Abstract: Background Chronic myeloid leukemia (CML)-study IV was designed to explore whether treatment with imatinib (IM) at 400mg/day (n=400) could be optimized by doubling the dose (n=420), adding IFN (n=430) or cytarabine (n=158) or using IM after IFN-failure (n=128). Methods From July 2002 to March 2012, 1551 newly diagnosed patients in chronic phase were randomized into a 5-arm study. The study was powered to detect a survival difference of 5% at 5 years. The impact of patients' and disease factors on survival was prospectively analyzed. At the time of evaluation, at least 62% of patients still received imatinib, 26.2% were switched to 2nd generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Results After a median observation time of 9.5 years, 10-year overall survival was 82%, 10-year progression-free survival 80% and 10-year relative survival 92%. In spite of a faster response with IM800mg, the survival difference between IM400mg and IM800mg was only 3% at 5 years. In a multivariate analysis, the influence on survival of risk-group, major-route chromosomal aberrations, comorbidities, smoking and treatment center (academic vs. other) was significant in contrast to any form of initial treatment optimization. Patients that reached the response milestones 3, 6 and 12 months, had a significant survival advantage of about 6% after 10 years regardless of therapy. The progression probability to blast crisis was 5.8%. Blast crisis was proceeded by high-risk additional chromosomal aberrations. Conclusions For responders, monotherapy with IM400mg provides a close to normal life expectancy independent of the time to response. Survival is more determined by patients' and disease factors than by initial treatment selection. Although improvements are also needed for refractory disease and blast crisis, more life-time can currently be gained by carefully addressing non-CML determinants of survival. Disclosures Hehlmann: Novartis: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy. Saussele: Pfizer: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding. Pfirrmann: BMS: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria. Krause: Novartis: Honoraria. Baerlocher: Novartis: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria. Bruemmendorf: Novartis: Research Funding. Müller: Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding; Ariad: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding. Jeromin: MLL Munich Leukemia Laboratory: Employment. Hänel: Roche: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria. Burchert: BMS: Honoraria. Waller: Mylan: Consultancy, Honoraria. Mayer: Eisai: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Link: Novartis: Honoraria. Scheid: Novartis: Honoraria. Schafhausen: Novartis: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Ariad: Honoraria. Hochhaus: Incyte: Research Funding; MSD: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; ARIAD: Research Funding.

Abstract: Background In newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML), the general recommendation is to start treatment immediately after the diagnosis has been made. This paradigm is based both on the observation that untreated acute leukemia has a poor prognosis and on retrospective analyses demonstrating a shorter survival in younger AML patients (pts) in whom treatment was delayed by more than 5 days (Sekeres et al., 2009). A more recent single-center analysis came to a different conclusion, showing no prognostic effect for the time from diagnosis to treatment (TDT; Bertoli et al., 2013). We explored the relationship between TDT and prognosis on a large set of real-world data from the AML registry of the Study Alliance Leukemia (SAL) and compared it to the published cohorts. Methods The SAL runs a transregional AML registry in 46 treatment centers across Germany (NCT03188874). All registered patients with an intensive induction treatment, a minimum follow-up time of 12 months and no acute promyelocytic leukemia were selected (n=2,200). Treatment start was defined by the first day of cytarabine, whereas single agent hydroxyurea (HU) was labeled as pretreatment. We analyzed the influence of TDT on complete remission (CR), early death (ED) and overall survival (OS) in univariable analyses for each day of treatment delay, in groups of 0-5, 6-10, 11-15 and & gt;15 days of TDT, and by using the restricted cubic spline (RCS) method for data modelling. In order to adjust for the influence of established prognostic variables on