presentations discussion Annual EHA the highlights finish at June today's Thanks, Olivia. I'll Congress. with in the from data
lower-risk EHA the presentations also you participated as question-and-answer the discussed As can XX interactive to unmet with refractory and on relapsed meeting were we We KOL by as potentially the MF, know, role in hosted relapsed/refractory that event needs. in and KOL the of and in significant the MDS analysts. imetelstat event sell-side reprised those encouraged June investigators the in with the at need two session both important the serve ESAs that's dialogue well who medical
Dr. activity MDS, independence, and lower-risk potential disease and modifying emphasized broad transfusion Platzbecker For the treatment. meaningful durable imetelstat of
[indiscernible] the real-world with MF, described imetelstat potential in OS Dr. the relapsed/refractory For observed been benefit treatment corroborated data IMbark. that's how
like I'd review now to the So highlights.
median at review let's IMerge. II the the which EHA XX the Phase presentation updated was data at the was target safety from in the XXXX, for cutoff data The patients time date and population XX.X First, months. April of portion follow-up XX, efficacy
The IMerge patients efficacy who of achieved is rate, reminder, period a a TI an a the simply week clinical transfusion eight for trial. stated, consecutive part primary two independence As Phase proportion II/III weeks. eight endpoint is TI of or or
IMerge December highlighted and XX-week rates Society KOL week the lasting of Key reported and particular, clinically treatment XX duration XXXX, who event. transfusion-burden rate MDS. eight lower-risk the week imetelstat patients. patients investigators the meaningful presentation of treatment of responses durable in in the in much-needed imetelstat's in independence these both of weeks and was secondary The a and The both emphasized alternative XX-week data was include Hematology, potential eight EHA participated endpoints XX%. meaningful annual the ASH, achievable by the TI of as role or updated MDS transfusion-dependent, of with TI. high At rate TI transfusion or importance heavily In TI rate lower-risk for TI reported at least meeting all American
new responders, two increased With the EHA of XX%. addition at reported rate the to
data patients at XX the as The independence this follow-up reported duration reported of of more to be with to transfusion durability XX-week the EHA. responders at with TI XX% transfusion of improved to also the was response X.X of of and than ASH compared years. a rate set weeks then months in over longer XX% the for With increasing independence ASH, reported longest for XX median or duration rate
total In a XX of target And experienced was there patients four red in of in mean reduction addition, patient unit cells XX the a population blood at burden a transfusion burden. reduction relative of of less in lead transfusion when chair, and an compared in life, overload. iron potential time to reductions to to cost XX% transfusion These of exposure the reduced quality should burden less baseline. least improved infusion
greater event, in was EHA than units. patient was as indicated independence patients updated the broadly Next, similar baseline from burdens distributed This or KOL that among achievable different with transfusion emphasized with either six than also at data that the included results less subgroups. were transfusion imetelstat
were is, results observed RS-negative and similar positive patients. ring both subgroups, in sideroblast RS patient that addition, In
or and patients. units that activity MDS below potentially treatments. used therefore, ml, imetelstat transfusion imetelstat with per both treatment million demonstrates for different broadly levels, of XXX lower-risk patients these achieved Likewise, independence above it be We're can baseline subgroups, the similar serum and that with across erythropoietin encouraged
marrow SFXBX in MDS proportion the the Finally, of mutation, by carrying provided and also II hallmarks malignant with and after Phase EHA the IMerge imetelstat at bone imetelstat updated the are further of potential disease-modifying of the which reduction evidence evidenced presented data was the the of cells. cells treatment in improvement treatment. portion This from both of of activity cytogenetics by cells
of reported TI in a X presentation than grams eight of rise per responders EHA recovery [indiscernible]. week potential deciliter, XX% the more the suggesting experienced pneumatic addition, also In neural hemoglobin of
of the now imetelstat modification associated data, disease evidence With these we have with hematologic with three malignancies myeloid potential treatment.
in and first lower-risk in was third, The was now thrombocythemia, in MDS. essential the the myelofibrosis, in second
and from to were no X put few in four were To II presented were frequently X there context, the results like safety or Phase IMerge further from side, Grade More about a to of neutropenias ASH say safety thrombocytopenias The the a events than compared reversible II signals. luspatercept, Phase XX% profile. within reported December cytopenias. most On limitation at luspatercept and new data adverse trial acknowledge the I relatively open-label for Phase the the in those weeks. I'd MEDALIST which described of comparing Phase clinical has a that to in portion trial, was III just with imetelstat-treated trial that Phase and benign data II the of the data III patients We the placebo-controlled results an also a IMerge. trial blinded safety words
data the However, Phase luspatercept. that suggest differentiated IMerge imetelstat efficacy is of II that does from
patients to to many lower-risk in IMerge. They were they and had in naive patients MDS patients non-del(Xq), were MEDALIST studied and lower-risk the and -- ESAs similarities transfusion-dependent, become failed studied sorry, the both HMAs. had lenalidomide For they have
X higher for to transfusions patients blood cells eight disease of was units units distinction. The patients. eight of compared the enrolled MEDALIST there had a number X the red median baseline weeks per However, pretreatment per important was an weeks IMerge IMerge burden, patient for in population specifically packed
had XX% per of to weeks. burden than burden of Notably, units patients a weeks. MEDALIST the baseline the units eligible per eight less not IMerge trial, we would for Those patients equal greater or eight than where been X required have a of transfusion transfusion X
the was patients IMerge RS limited open we luspatercept. was and in the When eight XX% for two patients TI efficacy the two for and enrollment patients, from RS-positive overall the positive XX% were studies, while RS-negative MEDALIST look the patient week to between imetelstat-treated populations that two at results for distinction similar, only. is Another both rates drugs to
luspatercept. presentation, equal from patients XX% of the with than luspatercept of transfusion ASH the burden only However, was The in the with units population per in for consistent IMerge. the burden analysis the X further week patients of that or with imetelstat rate to weeks, is data upon transfusion greater the eight that TI eight the baseline
In of we within will of were IMerge, able of luspatercept seen a as refractory or relapse including conclusion, eight patients and week other XX-week a MDS transfusion II imetelstat demonstrate if independence within broad portion IMerge expect our III upcoming ESAs. Phase favorably drugs, portion with the population who is compare in rates similar range to Phase was lower-risk
next to EHA KOL to at like presented at IMbark. event data the turn our I'd and from
in calculated median months cohort milligrams with Our patients Moffitt for real-world a OS clinical Center, set collaboration for a imetelstat compared steroids also Using in to OS with make best data that analysis patients IMbark MF Phase who best real-world MF trial to The patients OS median between hospital protocol, exclusion abbreviated these the chemotherapeutic imetelstat-treated used was intermediate approaches, Florida. double in the cancer therapy. treated months, the weeks guidelines was data, academic analyses from conducted such data, known In to in A was XX.X median every and for were closely spleen statistical observed treated relapsed/refractory therapy. imetelstat was better patients real-world the data the in treatment from discontinued treated statistical more overall of IMbark order series the available identified the four more potential therapy XX.X per calculated with II of so the median who of key which relapsed/refractory had technique patient size. using the a as the baseline to from survival assess IMbark matched high-risk X.X or the the with Moffitt subsequently match was IMbark patients benefit than characteristics patients then defined overall for as inclusion with from real-world analyses, relapsed/refractory agents. available patients available calculated survival leading Cancer trial, in cohorts. a that's for and best the myelofibrosis. the IMbark than ruxolitinib further using data imetelstat-treated In the kilogram OS was score comparison RWD, twice IMbark counting or To of was as platelet closely just two treated propensity and criteria in that balance analysis in patient
compared lower The patients imetelstat-treated the of death to available to for also XX% best real-world XX% therapy. patients the treated indicated with analyses risk
the corroborated X.X Phase per analyses milligram of in the OS clinical these benefit So IMbark observed arm kilogram the trial. potential II
real-world data, survival between in overall potential analyses comparative trial MF confidence further of that may limitations us benefit of are there data analyses the be evaluation clinical and give Although, relapsed/refractory these warranted.
been and late-stage approaches prepare such, we've Phase of As II the FDA. development evaluating potential an we for strategies regulatory as meeting end with
first We the XXXX. conduct by that meeting to are end of quarter planning the of
In supports future imetelstat We've future a team since We of drug. later IND to completed at we've the program compelling ago. Phase that of than transfer. milestones. progress achieve great leadership the made and in world-class EHA expect to development to for open IMerge month. full development We've summary, year data rights regaining MDS responsibly reported the the portion the drug this III assumed less built We've imetelstat the
strategically II in and preparing potential an with meeting development Phase end of relapsed/refractory for paths also imetelstat for We're scenarios FDA MF. late-stage to regulatory possible discuss
year to and proving we XXXX for to second milestones achieving be the as half we through year. of look a progress is the these forward critical Geron,
And I'll operator. our that, turn to now we're call to your happy the with back answer questions.
