 2 (11%) were lost to follow-up and 6 (33%) remain alive in remission. Overall (Panel A) and progression-free (Panel B) survival curves the 18 leukemic (solid line) and 54 non-leukemic phase (dashed line) DLBCL are depicted in the Figure. Conclusion: DLBCL presenting with circulating lymphoma cells is associated with chemo-resistance (44% CR) and poor outcomes with the exception of those who achieve complete remission. These patients are candidates for alternative therapies. Disclosures: Kaufman: Millenium: Consultancy; Genzyme: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding. Lonial:Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Gloucester: Research Funding. Armitage:Eisa: Consultancy; Allo: Consultancy; Ziopharm: Consultancy.

Description: Background Ponatinib is a potent oral pan–BCR-ABL tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) that has demonstrated significant clinical activity in heavily pretreated CP-CML pts. A multivariate analysis of CP-CML pts in the PACE trial found significant associations between major cytogenetic response (MCyR) and higher dose intensity; however, dose reductions and/or interruptions (DR/I) of ponatinib occur often in pts who experience adverse events (AEs). The clinical significance of such DR/I are not well known. Objectives To assess the impact of DR/I and dose intensity of ponatinib on clinical outcomes in pts with CP-CML enrolled in the PACE trial. Methods A total of 270 CP-CML pts were enrolled in this ongoing, phase 2, international, open-label clinical trial. The efficacy population (N=267) was included in this post hoc analysis. Dose reductions were defined as any reduction below the standard 45 mg daily dose; interruptions were defined as a period in which ponatinib was held for ≥3 consecutive days between non-missing doses. Up to 2 reductions (to 30 or 15 mg/day) were permitted for managing AEs. To assess the impact of dose modification on response, pts were grouped according to tertiles of average dose intensity (mg/day), calculated as the cumulative dose divided by treatment exposure. All variables were calculated within 12 mos of the first dose to correspond to the primary outcome measure of MCyR by 12 mos. Secondary efficacy endpoints included complete cytogenetic response (CCyR) and major molecular response (MMR). Responses were assessed every 3 mos. The Cochran–Armitage trend test was used to assess whether response rates increased with higher average dose intensity tertiles; all P-values were 2-sided. Data are as of 01 Apr 2013, with a median follow-up of 20 (0.1–28) mos. Minimum follow-up for pts still on study was 18 mos. Results A total of 209 (78%) pts required DR/I at least once within 12 mos: 172 pts (64%) had at least 1 dose reduction (median time to first dose reduction was 64 days). In pts with 〉1 dose reduction (n=75, 28%), the median time between the first and second reduction was 91 days. Among pts with a dose reduction at any time, 35% re-escalated to 45 mg daily. Dose interruption was experienced by 199 (75%) pts (median total duration of 35 days). The most common reason for DR/I was thrombocytopenia (33%). For pts with average dose intensity ≤27 mg/day (N=89), 〉27 to ≤42 mg/day (N=88), and 〉42 mg/day (N=90), respectively, the median age was 62, 62, and 56 yrs; median time since initial diagnosis was 11, 7, and 6 yrs; each group had received a median of 3 prior TKIs. Among these tertiles, the best response to the most recent dasatinib- or nilotinib-containing regimen was MCyR or better in 21%, 22%, and 35%; CCyR or better in 11%, 14%, and 23%; MMR or better in 1%, 2%, and 6%, respectively. Within 12 mos of the first dose, median duration of treatment exposure was 356 (26–366), 366 (51–366) and 366 (3–366) days, respectively. Twenty-nine pts had 27 to ≤42 mg/day and 〉42 mg/day. Response rates were lower in pts with average dose intensity ≤27 