Search

The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of pevonedistat, a neural precursor cell expressed, developmentally down-regulated protein 8 (NEDD8)-activating enzyme inhibitor, on the heart rate-corrected QT (QTc) interval in cancer patients. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive pevonedistat 25 or 50 mg/m

Pevonedistat; Chronic myelomonocytic leukemia Pevonedistat; Leucemia mielomonocítica crónica Pevonedistat; Leucèmia mielomonocítica crònica PANTHER is a global, randomized phase 3 trial of pevonedistat+azacitidine (n = 227) vs azacitidine monotherapy (n = 227) in patients with newly diagnosed higher-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS; n = 324), higher-risk chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (n = 27), or acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with 20% to 30% blasts (n = 103). The primary end point was event-free survival (EFS). In the intent-to-treat population, the median EFS was 17.7 months with pevonedistat+azacitidine vs 15.7 months with azacitidine (hazard ratio [HR], 0.968; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.757-1.238; P = .557) and in the higher-risk MDS cohort, median EFS was 19.2 vs 15.6 months (HR, 0.887; 95% CI, 0.659-1.193; P = .431). Median overall survival (OS) in the higher-risk MDS cohort was 21.6 vs 17.5 months (HR, 0.785; P = .092), and in patients with AML with 20% to 30% blasts was 14.5 vs 14.7 months (HR, 1.107; P = .664). In a post hoc analysis, median OS in the higher-risk MDS cohort for patients receiving >3 cycles was 23.8 vs 20.6 months (P = .021) and for >6 cycles was 27.1 vs 22.5 months (P = .008). No new safety signals were identified, and the azacitidine dose intensity was maintained. Common hematologic grade ≥3 treatment emergent adverse events were anemia (33% vs 34%), neutropenia (31% vs 33%), and thrombocytopenia (30% vs 30%). These results underscore the importance of large, randomized controlled trials in these heterogeneous myeloid diseases and the value of continuing therapy for >3 cycles. The trial was registered on clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT03268954. This study was sponsored by Takeda Development Centers Inc (TDCA; Lexington, MA).

P27Kip1 (CDKN1B) regulates cellular proliferation and senescence, and p27Kip1 deficiency in cancer is strongly correlated with poor prognosis of multiple cancer types. Understanding the mechanism of p27Kip1 loss in cancer and the consequences of restoring p27Kip1 levels is therefore critical for effective management during therapy. Here, SIRT1, a class III histone deacetylase (HDAC), is identified as an important regulator of p27Kip1 expression. Mechanistically, SIRT1 reduces p27Kip1 expression by decreasing p27Kip1 protein stability through the ubiquitin–proteasome pathway. In addition, SIRT1 silencing suppresses non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) proliferation and induces senescence in a p27Kip1-dependent manner. Furthermore, SIRT1 silencing dramatically suppresses tumor formation and proliferation in two distinct NSCLC xenograft mouse models. Collectively, these data demonstrate that not only SIRT1 is an important regulator of p27Kip1 but also SIRT inhibition induces senescence and antigrowth potential in lung cancer in vivo.Implications: SIRT1 is a key regulator of p27 protein levels and SIRT1 inhibition is a viable strategy for NSCLC therapy by means of p27 reactivation. Mol Cancer Res; 13(1); 41–49. ©2014 AACR.

Fig.S1: The level of p27Kip1 mRNA was unaffected by SIRT1 silencing. The mRNA levels of p27 were measured by quantitative RT-PCR analysis. 5 mg RNA extracted from SIRT1 silenced (shSIRT1) or shRNA control (shControl) H1299 and H460 cells. The mRNA levels of p27 are expressed relative to b-actin transcripts. Each experiment was performed in triplicate and repeated three times. The error bars represent the SEM. Fig.S2: SIRT1 silencing has no effect on apoptosis. Cell extracts were made from SIRT1- silenced and shRNA-control H1299 and H460 cells, and immunoblot analysis was performed with PARP and β-actin antibodies. Fig.S3: A. SIRT1 has no effect on p21 expression in both p53 wild type and p53 null cells. Cell extracts were made from SIRT1-silenced and shRNA-control H460 (p53+/+) and H1299 (p53-/-) cells, and immunoblot analysis was performed with anti-acetylated-p53, p21 and β-actin antibodies. B. p16 is deleted in NSCLC H460 and A549 cells. Cell extracts were made from SIRT1-silenced and shRNA-control H460 (p16-/-) and A549 (p16-/-) cells, or p16 wild type Hela cells. The immunoblot analysis was performed with anti-acetylated-p16, and β-actin antibodies. Table 1. The p27, p53 and p16 status in studied NSCLC cell lines.

In the first phase 3 study in relapsed/refractory AL amyloidosis (TOURMALINE-AL1 NCT01659658), 168 patients with relapsed/refractory AL amyloidosis after 1–2 prior lines were randomized to ixazomib (4 mg, days 1, 8, 15) plus dexamethasone (20 mg, days 1, 8, 15, 22; n = 85) or physician’s choice (dexamethasone ± melphalan, cyclophosphamide, thalidomide, or lenalidomide; n = 83) in 28-day cycles until progression or toxicity. Primary endpoints were hematologic response rate and 2-year vital organ deterioration or mortality rate. Only the first primary endpoint was formally tested at this interim analysis. Best hematologic response rate was 53% with ixazomib–dexamethasone vs 51% with physician’s choice (p = 0.76). Complete response rate was 26 vs 18% (p = 0.22). Median time to vital organ deterioration or mortality was 34.8 vs 26.1 months (hazard ratio 0.53; 95% CI, 0.32–0.87; p = 0.01). Median treatment duration was 11.7 vs 5.0 months. Adverse events of clinical importance included diarrhea (34 vs 30%), rash (33 vs 20%), cardiac arrhythmias (26 vs 15%), nausea (24 vs 14%). Despite not meeting the first primary endpoint, all time-to-event data favored ixazomib–dexamethasone. These results are clinically relevant to this relapsed/refractory patient population with no approved treatment options.

nbsp;Primary systemic light-chain (AL) amyloidosis is a rare clonal plasma cell disorder characterized by the production of abnormal immunoglobulin fragments, which form insoluble fibrils that aggregate as amyloid deposits in organs and tissues, leading to organ dysfunction and death.nbsp;The aim of this literature review is to increase awareness of AL amyloidosis and educate nurses on the care of this patient population.nbsp;This overview is based on a literature search of AL amyloidosis, including its pathogenesis, prognosis, and presentation. Guidance for nursing assessment, intervention, and patient education throughout the disease trajectory is presented.nbsp;AL amyloidosis is a rare disease resulting in organ impairment and death if untreated. Nursing management includes knowledge of key assessment, monitoring, intervention, and education strategies with goals to preserve organ function and improve survival and quality of life in patients with AL amyloidosis.

The investigational NEDD8‐activating enzyme inhibitor pevonedistat is being evaluated in combination with azacitidine versus single‐agent azacitidine in patients with higher‐risk myelodysplastic syndrome (higher‐risk MDS), higher‐risk chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (higher‐risk CMML), or low‐blast acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in a Phase 3 trial PANTHER. To support Asia‐inclusive global development, we applied multiregional clinical trial (MRCT) principles of the International Conference on Harmonisation E17 guidelines by evaluating similarity in drug‐related and disease‐related intrinsic and extrinsic factors. A PubMed literature review (January 2000–November 2019) supported similarity in epidemiology of higher‐risk MDS, AML, and CMML in Western and East Asian populations. Furthermore, the treatment of MDS/AML was similar in both East Asian and Western regions, with the same dose of azacitidine being the standard of care. Median overall survival in MDS following azacitidine treatment was generally comparable across regions, and the types and frequencies of molecular alterations in AML and MDS were comparable. Dose‐escalation studies established the same maximum tolerated dose of pevonedistat in combination with azacitidine in Western and East Asian populations. Pevonedistat clearance was similar across races. Taken together, conservation of drug‐related and disease‐related intrinsic and extrinsic factors supported design of an Asia‐inclusive Phase 3 trial and a pooled East Asian region. A sample size of ~ 30 East Asian patients (of ~ 450 randomized) was estimated as needed to demonstrate consistency in efficacy relative to the global population. This analysis is presented as an exemplar to illustrate application of clinical pharmacology and translational science principles in designing Asia‐inclusive MRCTs. Study Highlights WHAT IS THE CURRENT KNOWLEDGE ON THE TOPIC? Azacitidine is the standard of care for myelodysplastic syndromes/low‐blast acute myeloid leukemia (AML) across Western and East Asian patients. The first‐in‐class small‐molecule inhibitor of NEDD8‐activating enzyme, pevonedistat, has been investigated as a single agent in multiple studies of hematologic and nonhematologic malignancies and in combination with azacitidine in elderly patients with untreated AML. WHAT QUESTION DID THIS STUDY ADDRESS? By applying clinical pharmacology and translational science and International Conference on Harmonisation E17 principles, this study designed an East Asian‐inclusive global pivotal Phase 3 trial of pevonedistat, taking into consideration drug‐related and disease‐related intrinsic and extrinsic factors. WHAT DOES THIS STUDY ADD TO OUR KNOWLEDGE? These analyses provide scientific rationale for Asia‐inclusive globalization of the pivotal, Phase 3 PANTHER trial and for pooling clinical data across the East Asian region for assessing consistency in efficacy. HOW MIGHT THIS CHANGE CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY OR TRANSLATIONAL SCIENCE? We developed a framework to facilitate efficient global clinical development of investigational therapies for rare cancers and orphan diseases in Asia‐inclusive multiregional clinical trials.