the outcomes, we used multivariable regression models and propensity score weighting. The influence of HU pretreatment on outcomes was investigated by introducing an interaction term between TDT and the presence of HU pretreatment. Results The median age was 59 years (y) (IQR 50-68), the proportion of pts with favorable, intermediate and adverse genetic risk according to ELN was 27%, 53%, and 20%; & gt;95% of pts received induction treatment with standard 7+3. HU pretreatment was administered in 4% of pts. The median TDT was 3 days (IQR 2-6). Descriptive statistics after grouping of pts showed the highest median age and the lowest proportion of NPM1 mutated and favorable risk in the TDT group 11-15. Of all pts, 79% achieved a CR/CRi; unadjusted CR rates for the patient groups with TDT of 0-5, 6-10, 11-15 and & gt;15 days were 80%, 77%, 74% and 76%, respectively (p=0.317). In multivariable analysis accounting for the influence of ELN risk, age, WBC, LDH, de novo versus secondary AML and ECOG, the OR for each additional day of TDT was 0.99 (95%-CI, 0.97-1.00; p=0.124). Four percent of pts died within the first 30 days from treatment start. The respective rates in the four TDT categories were 4.0%, 3.8%, 5.1% and 4.1% (p=0.960). In multivariable analysis, the OR for TDT was 1.01 (95%-CI, 0.98-1.05; p=0.549). After a median follow-up of 40 months, the 2-y OS of all pts was 51%. The unadjusted 2-y OS rates stratified by TDT of 0-5, 6-10, 11-15, & gt;15 days were 52, 49, 46, and 51% (see Table 1 and Figure 1). The hazard ratio (HR) for each day of treatment delay was 1.00 (95%-CI; 0.99-1.01; p=0.317). In multivariable Cox regression analysis, the HR for TDT as continuous variable was 1.00 (95%-CI, 0.99-1.01; p=0.689). When OS was analyzed separately stratified for age ≤60 and & gt;60 ys and for high versus lower initial WBC defined by a threshold of 50 x 109/L, no significant differences between TDT groups were observed. Multivariable models using TDT as a grouped variable or with RCS did not provide evidence for a significant influence of TDT on outcomes. Propensity score matching of pts in the four TDT groups did not reveal an influence on outcomes. The use of HU was not associated with CR, ED nor OS. Conclusion Our study on 2,200 newly diagnosed registry pts receiving consistent intensive induction with standard-dose cytarabine plus daunorubicin (7+3) suggests that TDT is not related to response or survival, neither in younger nor in older pts. Despite multivariable analyses, a bias towards longer TDT intervals in pts judged to be clinically stable by the treating physician cannot be excluded entirely. As treatment stratification in intensive first-line treatment of AML evolves, the TDT data suggests that it may be a safe and reasonable approach to wait for genetic and other laboratory test results in order to assign clinically stable pts to the best available treatment option before the start of intensive treatment. Disclosures Krämer: Daiichi-Sankyo: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bayer: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Hänel:Roche: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Celgene: Other: advisory board; Novartis: Honoraria; Takeda: Other: advisory board. Jost:Daiichi: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Gilead: Other: travel grants; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria. Brümmendorf:Merck: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; University Hospital of the RWTH Aachen: Employment; Ariad: Consultancy. Krause:Siemens: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria; MSD: Honoraria; Gilead: Other: travel; Celgene Corporation: Other: Travel. Scholl:Novartis: Other: Project funding; Pfizer: Other: Advisory boards; Gilead: Other: Project funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Other: Advisory boards; AbbVie: Other: Advisory boards. Hochhaus:Pfizer: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; MSD: Research Funding. Kiani:Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Middeke:Sanofi: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; MSD: Consultancy. Thiede:AgenDix GmbH: Employment, Equity Ownership; Novartis: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Research Funding; Daiichi-Sankyo: Speakers Bureau. Stoelzel:JAZZ Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Neovii: Other: Travel funding; Shire: Consultancy, Other: Travel funding. Platzbecker:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding.

