Abstract: Although high critical current density ( J c ) YBCO can be deposited on rolling assisted biaxially-textured substrates (RABiTS) with the YSZ/CeO 2 /Ni architecture, improvement in uniformity is needed due to the presence of two-component YBCO epitaxy and cracking in the CeO 2 buffer. We have determined that Yb 2 O 3 is an excellent buffer material that provides a single-component YBCO epitaxy. In addition, crack-free epitaxial Y 2 O 3 can be consistently deposited onto textured Ni substrates. High quality YBCO films have been deposited, and J c as high as 1.8 ×10 6 A/cm 2 at 77 K has been obtained on this Yb 2 O 3 /Y 2 O 3 /Ni alternative RABiTS architecture.

Abstract: Inhibition of cholesterol synthesis and uptake sensitizes acute myeloid leukaemia ( AML ) blasts to chemotherapy. A Phase 1 study demonstrated the safety of high dose pravastatin given with idarubicin and cytarabine in patients with AML and also demonstrated an encouraging response rate. The Southwestern Oncology Group ( SWOG ) trial, SWOG S0919, was a Phase 2 trial evaluating the complete remission ( CR ) rate in a larger number of patients with relapsed AML treated with idarubicin, cytarabine and pravastatin. This study closed to accrual after meeting the defined criterion for a positive study. Thirty‐six patients with a median age of 59 years (range 23–78) were enrolled. The median time from diagnosis to registration was 18 months. Relapse status was first relapse, 17 patients (47%); second relapse, 15 patients (42%); third relapse, two patients (5·5%) and fourth relapse, two patients (5·5%). The response rate was 75% [95% confidence interval: 58–88%; 20 CR s, 7 CR with incomplete count recovery ( CR i)], and the median overall survival was 12 months. The P ‐value comparing 75–30% (the null response rate based on prior SWOG experience) was 3·356 × 10 −4 . Given the encouraging CR / CR i rate, this regimen should be considered for testing in a prospective randomized trial against best conventional therapy.

Abstract: 7028 Background: Inhibition of cholesterol synthesis and uptake sensitizes AML blasts to chemotherapy (Blood 104: 1816, 2004). A prior Phase 1 study demonstrated the safety of high dose pravastatin given with idarubicin and cytarabine in patients with AML and also reported an encouraging response rate (Blood 109: 2999, 2007). SWOG S0919 therefore evaluated the complete remission (CR) rate in a larger number of pts with relapsed AML treated with the pravastatin dose arrived at in the Phase 1 trial. Methods: Pts were treated at SWOG institutions from Aug 2009 through Nov 2012. Pravastatin was supplied by Bristol-Meyers Squibb. The protocol was approved by each institution’s review board. Eligibility: age ≥ 18 yrs, relapsed AML, cardiac ejection fraction ≥ 45%, CR/ CR with incomplete count recovery (CRi) following most recent chemotherapy lasting ≥ 3 months, no prior hematopoietic cell transplant. Treatment: oral pravastatin 1280 mg Days 1-8, idarubicin 12 mg/m 2 /d IV Days 4-6, and cytarabine 1.5 g/m 2 /d continuous IV infusion Days 4-7. Pts achieving a CR could receive 2 cycles of consolidation. CR and CRi were defined by IWG criteria. Fifty eligible pts were to be accrued. If ≥ 21 pts achieved CR or CRi, the regimen would be considered sufficiently effective (critical level = 4.8% if true CR rate = 30% and power of 90% if true CR rate = 50%). Results: The study closed to accrual on Nov 1, 2012 after meeting the defined criterion for a positive study. Thirty-six pts with a median age of 59 yr (range 23-78) were enrolled. Seventeen pts (47%) were male and the median WBC was 2800/ uL (range 700-110,600). The median time from initial dx to registration was 18 mo (range 5-136). Relapse status: 1 st : 17 pts (47%), 2 nd : 15 (42%), 3 rd : 2 (5.5%), and 4 th : 2 (5.5%). Eighteen pts have died, 3 during treatment. The response rate was 75% (95% CI 58-88%; 20 CR, 7 CRi); and the median overall survival was 10 mo. The p-value comparing 75% to 30% (null response rate) is 3.356 x 10 -8 . Duration of last CR (≤ 6 months) and prior high dose cytarabine exposure did not affect response to protocol treatment. Conclusions: The CR/ CRi in this relapsed population is encouraging. We plan to evaluate the efficacy of this regimen in higher-risk patients. Clinical trial information: NCT00840177.

Abstract: Azacitidine is standard, first-line therapy in higher-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS). Whether azacitidine-based combinations with lenalidomide or vorinostat produce superior overall response rates (ORRs) to azacitidine is not known. Patients and Methods North American Intergroup Study S1117 is a phase II/III trial that randomly assigned patients with higher-risk MDS and chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) 1:1:1 to azacitidine (75 mg/m 2 /day on days 1 to 7 of a 28-day cycle); azacitidine plus lenalidomide (10 mg/day on days 1 to 21); or azacitidine plus vorinostat (300 mg twice daily on days 3 to 9). The primary phase II end point was improved ORR. Results Of 277 patients from 90 centers, 92 received azacitidine, 93 received azacitidine plus lenalidomide, and 92 received azacitidine plus vorinostat. Median age was 70 years (range, 28 to 93 years), 85 patients (31%) were female, and 53 patients (19%) had CMML. Serious adverse events were similar across arms, although combination-arm patients were more likely to undergo nonprotocol-defined dose modifications ( P 〈 .001).With a median follow-up of 23 months (range, 1 to 43 months), the ORR was 38% for patients receiving azacitidine, 49% for azacitidine plus lenalidomide ( P = .14 v azacitidine), and 27% for azacitidine plus vorinostat ( P = .16 v azacitidine). For patients with CMML, ORR was higher for azacitidine plus lenalidomide versus azacitidine (68% v 28%, P = .02) but similar for all arms across cytogenetic subgroups, as was remission duration and overall survival. ORR was higher with mutations in DNMT3A and lower for SRSF2, whereas ORR duration improved with fewer mutations. Lenalidomide dose reduction was associated with worse overall survival (hazard ratio, 1.30; P = .05). Conclusion Patients with higher-risk MDS treated with azacitidine-based combinations had similar ORR to azacitidine monotherapy, although patients with CMML benefitted from azacitidine plus lenalidomide. The efficacy of combination regimens may have been affected by dose modifications.

Abstract: Hypophysiotropic somatostatin (SST) neurons in the periventricular hypothalamic area express growth hormone (GH) receptor (GHR) and are frequently considered as the key neuronal population that mediates the negative feedback loop controlling the hypothalamic–GH axis. Additionally, insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) may also act at the hypothalamic level to control pituitary GH secretion via long-loop negative feedback. However, to the best of our knowledge, no study so far has tested whether GHR or IGF-1 receptor (IGF1R) signaling specifically in SST neurons is required for the homeostatic control of GH secretion. Here we show that GHR ablation in SST neurons did not impact the negative feedback mechanisms that control pulsatile GH secretion or body growth in male and female mice. The sex difference in hepatic gene expression profile was only mildly affected by GHR ablation in SST neurons. Similarly, IGF1R ablation in SST neurons did not affect pulsatile GH secretion, body growth, or hepatic gene expression. In contrast, simultaneous ablation of both GHR and IGF1R in SST-expressing cells increased mean GH levels and pulse amplitude in male and female mice, and partially disrupted the sex differences in hepatic gene expression. Despite the increased GH secretion in double knockout mice, no alterations in body growth and serum or liver IGF-1 levels were observed. In summary, GHR and IGF1R signaling in SST neurons play a redundant role in the control of GH secretion. Furthermore, our results reveal the importance of GH/IGF-1 negative feedback mechanisms on SST neurons for the establishment of sex differences in hepatic gene expression profile.

Abstract: Abstract 2590 Background FLT3-internal tandem duplication (ITD) is found in about 30% of patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) at diagnosis and confers a high risk of relapse. Thus allogeneic hematopoietic transplant (HCT) is recommended for these patients in first complete remission (CR) and after HCT they become candidates for trials of FLT3-ITD inhibitors (such as quizartinib) to prevent relapse. However at referral to tertiary centers after reaching CR, FLT3-ITD status at diagnosis is often unknown, complicating decisions about HCT. FLT3-ITDs are known to be associated with a normal karyotype (NK), translocation 6;9 and a high white blood cell (WBC) count, and we hypothesized that assessment of likely FLT3-ITD status at diagnosis in patients presenting in CR not tested at diagnosis would be improved by examining these covariates simultaneously. Methods Our initial analysis included 434 adult patients with newly diagnosed AML (excluding APL) treated on three SWOG trials (S9031, S9333, and S0106) in whom FLT3-ITD status (positive/negative) was established at diagnosis. Univariate and then multivariate analyses were used to identify covariates independently associated with FLT3-ITD positivity. The relative abilities of these to predict FLT3-ITD positivity were quantified using the area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUC); an AUC of 1.0 denotes perfect prediction, whereas an AUC of 0.5 is analogous to a coin flip. The log odds ratios (ORs) from the multivariate models were used to assign a score to each covariate and scores were summed; such that the higher the score, the greater is the likelihood of the FLT3-ITD positivity at diagnosis. We tested the performance of the scoring system in 2 newly-diagnosed populations that had not contributed to the system's development and in whom FLT3-ITD status at diagnosis was known: (a) 210 patients treated at FHCRC (Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center) and (b) 1,401 patients treated at MDACC (M.D. Anderson Cancer Center). Covariates examined were: age, sex, performance status (PS), WBC count, platelet count, bone marrow blast percentage, secondary AML, and cytogenetic risk (using SWOG/Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group criteria). Results FLT3- ITD was present in 101 of the 434 SWOG patients (23%) in the scoring system development population. The log OR were rounded to the nearest half point to create the scoring system. Only WBC 〉 20,000 (reference, WBC 〈 20,000) and cytogenetics (reference, normal) had non-zero scores, which are summarized below: Scores less than −0.5 were called low, ≥−0.5 and 〈 0.5 intermediate, ≥ 0.5 high. The AUC was 0.75 and contrasted with 0.66 and 0.69 when only WBC or cytogenetics were considered. However when this system was tested in the FHCRC population (16% FLT3-ITD positive) its AUC was only 0.58, not better than when each covariate was examined separately (AUC 0.54 and 0.6 for WBC and cytogenetics, respectively). Similarly at MDACC (17% FLT3-ITD positive) the system's AUC was 0.68 vs. 0.59 and 0.68 for WBC and cytogenetics, respectively. Conclusion Although this scoring system seemed useful tool within the population it was developed (SWOG), such was not the case in two independent cohorts of AML patients with known FLT3-ITD status (FHCRC and MDACC). This indicates that there is no obvious substitute for actual data on FLT3-ITD status. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract: Background: The few therapies available to treat higher-risk MDS and CMML have limited impact on outcome. We previously reported initial results of S1117, which compared overall response rates (ORRs) of azacitidine (AZA) monotherapy to AZA combined with the histone deacetylase inhibitor vorinostat (VOR), or the immunomodulator lenalidomide (LEN)( ASH 2014 LBA-5). We now report updated response data and overall survival (OS), subgroup analyses, impact of cytogenetics, and effect of treatment center volume/centers of excellence on outcome. Methods: This randomized, Phase II study (ClinTrials.gov # NCT01522976) enrolled higher-risk MDS (International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) Int-2 or High and/or bone marrow blasts ≥5%) and CMML adult patients (pts) with 〈 20% blasts from 3/12-6/14 to receive AZA (75 mg/m2/d on d1-7 of a 28d cycle), AZA + LEN (10 mg/d on d1-21), or AZA + VOR (300 mg BID on d3-9). Pts continued treatment until treatment failure, defined as disease progression, relapse, significant or unresolved toxicity, or lack of response. Dose reductions occurred for grade ≥3 adverse events (per NCI CTCAE) or delayed count recovery. Cytogenetic risk groups were defined per IPSS-R. The primary endpoint was improvement in ORR, by intention to treat and reviewed centrally, of one of the combination arms vs. AZA per 2006 International Working Group MDS response criteria (complete response (CR) + partial response (PR) + hematologic improvement (HI)). OS was from study entry. MDS Centers of Excellence (MCE) were defined per MDS Foundation; center volume was defined as low (1-4 pts enrolled) or high (5-17 pts). Results: Of 277 pts, 92 received AZA, 93 AZA+LEN, and 92 AZA+VOR. Baseline characteristics, previously reported, were similar across arms. Pts received a median of 22 weeks of therapy and were followed for a median of 10 months (range: 0-30). Non-protocol defined dose modification and protocol discontinuation due to toxicity occurred more frequently in combination arms vs. AZA (p=.0014 and p=.018, respectively). Responses are now assessable in all pts (Table 1). ORR was statistically similar for combination arms vs. AZA, with a trend for longer response duration (p=.083) for combinations. Within HI, AZA+LEN pts had higher HI-n than AZA pts (16% vs. 5%, p=.031). ORR for CMML pts was significantly higher for LEN+AZA vs. AZA (63% vs. 29%, p=.04), with a trend for longer response duration for combinations (p=.06); no differences in ORR were seen for therapy-related MDS, IPSS subgroups, or transfusion-dependent pts. Allogeneic transplantation rates were similar. Median OS (Figure) for AZA:AZA+LEN:AZA+VOR was 15:18 (p=.38):17 (p=.17) months; p=.19 for combination arms vs. AZA. Median OS after failure was 7:9 (p=.6):9 (p=.05) months; p=.15 for combination arms after failure vs. AZA. For pts on therapy 〉 6 months, there was a trend (p=.08) for higher ORR for AZA+LEN vs. AZA, though response duration was similar; median OS was 18:21 (p=.44 vs. AZA):21 months (p=.45 vs. AZA). Cytogenetic risk category distribution and ORR was similar across arms. OS (compared to Very Good/Good) was worse for Poor (HR 2.07, p=.022) and Very poor (HR 4.41, p 〈 .001), without significant modification by treatment arm (Table 2). Compared to pts without identified cytogenetic abnormalities (abn), ORR across arms was better for pts with Chr 5 abn (OR 2.38, p=.004); OS was better for normal (HR .42, p 〈 .001) and worse for Chr 5 abn (HR 3.1, p 〈 .001), -7 (HR 2.69, p 〈 .001), and 17p (HR 2.61, p 〈 .001). While small numbers prevented definitive conclusions for treatment arm effect, combinations trended towards improving OS in Normal and Chr 5 abn only. The outcome of all pts and pts on discrete study arms treated at MCE (n=75) or high volume (n=138) sites were similar to non-MCE or low-volume sites for ORR, non-protocol defined dose modifications, dose adjustment in first 4 cycles, time to off-protocol (HR 1.2, p=.21 and HR .94, p=.64), and OS (HR .81, p=.3 and HR .77, p=.12). Conclusions: In higher-risk MDS pts, ORR and OS was similar for AZA monotherapy compared to combination arms, while for CMML pts, ORR was significantly higher with AZA+LEN. For cytogenetic subgroups, OS was worse for Chr 5 abn, -7, and 17p, and may be improved by combinations in normal or Chr 5 abn. MCE or treatment at a high volume site did not impact these effects or outcomes. Figure 1. Responses Figure 1. Responses Figure 2. Cytogenetics Figure 2. Cytogenetics Figure 3. Figure 3. Disclosures Sekeres: Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. List:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding. Odenike:Sunesis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Stone:Merck: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy. Gore:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Buckstein:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Fang:Affymetrix: Research Funding. Attar:Agios Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Erba:Ariad: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Sunesis: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Jannsen (J & J): Other: Data Safety and Monitoring Committees ; Ariad: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; GlycoMimetics: Other: Data Safety and Monitoring Committees; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium/Takeda: Research Funding; Millennium/Takeda: Research Funding; Celator: Research Funding; Celator: Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; Sunesis: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; GlycoMimetics: Other: Data Safety and Monitoring Committees; Jannsen (J & J): Other: Data Safety and Monitoring Committees.