mg/day; however, these pts still achieved MCyR, CCyR, and MMR rates that substantially exceeded those reported with the most recent dasatinib- or nilotinib-containing regimen. Conclusions Higher dose intensity of ponatinib was associated with higher response rates in this heavily pretreated CP-CML population, but lower dose intensity still led to positive clinical outcomes. It should be noted that higher responses to the most recent dasatinib- or nilotinib-containing regimen were also seen in pts with higher average dose intensity. In summary, these data indicate that although optimal responses were seen with average ponatinib dose intensity 〉42 mg/day, pts can be effectively managed with dose reduction or interruption if clinically indicated. Disclosures: Pinilla-Ibarz: Novartis, Ariad: Research Funding; Novartis, Ariad, BMS and Pfizer: Speakers Bureau. Cortes:Ariad, Pfizer, Teva: Consultancy; Ariad, BMS, Novartis, Pfizer, Teva: Research Funding. Kim:BMS, Novartis, IL-Yang: Consultancy; BMS, Novartis, Pfizer, ARIAD, IL-Yang: Research Funding; BMS, Novartis, Pfizer, IL-Yang: Honoraria; BMS, Novartis, Pfizer: Speakers Bureau; BMS, Pfizer: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Le Coutre:Novartis: Research Funding; Novartis, BMS, Pfizer: Honoraria. Paquette:Ariad, BMS, Novartis: Consultancy; Ariad, BMS, Novartis: Honoraria; Ariad, BMS, Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Chuah:Novartis, BMS: Honoraria. Nicolini:Novartis, ARIAD, Teva: Consultancy; Novartis, BMS: Research Funding; Novartis, BMS, Teva, Pfizer, ARIAD: Honoraria; Novartis, BMS, TEva: Speakers Bureau; Novartis, ARIAD, Teva, Pfizer: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Apperley:Novartis: Research Funding; Ariad, Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis, Pfizer, Teva: Honoraria. DeAngelo:Araid, Novartis, BMS: Consultancy. Abruzzese:BMS, Novartis: Consultancy. Rea:BMS, Novartis, Pfizer, Ariad, Teva: Honoraria. Baccarani:ARIAD, Novartis, BMS: Consultancy; ARIAD, Novartis, BMS, Pfizer, Teva: Honoraria; ARIAD, Novartis, BMS, Pfizer, Teva: Speakers Bureau. Muller:Novartis, BMS, ARIAD: Consultancy; Novartis, BMS: Research Funding; Novartis, BMS, ARIAD: Honoraria. Gambacorti-Passerini:Pfizer: Research Funding; Pfizer, BMS: Honoraria. Lustgarten:ARIAD: employees of and own stock/stock options in ARIAD Pharmaceuticals, Inc Other, Employment. Rivera:ARIAD: employees of and own stock/stock options in ARIAD Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Other, Employment. Clackson:ARIAD: employees of and own stock/stock options in ARIAD Pharmaceuticals, Inc Other, Employment. Turner:ARIAD: Employment. Haluska:ARIAD: employees of and own stock/stock options in ARIAD Pharmaceuticals, Inc Other, Employment. Deininger:BMS, ARIAD, NOVARTIS: Consultancy; BMS, NOVARTIS, CELGENE, GILEAD: Research Funding; ARIAD, NOVARTIS: Advisory Boards, Advisory Boards Other. Hochhaus:Ariad, Novartis, BMS, MSD, Pfizer: Research Funding; Novartis, BMS, Pfizer: Honoraria. Hughes:Novartis, BMS, ARIAD: Honoraria, Research Funding. Goldman:ARIAD: Honoraria. Shah:Ariad, Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding. Kantarjian:ARIAD, Novartis, BMS, Phizer: Research Funding. Talpaz:Ariad, BMS, Sanofi, INCYTE: Research Funding; Ariad, Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Ariad, Sanofi, Novartis: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Description: Abstract 915 Background: Many patients (pts) with advanced Ph+ leukemias experience failure of all currently available tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) targeting BCR-ABL and have limited treatment options. Ponatinib is a potent pan-BCR-ABL inhibitor that is active against native and mutated forms of BCR-ABL, including the TKI resistant T315I mutant. The efficacy and safety of ponatinib (45 mg orally once daily) in pts with AP-CML, BP-CML, or Ph+ ALL were