Abstract: Higher doses of cytarabine appear to improve long-term outcome in acute myeloid leukemia (AML), in particular for younger patients. To this end, the optimal dosage of single-agent cytarabine in consolidation therapy remains elusive. Here, we assessed the impact of different dosages of cytarabine consolidation after 7 + 3 induction on outcome in a large real-world data set from the German Study Alliance Leukemia-Acute Myeloid Leukemia (SAL-AML) registry. Methods Patients between 18 and 64 years of age, registered between April 2005 and September 2020, who attained complete remission after intensive induction and received at least one consolidation cycle with intermediate (IDAC) or high-dose cytarabine (HiDAC) were selected. To account for differences in patient and disease characteristics between both groups, the average treatment effect was estimated by propensity score weighting. Results Six-hundred-forty-two patients received HiDAC consolidation with median dosage of 17.6 (IQR (interquartile range), 16.5–18.0) g/m 2 for a median number of 3 cycles (IQR, 2–3), whereas 178 patients received IDAC consolidation with 5.9 (IQR, 5.7–8.6) g/m 2 for a median of 2 cycles (IQR, 1–3). Both groups differed significantly in some important characteristics (age, sex, cytogenetic risk group, ECOG performance status, disease status, HCT-CI, number of induction cycles). After propensity score weighting for differences in patient and disease characteristics, relapse-free survival after 2 years was comparable between HiDAC-treated (55.3%) and IDAC-treated (55.6%) patients (HR = 0.935, p  = 0.69). Moreover, no significant differences in overall survival were observed after 2 years (84.7 vs. 80.6%, HR = 1.101, p  = 0.65). Notably, more patients treated with IDAC received allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation in first remission (37.6 vs. 19.8%, p   〈  0.001). Censoring for allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation in first remission revealed no significant survival difference with regard to cytarabine dosage. Considering only of European LeukemiaNet (ELN) favorable-risk AML patients, there was no significant difference in outcome. Of note, significantly more patients treated with HiDAC suffered from ≥ 3 CTCAE infectious complications (56.7 [95%-CI 52.8–60.6%] vs. 44.1% [95%-CI 36.6–51.7%] ; p  = 0,004). The rate of other ≥ 3 CTCAE non-hematological toxicities and secondary malignancies was comparable in both treatment groups. Conclusions This retrospective analysis suggests no significant benefit of high-dose cytarabine compared to intermediate dosages in consolidation for AML patients under 65 years of age, independent of ELN risk group. Trial registration NCT03188874.

Abstract: TL in LSCs is significantly shortened at diagnosis of CML and correlates with LSC burden. TL in nonleukemic myeloid cells in deep molecular remission is unaffected by long-term TKI treatment.

Abstract: In fit patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML), immediate treatment start is recommended due to the poor prognosis of untreated acute leukemia. We explored the relationship between time from diagnosis to treatment start (TDT) and prognosis in a large real-world data set from the German Study Alliance Leukemia–Acute Myeloid Leukemia (SAL-AML) registry. All registered non–acute promyelocytic leukemia patients with intensive induction treatment and a minimum 12 months of follow-up were selected (n = 2263). We analyzed influence of TDT on remission, early death, and overall survival (OS) in univariable analyses for each day of treatment delay, in groups of 0 to 5, 6 to 10, 11 to 15, and & gt;15 days of TDT, adjusted for influence of established prognostic variables on outcomes. Median TDT was 3 days (interquartile range, 2-7). Unadjusted 2-year OS rates, stratified by TDT of 0 to 5, 6 to 10, 11 to 15, and & gt;15 days, were 51%, 48%, 44%, and 50% (P = .211). In multivariable Cox regression analysis accounting for established prognostic variables, the TDT hazard ratio as a continuous variable was 1.00 (P = .617). In OS analyses, separately stratified for age ≤60 and & gt;60 years and for high vs lower initial white blood cell count, no significant differences between TDT groups were observed. Our study suggests that TDT is not related to survival. As stratification in intensive first-line AML treatment evolves, TDT data suggest that it may be a feasible approach to wait for genetic and other laboratory test results so that clinically stable patients are assigned the best available treatment option. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT03188874.

