Abstract: As a reliable scoring system to detect the risk of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage after thrombectomy for ischemic stroke is not yet available, we developed a nomogram for predicting symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage in patients with large vessel occlusion in the anterior circulation who received bridging of thrombectomy with intravenous thrombolysis (training set), and to validate the model by using a cohort of patients treated with direct thrombectomy (test set). Methods— We conducted a cohort study on prospectively collected data from 3714 patients enrolled in the IER (Italian Registry of Endovascular Stroke Treatment in Acute Stroke). Symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage was defined as any type of intracerebral hemorrhage with increase of ≥4 National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score points from baseline ≤24 hours or death. Based on multivariate logistic models, the nomogram was generated. We assessed the discriminative performance by using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. Results— National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score, onset-to-end procedure time, age, unsuccessful recanalization, and Careggi collateral score composed the IER-SICH nomogram. After removing Careggi collateral score from the first model, a second model including Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score was developed. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the IER-SICH nomogram was 0.778 in the training set (n=492) and 0.709 in the test set (n=399). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the second model was 0.733 in the training set (n=988) and 0.685 in the test set (n=779). Conclusions— The IER-SICH nomogram is the first model developed and validated for predicting symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage after thrombectomy. It may provide indications on early identification of patients for more or less postprocedural intensive management.

Abstract: This study was designed to derive and validate a score to predict early ischemic events and major bleedings after an acute ischemic stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation. Methods— The derivation cohort consisted of 854 patients with acute ischemic stroke and atrial fibrillation included in prospective series between January 2012 and March 2014. Older age (hazard ratio 1.06 for each additional year; 95% confidence interval, 1.00–1.11) and severe atrial enlargement (hazard ratio, 2.05; 95% confidence interval, 1.08–2.87) were predictors for ischemic outcome events (stroke, transient ischemic attack, and systemic embolism) at 90 days from acute stroke. Small lesions (≤1.5 cm) were inversely correlated with both major bleeding (hazard ratio, 0.39; P =0.03) and ischemic outcome events (hazard ratio, 0.55; 95% confidence interval, 0.30–1.00). We assigned to age ≥80 years 2 points and between 70 and 79 years 1 point; ischemic index lesion 〉 1.5 cm, 1 point; severe atrial enlargement, 1 point (ALESSA score). A logistic regression with the receiver-operating characteristic graph procedure (C statistic) showed an area under the curve of 0.697 (0.632–0.763; P =0.0001) for ischemic outcome events and 0.585 (0.493–0.678; P =0.10) for major bleedings. Results— The validation cohort consisted of 994 patients included in prospective series between April 2014 and June 2016. Logistic regression with the receiver-operating characteristic graph procedure showed an area under the curve of 0.646 (0.529–0.763; P =0.009) for ischemic outcome events and 0.407 (0.275–0.540; P =0.14) for hemorrhagic outcome events. Conclusions— In acute stroke patients with atrial fibrillation, high ALESSA scores were associated with a high risk of ischemic events but not of major bleedings.

Abstract: Bridging therapy with low-molecular-weight heparin reportedly leads to a worse outcome for acute cardioembolic stroke patients because of a higher incidence of intracerebral bleeding. However, this practice is common in clinical settings. This observational study aimed to compare (1) the clinical profiles of patients receiving and not receiving bridging therapy, (2) overall group outcomes, and (3) outcomes according to the type of anticoagulant prescribed. Methods— We analyzed data of patients from the prospective RAF and RAF-NOACs studies. The primary outcome was defined as the composite of ischemic stroke, transient ischemic attack, systemic embolism, symptomatic cerebral bleeding, and major extracerebral bleeding observed at 90 days after the acute stroke. Results— Of 1810 patients who initiated oral anticoagulant therapy, 371 (20%) underwent bridging therapy with full-dose low-molecular-weight heparin. Older age and the presence of leukoaraiosis were inversely correlated with the use of bridging therapy. Forty-two bridged patients (11.3%) reached the combined outcome versus 72 (5.0%) of the nonbridged patients ( P =0.0001). At multivariable analysis, bridging therapy was associated with the composite end point (odds ratio, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.4–3.7; P 〈 0.0001), as well as ischemic (odds ratio, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.3–3.9; P =0.005) and hemorrhagic (odds ratio, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.2–4.9; P =0.01) end points separately. Conclusions— Our findings suggest that patients receiving low-molecular-weight heparin have a higher risk of early ischemic recurrence and hemorrhagic transformation compared with nonbridged patients.

Abstract: The best time for administering anticoagulation therapy in acute cardioembolic stroke remains unclear. This prospective cohort study of patients with acute stroke and atrial fibrillation, evaluated (1) the risk of recurrent ischemic event and severe bleeding; (2) the risk factors for recurrence and bleeding; and (3) the risks of recurrence and bleeding associated with anticoagulant therapy and its starting time after the acute stroke. Methods— The primary outcome of this multicenter study was the composite of stroke, transient ischemic attack, symptomatic systemic embolism, symptomatic cerebral bleeding and major extracranial bleeding within 90 days from acute stroke. Results— Of the 1029 patients enrolled, 123 had 128 events (12.6%): 77 (7.6%) ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack or systemic embolism, 37 (3.6%) symptomatic cerebral bleeding, and 14 (1.4%) major extracranial bleeding. At 90 days, 50% of the patients were either deceased or disabled (modified Rankin score ≥3), and 10.9% were deceased. High CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score, high National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale, large ischemic lesion and type of anticoagulant were predictive factors for primary study outcome. At adjusted Cox regression analysis, initiating anticoagulants 4 to 14 days from stroke onset was associated with a significant reduction in primary study outcome, compared with initiating treatment before 4 or after 14 days: hazard ratio 0.53 (95% confidence interval 0.30–0.93). About 7% of the patients treated with oral anticoagulants alone had an outcome event compared with 16.8% and 12.3% of the patients treated with low molecular weight heparins alone or followed by oral anticoagulants, respectively ( P =0.003). Conclusions— Acute stroke in atrial fibrillation patients is associated with high rates of ischemic recurrence and major bleeding at 90 days. This study has observed that high CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score, high National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale, large ischemic lesions, and type of anticoagulant administered each independently led to a greater risk of recurrence and bleedings. Also, data showed that the best time for initiating anticoagulation treatment for secondary stroke prevention is 4 to 14 days from stroke onset. Moreover, patients treated with oral anticoagulants alone had better outcomes compared with patients treated with low molecular weight heparins alone or before oral anticoagulants.

Abstract: Background Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are the standard of care for pts with CP-CML. Current recommendation is to continue TKI therapy indefinitely but previous studies indicate that pts with deep and sustained molecular responses (MRs) on imatinib (IM) may achieve long-lasting TFR. Nilotinib (NIL) at 300mg BID induces higher rates of deep MRs compared to IM and high dose NIL (400mg BID) enables a substantial proportion of pts who do not obtain MR4 (BCR-ABL1IS £ 0.01%) or MR4.5 (BCR-ABL1IS £ 0.0032%) with IM to reach such deep MRs levels, potentially compatible with TFR. However, optimal duration of treatment with NIL to ensure the highest rate of TFR after treatment discontinuation is unknown. Objective ENESTPath was designed to assess the optimal duration of NIL therapy that is necessary to achieve and maintain TFR upon treatment discontinuation in pts pretreated with IM. Methods ENESTPath is a randomized, phase III study enrolling CP-CML pts who after at least 2 years (yrs) of IM therapy achieved a complete cytogenetic response (CCyR), but not yet a MR4. After enrollment, pts were assigned to receive NIL at 300 mg BID for 2 yrs or 3 yrs (Arm 1 and Arm 2, respectively). Patients who will obtain a stable MR4 or better for at least 12 months (mo) will enter the TFR phase. Primary endpoint is to evaluate the proportion of pts in both arms who will remain in TFR for ≥1 yr after NIL discontinuation. Results 620 pts were enrolled in the study between May-2013 & Apr-2015. In this interim analysis, the first 300 pts (mean age 50.8 yrs; 63.7% male) enrolled and treated with NIL for ≥1 yr have been included. Baseline characteristics are detailed in the Table. By 12 mo of NIL treatment, cumulative incidences of newly acquired MR4 and MR4.5 were 57.4% and 30.5%, respectively. Further analysis of MR4 achievement showed that pts with a major molecular response (MMR: BCR-ABL1IS 〉 0.01% - ≤0.1%) at baseline had a higher probability to achieve a MR4 than those lacking MMR at baseline, with a cumulative incidence of MR4 by 12 months of 64.8% and 30.8%, respectively (Figure). Adverse events (AEs) were mostly of grade 1-2, manageable with supportive care or NIL dose interruption/reduction and included pruritus (19%), headache (9%), skin rash (9%), upper abdominal pain (8%) and constipation (7%). Grade 3-4 hematologic AEs were uncommon. The incidence of grade 3-4 laboratory abnormalities was low: lipase increase, hyperglycemia, ALT and AST increase, hyperbilirubinemia and hypercholesterolemia reported in 3.7%, 1.3%, 1%, 0.7%, 0.3%, 0.3% pts, respectively. Grade 3-4 ischemic cardiovascular events were experienced by 5% of pts including peripheral artery occlusive disease (1.7%) and coronary artery disease (3.7%) (1 pt experienced both AEs). Sub-analyses aiming to evaluate the impact of baseline SCOREa CV risk factor on the onset of arterial ischemic events are currently ongoing. Results on 168 pts showed grade 3-4 ischemic CV events in 19% of pts who were at very high or high risk (n = 47) compared to 1.7% of in pts with moderate or low risk (n = 121). During the first 12 mo, 48 (16%) pts discontinued NIL therapy: 32 discontinued due to AEs/laboratory abnormalities, 12 withdrew consent, 4 due to other reasons (protocol deviation, pregnancy and non-compliance). No patients left the study due to progression to AP/BP. Till date there were no on-treatment deaths. Conclusions This interim analysis shows that a switch to NIL at lower doses than in prior studies (300mg BID instead of 400mg BID) induces high rates of MR4 and MR4.5 in pts without such MR levels on IM. The safety profile of NIL at 300mg BID is consistent with that described in other prospective studies.Thus a switch to NIL for pts not achieving a deep MR during IM therapy is predicted to substantially increase the probability of achieving TFR requirements. A longer follow-up is necessary to assess what may be the best duration of NIL prior to treatment discontinuation. aRisk factors evaluated by applying the SCORE chart proposed by the European Society of Cardiology Table 1. Table 1. Figure 1. Figure 1. Disclosures Rea: Novartis: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Ariad: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria. Rosti:Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Cross:Qiagen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Ariad: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Hellman:Novartis: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding. Niederwieser:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Almeida:Shire: Speakers Bureau; Bristol Meyer Squibb: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy. Dezzani:Novartis: Employment. Pellegrino:Novartis: Employment. Costantini:Novartis: Employment. Walasek:Novartis: Employment. Saglio:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis Pharmaceutical Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria; ARIAD: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria. Steegmann:Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; Ariad: Honoraria, Research Funding. Baccarani:NOVARTIS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; PFIZER: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; ARIAD Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau.

Abstract: Tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKIs)have completely changed the expected survival of chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) patients which is now approaching that of the general population: a relevant proportion of CML patients are currently elderly or very elderly. Very elderly patients represent generally a small proportion in published experiences. Older CML patients imatinib treated, as it happens in the general population, receive other drug treatments for associated chronic illnesses. Our aim is to assess if and which classes of concomitant drugs have an impact on cytogenetic response in chronic phase (CP)-CML very elderly (age 〉 75 years) patients. Two hundred and twelve very elderly CP-CML patients, imatinib treated at 33 italian hematological institutions have been retrospectively evaluated. Median age at diagnosis was 78.5 years (range 75.0-93.0); 111 (52.4%) were male. Sixty-two (29.2%) were Sokal high risk. Sixty-seven (31.8%) were treated with reduced dose imatinib ( 〈 400 mg/day), and the remaining patients with imatinib 〉 400 mg/day. Concomitant drugs were 1-2 in 73 (34.4%) patients, 3-4 in 59 (27.8%), and 〉 5 in 64 (30.2%); 16 (7.6%) did not assume any concomitant drug. Drugs more frequently used were antiplatelets, assumed by 104 (49.1%) patients, followed by diuretics in 91 (42.9%) patients, proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) in 86 (40.6%), ACE inhibitors in 55 (25.9%), beta blockers in 44 (20.7%), angiotensin II receptors blockers (ARB) in 41 (19.3%), calcium channel blockers in 34 (16%), statins in 25 (11.8%), and alpha blockers in 11 (5.2%). Univariate logistic regression models were computed to assess the association between cytogenetic response after 6 or 12 months of imatinib treatment and number of concomitant drugs or selected drug classes. Statistical analyses were done using JMP 11.1 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA). Complete cytogenetic response (CCyR) was obtained in 124 (58.8%) patients, of whom 70 (33%) within 6 months. Consequently, we focused our study on the impact of number and types of drugs on CCyR rate, which represents the primary therapeutic endpoint in the elderly. Cytogenetic response distribution according to concomitant drugs is reported in table 1. We did not find any significant correlation between number of concomitant drugs, single classes of antihypertensive drugs, antiplatelets, PPIs or statins and CCyR rate at 6 or 12 months. Even though few pharmacokinetic interactions are reported between imatinib and some of medications we considered, this does not seem to have an impact on cytogenetic response rate in our cohort. Indeed, our results confirm the well-known safety and efficacy of imatinib also in very elderly CML patients. Table 1. Cytogenetic response according to concomitant drugs Drug classes Cytogenetic response CCyR 〈 6 months CCyR 7-12 months CCyR 〉 12 months No CCyR Antiplatelets (n=104) 38 (36.5%) 31 (29.8%) 11 (10.6%) 24 (23.1%) Diuretics (n=91) 32 (35.2%) 21 (23.1%) 13 (14.3%) 25 (27.4%) Proton pump inhibitors (n=86) 30 (34.9%) 22 (25.6%) 13 (15.1%) 21 (24.4%) ACE inhibitors (n=55) 19 (34.6%) 11 (20%) 12 (21.8%) 13 (23.6%) Beta blockers (n=44) 18 (40.9%) 11 (25%) 3 (6.8%) 12 (27.3%) Angiotensin II receptor blockers (n=41) 19 (46.3%) 11 (26.8%) 5 (12.3%) 6 (14.6%) Calcium channel blockers (n=34) 10 (29.4%) 7 (20.6%) 6 (17.7%) 11 (32.3%) Statins (n=25) 9 (36%) 7 (28%) 2 (8%) 7 (28%) Alpha blockers (n=11) 4 (36.4%) / 1 (9.1%) 6 (54.5%) Disclosures Castagnetti: Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; ARIAD: Consultancy, Honoraria. Abruzzese:BMS, Novartis, Pfizer, Ariad: Consultancy. Tiribelli:Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Ariad Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis Farma: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Rosti:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

Abstract: 669 Background: Nowadays the optimal treatment for mCRC beyond second line is still questioned. During last years, regorafenib and TAS-102 showed to improve survival compared to best supportive care in pts with refractory mCRC. Recently, some retrospective analyses compared the efficacy and safety of regorafenib and TAS-102 reporting no significant differences in survival and response outcomes. In real-world clinical practice, chemotherapy (CT) rechallenge is often considered for refractory mCRC. However, evidences regarding CT rechallenge is limited and no study has previously compared such approach with the recently approved antineoplastic agents in late lines. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy between CT rechallenge and regorafenib in pts with refractory mCRC. Methods: This is a mono-institutional retrospective study. We compared the efficacy of FOLFOX rechallenge and regorafenib in pts with mCRC refractory to at least 2 lines of standard CT, treated at Fondazione Policlinico Universitario “A. Gemelli”-IRCCS between Jan-10 and Jan-18. The primary endpoint was OS. Secondary endpoints were RR and PFS. Results: One hundred thirty-one pts received regorafenib and 43 FOLFOX rechallenge. OS was significantly higher with FOLFOX rechallenge than it was with regorafenib (13 vs. 6 months; HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.33-0.66; p = 0.0002). PFS was significantly higher in the FOLFOX rechallenge group compared to the regorafenib group (5 vs. 3 months; HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.46-0.89; p = 0.0073). Accordingly, RR was better in pts receiving FOLFOX rechallenge compared to regorafenib (25 vs. 3%; Chi-square p 〈 0.0001). Conclusions: Our study, although retrospective and small-sized, compared for the first time to our knowledge the efficacy of CT rechallenge to regorafenib in refractory mCRC. In our analysis, CT rechallenge with FOLFOX proved to be superior compared to regorafenib, with a survival and response benefit in pretreated mCRC. The survival benefit observed for rechallenge might be explained by the significantly higher tumor shrinkage achieved with CT rechallenge compared to regorafenib. Our results warrant further confirmation in wider and/or prospective analyses.