evaluated in a phase 2, international, open-label clinical trial. Methods: The PACE trial enrolled 449 pts, including 85 AP-CML, 62 BP-CML, and 32 Ph+ ALL. Pts were resistant or intolerant (R/I) to dasatinib or nilotinib, or had the T315I mutation at baseline. AP-CML, BP-CML, and Ph+ ALL pts were assigned to 1 of 4 cohorts: AP-CML R/I, AP-CML T315I, BP-CML/Ph+ ALL R/I, BP-CML/Ph+ ALL T315I. Two AP-CML pts were not assigned to a cohort (post-imatinib, did not have T315I at baseline) and were excluded from efficacy analyses and included in safety analyses. The primary endpoint was major hematologic response (MaHR) at any time within 6 mos after treatment initiation. Data as of 23 July 2012 are reported, with a minimum follow-up of 9 mos (median 13 [4 to 21], 6 [0.1 to 18], and 6 [0.1 to 16] mos for AP-CML, BP-CML, and Ph+ ALL, respectively). Results: The median age for AP-CML, BP-CML, and Ph+ ALL pts was 60, 53, and 62 yrs, respectively. Median time from initial disease diagnosis to start of ponatinib was 7, 4, and 1.5 yrs, respectively. Pts were heavily pretreated: 94% received prior imatinib, 88% dasatinib, 61% nilotinib; 8% received 1 prior approved TKI, 39% received 2, and 53% received 3. Sixteen percent had undergone prior stem cell transplant. In pts previously treated with dasatinib or nilotinib (N=171), 94% had a history of resistance to dasatinib or nilotinib, 6% were purely intolerant. Reported MaHR rates with the most recent dasatinib or nilotinib therapy were 35% AP-CML, 16% BP-CML, 43% Ph+ ALL. At the time of analysis, 59% of AP-CML, 8% of BP-CML, and 9% of Ph+ ALL pts remained on study. Overall, the most common reasons for discontinuation were progressive disease (19%, 50%, and 53%, respectively) and adverse events (AEs; 11%, 16%, and 6%, respectively). Hematologic and cytogenetic response rates are shown in the table; MaHR and MCyR were observed across cohorts. MMR was achieved by 14% of AP-CML pts (14% R/I, 17% T315I). There was a trend for higher response rates among pts who received fewer prior approved TKIs. In AP-CML pts, the differences in MaHR rates by number of prior approved TKIs (1: 3/4 [75%]; 2: 20/33 [61%]; 3: 24/46 [52%]) were not significant (Fisher's Exact); differences in MCyR rates (1: 4/4 [100%]); 2: 13/33 [39%]; 3: 15/46 [33%]) were significant for pts treated with 1 vs 2 (p=0.0360) and 1 vs 3 prior approved TKIs (p=0.0168). Of pts achieving MaHR, 42% of AP-CML and 35% of BP-CML/Ph+ ALL pts were projected (Kaplan-Meier) to remain in MaHR at 1 yr. In AP-CML, the median progression-free survival (PFS) was estimated (Kaplan-Meier) as 80 (range 6 to 88) wks; the probability of maintaining PFS at 6 mos and 1 yr was estimated as 80% and 57%, respectively. Median overall survival (OS) had not yet been reached; the probability of OS at 6 mos and 1 yr was estimated (Kaplan-Meier) as 96% and 85%, respectively. In BP-CML/Ph+ ALL, median PFS was estimated as 18 (range 0.1 to 74) wks; the probability of maintaining PFS at 6 mos and 1 yr was estimated as 34% and 20%, respectively. Median OS was estimated as 30 (range 0.4 to 77) wks; the probability of OS at 6 mos and 1 yr was estimated as 54% and 34%, respectively. Ponatinib was generally well-tolerated; the most common treatment-related AEs were thrombocytopenia (29%), rash (25%), and neutropenia (22%). The most common serious treatment-related AEs were thrombocytopenia (3%) and pancreatitis (3%). Rash was generally grade 1 or 2 in severity. Thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, and pancreatitis were typically reported early in treatment and were manageable with dose modification. Conclusions: Ponatinib was generally well-tolerated and had substantial activity in pts with AP-CML, BP-CML, or Ph+ ALL, regardless of mutation status or prior therapy. Data with a minimum follow-up of 12 mos will be presented Disclosures: Kantarjian: Novartis: Consultancy; Pfizer: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; ARIAD: Research Funding. Off Label Use: ponatinib. Kim:Novartis, Bristol Myers-Squibb, Pfizer, ARIAD, and Il-Yang: Consultancy, Employment, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Pinilla-Ibarz:Novartis, BMS: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. le Coutre:Novartis and BMS: Honoraria. Paquette:ARIAD: Consultancy. Chuah:Novartis and Bristol Myers-Squibb: Honoraria. Nicolini:Novartis, Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer, ARIAD: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Apperley:Novartis, Bristol Myers-Squibb, and ARIAD: Honoraria, Research Funding. Talpaz:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Millenium: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; ARIAD: Research Funding; Deciphera: Research Funding; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Abruzzese:Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Rea:Bristol Myers-Squibb, Novartis, and Teva: Honoraria. Baccarani:ARIAD, Novartis, Bristol Myers-Squibb, and Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Muller:ARIAD: Consultancy. Wong:MolecularMD Corp: Employment, Equity Ownership. Lustgarten:ARIAD Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Rivera:ARIAD Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Clackson:ARIAD: Employment, Equity Ownership. Turner:ARIAD: Employment, Equity Ownership. Haluska:ARIAD: Employment, Equity Ownership. Guilhot:ARIAD: Honoraria. Hochhaus:ARIAD, Novartis, Bristol Myers-Squibb, Pfizer, and MSD: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Hughes:Novartis, BMS, ARIAD: Honoraria, Research Funding. Goldman:Novartis, Bristol Myers Squibb, Amgen: Honoraria. Shah:ARIAD Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy. Cortes:Novartis, BMS, ARIAD, Pfizer, and Chemgenex: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Description: Abstract 163 Background: Despite progress in Ph+ leukemia therapy, patients who experience failure of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and those with the T315I BCR-ABL mutation have limited treatment options. Ponatinib is an oral TKI developed using computational and structure-based design with optimal binding to the BCR-ABL active site. At clinically achievable concentrations, ponatinib demonstrated potent in vitro activity against native BCR-ABL and all BCR-ABL mutants tested, including T315I. The efficacy and safety of ponatinib (45 mg orally once daily) in patients with Ph+ leukemia were evaluated in a phase 2, international, open-label clinical trial. Methods: 449 patients resistant or intolerant (R/I) to dasatinib or nilotinib or with the T315I mutation confirmed at entry were enrolled and assigned to 1 of 6 cohorts: chronic phase (CP)-CML R/I (N=203), CP-CML T315I (N=64), accelerated phase (AP)-CML R/I (N=65), AP-CML T315I (N=18), blast phase (BP)-CML/Ph+ALL R/I (N=48), BP-CML/Ph+ALL T315I (N=46). Five patients (3 CP-CML, 2 AP-CML) without confirmed T315I and not R/I to dasatinib or nilotinib were treated, but not assigned to a cohort; they were included in safety analyses. The primary endpoint was major cytogenetic response (MCyR) at any time within 12 months for CP-CML and major hematologic response (MaHR) at any time within 6 months for advanced Ph+ leukemia. The trial is ongoing. Data as of 23 July 2012 are reported: median follow-up 11 (0.1 to 21) months; minimum follow-up 9 months. Results: Median age was 59 (18–94) yrs; 53% were male. Median time from diagnosis to ponatinib was 6 (0.3–28) yrs. Patients were heavily pretreated: 96% received prior imatinib, 84% dasatinib, 65% nilotinib; median number of prior TKIs was 3, with 53% exposed to all 3 approved TKIs. In patients previously treated with dasatinib or nilotinib (N=427), 88% had a history of resistance and 12% were purely intolerant to dasatinib or