ImetelChat

Geron will also have additional presentations at the EHA 2026 Congress and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) 2026 Annual Meeting, including abstracts related to its ongoing myelofibrosis clinical programs. This includes an updated overall survival analysis in patients with myelofibrosis treated with imetelstat in the Phase 2 IMbark trial compared with real-world data.

Additional Presentations EHA and ASCO include:

EHA 2026 Presentations

Presentation Title Author Abstract Number Presentation Details
Real-world Outcomes of Imetelstat: Interrogating Safety, Efficacy and Predictors of Response in Heavily Pretreated Lower-Risk MDS Patients* David A. Sallman, M.D. #PF670 Poster, Jun 12, 18:45-19:45 CEST
Updated Analysis of Overall Survival with Imetelstat in Patients with Relapsed or Refractory Myelofibrosis From IMBark Versus Real-world Data, and Assessment of Real-world Treatment Patterns Andrew T. Kuykendall, M.D. #PB3419 Publication-only
Phase 1/1B Trial of Imetelstat and Azacitadine with or without Venetoclax in Relapsed Acute Myeloid Leukemia (IMAGINE Trial)* Douglas A. Tremblay, M.D. #PB2719 Publication-only

*Investigator-sponsored Research (ISR)

ASCO 2026 Presentations

Presentation Title Author Abstract Number Presentation Details
Updated analysis of overall survival with imetelstat in relapsed/refractory myelofibrosis versus real-world data, and assessment of real-world treatment patterns Andrew T. Kuykendall, M.D. #366 Poster, Mon. June 1, 9:00 am -12:00 pm CDT
Updated protocol: IMproveMF, a Phase 1b trial of imetelstat + ruxolitinib in patients with intermediate-1/2 or high-risk myelofibrosis John O. Mascarenhas, M.D. #394b Poster, Mon. June 1, 9:00 am -12:00 pm CDT

Feeling good Billy Ray

Updated Analysis of Overall Survival with Imetelstat in Patients with Relapsed or Refractory Myelofibrosis From IMBark Versus Real-world Data, and Assessment of Real-world Treatment Patterns Andrew T. Kuykendall, M.D. #PB3419 Publication-only

Get ready Mr.G, this will be data from IMbark that perhaps you can plug into Claude and maybe get a clearer picture of what kind of BAT numbers we can expect with IMpact. Note this is a publication not a poster or an oral presentation. It’s the area where presentations go that did not rate a poster or oral presentation which is OK, it is at least in part is milking existing data. Something that could give us a window into anticipated BAT OS survival could be very useful.

Yeah Moffitt, bring that Real WorLd data! As anticipated.... and from a trusted, authoritative source

This is the line from the RWD study that I’m sure the Geron execs were hoping for ::: Exploratory analyses also suggested a trend toward improved responses when imetelstat was used within the first three lines of therapy.

Body of Abstracts (not just the titles) for ASCO released on May 21st.

You’re right that it’s somewhat obvious on the surface — but there are some genuinely interesting second-order implications worth unpacking.
What the IMbark vs. RWD OS comparison actually does
The IMbark matched cohort analysis (HR ~0.35 vs. BAT real-world patients who discontinued ruxolitinib) was always methodologically limited — it’s retrospective, non-randomized, and subject to selection bias. But it served a critical signaling function: it gave Geron and investigators a prior on the magnitude of OS benefit imetelstat might deliver. That prior directly shaped IMpactMF’s statistical design — the event-driven interim trigger (≈35% of patients having died), the power calculations, and the assumed hazard ratio the trial was powered to detect.
So what does updating that IMbark RWD analysis at ASCO 2026 actually mean?
A few layers:
1. Durability of the OS signal. If the updated analysis with longer follow-up shows the HR holds or tightens (e.g., stays near 0.35 or improves), that reinforces confidence that IMpactMF’s assumed effect size was reasonable. If it widens or weakens with more mature data and deaths, that’s a quiet warning sign that the Phase 3 may be underpowered for the magnitude of benefit hoped for.
2. The real-world comparator arm quality. RWD control arms are notoriously tricky. The interim analysis death event trigger is projected for H2 2026 — meaning IMpactMF’s actual BAT arm is accruing real survival data right now, in parallel. If the updated RWD at ASCO shows the control population’s survival has shifted (e.g., because BAT has improved with newer supportive care, pacritinib, navitoclax combos, etc.), that could subtly suggest the IMpactMF BAT arm may outperform original assumptions, compressing the detectable OS delta.
3. Investigator and market confidence going into the interim. This presentation lands essentially on the doorstep of the H2 2026 interim readout. A clean, maturing OS curve at ASCO is Geron telegraphing to the hematology community and investors: “the biological rationale is holding.” It’s a confidence-building data point timed strategically.
4. AML signal. The fact that Geron is also presenting AML-related abstracts is worth watching. Imetelstat’s mechanism — telomerase inhibition depleting malignant stem cells — is theoretically applicable across myeloid malignancies. If AML data shows any efficacy signal, it potentially expands the thesis beyond MDS/MF and provides a hedge narrative if IMpactMF disappoints.

Do you go to these events to present bad results?

BAT has almost certainly improved which is why MG, myself, Ryanand others have used AI to model timing of interim, HR and P values using suppositions in the range of 18 to 22 months as a hypothetical for BAT (instead of12-18 months) to explain the lengthening study time. Because some number of BAT patients will cross over to therapy as we discussed, this also can collapse the separation of the K-M curves and would need to be accounted for somehow. As an example if the internal target is not met at interim and it is clearly due to crossover patients starting to improve and live longer there is an ethics paradox that must be dealt with. Of course there are other factors to consider as well. Hope the IMbark abstract will shed light. Considering the upcoming abstract, I would think the idea is now use BAT in its most modern form as a comparator to the already established higher dose Imetelstat arm. The previous study from a few years ago used age matched controls.

It’s wild in the long (loooong) run that it seems Dr.Scarlett actually handed Harout (via Ms. Bir) a very strong hand of cards to work with ………………………………

…I need to see the river cards already (RWD MDS then interim MF, and then the AML card)