We investigated noninvasive procedures by hybrid imaging to assess the sites of active or inactive hematopoiesis in patients with primary myelofibrosis (PMF). To this end, we used two radionuclides, technetium 99m (99mTc) and indium 111‐chloride (111In‐Cl3), coupled with single‐photon emission tomography/computed tomography (SPECT/CT). We studied five patients with PMF and one with secondary myelofibrosis (MF). The classical pattern of lower fixation of both tracers at the axial skeleton where the myelofibrotic process occurs and the reactivation of sites of active hematopoiesis at the distal skeleton were confirmed. Coupling both radionuclides to SPECT/CT imaging allowed for more precise visualization of the sites of extramedullary hematopoiesis as those observed in the spleen and liver. Splenic high uptake of 111In‐Cl3 coupled with SPECT/CT represents a pathognomonic feature of PMF. We conclude that, the hybrid imaging procedures that we studied might constitute an alternative noninvasive method for the screening of the whole‐body marrow and, by this way, to assess the impact of targeted therapies in PMF patients in whom it is well known that the distribution of the hematopoietic active areas is disturbed. Hybrid imaging could also be useful for diagnostic purposes in cases of early PMF or in suspected cases of myelofibrosis secondary to polycythemia vera or essential thrombocythemia.

Objectives The impact of conventional treatment for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) on the nutritional, cognitive, and functional status of elderly patients is seldom studied. This assessment was performed in the context of the LAMSA 2007 trial. Methods The trial enrolled 424 patients with de novo AML. Among them, 316 benefited from geriatric assessment (GA) including nutritional, cognitive, and functional status and were scored according to Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) and sorror for the prediction of treatment toxicity, morbidity, and mortality. Patients were investigated at diagnosis for three times during follow‐up. Results This study showed that AML and its treatment have no impact on cognitive (P = .554) nor functional status (P = .842 for Activity of Daily Living and P = .087 for Instrumental Activities of Daily Living). The nutritional status improved over time (P = .041). None of these three parameters at baseline, associated or not with ECOG and sorror scores, impacted survivals or toxicities. Conclusions The cognitive, functional, and nutritional status had no impact in this cohort of fit elderly AML patients without unfavorable cytogenetics. The GA tools used provided no additional information compared with ECOG and sorror scores, to predict toxicity, morbidity, or mortality due to intensive chemotherapy.

We assessed the development of an adherent stromal layer in peripheral blood progenitor cells (PBPC) collections of 17 patients with solid tumors and hematological malignancies (n = 38), as well as in normal and disease-free bone marrow samples (n = 14). Light-density mononuclear cells from peripheral blood leukapheresis maintained in long term culture (LTC) conditions for at least 3 weeks failed to develop a stromal layer as was observed in all bone marrow samples. We found no differences with regard to CFU-GM growth, CD34+ percentage or cytological morphology. Our results indicate that spindle-shaped fibroblastoid cell progenitors present in the bone marrow are not mobilized towards peripheral blood by chemotherapy and/or growth factor stimulation, contrasting with hematopoietic progenitors, which, as is well known, are able to circulate. The absence of stromal progenitors in PBPC autografts does not appear to be relevant for a successful hematopoietic engraftment.

Using three different statistical tests in parallel, we showed in a preliminary study that neither mononuclear cells, CD34+33+ or 33− cells, nor CD34+38+ cells significantly correlated with engraftment kinetics following autologous blood cell transplantation (ABCT). We additionally demonstrated here, in a series of patients suffering from malignant diseases, that the graft content in CD34+38− cells is individually a more sensitive indicator of the earliest, as well as the latest post‐ABCT trilineage hematopoietic recovery than the colony‐forming units‐granulocyte‐macrophage and even the total CD34+ cell content. This suggests that the CD34+38− cell population is itself subdivided into two more subsets, one being already lineage‐committed and responsible for short‐term engraftment, the other containing only very primitive hematopoietic cells responsible for sustained engraftment. Strong arguments favor the probability that these subsets correspond to HLA‐DR+ and DR− cells, respectively. We also defined an optimal threshold value of 0.05 × 106 CD34+38− cells/kg of the patient's body weight (b.w.) above which a rapid and sustained trilineage engraftment safely occurs. In fact, infusion of lower numbers of cells seems to have a more significant impact on long‐term compared to short‐term neutrophil recovery and on platelet kinetics engraftment. We additionally looked for the eventual influence on engraftment time of the type of disease, and of post‐ABCT administration of hematopoietic growth factors (HGF). When the type of disease appeared to have no influence on the engraftment time, posttransplant HGF administration significantly reduced the time to trilineage engraftment in patients transplanted with < 0.05 × 106 CD34+38+ cells, thus justifying it in case of reinfusion of low numbers of CD34+38+ cells. On the other hand, the administration of HGF after infusion of more than 0.05 × 106 CD34+38− cells/kg b.w. did not hasten more, or only very little, the engraftment time, thus becoming not only unprofitable for the patients but costly as well.