nilotinib. Best prior response to most recent dasatinib or nilotinib was 26% MCyR or better in CP-CML, and 23% MaHR or better in advanced Ph+ leukemia. Frequent BCR-ABL mutations confirmed at entry were: 29% T315I, 8% F317L, 4% E255K, 4% F359V, 3% G250E. No mutations were detected in 44%. The primary endpoint response rates (see Table) in each cohort exceeded the prespecified statistical criteria for success. In CP-CML and AP-CML R/I (the 3 largest cohorts), 95% CIs exceeded the prespecified response rate. Median time to response (for responders) was 84 days in CP-CML, 112 days in AP-CML, 55 days in BP-CML/Ph+ALL. Responses were durable; the estimated (Kaplan-Meier) probability of responders maintaining the primary endpoint at 1 yr was 91% in CP-CML, 42% in AP-CML, 35% in BP-CML/Ph+ALL. In CP-CML, 46% had complete cytogenetic response and molecular response rates were 32% MMR, 20% MR4, and 12% MR4.5. Response rates were higher in patients exposed to fewer prior TKIs and those with shorter disease duration. Similar response rates were observed in patients with and without BCR-ABL mutations. In CP-CML, response rates were higher in those with T315I; however, a post hoc analysis found that presence of T315I was not a predictor of response. Instead, the difference in response rate was explained by T315I patients' younger age, shorter duration of leukemia, and exposure to less prior therapy. At the time of analysis, 52% of patients remained on therapy (66% CP-CML). The most frequent reasons for discontinuation were progression (18%) and AEs (12%). The most common drug-related AEs were thrombocytopenia (36%), rash (33%), and dry skin (31%). Pancreatitis was the most common drug-related SAE (5%); however, it occurred early and was managed with dose modification (1 patient discontinued due to pancreatitis). Conclusions: Ponatinib has substantial activity and is generally well tolerated in these heavily pretreated Ph+ leukemia patients who have limited available treatment options. Data with a minimum follow-up of 12 months will be presented. Disclosures: Cortes: Novartis, BMS, ARIAD, Pfizer, and Chemgenex: Consultancy, Research Funding. Kim:Novartis, BMS, Pfizer, ARIAD, Il-Yang: Consultancy, Employment, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Pinilla-Ibarz:Novartis, BMS: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. le Coutre:Novartis and BMS: Honoraria. Paquette:ARIAD: Consultancy. Chuah:Novartis, Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria. Nicolini:Novartis, Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer, ARIAD: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Apperley:Novartis, Bristol Myers-Squibb, and ARIAD: Honoraria, Research Funding. Talpaz:Deciphera: Research Funding; ARIAD: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Millenium: Research Funding; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Abruzzese:BMS, Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Rea:Bristol Myers-Squibb, Novartis, and Teva: Honoraria. Baccarani:ARIAD, Novartis, Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Muller:ARIAD: Consultancy. Wong:MolecularMD Corp: Employment, Equity Ownership. Lustgarten:ARIAD Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Rivera:ARIAD: Employment, Equity Ownership. Clackson:ARIAD: Employment, Equity Ownership. Turner:ARIAD: Employment, Equity Ownership. Haluska:ARIAD: Employment, Equity Ownership. Guilhot:ARIAD: Honoraria. Hochhaus:ARIAD, Novartis, BMS, Pfizer, MSD: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Hughes:Novartis, BMS, ARIAD: Honoraria, Research Funding. Goldman:Novartis, Bristol Myers-Squibb, and Amgen: Honoraria. Shah:ARIAD: Consultancy, Research Funding; Briston-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy. Kantarjian:Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; ARIAD: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding.

Description: Copper deficiency has long been recognized as cause of hematopoietic dysfunction, and diagnosis is straightforward if it is pursued. Over a three year period, we diagnosed copper deficiency in seven pts referred to our university-based hematology and BMT outpatient clinics for evaluation and treatment of myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) or neutropenia/anemia. This represents approximately 3% of new outpatient referrals carrying an ICD-9 code corresponding to MDS or neutropenia. Patient characteristics are shown in Table 1. Three of the seven pts carried a presumptive diagnosis of MDS, and one had received several months of decitabine therapy. Two patients were actually referred for consideration of stem cell transplantation; the others were referred for evaluation of cytopenias. Six of the seven patients had been evaluated by a hematologist prior to referral. Only 3 of 7 pts in our series had recognized risk factors for copper deficiency such as prior gastric bypass or other GI dysfunction; postulated risk factors in the other pts are included in Table1. All pts in our series were anemic and leukopenic, with absolute neutropenia at presentation. In contrast, platelet counts were normal or elevated in all pts, consistent with most previous reports. Five of the seven pts in our series had neuropathy or myelopathy of variable severity. The hematologic abnormalities responded rapidly and completely to oral and/or IV copper replacement in all pts, although neurologic recovery was slow and incomplete. Conclusions: Our experience indicates that copper deficiency is a relatively common cause of neutropenia and anemia, and the consequences of missing the diagnosis may be substantial, including performance of unnecessary transfusion, chemotherapy, and even stem cell transplantation. Normal or elevated platelet counts and concomitant neuropathy or myelopathy are important clues to the diagnosis. Furthermore, copper deficiency must be considered even in pts without obvious GI absorption abnormalities. Serum copper and ceruloplasmin assays should be incorporated into the routine evaluation of most pts with cytopenias and suspected MDS. Age/gender Ref. diagnosis Risk factor Associated symptoms Serum copper (80–155 mcg/dl) Ceruloplasmin (21–53 mg/dl 53F MDS–RAEB unknown Severe sensory-motor neuropathy 29 7 43F MDS–RA Excess carbonated soda intake? Severe sensory-motor neuropathy 2

Description: Background: Therapeutic options for steroid-refractory chronic graft-versus-host-disease (cGVHD) are limited. Extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP) is a photoimmune therapeutic modality to treat cGVHD that is tolerated relatively well, but its mechanism has not been fully defined. One model for the mechanism of ECP in cGVHD is dendritic cell (DC) depletion and T-cell modification (Alcindor, T, et al., BLOOD2001, 98:1622). We tested this hypothesis by determining the numbers of circulating DCs and T-cells prior to ECP and during therapy in patients with cGVHD, and correlating cell numbers with response. Methods: This study was IRB approved. We studied 25 adult pts (median age 43 yrs, range 23–71) with histories of hematological malignancies including NHL (n=7), AML (n=5), CML (n=5), ALL (n=3), MDS (n=3), Hodgkin’s lymphoma (n=1), and CLL (n=1), who developed cGVHD after allogeneic, HLA-matched HPCT. Ten pts had progressive, 9 pts had de novo, and 6 pts had interrupted cGVHD. Initial treatment of cGVHD included corticosteroids in all pts. At the time of ECP initiation, pts were either dependent upon corticosteroids for control of cGvHD (21 pts), or steroid-intolerant (4 pts). No pts had received ECP prior to this study. ECP was administered 2 consecutive days every week for the first 2 months, two times a week every other week for 2 months, and then two times a week once a month. In addition to ECP, pts received steroids (21), MMF (n=13), FK506 (n=15), cyclosporine (n=3), MTX (n=3), rapamycin (n=1), rituximab (n=1) or pentostatin (n=1). Sites of cGVHD included skin (n=25), oropharynx (n=7), liver (n=5), gut (n=4), lung (n=1), and eye (n=1). A good response was defined as having 〉 50% reduction in the corticosteroid dose within 4 months of starting ECP, with improved or stable lesions on skin and other sites. For steroid-intolerant pts, clinical parameters such as improvement in skin condition were used to identify responders. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells were analyzed before ECP began and every 2 months during ECP therapy. The numbers of plasmacytoid DCs (pDC, Lin− CD123+ CD11c− HLA-DR+), myeloid DCs (mDC, Lin− CD123− CD11c+ HLA-DR+), and CD4+ and CD8+ T-cells in blood were determined by flow cytometry. Results: Median follow up of the 25 pts was 47.1 months (range, 8.6–90.9) from the time of transplant. The median number of ECP treatments was 26 (range 2–68). Fourteen pts (56%) had good response, and 11 were non-responders. The median time between HPCT and onset of cGVHD was similar for responders (8.6 months, range 3.3–34.7) and non-responders (6.1, range 3.4–43.8, p=0.52). The median time between HPCT and ECP was also similar for the two groups (32.3 months, range 13.1–60.0, vs. 21.9 months, range 4.1–47.5, respectively, p=0.12). Responders had an estimated 2-yr survival of 88% after starting ECP, vs 18% for non-responders (p=0.004). Two responders died at 11.2 and 31.2 months after starting ECP, compared with 7 non-responders (median 4.4 months, range 2.8–22.1). Non-responders had a relative risk of death of 11.6 compared with responders (p=0.022). Average prednisone doses for responders and non-responders were comparable, averaging 24.3 and 41.8 mg/day, respectively (p=0.11). Responders had higher baseline numbers of pDCs (average 5.8 vs. 0.6 cells/mcL, p=0.025) and mDCs (average 15 vs. 3.8 cells/mcL, p= 0.01) compared with non-responders. Baseline CD4+ T-cell numbers were higher in responders compared with non-responders (average 623 vs. 178 cells/mcL, p=0.005), as were CD8+ T-cell numbers (712 vs. 251 cells/mcL, p=0.047). Contrary to the original hypothesis, there were no consistent changes in the numbers of circulating DCs and T-cells among responders over a 12-month period. Receiver-operator characteristics (ROC) analysis showed that baseline numbers of blood mDCs of 〉3.7 cells/mcL prior to ECP had 79% sensitivity and 82% specificity to predict response of cGvHD patients to ECP. Conclusion: Our results demonstrate that higher numbers of circulating DCs and T-cells predict response to ECP in pts with cGVHD. Response to ECP was significantly associated with improved survival in univariate and multivariate analyses (p

Description: The optimal therapy for patients with chemotherapy sensitive relapsed or refractory lymphoma is high dose therapy followed by autologous hematopoietic stem cell rescue. Rituximab (R) has been added to salvage regimens to increase response rate, thereby making more patients eligible for high dose therapy. However, when R is used prior to the salvage regimen, it has been associated with a delay in platelet engraftment (Hoerr et al, J Clin Oncol. 2004 Nov 15;22:4561–6). We have previously noted in a retrospective review of 117 patients with lymphoma treated with high dose therapy and autologous HSC transplant that concurrent treatment with R did not impact stem cell collection or post transplant engraftment (Kaufman et al, BBMT, February 2005, Sup 1, [11.2] 6). AMD3100 (plerixafor) is a CXCR4 inhibitor that, when used with G-CSF, more effectively mobilizes stem cells than G-CSF alone. In order to test the hypothesis that R does not negatively impact stem cell collection or post-transplant engraftment when AMD3100 is used with G-CSF, we performed a prospective trial of the use of AMD3100, G-CSF and R for patients with CD20 (+) relapsed chemosensitive lymphoma versus the use of AMD3100 and G-CSF for patients with CD20 (−) relapsed chemosensitive lymphoma. Patients were treated with 2 cycles of ICE ± R depending on CD20 status of the malignant cell. Patients who had a response proceeded to mobilization with AMD3100 and G-CSF for the CD20 (−) group (Arm A) or AMD3100, G-CSF, and four weekly doses of R at 375 mg/m2 (two doses prior to G-CSF and AMD3100, and two doses after) for the CD20 (+) group (Arm B). After collection, patients were treated with high dose therapy with targeted intravenous busulfan, etoposide and cyclophosphamide followed by autologous HSC transplantation. Patient demographics, mobilization characteristics, graft yield, engraftment data, and toxicity were assessed. 21 patients have been accrued. 11 in Arm A (10 Hodgkin Lymphoma {HL} and 1 with Peripheral T Cell Lymphoma) and 10 in Arm B (2 HL and 7 NHL, and 1 with a composite HL/NHL). The median number of days of collection was 2 for each arm. The median CD34 (+) collected was 4.64 * 106 CD34+ cells/kg in Arm A compared to 5.25 * 106 CD34+ cells/kg in Arm B (p=0.6) The median number of CD34(+)/CD38(−) was similar for both arms. As expected from in vivo B-cell depletion, the percentage of CD19 (+) cells in the product was decreased in Arm B compared to Arm A (2.24% vs. 0.09%, p

Description: Background: T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia/lymphoma (T-ALL/LBL) in adults is an aggressive bone marrow malignancy that historically has a poor prognosis. Hyper-CVAD/methotrexate-cytarabine (hyper CVAD) regimen is a commonly used induction regimen following the protocol developed at MD Anderson Cancer center. Recent reports from Swedish Cancer Registry showed that relapse rates were much higher than expected with this regimen. We report our retrospective experiences across three different centers, Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University (Atlanta), University of Alabama Cancer Center (Birmingham) and Moffitt Cancer Center, (Tampa), with the use of this regimen for management of T-ALL/LBL. Methods: We conducted a retrospective chart review of all adult T-ALL/T-LBL cases at three large cancer centers between the years 2005-2015, treated at the physician's discretion. Data collected included patient demographics, tumor characteristics (white count at diagnosis, flow cytometry, FISH, cytogenetics, bone marrow involvement), treatment regimens and patient outcomes. Since hyper CVAD is a commonly used regimen outside of clinical trials, we focused our analysis on outcomes with this regimen. This regimen consisted of 4 courses of hyper-CVAD (fractionated cyclophosphamide, vincristine [VCR], doxorubicin, dexamethasone; the odd courses 1, 3, 5, 7); and 4 courses of MTX-Ara-C (methotrexate-cytarabine; the even courses 2, 4, 6, 8). CNS prophylaxis was given to all patients as per standard of care recommendations. All patients eligible for maintenance received 2 years of POMP (6 mercaptopurine, methotrexate, vincristine and prednisone) maintenance. Relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were examined looking at medians and interquartile ranges of times to events. Kaplan Meier curves provided a graphical representation of the survival probability. Results: The final analysis included 95 adult patients with 64/95 (67%) patients receiving hyper-CVAD induction. Among the hyper-CVAD patients the median age at diagnosis was 30 (range 17-74). 71% of patients were male. Median white cell count (WBC) was 13.6/mm3 (1.7-500). Cytogenetic analysis revealed diploid in 36, complex (1 or more abnormalities in 16) and was not available in 12. WBC count was 〉 100,000/mm3 in 9 patients. 14 patients had mediastinal disease while 7 had CNS disease at diagnosis. Hyper-CVAD was the primary induction regimen in 56/64. Other patients either started on non-hyper CVAD induction prior to switching (n=3) or had asparaginase added to induction (n=5). The median number of cycles given as 7 (range 2-10) with 27(45%) patients receiving the planned 8 cycles. 37 patients did not complete 8 cycles due to stem cell transplant in remission (n=12), progressive disease (n=10) and unclear reasons (n=15). After induction therapy, remission status was unknown in 3 patients while 43/61 patients (70%) achieved remission. Maintenance with POMP was started in 21 patients that were in remission while 12 patients were taken to transplant without starting on maintenance. At the time of analysis, 23/64 (35%) patients are alive. The median relapse free survival was 387 days (12.9 months) and the median overall survival was 536 days (17.6 months). Excluding one patient lost to follow up, 44/63 (69.8%) relapsed. There was no difference in relapse versus non relapse patients in terms of median age (30 vs 33 years), median WBC at diagnosis (13.2 vs 13.6 mm3). Relapse rate was lower in patients with diploid karyotype (22/36, 61%) as compared to those with complex karyotype (14/16). Median survival in patients post relapse was 150 days. Only 9 patients were able to go for transplant after relapse with post transplant survival also being low (6 deaths). For the entire group, the two year survival was 35%. Conclusion: Our multi-institutional retrospective review shows that outcomes are poor across various centers in patients outside of clinical trials. This is the largest reported series of patients with adult T-ALL/T-LBL treated with hyper-CVAD outside of clinical trials. This data warrants investigation with newer agents to improve outcomes in this disease. Figure 1. Relapse free survival and overall survival in patients treated with hyper-CVAD (n=64) Figure 1. Relapse free survival and overall survival in patients treated with hyper-CVAD (n=64) Disclosures Kota: Leukemia Lymphoma Society: Research Funding; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Hathaway:OnQ Health: Research Funding. Shah:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Acetylon: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; PLexus Communications: Honoraria; Pharmacyclics: Speakers Bureau; Spectrum: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Honoraria; Rosetta Genomics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Jillella:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Borate:Genoptix: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Gilead: Speakers Bureau; Alexion: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Speakers Bureau.