TO THE EDITOR : There is a critical unmet need for novel treatments for higher-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS), higher-risk chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML), and low-blast (LB) acute myeloid leukemia (AML). For patients ineligible for stem cell transplant (SCT), standard therapy with hypomethylating agents, such as azacitidine and decitabine, is not curative, with most patients relapsing within 2 years. [...]

Pathological deterioration of mitochondrial function is increasingly linked with multiple degenerative illnesses as a mediator of a wide range of neurologic and age-related chronic diseases, including those of genetic origin. Several of these diseases are rare, typically defined in the United States as an illness affecting fewer than 200,000 people in the U.S. population, or about one in 1600 individuals. Vision impairment due to mitochondrial dysfunction in the eye is a prominent feature evident in numerous primary mitochondrial diseases and is common to the pathophysiology of many of the familiar ophthalmic disorders, including age-related macular degeneration, diabetic retinopathy, glaucoma and retinopathy of prematurity - a collection of syndromes, diseases and disorders with significant unmet medical needs. Focusing on metabolic mitochondrial pathway mechanisms, including the possible roles of cuproptosis and ferroptosis in retinal mitochondrial dysfunction, we shed light on the potential of α-lipoyl-L-carnitine in treating eye diseases. α-Lipoyl-L-carnitine is a bioavailable mitochondria-targeting lipoic acid prodrug that has shown potential in protecting against retinal degeneration and photoreceptor cell loss in ophthalmic indications.

SummaryPevonedistat (TAK-924/MLN4924) is an investigational small-molecule inhibitor of the NEDD8-activating enzyme that has demonstrated preclinical and clinical activity across solid tumors and hematological malignancies. Here we report the results of a phase I trial characterizing the mass balance, pharmacokinetics, and clearance pathways of [14C]-pevonedistat in patients with advanced solid tumors (NCT03057366). In part A (n = 8), patients received a single 1-h intravenous infusion of [14C]-pevonedistat 25 mg/m2. In part B (n = 7), patients received pevonedistat 25 or 20 mg/m2 on days 1, 3, and 5 in combination with, respectively, docetaxel 75 mg/m2 or carboplatin AUC5 plus paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 on day 1 every 3 weeks. Following the single dose of [14C]-pevonedistat 25 mg/m2 in part A, there was a parallel log-linear decline in plasma and whole blood pevonedistat concentration, with systemic exposure of unchanged pevonedistat representing 41% of drug-related material (i.e., unchanged pevonedistat and its metabolites). The mean terminal half-life of pevonedistat and drug-related material in plasma was 8.4 and 15.6 h, respectively. Pevonedistat distributed preferentially in whole blood with a mean whole-blood-to-plasma ratio for pevonedistat AUC∞ of 40.8. By 1 week post dose, the mean recovery of administered radioactivity was 94% (41% in urine and 53% in feces). The pevonedistat safety profile during both study parts was consistent with previous clinical experience, with no new safety signals observed. In part B, pevonedistat in combination with docetaxel or carboplatin plus paclitaxel was generally well tolerated. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03057366.

Purpose: The current standard-of-care for front-line therapy for acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) results in short-term and long-term toxicity, but still approximately 40% of children relapse. Therefore, there is a major need to accelerate the evaluation of innovative medicines, yet drug development continues to be adult-focused. Furthermore, the large number of competing agents in rare patient populations requires coordinated prioritisation, within the global regulatory framework and cooperative group initiatives. Methods: The fourth multi-stakeholder Paediatric Strategy Forum focused on AML in children and adolescents. Results: CD123 is a high priority target and the paediatric development should be accelerated as a proof-of-concept. Efforts must be coordinated, however, as there are a limited number of studies that can be delivered. Studies of FLT3 inhibitors in agreed paediatric investigation plans present challenges to be completed because they require enrolment of a larger number of patients than actually exist. A consensus was developed by industry and academia of optimised clinical trials. For AML with rare mutations that are more frequent in adolescents than in children, adult trials should enrol adolescents and when scientifically justified, efficacy data could be extrapolated. Methodologies and definitions of minimal residual disease need to be standardised internationally and validated as a new response criterion. Industry supported, academic sponsored platform trials could identify products to be further developed. The Leukaemia and Lymphoma Society PedAL/EUpAL initiative has the potential to be a major advance in the field. Conclusion: These initiatives continue to accelerate drug development for children with AML and ultimately improve clinical outcomes.

NFE2L2 and/or KEAP1 mutations are associated with worse prognosis in all non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We determined real-world survival outcomes and treatment patterns among patients with advanced squamous cell NSCLC by NFE2L2 and KEAP1 mutation status.A retrospective study (January 2011-December 2018) was conducted using a de-identified US-based clinico-genomic database. Adult patients with advanced squamous cell NSCLC with ≥ 2 in-network visits and comprehensive genomic profiling during the study period were included. Outcomes included real-world progression free survival (rwPFS) by line of therapy and overall survival (OS). The real-world effectiveness of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 first-line therapy was also evaluated in patients with a NFE2L2 and/or KEAP1 mutation.Of 703 patients included (median age: 70.0 years), 31.6% had a NFE2L2 and/or KEAP1 mutation. The most common first- and second-line treatments regardless of mutation status were platinum-based chemotherapies and anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapies. The most common third-line treatment was anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy in patients with a NFE2L2 and/or KEAP1 mutation and single-agent chemotherapy in patients with wild-type disease. Patients with a NFE2L2 and/or KEAP1 mutation versus wild-type disease had significantly shorter rwPFS (4.54 vs. 6.25 months; P = .003) following first- but not second- or third-line therapy and shorter median OS (13.59 vs. 17.37 months; P = .4105). No survival differences were observed in patients with a NFE2L2 and/or KEAP1 mutation receiving first-line anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapies versus other therapies.Patients with advanced squamous cell NSCLC with a NFE2L2 and/or KEAP1 mutation have poor real-world survival, highlighting the need for a genotype-directed therapeutic strategy in this population.

Lysine Specific Demethylase 1 (LSD1, also known as KDM1A) is a member of the FAD-containing family of lysine demethylases and is generally involved in repressing transcription by specifically removing methyl groups from mono- and di-methylated lysine 4 of histone 3 - epigenetic marks commonly associated with actively transcribed genes. LSD1 over-expression has been associated with disease progression and worse prognosis in several human cancers, and its inhibition has been shown to reduce cancer cell growth, migration and invasion. LSD1 has therefore been recognized as a target of interest for the development of new drugs to treat cancer. Iadademstat (aka ORY-1001), a highly potent and selective LSD1 inhibitor (LSD1i) in clinical development for malignant indications, and other LSD1is, have been reported to be effective for the treatment of small cell lung cancer (SCLC) in in vitro and in vivo models. However, the published data indicate that while certain SCLC are highly sensitive to LSD1 inhibition this sensitivity is not a universal feature of SCLC cells raising the need to develop methods for identifying sensitive SCLC tumors. Herein, we report the identification of the predictive biomarkers ASCL1 and SOX2 for the enrichment of the SCLC population more likely to respond to iadademstat and other LSD1is. Response to LSD1is was evaluated in a broad panel of SCLC cell lines (from viability assay data obtained internally at Oryzon Genomics with iadademstat and from data published elsewhere using other LSD1is). Additionally, analysis of gene expression was performed in this cell line panel using internal and publicly available datasets (Affymetrix, CCLE). This analysis revealed that the transcription factors ASCL1 and SOX2 are more likely to be highly expressed in SCLC cell lines that respond to LSD1 inhibition. Moreover, the mRNA levels of these biomarkers were highly correlated with their protein levels in both SCLC cell lines and in patient-derived xenografts. In particular, immunofluorescence staining of these patient-derived SCLC samples can discriminate different degrees of ASCL1 and SOX2 protein expression levels (none, low, medium, high), which correlate with their mRNA levels determined by RNAseq in the same samples. Moreover, analysis of ASCL1 and SOX2 protein levels analyzed internally by immunofluorescence in 40 SCLC biopsies showed that 58% samples concomitantly expressed medium to high levels of both biomarkers. Taken together, these data suggest that medium to high expression of both ASCL1 and SOX2 define a SCLC population more likely to respond to LSD1 inhibition, and that this population could account for nearly 60% of SCLC cases. Therefore, ASCL1 and SOX2 expression could be used as predictive biomarkers for personalized medicine with iadademstat in SCLC patients and clinical research to validate this hypothesis is warranted. Citation Format: Natalia Sacilotto, Serena Lunardi, Filippo Ciceri, Cristina Mascaro, Tamara Maes, Ana Limon, Douglas V. Faller. ASCL1 and SOX2 expression levels predict sensitivity to LSD1 inhibition with iadademstat in small cell lung cancer. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference: Cancer Epigenomics; 2022 Oct 6-8; Washington, DC. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(23 Suppl_2):Abstract nr B025.