No abstract

Background: Guadecitabine (G) is a next generation subcutaneous (SC) hypomethylating agent (HMA) resistant to degradation by cytidine deaminase which results in prolonged in vivo exposure to the active metabolite decitabine. We conducted a large global randomized phase 3 study of G vs Treatment Choice (TC) with azacitidine (AZA), decitabine (DEC), or low dose Ara-C (LDAC) in 815 TN AML patients unfit for IC (ASTRAL-1 study). The primary ITT results were previously presented (Fenaux et al, EHA abstract S879, 2019). Clinical guidelines for single agent HMAs recommend a minimum of 4 to 6 treatment cycles for maximum benefit. We describe here the results of the study based on number of treatment cycles administered. M ethods: TN-AML patients ineligible for IC due to age ≥ 75 y, or coexisting morbidities, or ECOG PS 2-3 were randomized 1:1 to either G (60 mg/m2/d SC for 5-days Q28 days) or a preselected TC of AZA, DEC, or LDAC at their standard dose/schedule. AML diagnosis and response status were assessed by an independent central pathologist blinded to randomization assignment. Complete response (CR) and overall survival (OS) were co-primary endpoints. We analyzed patients' characteristics, number of treatment cycles, reasons for treatment discontinuation, CR, and OS including analyses by number of cycles received including prospective subgroups, and OS analyses of responders and non-responders. Results: 815 patients were randomized to G (408) or TC (407). Preselected TCs prior to randomization were DEC (43%), AZA (42%), and LDAC (15%). Baseline variables were well balanced across the 2 treatment arms. For G vs TC respectively, age ≥75 y in 62% vs 62.4%, PS 2-3 in 50.5% vs 50.4% (including 10.8% vs 8.8% PS 3), and poor risk cytogenetics in 34.3% vs 34.6%. Most patients were assigned to an HMA at randomization (759, 93%) with only 56 patients (7%) randomized to receive LDAC. Both CR (19.4% for G and 17.4% for TC), and OS Hazard Ratio (0.97; 95% CI 0.83-1.14) were similar and not significantly different between G and TC. Many patients in both arms did not receive the recommended minimum of 4 cycles (42.4% vs 40.8% for G vs TC respectively), or 6 cycles (54.2% vs 53.8% for G vs TC). The proportions were well balanced between the 2 treatment arms. Characteristics of patients who received at least 4 or 6 cycles were also well balanced between the 2 treatment arms for age, PS 2-3, secondary AML, poor risk cytogenetics, BM blasts >30%, and proliferative AML (total white cell count ≥20,000/uL). The primary reasons and proportions for treatment discontinuation were similar for the 2 treatments arms. For patients with <4 and <6 cycles respectively they are, in descending order, early deaths (16.7% and 20.7% of the overall ITT population), progression (7.6% and 11.7%), adverse events (5.8% and 6.9%), and patient decision (5.5% and 7.1%). In patients who received at least 4 cycles more patients achieved CR on G (33.6%) vs TC (28.6%), and median OS was longer on G (15.6 months for G vs 13 for TC, HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.64-0.96, log-rank p 0.02, Fig 1). Similarly, in patients who received at least 6 cycles, there were more CR on G (40.1%) vs TC (36.2%) and median OS was longer on G (19.5 months for G vs 15.0 for TC, HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.54-0.88, log-rank p 0.002, Fig 2). Subgroup analyses of OS in patients who received at least 4 or 6 cycles showed that survival benefit from G over TC was consistent in all prospective subgroups including against each of the 3 TCs (AZA, DEC, and LDAC). OS analyses in patients who received at least 4 or 6 cycles also favored G vs TC in both responders (CR, CRp, CRi, or PR) and non-responders with maximum benefit in patients who received at least 6 cycles (G vs TC OS HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.45-0.96, log-rank p 0.028 for responders, and HR of 0.73, 95% CI 0.53-1.00, log-rank p 0.048 for non-responders). Summary/Conclusions: In a large global 815-patient randomized study of G vs TC composed mainly of first generation HMAs, G was at least as effective as TC based on the primary ITT analysis of CR and the narrow 95% CI of OS HR (0.83-1.14). Analyses of patients by number of treatment cycles showed that those who received at least 4 or 6 cycles achieved longer OS in G vs TC with the largest benefit in those who received at least 6 cycles. The benefit was observed in all subgroups, and in both responders and non-responders. Treatment with single agent guadecitabine should continue as long as the patient can still benefit and for at least 6 cycles to gain the maximum survival benefit. Disclosures Roboz: Trovagene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sandoz: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Actinium: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amphivena: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Argenx: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astex: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bayer: 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; Celltrion: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Eisai: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz: 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; MEI Pharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Orsenix: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Otsuka: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Döhner:Celgene, Novartis, Sunesis: Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie, Agios, Amgen, Astellas, Astex, Celator, Janssen, Jazz, Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; AROG, Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer: Research Funding. Mayer:AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals AG: Research Funding. Krauter:Pfizer: Honoraria. Robak:Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; UCB: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel grant, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Other: Travel grant; Roche: Consultancy, Other: Travel grant, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel grant, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; BeiGene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; Morphosys AG: Research Funding. Kantarjian:Agios: Honoraria, Research Funding; Astex: Research Funding; Jazz Pharma: Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Actinium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Immunogen: Research Funding; AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria; Cyclacel: Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding; Daiichi-Sankyo: Research Funding; Ariad: Research Funding. Novak:Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: 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, Other: Travel,Accommodations; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Other: Travel,Accommodations. Jedrzejczak:Takeda: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Other: travel support for hematology meetings; Celgene: Other: travel support for hematology meetings; Novartis: Research Funding; Roche: Other: travel support for hematology meetings. Thomas:PFIZER: Honoraria; ABBVIE: Honoraria; DAICHI: Honoraria; INCYTE: Honoraria. Miyazaki:Chugai: Research Funding; Otsuka: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Nippon-Shinyaku: Honoraria; Dainippon-Sumitomo: Honoraria; Kyowa-Kirin: Honoraria. Brandwein:Jazz Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria; Otsuka: Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria. Demeter:Angelini: Other: Advisory Board; Pfizer: Other: Advisory Board; Novartis: Other: Advisory Board; Bristol Myers Squibb: Other: Advisory Board; Amicus: Other: Advisory Board; Amgen: Other: Advisory Board; Roche: Other: Advisory Board. Griffiths:Astex Phramaceuticals/Otsuka Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Persimmune: Consultancy; Persimmune: Consultancy; Genentech, Inc.: Research Funding; Appelis Pharmaceuticals: Other: PI on a clinical trial; New Link Genetics: Consultancy; Novartis Inc.: Consultancy; Novartis Inc.: Consultancy; Onconova Therapeutics: Other: PI on a clinical trial; Partner Therapeutics: Consultancy; Appelis Pharmaceuticals: Other: PI on a clinical trial; Boston Scientific: Consultancy; Boston Scientific: Consultancy; Genentech, Inc.: Research Funding; Abbvie, Inc.: Consultancy; Celgene, Inc: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene, Inc: Consultancy, Research Funding; New Link Genetics: Consultancy; Onconova Therapeutics: Other: PI on a clinical trial; Partner Therapeutics: Consultancy; Astex Phramaceuticals/Otsuka Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie, Inc.: Consultancy, PI on a clinical trial. Yee:Agensys, Astex, Hoffman La Roche, MedImmune, Merck, Millenium, Roche/Genentech: Research Funding; Novartis, Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas, Celgene, Otsuka, Shire, Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Hao:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Azab:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Fenaux:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding; Aprea: Research Funding; Astex: Honoraria, Research Funding; Jazz: Honoraria, Research Funding.

Cardiac and a spectrum of ECG findings are common in TTP. In this study, IBSP and QP had similar therapeutic profiles for TPE.

Conclusion: AMV564 is well-tolerated and demonstrates anti-leukemic activity through T-cell engagement using a 14-day administration schedule. AMV564 has a unique PK profile with a gradual increase in drug concentrations and thus the potential for better controlled T-cell activation.