Abstract: Introduction: Bosutinib is approved for patients with Philadelphia chromosome-positive (Ph+) chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) resistant/intolerant to prior therapy and patients with newly diagnosed Ph+ chronic phase (CP) CML. The phase 4 BYOND trial (NCT02228382) further evaluated the efficacy and safety of bosutinib in patients with previously treated CML. We report the final results from BYOND. Methods: Patients with CML resistant/intolerant to previous tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy received bosutinib 500 mg once daily. This final analysis was based on a November 23, 2020 database lock, after 3 years of follow-up. Results: Of 163 patients who received bosutinib, 156 had Ph+ CP CML; 4 patients with accelerated phase CML and 3 with Ph−/BCR-ABL1+ CML were analyzed separately. At study completion (median follow-up, 47.8 months), 48.1% of patient with Ph+ CP CML were still receiving treatment, and 68.6% completed the study. Most common primary reason for treatment discontinuation was adverse events (AEs) (26.9% [n=42/156]). Median treatment duration was 40.9 months (range, 0.2−50.1) and median dose intensity 306.4 mg/day (range, 79.7−560.6). Dose interruptions due to AEs occurred in 76.3% of patients and dose reductions in 79.5% of patients. Dose reduction (without further reduction) to 400, 300, or 200 mg/day occurred in 35 (22.4%), 46 (29.5%), and 38 (24.4%) patients, respectively. In evaluable patients with Ph+ CP CML, 81.1% (95% CI: 73.7-87.2), 71.8% (95% CI: 63.9-78.9), 59.7% (95% CI: 51.4-67.7) and 48.3% (95% CI: 40.1−56.6) attained or maintained complete cytogenetic response, major molecular response (MMR), MR 4, and MR 4.5 respectively, at any time on treatment. The majority of patients achieved a deeper molecular response relative to baseline while on bosutinib (Table 1). Among responders, the Kaplan-Meier probabilities (95% CI) of maintaining MMR and MR 4 at 36 months were 87.2% (78.0−92.7) and 80.7% (69.4−88.1), respectively. No patients with Ph+ CP CML progressed to accelerated/blast phase on-treatment. At 48 months, the cumulative incidence of progression free-survival events was 5.1% (95% CI: 2.4-9.4) and the Kaplan-Meier overall survival rate 88.3% (95% CI: 81.8-92.6). There were 17 deaths; 2 were considered CML-related (off-treatment progression to AP/BP, n=1; cardiogenic shock, n=1) and none were considered to be treatment-related by the investigator. In the overall patient population (N=163), any grade treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) were reported by 99.4% of patients and grade 3/4 TEAEs were reported by 79.1% of patients (Table 2). Most common (≥10%) TEAEs leading to dose reduction were diarrhea (27.0%) and increased ALT (12.3%) and most common TEAEs leading to temporary dose interruption were diarrhea (30.7%), increased ALT (14.7%), vomiting (13.5%), increased AST (11.0%), and nausea (10.4%). AEs leading to treatment discontinuation in ≥2% of patients were increased ALT (4.9%) and AST (2.5%). Conclusions: After 3 years, bosutinib continued to show efficacy in previously treated patients with Ph+ CP CML. Long-term AEs were generally manageable and consistent with previous reports of bosutinib. These results confirm the use of bosutinib as a standard of care in previously treated patients with CML. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Gambacorti-Passerini: Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy. Brümmendorf: Bristol Myers: Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Repeat Diagnostics: Research Funding; Takepart Media: Honoraria. Abruzzese: Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria. Kelly: Takeda: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Sanofi-Aventis: Consultancy; Denovo Biopharma: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Berkley Lights: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Agios: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Bayer: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Epizyme: Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Speakers Bureau. Oehler: OncLive: Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy; Pfizer: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy. Garcia-Gutiérrez: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; Pfizer: Research Funding. Hjorth-Hansen: Pfizer: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; AOP: Research Funding. Leip: Pfizer: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Purcell: Pfizer: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Luscan: Pfizer: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Viqueira: Pfizer: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Giles: Novartis: Consultancy; Actutate Therapeutics: Current Employment; Epigene Therapeutics: Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Hochhaus: Pfizer: Research Funding; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding.