Abstract: Mutations of the isocitrate dehydrogenase-1 (IDH1) and IDH2 genes are among the most frequent alterations in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and can be found in ∼20% of patients at diagnosis. Among 4930 patients (median age, 56 years; interquartile range, 45-66) with newly diagnosed, intensively treated AML, we identified IDH1 mutations in 423 (8.6%) and IDH2 mutations in 575 (11.7%). Overall, there were no differences in response rates or survival for patients with mutations in IDH1 or IDH2 compared with patients without mutated IDH1/2. However, distinct clinical and comutational phenotypes of the most common subtypes of IDH1/2 mutations could be associated with differences in outcome. IDH1-R132C was associated with increased age, lower white blood cell (WBC) count, less frequent comutation of NPM1 and FLT3 internal tandem mutation (ITD) as well as with lower rate of complete remission and a trend toward reduced overall survival (OS) compared with other IDH1 mutation variants and wild-type (WT) IDH1/2. In our analysis, IDH2-R172K was associated with significantly lower WBC count, more karyotype abnormalities, and less frequent comutations of NPM1 and/or FLT3-ITD. Among patients within the European LeukemiaNet 2017 intermediate- and adverse-risk groups, relapse-free survival and OS were significantly better for those with IDH2-R172K compared with WT IDH, providing evidence that AML with IDH2-R172K could be a distinct entity with a specific comutation pattern and favorable outcome. In summary, the presented data from a large cohort of patients with IDH1/2 mutated AML indicate novel and clinically relevant findings for the most common IDH mutation subtypes.

Abstract: Background: In newly-diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM), lenalidomide/bortezomib/dexamethasone (RVd) is one of the most widely used combination regimens. Anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies (CD38-moAb) increase efficacy when added to standard-of-care regimens. Here we present the first primary endpoint of the randomized, open-label, multicenter, phase III GMMG-HD7 trial, comparing RVd without (arm IA) or with the CD38-moAb isatuximab (Isa, arm IB) with regard to the rate of minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity after induction therapy in patients with transplant-eligible NDMM. Patients and Methods: Patients with transplant-eligible NDMM at 67 sites in Germany were equally randomized to receive three 42-day cycles of RVd (lenalidomide 25 mg/d p.o., d1-14 and d22-35; bortezomib 1.3 mg/m 2 s.c. d1, 4, 8, 11, 22, 25, 29, 32; dexamethasone 20 mg/d d1-2, 4-5, 8-9, 11-12, 15, 22-23, 25-26, 29-30, 32-33) in both arms. Isa was added to arm IB only (10 mg/kg i.v., cycle 1: d 1, 8, 15, 22, 29; cycles 2-3: d 1, 15, 29). Randomization for induction was stratified according to revised International Staging System (R-ISS). Primary endpoint of the trial was MRD negativity assessed by next-generation flow (NGF, cut off 1x10 -5) after induction. Secondary endpoints included rates of complete response (CR) after induction and safety. Data cut-off for the present analysis was April 2021. Results: Between 10/2018 and 09/2020, 662 patients were included in the trial. 660 patients were eligible for intention-to-treat analysis and 658 patients started induction (RVd: 329/328 and Isa-RVd: 331/330). Median age was 58 (range 26-70) years and baseline characteristics were well balanced between treatment arms. On induction, 35 (10.6%) and 18 (5.4%) patients discontinued treatment in the RVd vs. Isa-RVd arms (p=0.02). Among these, 8 (2.4%, RVd) vs. 7 (2.1%, Isa-RVd) patients discontinued induction due to adverse events (AE). 293 (89.1%) vs. 312 (94.3%) patients in the RVd vs. Isa-RVd arms continued further study treatment after induction. MRD negativity rates after induction were 35.6% vs. 50.1% (odds ratio [OR]=1.83, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] : 1.34-2.51, p & lt;0.001) for RVd vs. Isa-RVd, respectively. On multivariate analyses including treatment arm, R-ISS, performance status, renal impairment, age and sex, treatment with Isa-RVd (vs. RVd) remained the only significant predictor for increased MRD negativity after induction (OR=1.82, 95% CI: 1.33-2.49, p & lt;0.001). While the rates of CR after induction did not yet differ between the RVd vs. Isa-RVd arms (21.6% vs. 24.2%, p=0.46), the rate of very good partial response or better (≥VGPR) was significantly higher in the Isa-RVd arm (60.5% vs. 77.3%, p & lt;0.001). The rates of progressive disease were 4.0% (RVd) vs. 1.5% (Isa-RVd). At least one AE (grade ≥3) on induction occurred in 61.3% (RVd) and 63.6% (Isa-RVd) of patients (p=0.57). Most common AE (grade ≥3) by system organ class (SOC) for RVd vs. Isa-RVd were: "investigations": 23.5% vs. 23.9% (p=0.93), "blood and lymphatic system disorders": 16.8% vs. 25.8% (p=0.006), "infections and infestations": 10.4% vs. 13.0% (p=0.33) and "nervous system disorders": 10.1% vs. 8.5% (p=0.50). Rates of serious AE (SAE, any grade) on induction were similar between RVd and Isa-RVd (36.3% vs. 34.8%, p=0.75). Eight (RVd) and four (Isa-RVd) patients died during induction. Conclusions: The GMMG-HD7 trial met its primary endpoint. To the best of our knowledge this is the first phase III trial to demonstrate superiority of MRD negativity rates after induction by adding a CD38-moAb to RVd. There were no increased rates of SAE or early discontinuation in patients treated with Isa-RVd compared to RVd. The trial is ongoing, including analyses post autologous transplantation, which is followed by a second randomization to compare the efficacy of the addition of Isa to lenalidomide maintenance. Disclosures Goldschmidt: Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Grants and/or Provision of Investigational Medicinal Product, Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnology: Consultancy; Incyte: Research Funding; GSK: Honoraria; Chugai: Honoraria, Other: Grants and/or Provision of Investigational Medicinal Product, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Grants and/or Provision of Investigational Medicinal Product, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Grants and/or Provision of Investigational Medicinal Product, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Grants and/or Provision of Investigational Medicinal Product, Research Funding; Johns Hopkins University: Other: Grant; Molecular Partners: Research Funding; MSD: Research Funding; Mundipharma: Research Funding; Dietmar-Hopp-Foundation: Other: Grant; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Grants and/or Provision of Investigational Medicinal Product, Research Funding. Mai: Celgene / BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel accommodations and expenses, Research Funding; Glaxo Smith Kline: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel accommodations and expenses, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel accommodations and expenses, Research Funding; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel accommodations and expenses, Research Funding. Fenk: Takeda: Honoraria; GSK: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; BMS/Celgene: Honoraria. Besemer: Takeda: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; GSK: Honoraria. Dürig: Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Support, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Support, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Schroers: BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria. Metzler: Takeda: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; GSK: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy. Haenel: Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Jazz: Consultancy, Honoraria; GSK: Consultancy; Bayer Vital: Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Mann: Cellgene: Consultancy. Asemissen: GSK: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Celgene BMS: Honoraria. Heilmeier: Sanofi-Aventis Dtld. GmbH: Consultancy. Kriegsmann: Sanofi: Honoraria. Weinhold: Sanofi: Honoraria. Holderried: Amgen: Speakers Bureau; GSK: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Eurocept Pharmaceuticals: Other: Travel support; MSD: Speakers Bureau; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Other: Travel support; Sanofi: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Other: Travel support; Therakos: Other: Travel support; Daiichi Sankyo: Other: travel support; Medac: Other: Travel support; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Trautmann-Grill: Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria. Gezer: Amgen: Consultancy, Other: Invited Speaker; Takeda: Consultancy, Other: Invited Speaker; BMS: Consultancy, Other: Invited Speaker; Celgene: Consultancy, Other: Invited Speaker. Khandanpour: GSK: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS/Celgene: Honoraria. Knauf: Amgen: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Beigene: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria. Munder: GSK: Consultancy; Amgen: Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Incyte: Research Funding. Hoffmann: Sanofi-Aventis: Consultancy. Raab: Roche: Consultancy; GSK: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Salwender: GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES; Sanofi: Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES; Chugai: Honoraria; Oncopeptides: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES; AbbVie: Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES; Bristol-Myers Squibb/Celgene: Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES; Pfizer: Honoraria. Weisel: Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncopeptides: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Consultancy; Novartis: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria. OffLabel Disclosure: Isatuximab prior to ASCT in NDMM

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: The tyrosine-protein phosphatase nonreceptor type 11 (PTPN11) is an important regulator of RAS signaling and frequently affected by mutations in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Despite the relevance for leukemogenesis and as a potential therapeutic target, the prognostic role is controversial. To investigate the prognostic impact of PTPN11 mutations, we analyzed 1529 adult AML patients using next-generation sequencing. PTPN11 mutations were detected in 106 of 1529 (6.93%) patients (median VAF: 24%) in dominant (36%) and subclonal (64%) configuration. Patients with PTPN11 mutations were associated with concomitant mutations in NPM1 (63%), DNMT3A (37%), and NRAS (21%) and had a higher rate of European LeukemiaNet (ELN) favorable cytogenetics (57.8% vs 39.1%; P & lt; .001) and higher white blood cell counts (P = .007) compared with PTPN11 wild-type patients. In a multivariable analysis, PTPN11 mutations were independently associated with poor overall survival (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.75; P & lt; .001), relapse-free survival (HR: 1.52; P = .013), and a lower rate of complete remission (odds ratio: 0.46; P = .008). Importantly, the deleterious effect of PTPN11 mutations was confined predominantly to the ELN favorable-risk group and patients with subclonal PTPN11 mutations (HR: 2.28; P & lt; .001) but not found with dominant PTPN11 mutations (HR: 1.07; P = .775), presumably because of significant differences within the rate and spectrum of associated comutations. In conclusion, our data suggest an overall poor prognostic impact of PTPN11 mutations in AML, which is significantly modified by the underlying cytogenetics and the clonal context in which they occur.

