ALBERT

Description: Abstract 783FN2 Introduction: The advent of second generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) in the front line treatment setting of chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) has tightened the evaluation of imatinib response. Early assessment of response markers might identify slow responders harboring a BCR-ABL positive clone with an inferior susceptibility to tyrosine kinase inhibition. This group of patients could benefit from an early dose escalation or a change of treatment to a second generation TKI thus avoiding the risk of disease progression. Therefore we sought to evaluate the impact of molecular and cytogenetic response levels after 3 months of imatinib treatment on the further course of disease. Patients and methods: A total of 1,340 patients (median age 52 years, range 16–88, 40% female) were included into the randomized German CML study IV and treated with an imatinib based therapy consisting of imatinib 400 mg/d (n=381), imatinib 800 mg/d (n=399) and combinations of standard dose imatinib with interferon alpha (n=402) and low-dose cytarabine (n=158). Median follow-up was 4.7 years (range 0–9). Molecular response after 3 months was assessed in 743 patients, cytogenetic response in 498 patients. The BCR-ABL expression was determined by quantitative RT-PCR and standardized according to the international scale (BCR-ABL IS). Only patients expressing typical BCR-ABL transcripts (b2a2, b3a2, b2a2 and b3a2) were considered. Cytogenetic response was determined by conventional metaphase analysis. Disease progression was defined by the incidence of accelerated phase, blastic phase or death from any reason. A landmark analysis was performed for progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Results: Disease progression was observed in 149 patients (11.1%), 127 patients died (9.5%). After 3 months of treatment the median BCR-ABL IS was 2.6% (0-100), the median proportion of Philadelphia chromosome positive metaphases (Ph+) was 8% (0-100). The BCR-ABL landmarks of 1% and 10% after 3 months of imatinib both proved to discriminate significantly for PFS and OS: BCR-ABL IS 65% (n=84), p=0.004 for PFS and p=0.011 for OS. A 3 group stratification did not reach statistical significance. Conclusions: The achievement of molecular and cytogenetic response landmarks after 3 months of imatinib treatment is predictive for long term progression free and overall survival. At 3 months a BCR-ABL IS of 10% or more is associated with a 5-year overall survival of 87% suggesting an early change of treatment, whereas a BCR-ABL IS of 1% or less indicates a favorable 5-year overall survival of 97%. Disclosures: Schnittger: Münchner Leukämie Labor: Equity Ownership. Haferlach:Münchner Leukämie Labor: Equity Ownership. German CML Study Group:Deutsche Krebshilfe: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; BMBF: Research Funding; EU: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Essex: Research Funding.

Description: Introduction The outcome of elderly patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) treated with imatinib has been studied in several trials. However, there are no reports on the effects of different imatinib dosages in older vs. younger CML patients. Methods To evaluate the efficacy of imatinib in the elderly, we analyzed data from the German CML-Study IV, a randomized 5-arm trial designed to optimize imatinib therapy alone or in combination. There was no upper age limit for inclusion. Patients with BCR-ABL positive CML in chronic phase randomized to imatinib 400 mg/d (IM400) or imatinib 800 mg/d (IM800) were compared, stratified according to median age at diagnosis in western populations ≥ 65 years vs. 〈 65 years, regarding effectively administered imatinib dose, time to hematologic, cytogenetic and molecular remissions, adverse events (AEs), rates of progression to accelerated phase (AP) and blast crisis (BC), survival, and causes of death. The full 800 mg dose was given after a 6 weeks run-in period with imatinib 400 mg/d to avoid excessive cytopenias. The dose could then be reduced according to tolerability for maximum patients' compliance. Results From July 2002 through March 2012, 1,551 patients were randomized, 828 of these to IM400 or IM800. Median age of these patients was 52 years (IM400: 53 years; IM800: 51 years). 784 patients were evaluable for follow-up (IM400: 382; IM800: 402). 193 patients were ≥ 65 years, 591 〈 65 years. 110 patients (29%) on IM400 and 83 (21%) on IM800 were ≥ 65 years. Median observation time on IM400 was 63.0 months in the elderly and 67.6 months in the younger group, on IM800 50.9 months in the elderly and 50.1 months in the younger group. The median dose per day was lower for elderly patients on IM800 (421 mg/d for patients ≥ 65 years vs. 556 mg/d for patients 〈 65 years), with the highest median dose in the first year (466mg/d for patients ≥ 65 years vs. 630mg/d for patients 〈 65 years). The median dose for patients on IM400 was 400 mg/d for both age groups. There was no difference between age groups in achieving a complete hematologic remission or a complete cytogenetic remission, neither if IM400 and IM800 were combined, nor in an analysis according to treatment groups. Elderly patients on IM400 achieved major molecular remission (MMR) and deep molecular remission (MR4) significantly later than younger patients (18.1 vs. 15.9 months, p=0.013; 54.4 vs. 33.3 months, p=0.012, respectively) whereas no difference was detected for patients on IM800 (11.9 vs. 10.5 months; 24.2 vs. 26.1 months, respectively). Imatinib was well tolerated in elderly patients with only few WHO grade 3-4 AEs being more frequent in the elderly than in younger patients (dermatologic AEs on IM400: 5.4 vs. 0.4%; infections on IM800: 8.3 vs. 2.5%). There were no significant differences between age groups in probabilities of progression to AP or BC neither if IM400 and IM800 were combined, nor in an analysis according to treatment groups. Five-year age-adjusted relative survival for elderly patients was comparable to that of younger patients. Conclusion We could demonstrate that elderly patients achieved molecular remissions significantly later when treated with standard dose imatinib but not when treated with higher imatinib dosages. As the safety profile of IM800 in senior patients was favorable too we conclude, that the optimal dose for elderly patients could be higher than 400 mg/d. Disclosures: Müller: Ariad: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Hochhaus:Pfizer: Consultancy; ARIAD: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Travel Other. Hehlmann:BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Saussele:BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding, Travel, Travel Other; Pfizer: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Travel Other.

Description: Abstract 862 Rapid relapse after discontinuation of imatinib, the need for indefinite therapy and residual disease in most patients are the major challenges in management of CML. Combinations of imatinib with IFN simultaneously, or consecutively preceding imatinib, or with araC may improve treatment outcome. The German CML Study Group therefore designed a randomized trial to compare standard imatinib vs. imatinib + interferon alpha (IFN) vs. imatinib + low dose araC vs. imatinib after IFN failure (for low- and intermediate-risk patients, high risk patients received imatinib 800 mg instead). The current evaluation represents the prefinal results of the pilot phase of the trial. Inclusion criteria were newly diagnosed BCR/ABL positive CML in chronic phase (CP). Primary aims are: prolongation of survival (overall, OS, and progression free, PFS), determination of rates of hematologic, cytogenetic and molecular remissions, adverse events (AE) and role of allografting. By the end of 2005, 670 patients were randomized, 13 had to be excluded (no CML (n=3), pregnancy, no CP (n=1 each), imatinib 800 mg (n=8)). Analysis was according to intention to treat. 657 patients were evaluable (174 with imatinib 400 mg, 196 with imatinib+IFN, 158 with imatinib+araC and 129 with imatinib after IFN-failure). 656 patients were evaluable for hematologic, 611 for cytogenetic, and 618 for molecular responses. Patient characteristics of treatment arms were similar for age (median 53 years), sex (40% female), median values for Hb (12.6 g/dl), WBC (66.2/μl), platelets (383/μl) and for Euro risk score (low 35%, intermediate 54%, high 10%). The median dose of imatinib was 400mg/die in all arms, of araC 10 mg per treatment day and of IFN 4.2 Mio I.U./die in the imatinib after IFN arm and 1.8 Mio I.U./die in the imatinib+IFN arm. Median observation time was 57.3 months. 55 patients died, 73 patients were transplanted in 1st CP, 81 patients progressed, 59 patients were switched to second generation TKIs. After 3 years 126 patients (72%) of the imatinib 400mg arm still received the initial therapy as well as 60 patients (30%) of the imatinib+IFN arm and 53 patients (34%) of the imatinib+araC arm. 9 patients (7%) of the imatinib after IFN arm are still on IFN. 5-year OS of all patients is 91%. 5-year PFS of all patients (no death, patient still in first chronic phase) is 87%. 5-year-OS and PFS according to treatment arm are shown in the Table. At 5 years, the cumulative incidences of achieving complete cytogenetic remission or major molecular remission (MMR) as determined by competing risks (death, progression) are not different (Table). Type and severity of adverse events (AE) over a 5-years period did not differ from those reported previously (Table). Hematologic AEs grade III/IV were similar in all therapy arms except leukopenia grade III/IV, which was more frequently observed in the imatinib after IFN arm (14%). Non hematologic AEs were mainly fluid retention, neurological and gastrointestinal symptoms and fatigue. Neurologic symptoms and fatigue were more often reported for the therapy arms with IFN. Imatinib 400mgImatinib+IFNImatinib+AraCImatinib after IFN5-Year Survival and Response RatesOS87%93%92%92% PFS84%91%88%84% CCR92%92 %89%83% MMR83%78%80%70% Adverse Events, WHO Grade III/IVAnemia7%1%3%3% Leukopenia4%5%2%14% Thrombocytopenia5%6%6%6% WHO Grade I-IVEdema15%13%5%0% Neurological5%15%5%22% Gastrointestinal17%27%21%15% Fatigue8%13%9%23% This analysis shows excellent survival and durable response rates in all arms. Currently, survival in all treatment arms is equal to, or better than in IRIS. To verify possible differences in survival, e.g. imatinib 400 mg vs. imatinib + IFN, longer observation is planned. Although cytogenetic and molecular responses in the imatinib after IFN failure arm at 5 years are inferior to that in the other treatment arms, the question of whether the consecutive therapy with IFN first and imatinib after IFN-failure provides a survival advantage requires long term follow-up. Imatinib in combination with, or after IFN, or with low dose araC are feasible and safe treatment modalities. We expect that the study will optimize and improve therapy outcome in CML. Disclosures: German CML Study Group: Deutsche Krebshilfe: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; German Competence Net : Research Funding; European LeukemiaNet: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Essex: Research Funding.

Description: Abstract 357 Treatment of CML with imatinib of 400 mg can be unsatisfactory. Treatment optimization is warranted. The German CML-Study group has therefore conducted a randomized study comparing imatinib 800 mg vs 400 mg vs 400 mg + IFN. A significantly faster achievement of MMR at 12 months has been observed with imatinib 800 mg in a tolerability adapted manner and MMR by 12 months has been found to translate into better overall survival. Since stable CMR has been associated with durable off-treatment remissions we sought to analyse the impact of tolerability-adapted imatinib 800 mg on CMR and survival. Standardized determinations of molecular response and evaluation of its impact on outcome are goals of CML-Study IV. CMR4 is defined as a BCR-ABL/ABL ratio of

Description: Peripheral (mature) T-cell lymphomas (PTCL) are represented by distinct lymphoma entities, many of which with a rather unfavourable clinical outcome as compared to B-cell lymphomas. Standard treatment regimens have not been established, except in primary cutaneous T-cell lymphomas (PCTCL). With regard to the unfavourable prognosis we designed a treatment protocol using chemoimmunotherapy in peripheral T-cell lymphomas except PCTCL and ALK-positive large cell anaplastic T-cell lymphomas, consisting of alemtuzumab 3, 10, 30, 30 mg, days 1–4, fludarabine (Flu) 25 mg/m2 days 2–4, cyclophosphamide (CP) 600 mg/m2 day 3, and doxorubicin (Dox) 50 mg/m2 day 4. Included were patients with primary diagnosis or with first or second relapse. Rationales for this regimen were proven efficacy of CP and Dox in T-cell lymphomas, high efficacy of Flu and CP (FC) in other lymphomas and the possible synergism of antibodies with cytotoxic drugs. So far, 23 patients have been included, 18 are evaluable for response and toxicity. Of the latter, 10 patients were diagnosed with PTCL-NOS, 5 with AILD, one with enteropathy-associated T-cell lymphoma, one with NK-cell lymphoma, and one with T-PLL. 9 patients were enrolled with primary diagnosis and 9 patients in relapse. The median age was 60 years (range 21–77); the median non-age adjusted IPI 2.5 (0–4), 2 in patients with primary diagnosis and 3 in patients with relapse. The overall response rate was 61% (11/18). In patients with primary diagnosis the CR rate was 78% (7/9), one patient achieved no change, and one patient died from treatment associated complications before response could be evaluated. All responding patients are in ongoing CR at 2+, 2+, 6+, 11+, 15+,16+, and 17+ months. In the group of relapsed patients one CR and 3 PR (44%) were observed. The main toxicity was leukocytopenia (81% grade III and IV of all evaluable treatment cycles), other grade III and IV toxicities included anemia (18%), thrombocytopenia (39%), infections (18%) nausea/emesis (9%), and allergic reactions (4%). Ten (56%) patients reactivated CMV without CMV-related disease and one patient with suspected CMV-peumonia. In conclusion, this is the first study demonstrating that alemtuzumab can be integrated into a triple-agent chemotherapy regimen. The combination is effective in the first-line treatment of peripheral T-cell lymphomas, however, regarding the general outcome a longer follow-up period of a larger patient population is required.

Description: The advent of imatinib has considerably changed treatment in chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). Although response rate and duration of response with imatinib monotherapy continue to be impressive, the majority of patients (pts) in complete cytogenetic remission (CCR) retain BCR-ABL transcripts as markers of residual disease and potential cause of relapse. In addition rapid evolvement of blast crises from CCR has been reported. Therefore, we designed an investigator-initiated phase IV prospective trial aiming to address the role of imatinib in combination with interferon alpha (IFN) or Ara-C and treatment intensification with high dose imatinib. In July 2002, the German CML-Study Group has activated the four-armed randomized controlled trial comparing imatinib 400 mg/d with imatinib+IFN, imatinib+Ara-C and imatinib after IFN failure in newly diagnosed pts with chronic phase CML. Randomization is stratified according to prognostic risk groups and not biased by consecutive allogeneic stem cell transplantation (SCT). High risk pts are randomly assigned to primary imatinib-based therapies including a 4th treatment arm with imatinib 800 mg/d. The treatment arm imatinib after IFN failure retains the chance of an IFN-induced CCR with 10 year-survival rates of 70–80%. In case of IFN failure pts are crossed over to imatinib. Allogeneic SCT is recommended for all pts with high risk, imatinib failure and EBMT-score 0–1. By August 2004, 429 pts were randomized: imatinib 400 mg/d (n=103), imatinib+IFN (n=130), imatinib+Ara-C (n=108), imatinib after IFN failure (n=84), and imatinib 800 mg/d (n=4). According to the New CML score, 34% of patients were low risk, 56% intermediate risk, and 10% high risk. At baseline, median WBC count was 63/nl (3.5–513), median platelet count was 385/nl (49–2,799) and median hemoglobin was 12.7 g/dl (6.1–16.6). We sought to evaluate results of the first cohort of pts (n=217) with a 〉12 months follow-up, recruited between 7/2002 and 5/2003 (imatinib 400 mg/d, n=52; imatinib+IFN, n=70; imatinib+Ara-C, n=49; imatinib after IFN failure, n=46). Median age was 56 yrs (16–82), 62% of pts were male. Cytogenetic data are available from 117 pts (68%) randomized to primary imatinib-based therapies. At 12 months, 104 pts (89%) achieved a major cytogenetic remission (Ph+

Description: In spite of favorable response and survival results for the majority of CML patients on imatinib therapy, in a substantial minority imatinib fails or shows suboptimal responses. A treatment optimization study was therefore designed to compare in a randomized fashion standard imatinib vs. imatinib + interferon alpha (IFN) vs. imatinib + low dose araC vs. imatinib after IFN (for low- and intermediate-risk patients) or vs. imatinib 800 mg (for high-risk patients). Inclusion criteria were newly diagnosed BCR/ABL positive CML in chronic phase. In July 2005, randomization to the arms imatinib + araC and imatinib after IFN was discontinued and recruitment for imatinib 800 mg was expanded to low- and intermediate-risk patients. Primary goals are: rates of hematologic, cytogenetic and molecular remissions, duration of chronic phase, overall survival, adverse events and analysis of subsequent allografting. Since its activation in 7/2002, 1203 patients have been randomized. The current evaluation represents the first of three designed, statistically adjusted interim analyses of 710 patients randomized by the end of 2005 with a followup of at least 2 years. Analysis was according to intention to treat. 666 patients (545 with primary imatinib, 121 with primary IFN) were evaluable for hematologic, 621 for cytogenetic, and 631 for molecular responses. Median age was 53 years, 60% were male, median values were for Hb 12.5 g/dl, WBC 71.2/nl and platelets 384/nl, 35% had low, 53% intermediate and 12% high risk (Euro score). Median observation time was 3.5 years. Median duration of IFN pretreatment was

Description: Abstract 3281 Poster Board III-1 Introduction: In the two consecutive German CML studies III and IIIA (recruitment periods from 1995 to 2001 and 1997 to 2004), eligible patients were assigned to early HSCT by genetic randomization according to availability of a matched related donor. After randomization, 113 patients of study III (84% of 135) and 144 of study IIIA (87% of 166) were eventually transplanted in first chronic phase (CP) using a related donor. Despite comparable transplantation protocols and most centers participating in both studies, survival probabilities in study IIIA were significantly better, even when adjusted for the established EBMT risk score (Gratwohl et al., Lancet 1998 [1]), p + 0.0097. For further explanation, the German Registry for Stem Cell Transplantation (DRST) and the Swiss Transplant Working Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (STABMT) were asked for data support. Patients and Methods: The main sample characteristics of the 257 transplanted CML study patients were also applied to the registry patients: diagnosis of CML between 1994 and 2004, first HSCT with a related donor performed in first CP between 1995 and 2004 at an age between 12 and 65 years, and blood or bone marrow as stem cell sources. Thus, additional data of 582 HSCT patients were retrieved from the two registries. Age, recipient sex, donor sex, time between diagnosis and HSCT, calendar year of HSCT, stem cell source, and HLA matching were investigated as potential predictive factors for survival. Then, a sample of patients with the same risk distribution as the 113 patients of study III was randomly drawn from the registry patients. By application of repeated resampling to this new patient group, bootstrap confidence intervals for survival probabilities at various times after HSCT were extractable. This provided the basis to judge whether the survival in study III could be seen as a typical random representation of a sample with an equivalent risk structure or not. The same method was applied to the 144 patients of study IIIA. Results: The 5-year survival probability of all 839 patients resulted in 73% (229 died). Median follow-up time of living patients was 6.7 years. Due to the characteristic plateau of post-transplant survival probabilities, the predictive influence was judged by the Kaplan-Meier method and the log rank statistic. Also consideration of age and time between diagnosis and HSCT as continuous variables seemed less appropriate than working with categorizations. Furthermore, the previously published cut-points “1 year” for time from diagnosis to HSCT ([1]) and “44 years” for age at HSCT (Maywald et al., Leukemia 2006) were independently confirmed to be the best. Cox model and logistic regression with survival status after 3 years both indicated that age at HSCT, HLA matching, time between diagnosis and HSCT, and calendar year of HSCT had independent statistically significant predictive influence on survival (p 〈 0.05). The first two factors had the strongest effects. Calendar year was only influential when distinction was made between HSCT until and after 1999. All possible combinations of the 4 factors could be summarized in 4 risk groups with significantly different survival probabilities (at 5 years: 87%, 76%, 63%, and 24%). Matched for the risk group distribution of study III [study IIIA], a maximum of 290 [428] registry patients could be drawn. For the 290 [428] patients, 5-year survival was 69% [77%] with a 95% bootstrap confidence interval from 63% to 74% [72% to 81%]. Thus, as for all yearly intervals within the first 5 years, the 5-year survival probabilities of studies III: 65% and IIIA: 79% lied within the corresponding confidence intervals. Conclusions: Along with the registry patients, the study data enabled the identification of age at HSCT, HLA matching, time between diagnosis and HSCT, and calendar year of HSCT as factors with independent predictive impact on survival which led to 4 risk groups with statistically significantly different survival probabilities. More favorable-risk patients in study IIIA stood for a better transplantation strategy. In consideration of these different risks, the survival probabilities in both studies did not significantly vary from those of registry samples with matched risk structures. Accordingly, an improved transplantation strategy along with random variation could be considered as an explanation of the significantly different survival probabilities between the two studies. Disclosures: Haferlach: MLL Munich Leukemia Laboratory: Equity Ownership. Hochhaus:Novartis, Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding. Hasford:Novartis: Research Funding. Gratwohl:AMGEN, Roche, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, Pfizer: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy. German CML Study Group:Kompetenznetz Leukämie, European Leukemia Net, Roche, Essex, AMGEN: Research Funding.

Description: Abstract 3411 Background: Dose of therapy and time to response may be different in the elderly as compared to younger patients with CML. This has been reported previously for interferon α (Berger et al., Leukemia 2003). For imatinib, contradictory results have been presented (Rosti et al. Haematologica 2007, Guliotta et al. Blood 2009). Aims: An analysis comparing dose-response relationship in patients more or less than 65 years (y) of age is warranted. Methods: We analysed the German CML-Study IV, a randomized 5-arm trial to optimize imatinib therapy by combination, dose escalation and transplantation. Patients older and younger than 65y randomized to imatinib 400 mg (IM400) or 800 mg (IM800) were compared with regard to time to hematologic, cytogenetic and molecular remissions, imatinib dose, adverse events (AEs) and overall survival (OS). Results: From July 2002 to April 2009, 1311 patients with Ph+ CML in chronic phase were randomized, 623 patients were evaluable, 311 patients for treatment with IM400 and 312 for IM800. 84 (27%) and 66 (21%), respectively, were older than 65 years. All patients were evaluable for hematologic, 578 (140 〉65y and 438