Sapanisertib is an oral, highly selective inhibitor of mammalian target of rapamycin complexes 1 and 2. The aim of this study was to assess the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, preliminary efficacy, and to establish the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of sapanisertib. In this dose-escalation and expansion study, East Asian patients with nonhematologic malignancies received increasing sapanisertib doses once-daily (QD; starting at 2 mg) or once-weekly (QW; starting at 20 mg) in 28-day cycles. Among 28 patients (QD dosing, n = 22; QW dosing, n = 6), three dose-limiting toxicities were reported (stomatitis [n = 2], gastrointestinal inflammation, gingivitis, and acute myocardial infarction [all n = 1]), all in the 4 mg QD cohort. The RP2D of sapanisertib was 3 mg QD. The most common adverse events were stomatitis (64%), nausea (50%), and decreased appetite (50%) in the QD arm, and nausea (100%), blood alkaline phosphatase increased (67%), and hyperglycemia (67%) in the QW arm. The Tmax of sapanisertib was ~ 0.5–2.6 h and the T1/2 was ~ 5.9–7.6 h. Three patients achieved stable disease for ≥ 6 months (1 each in 3 mg QD, 4 mg QD and 20 mg QW cohorts, respectively); the clinical benefit rate was 45% and 67% in the QD and QW arms, respectively. The RP2D of sapanisertib in East Asian patients (3 mg QD) was lower than in Western patients (4 mg QD), but the pharmacokinetics and safety profiles were similar. Sapanisertib was well tolerated and showed moderate anti-tumor effects in heavily pretreated patients with nonhematologic malignancies. NCT03370302; Registered December 7, 2017

Herein we trace links between biochemical pathways, pathogenesis, and metabolic diseases to set the stage for new therapeutic advances. Cellular and acellular microorganisms including bacteria and viruses are primary pathogenic drivers that cause disease. Missing from this statement are subcellular compartments, importantly mitochondria, which can be pathogenic by themselves, also serving as key metabolic disease intermediaries. The breakdown of food molecules provides chemical energy to power cellular processes, with mitochondria as powerhouses and ATP as the principal energy carrying molecule. Most animal cell ATP is produced by mitochondrial synthase; its central role in metabolism has been known for >80 years. Metabolic disorders involving many organ systems are prevalent in all age groups. Progressive pathogenic mitochondrial dysfunction is a hallmark of genetic mitochondrial diseases, the most common phenotypic expression of inherited metabolic disorders. Confluent genetic, metabolic, and mitochondrial axes surface in diabetes, heart failure, neurodegenerative disease, and even in the ongoing coronavirus pandemic.

Aims A population pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis was conducted to quantify the impact of patient-specific and concurrent medication factors on pevonedistat PK. Methods Data were pooled from 6 clinical studies consisting of 335 patients with solid tumours or haematological malignancies administered pevonedistat alone or in combination with azacitidine, docetaxel, carboplatin + paclitaxel, or gemcitabine. Model development and covariate analysis followed standard methods. Parameters and bootstrap 95% confidence intervals were estimated using nonlinear mixed-effects modelling. The final model was evaluated using visual predictive checks and other goodness-of-fit criteria. Results A linear 2-compartment model best described pevonedistat PK. The final model included the effect of body surface area (BSA) on clearance (CL and Q) and volume of distribution of pevonedistat, effect of concomitantly administered carboplatin + paclitaxel on CL, and effect of albumin on Q. Race, sex, age, tumour type (haematological vs solid), mild or moderate renal impairment (creatinine clearance ≥30 mL/min), or mild hepatic impairment, had no impact on pevonedistat PK. Conclusions The clinical PK profile of pevonedistat is comparable in patients with solid tumours or haematological malignancies. All PK parameters exhibited ≥20% change over the observed BSA range (1.38-3 m2 ) with CL ranging from 75.5 to 208% of the reference value, with simulations supporting BSA-based dosing to minimize interindividual variability in drug exposures. Concurrent administration of carboplatin + paclitaxel decreased pevonedistat CL by approximately 44%, while coadministration with azacitidine, gemcitabine or docetaxel did not alter pevonedistat CL. No other factors were identified as influencing pevonedistat PK.

BackgroundNovel, pragmatic, patient-centered strategies are needed to ensure fit-for-purpose patient-reported outcomes (PRO) instruments in clinical trial research for rare diseases such as myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS), acute myeloid leukemia (AML), and chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML). The objective of the current study was to select supplemental items to add to the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life-Core 30 (QLQ-C30) to ensure content coverage of all important clinical concepts in patients with higher-risk (HR) MDS, low-blast count(LB) AML, and CMML, thus, improving the instrument's ability to detect clinically meaningful treatment benefit for this context of use.MethodsOur mixed methods approach comprised literature review, clinician consultation (n= 3), and qualitative and quantitative analysis of two stages of patient interview data (n= 14, n= 18) to select library bank items to supplement a generic cancer PRO, the EORTC QLQ-C30.ResultsUnique symptom (n= 54) and impact (n= 72) concepts were organized into conceptual frameworks of treatment benefit, compared with EORTC QLQ-C30 items and conceptual gaps identified. Supplemental items (n= 13) addressing those gaps were selected from the EORTC Item Library and tested with patients. Supplemental item endorsement frequencies met World Health Organization Quality of Life criteria, suggesting good targeting and relevance for this sample. However, three supplemental items were confirmed as problematic based upon cognitive debriefing results, and expert clinical consultations. Ultimately, 10 supplemental items (n= 7 symptom; n= 3 impact) were selected for the MDS/AML/CMML context.ConclusionSupplemental items were selected to enhance the conceptual coverage of the EORTC QLQ-C30 in the areas of fatigue, shortness of breath, and functioning.

Population pharmacokinetic (PK) and exposure-safety analyses of alisertib were performed in children enrolled in two clinical trials: NCT024448841 and NCT01154816.2 NCT02444884 was a dose-finding study in children with relapsed/refractory solid malignancies (phase 1) or neuroblastomas (phase 2). Patients received oral alisertib 45-‍100 mg/m2 as powder-in-capsule once daily (QD) or twice daily (BID) for 7 days in 21-day cycles. Serial blood samples were collected up to 24 hours post-dose on cycle 1, day 1. NCT01154816 was a phase 2 single-arm study evaluating efficacy in children with relapsed/refractory solid malignancies or acute leukemias. Patients received alisertib 80 mg/m2 as enteric-coated tablets QD for 7 days in 21-day cycles. Sparse PK samples were collected up to 8 hours post-dose on cycle 1, day 1. Sources of alisertib PK variability were characterized and quantified using nonlinear mixed-effects modeling to support dosing recommendations in children and adolescents. A 2-compartment model with oral absorption described by 3 transit compartments was developed using data from 146 patients. Apparent oral clearance and central distribution volume were correlated with body surface area (BSA) across the age range of 2-21 years, supporting the use of BSA-based alisertib dosing in the pediatric population. The recommended dose of 80 mg/m2 QD enteric-coated tablets provided similar alisertib exposures across pediatric age groups and comparable exposure to that in adults receiving 50 mg BID (recommended adult dose). Statistically significant relationships (p < .01) were observed between alisertib exposures and incidence of grade ≥2 stomatitis and febrile neutropenia, consistent with antiproliferative mechanism-related toxicities. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Simple Summary The tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) imatinib was the first targeted therapy to show clinical efficacy against chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) through inhibition of the breakpoint cluster region–Abelson murine leukemia viral oncogene homolog (BCR-ABL), which is responsible for the disease. Two other generations of TKIs have succeeded imatinib, offering additional therapeutic solutions for a growing number of patients with imatinib-resistant CML. However, these clinical approaches although very effective, generate many unwanted side effects because of their daily administration. Attempts to stop TKI when the disease is no longer detectable at the molecular level, unfortunately result in relapses in more than half of cases. This highlights the presence of undetectable leukemia cells, recognized as leukemic stem cells (LSCs) that are TKI insensitive. It therefore appears necessary to identify new biochemical pathways in LSCs, the targeting of which would make re-sensitization to TKIs possible. The results presented here demonstrate that targeting the protein kinase Cδ (PKCδ) pathway represents a valid alternative for LSC elimination. Abstract Numerous combinations of signaling pathway blockades in association with tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) treatment have been proposed for eradicating leukemic stem cells (LSCs) in chronic myeloid leukemia (CML), but none are currently clinically available. Because targeting protein kinase Cδ (PKCδ) was demonstrated to eliminate cancer stem cells (CSCs) in solid tumors, we evaluated the efficacy of PKCδ inhibition in combination with TKIs for CML cells. We observed that inhibition of PKCδ by a pharmacological inhibitor, by gene silencing, or by using K562 CML cells expressing dominant-negative (DN) or constitutively active (CA) PKCδ isoforms clearly points to PKCδ as a regulator of the expression of the stemness regulator BMI1. As a consequence, inhibition of PKCδ impaired clonogenicity and cell proliferation for leukemic cells. PKCδ targeting in K562 and LAMA-84 CML cell lines clearly enhanced the apoptotic response triggered by any TKI. A strong synergism was observed for apoptosis induction through an increase in caspase-9 and caspase-3 activation and significantly decreased expression of the Bcl-xL Bcl-2 family member. Inhibition of PKCδ did not modify BCR-ABL phosphorylation but acted downstream of the oncogene by downregulating BMI1 expression, decreasing clonogenicity. PKCδ inhibition interfered with the clonogenicity of primary CML CD34+ and BCR-ABL-transduced healthy CD34+ cells as efficiently as any TKI while it did not affect differentiation of healthy CD34+ cells. LTC-IC experiments pinpointed that PKCδ inhibition strongly decreased the progenitors/LSCs frequency. All together, these results demonstrate that targeting of PKCδ in combination with a conventional TKI could be a new therapeutic opportunity to affect for CML cells.

Introduction: Pevonedistat, an investigational, first-in-class NEDD8-activating enzyme inhibitor, disrupts protein homeostasis, leading to cancer cell death. For patients with higher-risk MDS ineligible for transplant, real-world data reveal median overall survival (OS) is 11–15 months with treatment, yet no novel treatments have been approved in a decade. Methods: Patients with higher-risk MDS/chronic myelomonocytic leukemia or low-blast acute myeloid leukemia (AML) naive to hypomethylating agents were randomized 1:1, receiving pevonedistat (20 mg/m2 intravenously [IV], days 1, 3, 5) + azacitidine (75 mg/m2 IV/subcutaneously, days 1–5, 8, 9) (n=58) or azacitidine alone (n=62) in 28-day cycles until unacceptable toxicity, relapse, AML transformation, or progression. The study was powered for event-free survival (EFS: time from randomization to death/AML transformation, whichever occurred first). This report focuses on higher-risk MDS, including their cytogenetic and genetic characterization. Results: In patients with higher-risk MDS (n=67/120), baseline characteristics were balanced between arms. EFS was longer with pevonedistat+azacitidine vs azacitidine (median 20.2 vs 14.8 months; HR 0.54; 95% CI 0.29–1.00; p=.045). For patients with high-risk MDS assessed using the Cleveland Clinic model formula (n=16/arm), median EFS was 20.2 vs 11.7 months (HR 0.39; 95% CI 0.17–0.90; p=.023); median OS was 24.2 vs 14.2 months (HR 0.45; 95% CI 0.19–1.05; p=.056) with pevonedistat+azacitidine vs azacitidine. Overall response rate (complete remission [CR]+partial remission [PR]+hematological improvement, n=59 response-evaluable patients) was 79% with pevonedistat+azacitidine vs 57% with azacitidine, with a CR rate of 52% vs 27% (p=.050); median duration of response (DOR, CR+PR) was 34.6 vs 13.1 months (p=.106). Median (range) time to transformation (pevonedistat+azacitidine [n=5] vs azacitidine [n=9]) was 12.2 (4.6–12.6) vs 5.9 (1.7–14.8) months. Median dose intensity of azacitidine was 98% in both arms. Exposure-adjusted adverse event (AE) rates, normalized by mean cycles dosed, were lower with pevonedistat+azacitidine vs azacitidine. Pevonedistat+azacitidine clinical activity was observed in patients with adverse-risk mutations. Conclusions: In patients with higher-risk MDS, pevonedistat+azacitidine prolonged EFS, delayed AML transformation, nearly doubled CR rate, and tripled DOR vsazacitidine alone. EFS and OS favored pevonedistat+azacitidine vs azacitidine in patients with high-risk MDS. Exposure-adjusted AE rates were lower with pevonedistat+azacitidine vs azacitidine without added myelosuppression.

Correction to: Leukemia 10.1038/s41375-021-01125-4, published online 22 January 2021. In Supplementary Table 2, the n numbers for the response-evaluable patients with higher-risk MDS were swapped for the pevonedistat + azacitidine arm and the azacitidine alone arm. Instead of n = 30 and n = 29 as originally published, these have now been corrected to n = 29 for pevonedistat + azacitidine and n = 30 for azacitidine. No changes were required to the response rate percentages as these were calculated using the correct denominators. The updated files are attached to this correction.

Background This Phase 1 dose-escalation/expansion study assessed safety/tolerability of sapanisertib, an oral, highly selective inhibitor of mTORC1/mTORC2, in advanced solid tumours. Methods Eligible patients received increasing sapanisertib doses once daily (QD; 31 patients), once weekly (QW; 30 patients), QD for 3 days on/4 days off QW (QD × 3dQW; 33 patients) or QD for 5 days on/2 days off QW (QD × 5dQW; 22 patients). In expansion cohorts, 82 patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC), endometrial or bladder cancer received sapanisertib 5 mg QD (39 patients), 40 mg QW (26 patients) or 30 mg QW (17 patients). Results Maximum tolerated doses of sapanisertib were 6 mg QD, 40 mg QW, 9 mg QD × 3dQW and 7 mg QD × 5dQW. Frequent dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) included hyperglycaemia, maculo-papular rash (QD), asthenia and stomatitis (QD × 3dQW/QD × 5dQW); expansion phase doses of 5 mg QD and 30 mg QW were selected based on tolerability beyond the DLT evaluation period. One patient with RCC achieved complete response; nine experienced partial responses (RCC: seven patients; carcinoid tumour/endometrial cancer: one patient each). Sapanisertib pharmacokinetics were time-linear and supported multiple dosing. Pharmacodynamic findings demonstrated treatment-related reductions in TORC1/2 biomarkers. Conclusions Sapanisertib demonstrated a manageable safety profile, with preliminary antitumour activity observed in RCC and endometrial cancer. Clinical trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01058707.

Summary Pevonedistat (TAK-924/MLN4924) is an investigational small-molecule inhibitor of the NEDD8-activating enzyme that has demonstrated preclinical and clinical activity across solid tumors and hematological malignancies. Here we report the results of a phase I trial characterizing the mass balance, pharmacokinetics, and clearance pathways of [14C]-pevonedistat in patients with advanced solid tumors (NCT03057366). In part A (n = 8), patients received a single 1-h intravenous infusion of [14C]-pevonedistat 25 mg/m2. In part B (n = 7), patients received pevonedistat 25 or 20 mg/m2 on days 1, 3, and 5 in combination with, respectively, docetaxel 75 mg/m2 or carboplatin AUC5 plus paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 on day 1 every 3 weeks. Following the single dose of [14C]-pevonedistat 25 mg/m2 in part A, there was a parallel log-linear decline in plasma and whole blood pevonedistat concentration, with systemic exposure of unchanged pevonedistat representing 41% of drug-related material (i.e., unchanged pevonedistat and its metabolites). The mean terminal half-life of pevonedistat and drug-related material in plasma was 8.4 and 15.6 h, respectively. Pevonedistat distributed preferentially in whole blood with a mean whole-blood-to-plasma ratio for pevonedistat AUC∞ of 40.8. By 1 week post dose, the mean recovery of administered radioactivity was 94% (41% in urine and 53% in feces). The pevonedistat safety profile during both study parts was consistent with previous clinical experience, with no new safety signals observed. In part B, pevonedistat in combination with docetaxel or carboplatin plus paclitaxel was generally well tolerated. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03057366. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s10637-020-01017-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

In this review we outline a rationale for identifying neuroprotectants aimed at inducing endogenous Klotho activity and expression, which is epigenetic action, by definition. Such an approach should promote remyelination and/or stimulate myelin repair by acting on mitochondrial function, thereby heralding a life-saving path forward for patients suffering from neuroinflammatory diseases. Disorders of myelin in the nervous system damage the transmission of signals, resulting in loss of vision, motion, sensation, and other functions depending on the affected nerves, currently with no effective treatment. Klotho genes and their single-pass transmembrane Klotho proteins are powerful governors of the threads of life and death, true to the origin of their name, Fates, in Greek mythology. Among its many important functions, Klotho is an obligatory co-receptor that binds, activates, and/or potentiates critical fibroblast growth factor activity. Since the discovery of Klotho a little over two decades ago, it has become ever more apparent that when Klotho pathways go awry, oxidative stress and mitochondrial dysfunction take over, and age-related chronic disorders are likely to follow. The physiological consequences can be wide ranging, potentially wreaking havoc on the brain, eye, kidney, muscle, and more. Central nervous system disorders, neurodegenerative in nature, and especially those affecting the myelin sheath, represent worthy targets for advancing therapies that act upon Klotho pathways. Current drugs for these diseases, even therapeutics that are disease modifying rather than treating only the symptoms, leave much room for improvement. It is thus no wonder that this topic has caught the attention of biomedical researchers around the world.

Background and Objective Significant clinical burden is associated with higher-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (HR-MDS); however, the economic burden has not been fully examined. We examined cost of care and healthcare utilization (HCU) in HR-MDS patients engaged in routine care in the United States (US). Methods Adult US patients diagnosed with HR-MDS from 1/1/2008 to 10/31/2015 were identified from the Optum database. Patients were followed until death, progression to acute myeloid leukemia (AML), end of enrollment, or end of study (12/31/2015). Myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS)-related costs/HCU (including medical/pharmacy claims with a primary diagnosis of MDS, MDS-related treatment, or supportive care) and non-MDS-related costs/HCU were evaluated. Costs were calculated as per-patient per-month (PPPM) costs adjusted to 2015 US dollars. Results Of the 209 HR-MDS patients included, median follow-up was 9.9 months (interquartile range 4.6–17.9), and 69.4% had at least one inpatient admission, 56.9% had at least one emergency department visit, and nearly all patients had at least one outpatient visit. Average PPPM costs over follow-up were $17,361; year 1 versus year 2 costs were higher ($17,337 vs $12,976) following HR-MDS diagnosis. The majority of costs were for MDS-related medical services ($10,327 PPPM). MDS-related medical PPPM costs decreased from $10,557 (year 1) to $6530 (year 2). The main drivers of MDS-related medical costs and the decrease in year 2 were chemotherapy and supportive care costs. Conclusions The economic burden of HR-MDS is considerable, particularly within the first year of diagnosis. Treatment/supportive care costs accounted for a significant portion of MDS-related costs. As HR-MDS treatment evolves, the economic impact and HCU need to be further investigated.

This retrospective claims database study examined healthcare utilization (HCU) and costs associated with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in 237 elderly patients who received chemotherapy or a stem cell transplant (SCT) following AML diagnosis. Patients with secondary AML were excluded. Over the entire follow-up period, 92.0% of patients had ≥1 inpatient admission; 85.7% had ≥1 AML-related admission, and 42.6% had ≥1 non-AML-related admission. During inpatient admissions, 39.2% of patients had ≥1 intensive care unit (ICU) admission, with 20.7% having ≥1 AML-related ICU admission, and 27.8% having ≥1 non-AML-related ICU admission. Total mean per-patient per-month (PPPM) costs over the follow-up period were $25,243 (SD: $21,909), with costs from Year 1 ($27,756 [SD: $22,121]) more than double those in Year 2 ($12,953 [SD: $26,334]) following AML diagnosis. The majority of total costs were medical ($24,512 PPPM [SD: $21,704]), which included inpatient admissions ($6548 PPPM [SD: $10,777]), other outpatient visits ($5021 PPPM [SD: $7997]), supportive care ($3640 PPPM [SD: $5589], and chemotherapy administration ($2029 PPPM [SD: $2345]). Healthcare costs of treated elderly AML patients are substantial, particularly in the first year following diagnosis. Further research is needed to understand factors contributing to high costs in various settings of care for elderly AML patients.

Summary Purpose This phase Ib study (NCT01862328) evaluated the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), safety, and efficacy of pevonedistat in combination with standard-of-care chemotherapies in patients with solid tumors. Methods Patients received pevonedistat with docetaxel (arm 1, n = 22), carboplatin plus paclitaxel (arm 2, n = 26), or gemcitabine (arm 3, n = 10) in 21-days (arms 1 and 2) or 28-days (arm 3) cycles. A lead-in cohort (arm 2a, n = 6) determined the arm 2 carboplatin dose. Dose escalation proceeded via continual modified reassessment. Results Pevonedistat MTD was 25 mg/m2 (arm 1) or 20 mg/m2 (arm 2); arm 3 was discontinued due to poor tolerability. Fifteen (23%) patients experienced dose-limiting toxicities during cycle 1 (grade ≥3 liver enzyme elevations, febrile neutropenia, and thrombocytopenia), managed with dose holds or reductions. Drug-related adverse events (AEs) occurred in 95% of patients. Most common AEs included fatigue (56%) and nausea (50%). One drug-related death occurred in arm 3 (febrile neutropenia). Pevonedistat exposure increased when co-administered with carboplatin plus paclitaxel; no obvious changes were observed when co-administered with docetaxel or gemcitabine. Among 54 response-evaluable patients, two had complete responses (arm 2) and 10 had partial responses (three in arm 1, one in arm 2a, six in arm 2); overall response rates were 16% (arm 1) and 35% (arm 2). High ERCC1 expression correlated with clinical benefit in arm 2. Conclusion Pevonedistat with docetaxel or with carboplatin plus paclitaxel was tolerable without cumulative toxicity. Sustained clinical responses were observed in pretreated patients receiving pevonedistat with carboplatin and paclitaxel. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01862328.

Pevonedistat (TAK-924/MLN4924) is a novel inhibitor of NEDD8-activating enzyme (NAE) with single-agent activity in relapsed/refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML). We performed a phase 1b study of pevonedistat (PEV) with azacitidine (AZA) based on synergistic activity seen preclinically. Primary objectives included safety and tolerability, and secondary objectives included pharmacokinetics (PK) and disease response. Patients ≥60 years with treatment-naive AML (unfit for standard induction therapy) received PEV 20 or 30 mg/m2 IV on days 1, 3, and 5 combined with fixed-dose AZA (75 mg/m2 IV/subcutaneously) on days 1 to 5, 8, and 9, every 28 days. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were constipation (48%), nausea (42%), fatigue (42%), and anemia (39%). In total, 11 deaths were observed and considered unrelated to study therapy by the investigators. Transient elevations in aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) were dose limiting. The recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of PEV in this combination is 20 mg/m2 PEV PK was not altered by the addition of AZA. Overall response rate (ORR) based on an intent-to-treat analysis was 50% (20 complete remissions [CRs], 5 complete remission with incomplete peripheral count recovery, 7 partial remissions [PRs]), with an 8.3-month median duration of remission. In patients receiving ≥6 cycles of therapy (n = 23, 44%), ORR was 83%. In patients with TP53 mutations, the composite CR/PR rate was 80% (4/5). Two of these patients stayed on study for >10 cycles. Baseline bone marrow blast percentage or cytogenetic/molecular risk did not influence ORR. This study was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01814826.

Treatment for patients with systemic light chain (AL) amyloidosis remains challenging. Our study aims to describe treatment patterns for both newly diagnosed and relapsed/refractory AL (RRAL) amyloidosis, and to assess clinical outcomes, healthcare costs, and resource utilization during the first year following a diagnosis of RRAL amyloidsis.This was a retrospective observational study of adult patients with AL amyloidosis using the US Optum administrative claims data during 1/1/2008 to 6/30/2015. Diagnosis was based on both ICD-9 codes and treatments with a claim for AL-amyloidosis-specific anticancer systemic agents.Of 334 patients with AL amyloidosis, 43.1% were considered as RRAL amyloidosis. The majority (75%) of RRAL amyloidosis patients had organ involvement prior to the second line treatment. Proteasome-inhibitor-based regimens were most frequently used (41.0% for first-line AL, 30.6% for RRAL amyloidosis). Organ deterioration and mortality rates were 49.3% and 10.4%, respectively, during the two years following relapse. The average monthly cost was $14,369 per patient for RRAL amyloidosis including medical costs ($9441) and drug costs ($4928).RRAL amyloidosis is associated with high morbidity from target organ failure and mortality, which emphasizes the need for novel medications to improve care for patients with RRAL amyloidosis.

Background: Older patients with higher-risk MDS/CMML or AML with 20-30% marrow blasts typically receive single-agent hypomethylating agent (HMA) therapy. Median response duration and survival for these patients is poor, and many patients with MDS transform to secondary AML, which is associated with a particularly dismal prognosis. Novel HMA-based combination therapies that improve survival, delay transformation to AML, and increase depth and duration of response vs single-agent HMA therapy without additional toxicity or myelosuppression are needed. In a randomized, proof-of-concept phase 2 study PEV - a first-in-class, selective inhibitor of NEDD8-activating enzyme - in combination with AZA demonstrated encouraging clinical efficacy vs AZA alone in patients with higher-risk MDS and AML with 20-30% marrow blasts, with nearly double the complete remission rate, almost triple the duration of response, and improved event-free survival (EFS) among patients with higher-risk MDS (Sekeres Leukemia 2021). PEV + AZA had a comparable safety profile to AZA alone, without increased myelosuppression. Here we report the study design and patient characteristics from PANTHER, a global, multicenter, randomized phase 3 trial (NCT03268954). Methods: Patients aged ≥18 years with a confirmed diagnosis of higher-risk MDS or higher-risk CMML (Revised International Prognostic Scoring System [IPSS-R] risk score >3; ≥5% marrow blasts for intermediate-risk patients) or AML with 20-30% marrow blasts and who were chemotherapy/HMA-naïve and ineligible for upfront intensive chemotherapy and/or allogeneic stem cell transplantation were randomized 1:1 to receive PEV 20 mg/m 2 (IV, days 1, 3, 5) + AZA 75 mg/m 2 (IV or subcutaneous; days 1-5, 8, 9) or AZA alone in 28-day cycles until unacceptable toxicity, relapse, progressive disease, or transformation to AML. Patients were stratified into 4 categories: very high, high, and intermediate risk (per IPSS-R) MDS/CMML, and AML with 20-30% marrow blasts. The primary endpoint was EFS, defined as time from randomization to death or transformation to AML for patients with higher-risk MDS or higher-risk CMML, or to death for patients with AML. OS was a key secondary endpoint. EFS and OS are being tested sequentially in the higher-risk MDS cohort and intent-to-treat (ITT) population using separate hierarchical testing procedures (total 1-sided alpha of 0.025 for each procedure), with subsequent OS testing in the AML cohort. Results: A total of 454 patients were randomized (PEV + AZA, n=227; AZA alone, n=227), 324 with higher-risk MDS (n=161; n=163), 103 with AML (n=50; n=53), and 27 with higher-risk CMML (n=16; n=11). Baseline demographics and disease characteristics were generally well balanced between arms. In the ITT population, 58% and 63% of patients in the PEV + AZA and AZA alone arms, respectively, were male, 91% and 86% were aged ≥65 years (41% and 48% aged ≥75 years), and 89%/10% and 84%/15% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1/2. In patients with higher-risk MDS who were treated with PEV + AZA or AZA alone, IPSS-R risk group was very high in 39% and 36%, high in 37% and 39%, and intermediate in 24% and 25%; 93% and 94% of patients had de novo disease. In patients with AML treated with PEV + AZA or AZA alone, 60% and 70% were classified as adverse-risk per European LeukemiaNet 2017 guidelines; 62% and 49% had de novo disease. To date, no new safety signals have been identified. At the prespecified second interim analysis for the primary endpoint of EFS (n=147 events, higher-risk MDS), approximately 202 OS events had also occurred. Conclusions: Patient characteristics were well-balanced between arms, and the population is reflective of typical patients with higher-risk MDS/CMML and AML with 20-30% marrow blasts. EFS and OS in the ITT population and the higher-risk MDS cohort for each treatment arm will be presented, along with data on secondary endpoints, including response rates and duration of response, time to AML transformation in patients with higher-risk MDS, rates of transfusion independence, and safety. If endpoints are met, this would be the first phase 3 study in this setting to demonstrate superior efficacy with addition of a novel agent to AZA. Disclosures Sekeres: Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda/Millenium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Girshova: Astellas Pharma, Inc.: Research Funding. Diez-Campelo: Takeda Oncology: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Valcarcel: ASTELLAS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; NOVARTIS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; AMGEN: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; JAZZ: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; SOBI: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; SANOFI: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; TAKEDA: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; CELGENE: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Viniou: Abbvie: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Sandoz: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. De Paz Arias: BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Symeonidis: Astellas: Consultancy, Research Funding; Demo: Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; MSD: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; WinMedica: Research Funding; GenesisPharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; GSK: Research Funding; Sanofi/Genzyme: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Anagnostopoulos: Abbvie: Other: clinical trials; Sanofi: Other: clinical trials ; Ocopeptides: Other: clinical trials ; GSK: Other: clinical trials; Incyte: Other: clinical trials ; Takeda: Other: clinical trials ; Amgen: Other: clinical trials ; Janssen: Other: clinical trials; novartis: Other: clinical trials; Celgene: Other: clinical trials; Roche: Other: clinical trials; Astellas: Other: clinical trials . Platzbecker: Takeda: Honoraria; AbbVie: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Celgene/BMS: Honoraria; Geron: Honoraria. Santini: Astex: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS/Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Geron: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Menarini: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Fram: Takeda Pharmaceuticals Intl. Co: Current Employment; Takeda: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Bristol Myers Squibb: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Baxter: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Pfizer: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Gilead: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Teva: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Viatris: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Medtronics: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Zimmer Biomet Hldgs Inc: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Yuan: Takeda: Current Employment. Faller: Briacell, Inc: Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company; Takeda Pharmaceuticals Co.: Current Employment; Viracta Therapeutics, Inc: Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company, Ended employment in the past 24 months, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Ades: ABBVIE: Honoraria; NOVARTIS: Honoraria; CELGENE/BMS: Honoraria; TAKEDA: Honoraria; JAZZ: Honoraria, Research Funding; CELGENE: Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: This presentation contains information about investigational use of pevonedistat. Safety and efficacy have not been determined.

Introduction Systemic immunoglobulin light chain (AL) amyloidosis is a rare disease characterized by amyloid fibril deposits, most commonly in the heart and kidneys. Management of the disease relies primarily on off-label use of multiple myeloma therapies. No treatments are approved for AL amyloidosis in the relapsed/refractory setting. In the phase 3, open-label TOURMALINE-AL1 trial (NCT01659658), patients with relapsed/refractory AL amyloidosis were randomized 1:1 to receive either oral ixazomib plus dexamethasone (Id) or physician's choice (CH) in 28-day cycles, and followed until progression or unacceptable toxicity. An interim analysis demonstrated that Id was well tolerated and, although the primary endpoint of hematologic response rate was not met, time-to-event efficacy analyses consistently favored Id. We report an analysis of patient-reported outcome (PRO) data on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and AL amyloidosis symptoms from TOURMALINE-AL1; such data for AL amyloidosis in general have been limited. Methods Four PRO instruments were used to collect data to support PRO-related secondary endpoints during the treatment period: the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy/Gynecologic Oncology Group Neurotoxicity subscale (FACT/GOG-Ntx), an amyloidosis symptom questionnaire (ASQ), the EuroQoL 5-Dimension 3-Level (EQ-5D-3L), and the Visual Analogue Scale (EQ VAS) were collected at screening, day 1 of each cycle, and end of treatment (EOT), and the 36-item Short Form General Health Survey version 2 (SF-36v2) was collected at screening, day 1 of every third cycle, and EOT. Analysis of PRO data included descriptive summaries of means and change from baseline and a linear mixed model (LMM) for repeated measures for patients in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population with a baseline and at least one postbaseline PRO-specific assessment. No adjustment was made for multiple comparisons. Data cutoff date was 20 February 2019. Results The ITT population included 168 patients (Id: n=85; CH: n=83), who completed up to 58 cycles (Id) and up to 43 cycles (CH); median treatment duration was 11.7 vs 5.0 months, respectively. PRO compliance in the treatment period was high for all instruments (Figure). Baseline HRQOL as measured by the SF-36v2 and EQ VAS was similar between treatment arms. During the treatment period, SF-36v2 Mental and Physical Component Summary (MCS and PCS) scores remained stable relative to baseline and were similar between arms; the 8 subscale scores were also generally maintained over time, and mostly similar between arms. Least-squares (LS) mean changes from baseline were significantly higher (better HRQoL) for Id compared with CH at several cycles in the SF-36v2 Role Physical and Vitality subscales (p Symptom burden as measured by the FACT/GOG-Ntx and ASQ was low at baseline, leaving little room for improvement. FACT/GOG-Ntx scores were generally maintained over time. In the treatment period, there were small but significant differences in LS mean changes from baseline favoring Id over CH at multiple cycles for 7 of the 11 individual items and the neurotoxicity and sensory summary scores; there were small but significant differences favoring CH over Id for 1 individual item (trouble hearing) at a few later cycles. The ASQ total score trended downward slightly (lower burden) during treatment after the first few cycles in both arms. There were significant differences per the LMM favoring Id over CH at cycles 7 and 21 (p In both arms, EQ VAS scores trended upward (better HRQoL) during treatment and then declined slightly at EOT. (LMM analyses were not conducted for EQ-5D.) At EOT, a slight deterioration from baseline was observed in actual scores for SF-36v2 domains and summary scales, FACT/GOG-Ntx neurotoxicity and sensory subscales, and ASQ items and total score for both Id and CH. Conclusions Relapsed/refractory AL amyloidosis patients treated with Id experienced HRQOL and symptoms that were similar to or trended better than patients treated with CH. These data suggest that treatment with Id, although with a substantially longer treatment duration, did not have a negative impact on HRQOL in patients with relapsed/refractory AL amyloidosis, a population with currently no approved treatment options. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Sanchorawala: Regeneron: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Proclara: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncopeptide: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Sorrento: Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria; Caelum: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Wechalekar: Caelum Biosciences: Other: Clinical Trial Funding; Alexion, AstraZeneca Rare Disease: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Celgene: Honoraria; Amgen: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria. Kim: Janssen, BMS: Research Funding. Schönland: Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Travel grants, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel grants; Sanofi: Research Funding; Prothena: Honoraria, Other: Travel grants; Pfizer: Honoraria. Landau: Takeda, Janssen, Caelum Biosciences, Celgene, Pfizer, Genzyme: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Research Funding; Genzyme: Honoraria. Fiona: Pfizer: Research Funding. Suzuki: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abie: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; ONO: Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding. Dispenzieri: Sorrento Therapeutics: Consultancy; Oncopeptides: Consultancy; Pfizer: Research Funding; Alnylam: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Comenzo: Karyopharm: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Unum: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sanofi-Aventis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Patents & Royalties: WO2016187546A1, Research Funding; Prothena Biosciences: Consultancy, Research Funding; Caelum: Consultancy, Research Funding. Cherepanov: Takeda: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Hayden: Takeda: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Kumar: Takeda: Current Employment, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company. Labotka: Takeda: Current Employment. Faller: Takeda Pharmaceuticals Co.: Current Employment; Viracta Therapeutics, Inc: Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company, Ended employment in the past 24 months, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Briacell, Inc: Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company. Kastritis: Amgen, Genesis Pharma, Janssen, Takeda: Consultancy; Amgen, Janssen, Pfizer: Research Funding; Amgen, Genesis Pharma, Janssen, Takeda, Pfizer: Honoraria.

Introduction P-2001, a randomized phase 2 trial (NCT02610777), investigated the efficacy and safety of pevonedistat (P), the first small-molecule inhibitor of the NEDD8-activating enzyme, in combination with azacitidine (A) versus A alone in patients (pts) with higher-risk (Revised International Prognostic Scoring System risk >3, including intermediate [≥5% blasts], high, or very high risk) myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS)/chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML), or low-blast acute myeloid leukemia (LB AML) naïve to hypomethylating agents. The P-2001 trial recently demonstrated median event-free survival of 21.0 vs 16.6 months (HR=0.665; P = .076), and overall response rates (complete remission [CR] + CR with incomplete blood count recovery [CRi] + partial response [PR] + hematologic improvement [HI]) of 71% (n=39/55) vs 60% (n=32/53) with P+A compared with A, respectively. Management of MDS can significantly impact quality of life, and measures of high-symptom burden have been associated with worse clinical outcomes. We set out to explore patient-reported outcomes (PRO) as an exploratory endpoint in the study. Methods The study randomized 120 pts (1:1) to receive P+A or A alone in 28-day treatment cycles. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) quality of life questionnaire - core 30 items (QLQ-C30) was administered at the first day of each cycle, at the end of treatment (EOT) visit and post-EOT visits. Physical functioning (PF), fatigue (FA), dyspnea (DY) and global health status/quality of life (QL) were identified as key PRO concepts that deserved specific attention in this population. Analyses were carried out to explore the PRO data: description of available PRO data, longitudinal analyses of change in the key PRO scores with repeated measurement mixed models (RMMM), including comparison between treatment arms, and descriptive analysis of the key PRO scores after clinical response depending on the type of response (PR, CR, CRi, or HI), and before and after transformation to AML for pts with higher-risk MDS, independently from the treatment received. Results There were 112 pts in the PRO population (defined as all pts with a PRO assessment at baseline and at least 1 post-baseline); baseline demographics and disease characteristics are presented in Table 1. At least 90% of pts in the study had a PRO available at each cycle. As expected, the amount of available PRO data decreased over the study due to progression, death, or study discontinuations. The RMMMs of the PRO population did not show any statistically significant difference in the change over time in key QLQ-C30 scores (PF, QL, FA, and DY) between P+A versus A alone. Pts who experienced CR (P+A, 40%; A, 29%) showed a nonsignificant improvement in PF and QL, as well as a nonsignificant decrease of FA after CR than at baseline; no differences were noted in DY. Pts for whom best response was PR had less improvement in the key PROs than pts with CR, and those with HI did not show improvement compared with baseline. Among the 12 pts with higher-risk MDS/CMML progressing to AML during the study with available PRO data (P+A, n=4; A, n=8), 6 showed worsening in PF score (vs 2 improving), 6 showed worsening in QL score (vs 1 improving), 7 showed worsening in FA score (vs 1 improving), and 7 showed worsening in DY score (vs none improving). Conclusions Measurement of QL and symptom burden are integral clinical endpoints in assessing new treatments in higher-risk MDS/CMML and LB AML. There was no evidence to suggest that the addition of P to A led to change in the key PROs identified: QL, PF, FA and DY. Achievement of CR was associated with higher PRO scores compared with baseline independently of the treatment received, and progression to AML was associated with worsening QL scores. Additional analyses are planned with the P-2001 PRO data to further explore the impact of P on PROs by evaluating the impact of dropout during the study, comparing findings according to treatment arm, and better understanding the possible effect of adverse events on PROs. Disclosures Zeidner: AbbVie: Honoraria, Other: Independent Review Committee; Agios: Honoraria; AROG: Research Funding; AsystBio Laboratories: Consultancy; Sumitomo Dainippon Pharma Oncology, Inc.: Research Funding; Genentech: Honoraria; Daiichi Sankyo: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Forty-Seven: Other: Travel Reimbursement, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel Reimbursement, Research Funding. Mazerolle:Takeda Pharmaceutical Company: Other: Granted research funding to Modus Outcomes, my employer; Modus Outcomes: Current Employment. Bell:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Current Employment. Cain:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited: Current Employment. Faller:Phoenicia Biosciences: Consultancy, Current equity holder in private company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Patents & Royalties; Viracta Therapeutics: Consultancy, Current equity holder in private company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Patents & Royalties; Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited: Current Employment; Briacell Therapeutics: Consultancy, Current equity holder in private company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Patents & Royalties. Dalal:Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc, a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical International Company, Cambridge, MA: Current Employment, Current equity holder in private company. Regnault:Modus Outcomes: Current Employment. Fram:Teva: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Baxter: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Gilead: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Pfizer: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Bristol Myers Squibb: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Takeda: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Vertex Phamaceuticals: Patents & Royalties: Patent 10/728,114; Takeda Pharmaceuticals Intl. Co.: Consultancy, Current Employment; BeyondSpring Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Consultancy. OffLabel Disclosure: Pevonedistat is the first small molecule inhibitor of the neural precursor cell expressed, developmentally downregulated 8 (NEDD8)-activating enzyme (NAE)

Background Pevonedistat is the first small-molecule inhibitor of neural precursor cell expressed, developmentally downregulated protein 8 (NEDD8)-activating enzyme (NAE). Inhibiting NAE blocks ubiquitination of select proteins upstream of the proteasome. Treatment with pevonedistat disrupts cell cycle progression and cell survival, leading to cell death in cancers, including myeloid malignancies. In a phase 1b study in patients aged ≥60 yrs with untreated AML, pevonedistat in combination with azacitidine (AZA) was tolerable and showed clinical activity (Swords et al. Blood 2018). In a randomized phase 2 study of pevonedistat + AZA vs AZA alone in patients with higher-risk myelodysplastic syndromes/chronic myelomonocytic leukemia and low-blast AML, pevonedistat + AZA improved event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS), had a similar safety profile to AZA alone, did not increase myelosuppression, and maintained AZA dose intensity (Adès et al. ASCO 2020). Venetoclax (VEN) is a small-molecule inhibitor of B-cell lymphoma 2 that is approved in the United States in combination with low-dose cytarabine or hypomethylating agents for the treatment of patients with AML. VEN + AZA has been shown to improve OS vs AZA alone, and the combination is emerging as a standard of care for older patients with newly diagnosed AML who are unfit for standard intensive chemotherapy. Despite recent advances, outcomes for these patients remain poor; novel therapies that increase duration of response (DOR) or reduce relapse rates are needed. Pevonedistat in combination with VEN has shown synergistic cytotoxic effects in AML cell lines and primary clinical AML samples (Knorr et al. Cell Death Differ 2015). This is likely mediated through pevonedistat-induced neutralization of prosurvival proteins including myeloid leukemia cell differentiation protein (MCL-1). Upregulation of MCL-1 is thought to be a primary mode of resistance to VEN. Therefore, treatment with pevonedistat + VEN may help to prevent or overcome resistance to VEN and prolong DOR. The reported clinical benefit of both pevonedistat + AZA and VEN + AZA in AML, and preclinical evidence of synergy between pevonedistat and VEN, suggest that combination treatment with all 3 therapies may result in improved outcomes compared with VEN + AZA in patients with newly diagnosed AML who are unfit for intensive chemotherapy. A phase 1/2 study of the triplet combination of pevonedistat, VEN, and AZA in secondary AML established the recommended phase 2 dose and demonstrated a high response rate in this relatively refractory population (Short et al. EHA 2020). Methods NCT04266795 is a randomized, open-label, controlled, phase 2 study (Figure) that is being conducted across ~85 sites globally. Eligible patients are those aged ≥18 yrs with morphologically confirmed newly diagnosed AML (World Health Organization criteria 2008) and considered unfit for treatment with cytarabine and anthracycline induction due to age and/or comorbidities. Patients are being randomized 1:1 to receive the combination of pevonedistat 20 mg/m2 intravenously (IV) on days 1, 3, and 5, VEN 400 mg by mouth on days 1-28 in cycle 1 (ramp up schedule of 100 mg on day 1, 200 mg on day 2, 400 mg on days 3-28) and then on days 1-28 (days 1-21 if remission is confirmed; can return to 28-day dosing if well tolerated) in cycle 2 onwards, and AZA 75 mg/m2 (IV or subcutaneously) on days 1-7 or 1-5, 8, and 9, or VEN + AZA, in 28-day cycles until unacceptable toxicity, relapse, or progressive disease. Randomization is stratified by age (18- Figure Disclosures Short: Amgen: Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Takeda Oncology: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding. Sedarati:Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited: Current Employment. Zhao:Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited: Current Employment. Tsukurov:Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited: Current Employment. Friedlander:Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited: Current Employment. Faller:Phoenicia Biosciences: Consultancy, Current equity holder in private company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Patents & Royalties; Briacell Therapeutics: Consultancy, Current equity holder in private company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Patents & Royalties; Viracta Therapeutics: Consultancy, Current equity holder in private company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Patents & Royalties; Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited: Current Employment. OffLabel Disclosure: Pevonedistat is the first small molecule inhibitor of the neural precursor cell expressed, developmentally downregulated 8 (NEDD8)-activating enzyme (NAE)

BACKGROUND: EBV-positive (EBV+) lymphomas including Hodgkin, B and T cell lymphomas, are generally associated with poor clinical outcomes, particularly for patients (pts) who have relapsed or are refractory (R/R) to standard therapies. There are currently no approved therapies for EBV+ lymphomas and with the exception of adoptive T-cell therapies, no EBV-targeted anti-lymphoma therapeutics are in development. EBV is detectable in cancer cells by in situ hybridization for EBV-encoded RNAs (EBER-ISH). Nstat (VRx-3996), a Class I-selective oral hydroxamate histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitor active against HDAC1-3, induces the expression of EBV protein kinases which activate the anti-viral nucleoside analogue VGCV via mono-phosphorylation. This leads to inhibition of both viral and cellular DNA synthesis in EBV+ tumor cells and potentially in surrounding EBV- tumor cells as well (bystander effect), causing apoptosis. This trial is the first to explore the safety and clinical activity of this targeted approach using oral Nstat in combination with oral VGCV in pts with R/R EBV+ lymphomas. Here we present an update of safety and efficacy for all enrolled patients, plus the preliminary safety of the recommended phase 2 doses (RP2D) of Nstat and VGCV (NCT03397706). METHODS: Pts with biopsy-proven EBV+ lymphomas (by EBER-ISH; any positive tumor cell) that had failed ≥1 prior systemic therapy and lacked treatment options by investigator's judgment were eligible for enrollment. Phase 1b used a 3x3 design to determine the RP2D of Nstat + VGCV. Phase 2 pts received the RP2D (Nstat 20 mg days (d) 1-4/7 + VGCV 900 mg orally daily in 28 d cycles) until PD or withdrawal. Primary endpoints were safety/RP2D selection (phase 1b) and ORR (phase 2); secondary endpoints were pharmacokinetics, duration of response (DoR), time to response (TTR), progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Response assessments began after Cycle 2 using Lugano 2014 response criteria. RESULTS: As of 5 July 2020, 43 pts have enrolled (phase 1b: 25; phase 2: 18). Lymphoma subtypes were diffuse large B cell (DLBCL) (6), extranodal NK/T-cell (ENKTL) (6), peripheral T cell, NOS (PTCL-NOS) (3), angioimmunoblastic (AITL) (4), cutaneous T cell (CTCL) (1), Hodgkin (HL) (8), other B cell (2), and immunodeficiency-associated lymphoproliferative disorders (IA-LPD) (13), including post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder (PTLD) (4), HIV-associated (5), and other [4: systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) (2), common variable immunodeficiency/primary immunodeficiency (2)]. Pts had a median of 2 prior therapies (range 1-11); 77% with ≥2 prior therapies, 86% were refractory to their most recent previous therapy and 77% had exhausted standard therapies in the judgment of the investigator. EBER positivity ranged from CONCLUSIONS: Co-administration of oral Nstat with VGCV has a favorable safety profile, may be suitable for combination with additional agents, and shows promising efficacy in pts with a variety of R/R, heavily pre-treated EBV+ lymphomas, the majority of whom were lacking therapeutic options. Preliminary data suggests that this regimen is highly active in EBV+ T/NK-NHL pts who are refractory to standard therapies, including ASCT (Table 1), and promising in EBV+ DLBCL. Thus far, no apparent correlation was noted between degree of EBER positivity in pre-study tumor biopsies and ORR. Disclosures Porcu: Viracta Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Verastem: Consultancy; Miragen: Research Funding; Kura Oncology: Research Funding; Kiowa Kirin: Research Funding; Innate Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Galderma: Research Funding; Daiichi: Consultancy, Honoraria; Cell Medica: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Haverkos:Viracta THerapeutics: Consultancy. Alpdogan:Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Kiowa Kirin: Consultancy. Baiocchi:viracta: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Prelude Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Brammer:Celgene Corporation: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Speakers Bureau. Feldman:AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Portola: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Kyowa Kirin: Consultancy, Research Funding; Eisai: Research Funding; Cell Medica: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Other, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Honoraria; Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Trillium: Research Funding; Viracta: Research Funding; Rhizen: Research Funding; Corvus: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Kite: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Brem:KITE: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; BeiGene: Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Morphosys: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Speakers Bureau. Scheinberg:Novartis Brasil S.A.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Katkov:Viracta Therapeutics, Inc.: Current Employment. McRae:Viracta Therapeutics, Inc.: Current Employment. Rojkjaer:Viracta Therapeutics, Inc.: Current Employment. Royston:Viracta Therapeutics, Inc.: Current Employment. OffLabel Disclosure: Nanatinostat(VRx-3996) is a Class I-selective oral HDAC inhibitor active against HDAC1-3 that induces the expression of EBV protein kinases which activate the anti-viral nucleoside analogue VGCV via mono-phosphorylation. This leads to inhibition of both viral and cellular DNA synthesis in EBV+ tumor cells and potentially in surrounding EBV- tumor cells as well (bystander effect), causing apoptosis.

Context: Pevonedistat, the first small-molecule inhibitor of NEDD8-activating enzyme, disrupts proteasomal degradation of select proteins. Setting: Patients with higher-risk MDS/CMML (IPSS-R >3, including intermediate [≥5% blasts], high, or very high risk) or LB-AML naive to hypomethylating agents were randomized 1:1 to receive intravenous pevonedistat 20 mg/m2 on days 1, 3, and 5 plus intravenous/subcutaneous azacitidine 75 mg/m2 on days 1–5, 8, and 9 (n=58), or azacitidine alone (n=62), in 28-day cycles. This abstract focuses on the higher-risk MDS subgroup. Main outcome measures: The study was powered on an endpoint of event-free survival (EFS). Overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR) and safety were also assessed. Patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was evaluated using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QoL Questionnaire-C30. Mutational profiling was performed on screening bone marrow aspirate samples. Results: In the intent-to-treat (ITT) population (n=120), EFS trended longer (median, 21.0 vs 16.6 months; hazard ratio [HR]=0.67; 95% CI, 0.42–1.05; P=.076) and median OS was 21.8 vs 19.0 months (HR=0.80; 95% CI, 0.51–1.26; P=.334) with pevonedistat+azacitidine vs azacitidine. In patients with higher-risk MDS (n=67), EFS was longer (median, 20.2 vs 14.8 months; HR=0.54; 95% CI, 0.29–1.00; P=0.045) and median OS was 23.9 vs 19.1 months (HR=0.70; 95% CI, 0.39–1.27; P=0.240) with pevonedistat+azacitidine vs azacitidine. In response-evaluable patients with higher-risk MDS (n=59), ORR was 79% (pevonedistat+azacitidine) vs 57% (azacitidine); median duration of response was 34.6 vs 13.1 months, respectively. Median azacitidine dose intensity was 98% (both arms) in patients with higher-risk MDS. With pevonedistat+azacitidine vs azacitidine, 94% vs 83% of patients with higher-risk MDS had grade ≥3 adverse events (most common: neutropenia [38% vs 37%], febrile neutropenia [22% vs 31%]). No difference was observed in patient-reported HRQoL between arms, with similar mean scores maintained from study entry to end of treatment. Clinical activity was observed with pevonedistat+azacitidine in patients with higher-risk MDS harboring poor prognostic mutations. Conclusions: Pevonedistat+azacitidine led to longer EFS vs azacitidine in higher-risk MDS, had a comparable safety profile to azacitidine alone, and azacitidine dose intensity was maintained. A randomized phase 3 trial ( NCT03268954 ) is ongoing.

Systemic immunoglobulin light-chain (AL) amyloidosis is a rare disorder arising from a plasma cell clone that produces misfolded immunoglobulin light chains, which are deposited in various tissues and organs as amyloid fibrils. Signs and symptoms are typically vague and overlap with those arising from other common diseases; consequently, diagnosis of AL amyloidosis is challenging for clinicians. Substantial delays between onset of symptoms and diagnosis are common, and result in poorer outcomes, particularly in patients with cardiac AL amyloidosis and others who develop advanced organ dysfunction. With the need to identify AL amyloidosis as early as possible, it is important for health-care practitioners, including advanced practice clinicians and nurses, to be aware of the hallmark presenting signs and symptoms, as well as the latest practice for evaluation and diagnosis. Increased awareness of signs and symptoms associated with AL amyloidosis, particularly relating to the most frequently involved organs, the heart and kidneys, represents an opportunity for achieving earlier diagnosis. Here we review these issues in AL amyloidosis, summarize the key presenting symptoms that clinicians need to be alert to, and discuss the latest diagnostic tests, with the aim of expediting patient identification and diagnosis with the goal of improving patient outcomes.