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: Biallelic mutations of the CEBPA gene (CEBPAbi) define a distinct entity associated with favorable prognosis; however, the role of monoallelic mutations (CEBPAsm) is poorly understood. We retrospectively analyzed 4708 adults with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) who had been recruited into the Study Alliance Leukemia trials, to investigate the prognostic impact of CEBPAsm. CEBPA mutations were identified in 240 patients (5.1%): 131 CEBPAbi and 109 CEBPAsm (60 affecting the N-terminal transactivation domains [CEBPAsmTAD] and 49 the C-terminal DNA-binding or basic leucine zipper region [CEBPAsmbZIP] ). Interestingly, patients carrying CEBPAbi or CEBPAsmbZIP shared several clinical factors: they were significantly younger (median, 46 and 50 years, respectively) and had higher white blood cell (WBC) counts at diagnosis (median, 23.7 × 109/L and 35.7 × 109/L) than patients with CEBPAsmTAD (median age, 63 years, median WBC 13.1 × 109/L; P & lt; .001). Co-mutations were similar in both groups: GATA2 mutations (35.1% CEBPAbi; 36.7% CEBPAsmbZIP vs 6.7% CEBPAsmTAD; P & lt; .001) or NPM1 mutations (3.1% CEBPAbi; 8.2% CEBPAsmbZIP vs 38.3% CEBPAsmTAD; P & lt; .001). CEBPAbi and CEBPAsmbZIP, but not CEBPAsmTAD were associated with significantly improved overall (OS; median 103 and 63 vs 13 months) and event-free survival (EFS; median, 20.7 and 17.1 months vs 5.7 months), in univariate and multivariable analyses. Additional analyses revealed that the clinical and molecular features as well as the favorable survival were confined to patients with in-frame mutations in bZIP (CEBPAbZIP-inf). When patients were classified according to CEBPAbZIP-inf and CEBPAother (including CEBPAsmTAD and non-CEBPAbZIP-inf), only patients bearing CEBPAbZIP-inf showed superior complete remission rates and the longest median OS and EFS, arguing for a previously undefined prognostic role of this type of mutation.

Abstract: Background Double induction using two subsequent 7+3 regimens of cytarabine plus anthracycline is commonly performed in AML patients with an adequate performance status in order to maximize dose intensity upfront. However, for patients with a good early response at day 15 of first induction, there is no prospective randomized evidence on the necessity or value of a second induction cycle. Aims In order to answer the question if good responders of the first 7+3 induction could be spared a second induction cycle, we set up randomized-controlled SAL DaunoDouble trial. The study prospectively assesses the outcome of patients with a good early response with respect to the number of induction cycles (single versus double). We assumed non-inferiority of single induction in terms of complete remission (CR/CRi) rate, based on a margin of 7.5%. Here, we present the results of the planned interim analysis. Methods Patients (pts) 18-65 years with newly diagnosed AML, normal cardiac and organ function received a first induction cycle with seven days of cytarabine plus three days of daunorubicin ("7+3"). Response assessment in bone marrow was done on day 15 after the initiation of chemotherapy and confirmed by central review. A blast count & lt;5% was defined as good response. Pts with good response were randomized to receive a second induction cycle (arm D) or no second induction cycle (arm S). Primary endpoint was CR/CRi after completion of induction, secondary endpoints were RFS, and OS. Results Between 2014 and 2020, 624 evaluable pts were enrolled and received the first induction cycle with 7+3. A marrow blast clearance below 5% on day 15 was achieved in 298 pts (48%), providing eligibility for randomization. Of these patients, 150 were randomized into arm S and 148 into arm D, respectively. Median age was 52 years, 92% had de novo AML, NPM1 mutation was present in 53%, FLT3-ITD in 25% of pts. Favorable, intermediate and adverse risk (ELN 2017) were present in 56%, 34% and 10% of pts, respectively. CR/CRi rates at the end of induction were 86% after single induction and 85% after double induction. The CR/CRi rates in 224 pre-defined per-protocol pts were 88% versus 91%, resulting in a CR difference of 3% (95%-CI -0.047-0.111; p for non-inferiority test 0.145). After a median follow-up time of 24 months, RFS was slightly but not significantly lower after single induction with a 3-year RFS of 53% versus 64% (HR 1.4, p=0.125), whereas no differences were seen in 3-year OS, with a of rate of 74% versus 75% (HR 1.1, p=0.645) after single versus double induction. Conclusion The interim analysis results show that in good responders, the difference between CR rates after single versus double induction was even smaller than the predefined 7.5% margin, suggesting a trend for non-inferiority of single induction, although statistical significance was not reached. The trial continued recruitment. These findings suggest that in good responders, it may be safe to omit a second induction cycle if a second cycle poses a high risk. Figure. CR + CRi, RFS and OS after randomization to single versus double induction. Disclosures Alakel: Pfizer: Consultancy. Jost:Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; JAZZ: Other: travel support; Celgene: Other: travel support. Novak:Roche: Consultancy; Janssen: Other: Travel expenses; Takeda: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Other: Travel expenses; Pfizer: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy. Krause:Takeda: Honoraria; Celgene: Other: Travel Support; MSD: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Siemens: Research Funding; Gilead: Other: Travel Support. Held:Roche: Consultancy, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding; MSD: Consultancy; Acrotech: Research Funding; Spectrum: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding. Platzbecker:AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Geron: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria. Thiede:AgenDix GmbH: Other: Co-owner and CEO. Müller-Tidow:Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BiolineRx: Research Funding; Janssen-Cilag GmbH: Speakers Bureau.

Abstract: Background: During the past decade, prognostic tools and outcomes of patients with newly-diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) markedly improved. Data from clinical trials evaluating early morbidity and mortality including patients with transplant-eligible NDMM treated with novel agents are scarce. Thus, we aimed to analyze early morbidity and mortality in this patient cohort, devise and validate a predictive score to identify patients at risk. Patients and methods: Between July 2005 and January 2018, 1333 patients with transplant-eligible NDMM from three subsequent phase III trials, HD4, MM5 and HD6 from the German-speaking Myeloma Multicenter Group (GMMG), received a novel agent-based induction therapy with either bortezomib (BTZ) / doxorubicine / dexamethasone (DEX; PAD: n=192, HD4; PAd: n=296, MM5), BTZ / cyclophosphamide / DEX (VCD: n=300, MM5), BTZ / lenalidomide / DEX (VRD: n=272, HD6) or elotuzumab / VRD (ELO-VRD: n=273, HD6). Severe infections (SI) were defined as any infection grade ≥ 3 according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE). SI and early deaths were counted on and up to 30 days post induction therapy. Uni-/multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess predictive factors for SI and early death and to account for trial effects. Data from the European Myeloma Network (EMN) 02 / Dutch-Belgian Cooperative Trial Group for Hematology Oncology Foundation (HOVON) 95 phase III trial including 1497 patients with transplant-eligible NDMM receiving induction therapy with VCD were used to validate a predictive score for SI and early mortality. Results: Overall, early mortality during induction therapy was low (n=24, 1.8%) in the GMMG cohort. SI were the most common cause for early deaths (n=15, 62.5%) as compared to MM progression-related death (n=5, 20.8%) and other causes (n=4, 16.7%). Rates of SI during induction therapy were 11.9% (n=159) and decreased in subsequent trial generations: HD4-PAD: 27.1%, MM5-PAd: 10.8%, MM5-VCD: 9.3%, HD6-VRD: 7.3% and HD6-ELO-VRD: 9.9% of patients. In the EMN02/HO95 trial, early mortality was 1.7% (n=25) and rates of SI were 6.8% (n=101). A multivariate model including patient and disease baseline characteristics identified four major risk factors for SI and/or early death on induction therapy in the GMMG cohort: age ( & gt;60 years; odds ratio [OR]=1.70, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] : 1.21-2.40, p=0.002), International Staging System (stage III; OR=1.92, 95% CI: 1.22-2.94, p=0.005), platelet count ( & lt;150/nl; OR=2.03, 95% CI: 1.27-3.30, p=0.004) and World Health Organization (WHO) performance status ( & gt;1; OR=1.82, 95% CI: 1.10-3.06, p=0.022). A sum score based on these four risk factors (one risk factor = one point) was built and included 519 (39.5%), 550 (41.9%) and 245 (18.6%) patients with a score of 0, 1 and ≥2 points. A higher score gradually predicted an increasing risk for SI and/or death during induction therapy: 0 points=7.9%, 1 point=11.5% and ≥2 points=23.2% (p & lt;0.001, Figure 1A); SI only: 0 points=7.7%, 1 point=10.9% and ≥2 points=21.6% (p & lt;0.001, Figure 1B) and early death only: 0 points=0.4%, 1 point=1.3% and ≥2 points=5.7% (p & lt;0.001, Figure 1C). In the EMN02/HO95 cohort, 673 (45.6%), 587 (39.7%) and 217 (14.7%) patients had a score of 0, 1 and ≥2 points. The score was successfully validated in the EMN02/HO95 cohort: SI and/or death during induction therapy: 0 points=5.0%, 1 point=8.3% and ≥2 points=11.9% (p & lt;0.001); SI only: 0 points=4.5%, 1 point=7.0% and ≥2 points=10.0% (p=0.006) and early death only: 0 points=0.5%, 1 point=2.2% and ≥2 points=2.5% (p=0.01). Conclusions: To date, this is the largest pooled analysis of individual patient data on early morbidity and mortality in patients with transplant-eligible NDMM treated with novel agent-based induction therapy. Our analysis highlights a decreasing incidence of SI and early mortality and proposes a validated, easy-to-use score to identify patients at excessive risk for SI and/or early death during induction therapy. This allows the implementation of intensive monitoring, preventive and supportive strategies for this subgroup of patients in further clinical trials and also routine care. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Mai: Celgene / BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel accommodations and expenses, Research Funding; Glaxo Smith Kline: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel accommodations and expenses, Research Funding; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel accommodations and expenses, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel accommodations and expenses, Research Funding. Salwender: AbbVie: Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES; Amgen: Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES; Takeda: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES; GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES; Bristol-Myers Squibb/Celgene: Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES; Oncopeptides: Honoraria; Chugai: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria. Zweegman: Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Munder: GSK: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Incyte: Research Funding. Pantani: Janssen: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria. Brossart: BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; MSD: Honoraria. Beksac: Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Oncopeptides: Consultancy. Raab: BMS: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; GSK: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Dürig: Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Support, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Support, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Besemer: Takeda: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; GSK: Honoraria. Fenk: GSK: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; BMS/Celgene: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria. Haenel: Bayer Vital: Honoraria; Jazz: Consultancy, Honoraria; GSK: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Metzler: Takeda: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; GSK: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy. Graeven: Amgen: Honoraria; Sanofi Aventis: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Johnson and Johnson: Honoraria; Astra Zeneca: Honoraria; MSD: Consultancy; Boehringer Ingelheim: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Fujifilm: Honoraria; Roche: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Ipsen Bioscience: Research Funding; MacroGenics: Research Funding. Boccadoro: Janssen and GSK: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi, Celgene, Amgen, Janssen, Novartis, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and AbbVie: Honoraria; Sanofi, Celgene, Amgen, Janssen, Novartis, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Mundipharma: Research Funding. Scheid: Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy; Abbvie: Honoraria; Takeda: 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; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Dimopoulos: Janssen: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Beigene: Honoraria. Weisel: Oncopeptides: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy; Novartis: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria. Cavo: Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Accommodations, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squib: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Sonneveld: SkylineDx: Honoraria, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene/BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Goldschmidt: Mundipharma: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Grants and/or Provision of Investigational Medicinal Product, Research Funding; Johns Hopkins University: Other: Grant; Molecular Partners: Research Funding; MSD: Research Funding; GSK: Honoraria; Chugai: Honoraria, Other: Grants and/or Provision of Investigational Medicinal Product, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Grants and/or Provision of Investigational Medicinal Product, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Grants and/or Provision of Investigational Medicinal Product, Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnology: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Grants and/or Provision of Investigational Medicinal Product, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Dietmar-Hopp-Foundation: Other: Grant; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Grants and/or Provision of Investigational Medicinal Product, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding.