1. Myeloproliferative Neoplasms
Hematology Highlights
Las Vegas, NV, USA – February 27, 2014, 2014
Ruben A. Mesa, MD
Professor & Chairman, Division of Hematology & Medical Oncology
Deputy Director, Mayo Clinic Cancer Center
Mayo Clinic – Arizona, USA
©2011 MFMER |

2. Myeloproliferative Neoplasms Hematology Highlights 2014
Burden and Biology of MPNs
JAK2 Inhibition in 2014
JAK2 Inhibition and beyond

3. The Natural History of MPNs
Diagnosis
WHO 2008
Essential
Thrombocythemia
Polycythemia Vera
Early/ Pre-fibrotic Primary Myelofibrosis
Classic Primary MF
Post ET/PV MF
MPN Blast Phase
©2011 MFMER |

4. ©2011 MFMER |

5. Calreticulin (CALR) Within ER
- chaperone ensuring quality control of glycoprotein folding
- calcium homeostasis
Outside ER
- found in cytoplasmic, cell surface and extracellular compartments
- roles in: proliferation
apoptosis
phagocytosis
immunogenic cell death

6. CALR mutations in JAK2 negative ET and MF

7. Burden of Myelofibrosis
Burden of ET/PV
Et & PV Associated
Symptoms
Macrovascular
Risk
Microvascular
Symptoms
MF Associated
Symptoms
MPN Associated
Symptoms
Splenomegaly
Anemia/
Cytopenis
Burden of Myelofibrosis

8. Myelofibrosis and Cytopenias (N=364)
N.B.
Varying times
NL Hg
Men 13.5 g/dL
Women 12 g/dL
Emanuel et. al. JCO 2012
©2011 MFMER |

9. Myelofibrosis and Splenomegaly
Why does Splenomegaly Matter in MF?
Mechanical discomfort
Pain
Possible splenic infarction
Early satiety adding to cachexia
Splenic sequestration and exacerbation of cytopenias
May delay engraftment in setting of allogeneic stem cell transplant
Cervantes et. al.
Blood 2009
(N=1054 PMF)
Emanuel et. al.
JCO 2012
(N=329 MF)
©2011 MFMER |

10. MPN Symptom Burden by Quartiles 1858 MPN-SAF Respondents
TSS <8 Q2
TSS 8 -17 Q3
TSS Q4
TSS >32
Parameter
P value of Comparison
Age
0.24
Gender F>M
<0.001
MPN Diagnosis
Subtype of MF
0.86
IPSET (ET Risk)
0.18
PV Risk (PV)
0.30
DIPSS (MF Risk)
Quartile 1 (Q1): 0-24% Quartile 2 (Q2): 25-49%
Quartile 3 (Q3): 50-74% Quartile 4 (Q4): %
Percentile MPN-SAF TSS

11. ET (N=775) PV (N=654) MF (N=423) Q1 – 30% Q2 – 26% Q3 – 24% Q4 – 20%

12. New Response Criteria for MPNs
ET2
PV2
MF1
Complete response 
Partial response
Clinical improvement
Stable disease
No response
Relapse
Other responses
Molecular
Cytogenetic and
molecular
1. Tefferi A et al. Blood. 2013;122: Barosi G et al. Blood. 2013;121:

13. New Response Criteria for MF: Complete Response1
Required criteria: for all response categories, benefit must last for ≥12 wks to qualify as a response
Bone marrow:
Age-adjusted normocellularity;
<5% blasts;
≤Grade 1 MF; and
Peripheral blood:
Hemoglobin ≥ 100 g/L and <UNL;
Neutrophils ≥ 1 x 109/L and <UNL;
Platelets ≥ 100 x 109/L and <UNL;
<2% immature myeloid cells; and
Clinical:
Resolution of disease symptoms
Spleen and liver not palpable
No evidence of EMH
EMH: extramedullary hematopoiesis
1. Tefferi A et al. Blood. 2013;122:

14. New Response Criteria for MF: Other Categories1
Clinical improvement
Achievement of anemia, spleen, or symptoms response without progressive disease or increase in severity of anemia, thrombocytopenia, or neutropenia
Anemia response
Transfusion-independent pts: a ≥20 g/L increase in Hb level
Transfusion-dependent pts: becoming transfusion independent
Spleen response
Baseline splenomegaly that is palpable at 5-10 cm, below the LCM, becomes not palpable, OR
Baseline splenomegaly that is palpable at >10 cm, below the LCM, decreases by ≥50%
Baseline splenomegaly that is palpable at <5 cm, below the LCM, is not eligible for spleen response
Symptoms response
A ≥50% reduction in the MPN-SAF TSS
CI: clinical improvement; LCM: left costal margin.
1. Tefferi A et al. Blood. 2013;122:

15. Myeloproliferative Neoplasms Hematology Highlights 2014
Burden and Biology of MPNs
JAK2 Inhibition in 2014
JAK2 Inhibition and beyond

16. JAK Inhibitors and Status of Development Myelofibrosis as lead indications* * * *
No Longer in Development
For MPNs
* Now Testing
in PV
©2011 MFMER |

17. Patient Disposition – 3 Year FU Comfort I
Ruxolitinib (n = 155)
Placebo
(n = 151)
Placebo Ruxolitinib (n=111)
Median exposure, weeks
145 37
105
Still on treatment, n (%)
77 (49.7)
57 (51.4)
Crossed over, n (%)
111 (73.5)
Discontinued, n (%)
78 (50.3)
40 (26.5)
54 (48.6)
Primary reasons for discontinuation, n (%)*
Death
15 (19.2)
7 (17.5)
11 (20.4)
Adverse event
9 (22.5)
8 (14.8)
Consent withdrawn
12 (15.4)
Disease progression
18 (23.1)
13 (32.5)
15 (27.8)
All patients originally randomized to placebo crossed over or discontinued within 3 months of the primary analysis
Median time to crossover: 41.1 weeks
ASH 2013
* Percentages are calculated based on the number of patients who discontinued within the respective treatment group.

18. Mean Daily Dose of Ruxolitinib Over Time
ASH 2013 25 20 15 10 5
Mean Daily Dose (mg, BID) ± SEM 8 16 24 32 72
104
136
144 48 88
120 64 56 96
128 40 80
112
Weeks
20 mg BID starting dose
15 mg BID starting dose 98 62
20 mg BID 49
15 mg BID
Number of patients
100 55 77 69 33 26 73 30 93 35
Approximately 70% of patients had dose adjustments during the first 12 weeks of therapy
By week 24, patients originally randomized to RUX 15 mg BID and 20 mg BID were titrated to a mean dose of ~10 mg BID and mg BID, respectively

19. Percentage Change in Spleen Size
ASH 2013
Mean reductions in spleen volume and palpable spleen length with ruxolitinib were stable over time
Ruxolitinib
Placebo
Weeks
Mean Percentage Change from Baseline
148
139
120
107
100 84
132 35 73
n = 12 24 48 72 96
144 4 8
153
152
150
141
130
110
102
147
136
109 47 90 79
Spleen Volume
Spleen Length

20. Improvements in EORTC QLQ-C30 Over Time
ASH 2013
Global Health Status/QoL
Fatigue 10
-10
-15
-25
-35 5 -5
-20
-30 20 10 -5
-15 15 5
-10
Mean Change From Baseline
Mean Change From Baseline 12 24 36 48 60 72 84 96
108
120
132
144 12 24 36 48 60 72 84 96
108
120
132
144
Weeks
RUX
PBO
Weeks
Arrows indicate improvement
Role Functioning
Physical Functioning 25 10 -5
-15
-25 15 5
-10
-20 20
Mean Change From Baseline
Weeks 15 5 -5
-10 10
Mean Change From Baseline 12 24 36 48 60 72 84 96
108
120
132
144 12 24 36 48 60 72 84 96
108
120
132
144
Weeks

21. Overall Survival ASH 2013 HR=0.69 (95% CI: 0.46, 1.03); P=0.067
Overall survival favored patients originally randomized to ruxolitinib compared with patients originally randomized to placebo
153
144
129
114
105
Placebo
154
149
134
119
107
100 92 85 8 95 88 79 38 82 68 28
155
148
143
131
124
115
111
108 1
Ruxolitinib
Number of patients at risk
145
137
125
122
112
101 45
106 84 19
Randomized to Placebo  Ruxolitinib
Randomized to Ruxolitinib
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2 24 40 56 72
104
120
136
168
176
Probability
Weeks 16 32 48 64 80 96
128
152
160 4 22 54 99 13 35 73 97
HR=0.69 (95% CI: 0.46, 1.03); P=0.067
No. of deaths: Ruxolitinib=42; Placebo=54
Median follow-up: 149 weeks
Percent of at-risk placebo who crossed over or discontinued *
*By week 80, all patients originally randomized to placebo discontinued or crossed over to ruxolitinib therapy 21

22. Overall Survival: Rank-Preserving Structural Failure Time (RPSFT) Analysis
ASH 2013
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2 8 24 40 56 72 88
104
120
136
168
176
Probability
Weeks 16 32 48 64 80 96
112
128
152
144
160
HR=0.36 (95% CI: 0.204, 1.035)
Placebo  Ruxolitinib
Ruxolitinib
Placebo-RPSFT
RPSFT is a recognized method to estimate HR after adjusting for crossover1-5
Hazard ratio of 0.36 is consistent with the hypothesis that ITT analysis underestimates the survival benefit of ruxolitinib relative to “true placebo”
(1) Robins J, Tsiatis A. Commun Stat Theory Methods. 1991;20: ; (2) Demetri GD, et al. Clin Cancer Res. 2012;18: ; (3) National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). NICE technology appraisal guidance Issued September 23, 2009; (4) Sternberg CN, et al. Eur J Cancer. 2013;49: ; (5) National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). NICE technology appraisal guidance Issued February 2011. 22

23. Mean Platelet Count and Hemoglobin Level Over Time
ASH 2013
Platelet Count
Hemoglobin
370
115
Ruxolitinib
Placebo
Ruxolitinib
Placebo
110
320
105
270
Mean Platelets (x109/L)
Mean Hemoglobin (g/L)
100
220 95
170 90
120 85 12 24 36 48 60 72 84 96
108
120
132
144 12 24 36 48 60 72 84 96
108
120
132
144
Weeks
Weeks
Number of patients
Number of patients
RUX
155
144
143
136
124
112
110
107
104
100 94 88 79
155
145
143
136
124
113
110
107
104
100 94 88 79
PBO
151
128
112 82 37
151
132
113 83 37

24. Incidence of New Onset All Grade Non-hematologic Adverse Events Regardless of Causality
ASH 2013
Incidence (%)
Ruxolitinib
0–<12 months (n=155)
12–<24 months (n=130)
24–<36 months (n=103)
≥36 months (n=82)
Fatigue
29.0
15.2
15.3
7.7
Diarrhea
27.8
6.7
10.8
3.9
Ecchymosis
21.2
10.4
5.7
Peripheral edema
21.3
8.4
12.6
Dyspnea
19.2
10.2
2.9
3.3
Dizziness
18.1
3.0
3.5
Pain in extremity
18.0
6.2
4.2
Headache
16.6
5.1
2.7
Nausea
6.8
5.9
Constipation
14.5
8.6
10.1
9.0
Abdominal pain
13.8
3.6
Insomnia
3.7
Vomiting
13.7
2.8
2.4
5.5
Pyrexia
13.5
7.3
8.5
Cough
13.1
13.3
4.0
6.0
Arthralgia
11.8
5.8
6.6
6.3
Upper respiratory tract infection
11.1
3.2
There was no change in the rate, distribution, or severity of nonhematologic adverse events in the ruxolitinib group with longer-term treatment; most nonhematologic adverse events were grade 1 or 2
Percentage of patients for each event was based on the effective sample size of the time interval (number of patients at risk at the beginning of the interval minus half of the censored patients during the time interval).
Adverse event is included if the incidence was >10% at any yearly interval.

25. Incidence of New Onset Grade 3 or 4 Non-hematologic Adverse Events Regardless of Causality
ASH 2013
Incidence (%)
Ruxolitinib
0–<12 months (n=155)
12–<24 months (n=130)
24–<36 months (n=103)
≥36 months (n=82)
Fatigue
6.2
0.9
3.3
Pneumonia
5.6
3.6
3.5
Abdominal pain
4.2
3.2
Arthralgia
2.1
Diarrhea
Dyspnea
2.2
2.5
Pain in extremity
1.1
Hyperuricemia
1.4
Fall
GI hemorrhage
Septic shock
Muscular weakness
Hypoxia
Sepsis
0.7
1.7
Epistaxis
Renal failure acute
2.4
Abdominal pain upper
Myocardial infarction
4.8
Percentage of patients for each event was based on the effective sample size of the time interval (number of patients at risk at the beginning of the interval minus half of the censored patients during the time interval).
Adverse event is included if the incidence was ≥2 patients at any yearly interval.

26. BM Morphology in a Ruxolitinib-Treated Patient: A Case Demonstrating Improvement on Ruxolitinib
ASH 2013
24 Mo
Post Ruxolitinib
Grade 2
48 Mo
Post Ruxolitinib
Grade 0
Baseline Biopsy
Grade 3
Kvasnicka HM, et al. ASCO (abstr 7030).
Permission to use images from Kvasnicka, HM

27. Dynamics of BM Changes Following Ruxolitinib Treatment at 48 Mo
ASH 2013
Kvasnicka, et al. ASH Abstract 4055.

28. JAK1 & 2 Inhibitors in MPNs – Efficacy Summary – As of ASH 2013
Yes No
Occasional
Not
Reported Yet
Ongoing Trials
Myelofibrosis
Polycythemia
Vera
Essential
Thrombocythemia
Spleen
Const.
Sympt.
Anemia
Survival 
Counts
Vasc
Events
Ruxolitinib - Approved
P III
P II
SAR –
PH III JAKARTA (HOLD)
Pacritinib-
PIII Ongoing (Persist MF)
CYT387 LY
P I
NS-018
BMS
PH II
INCB039110
(JAK1 Alone) PI
CEP701
©2011 MFMER |

29. JAK1 & 2 Inhibitors in MPN – Toxicity ASH 2013
Hematological
Toxicities
Gastrointestinal/ Renal
Neurological
Anemia 
ANC
PLT
Nausea
Diarr-hea 
LFTs
Or CR
Lipase
Head-ache
Dizzy
NeuroP/
Parathia
Ruxolitinib - Approved
23% 7%
11% 2%
0.6%
SAR –
PIII Ongoing (MF)
41% 6% 0% 5% 1%
W. E.
% ?
Pacritinib-
18%
CYT387
PII Ongoing (MF)
10%
20%
INCB (JAK1) – PI/II MF
28%
27%
BMS 3% LY 8%
Renal
<10%
11-20%
21-30%
31-40%
41-50%
51-60%
61-70%
71-80%
81-90%
91-100%
Toxicity Color – Represents All Grades ( Grade ¾ Toxicity - Percentage in Table Above)
©2011 MFMER |

30. Myeloproliferative Neoplasms Hematology Highlights 2014
Burden and Biology of MPNs
JAK2 Inhibition in 2014
JAK2 Inhibition and beyond

31. MPNs – Plateau vs. Decline
Clinical Status
ET – Possible Plateau
Asymptomatic Thrombocytosis
No Vascular Events
ET – Possible Plateau 2
Symptomatic Thrombocytosis
Sinus Venous Thrombosis
PV – Possible Plateau 2
Symptomatic Erythrocytosis
No Vascular Events
MF on Successful JAK2 Rx
Improving Weight
Decreased Spleen
Improved Survival
Post PV MF
6 Months worsening Fatigue
10 kg weight loss
Massive spleen
Time
©2011 MFMER |

32. MPNs – Cumulative Benefits
Clinical Status
Ruxolitinib
Improved Survival
Improved Spleen Burden
Improved Symptom Burden
Time
©2011 MFMER |

33. Clinical Status
MPNs – Cumulative Benefits Single Agent Trials JAK2 Inhibitors Compared to Ruxo
STUDY (JAK2/FLT3 Inhibitor)
Pacritinib (SB1518) (PH III vs. BAT)
NCT
? Other Benefit
-Less cytopenias
-Improved activity
STUDY (JAK2/JAK1 Inhibitor)
Momelotinib (CYT387) (PH III vs. Ruxo)
NCT
Improved Survival
Improved Spleen Burden
STUDY (JAK2/FLT3 Inhibitor)
NS-018 (PH I/II)
NCT
Improved Symptom Burden
STUDY (JAK2 Inhibitor – Also ET and PV)
LY (PH I/II)
NCT
Time
©2011 MFMER |

34. MPNs – Cumulative Benefits Ruxolitinib + drug X for Anemia
Clinical Status
STUDY COMBINATION (JAK2 PLUS Androgen)
Ruxolitinib Plus Danazol
Mayo Clinic (AZ) and Mt. Sinai Trial: NCT
Improved Anemia Burden
STUDY COMBINATION(JAK2 PLUS Hypomethylation)
Ruxolitinib Plus Azacitidine
MDACC Trial: NCT
Improved Survival
STUDY COMBINATION (JAK2 PLUS IMID)
Ruxolitinib Plus Lenalidomide
NCT
Improved Spleen Burden
STUDY COMBINATION (JAK2 PLUS IMID)
Ruxolitinib Plus Pomalidomide
Germany (ULM): NCT
Improved Symptom Burden
Time
©2011 MFMER |

35. MPNs – Cumulative Benefits Ruxolitinib + drug X for Deeper Marrow Changes Impact
Clinical Status
STUDY COMBINATION
(JAK2 PLUS HDAC Inhibitors)
Ruxolitinib Plus Panobinostat
Mt. Sinai Trial: NCT
UK Trial: NCT
Improved Marrow Dysfunction
STUDY COMBINATION (JAK2 PLUS LOXL2 Inhibitors)
Ruxolitinib Plus GS-6624
NCT
Improved Survival
STUDY COMBINATION (JAK2 PLUS rhPTX-2 (Anti-fibrosing))
Ruxolitinib Plus PRM -151
Opening Soon
Improved Spleen Burden
STUDY COMBINATION (JAK2 PLUS PI3 Kinase Inhibitor)
Ruxolitinib Plus BKM120
NCT
Improved Symptom Burden
STUDY COMBINATION
(JAK2 PLUS Hedgehog Inhibitor)
Ruxolitinib Plus LDE225
NCT

36. MPNs – Cumulative Benefits Single Agent Trials Alternate Targets
Clinical Status
MPNs – Cumulative Benefits Single Agent Trials Alternate Targets
STUDY (Interferons)
Peg Interferon α2b in “Early” MF
Cornell Lead: NCT
? Other Benefit
-Less cytopenias
-Improved activity
STUDY (Activin - ActRIIA-IgG1Fc)
Sotatercept (ACE 011)
MDACC: NCT
Improved Survival
Improved Spleen Burden
STUDY (Telomerase Inhibitor)
Imetelstat (GRN163L)
Mayo Clinic (Rochester): NCT
Improved Symptom Burden
STUDY (JAK1 Inhibitor)
INCB (PH II)
NCT
Time

37. Imetelstat: A Telomerase Inhibitor
Telomerase enzyme:
Reverse transcriptase comprised of an RNA component (hTR) and a reverse transcriptase catalytic protein subunit (hTERT)
Binds to the 3’ strand of DNA and adds TTAGGG nucleotide repeats to offset the loss of telomeric DNA occurring with each replication cycle
Not active in somatic cells; transiently upregulated in normal hematopoietic progenitor cells to support controlled proliferation
Highly upregulated in malignant progenitor cells, enabling continued and uncontrolled proliferation
imetelstat binds to RNA template preventing maintenance of telomeres
Imetelstat:
(hTERT)
Proprietary: 13-mer thio-phosphoramidate oligonucleotide complementary to hTR, with covalently-bound lipid tail to increase cell permeability/tissue distribution
Long half-life in bone marrow, spleen, liver (estimated human t½ = 41 hr with doses 7.5 – 11.7 mg/kg);
Potent competitive inhibitor of telomerase: IC50 = nM (cell-free)
Target: malignant progenitor cell proliferation
(hTR)
Tefferi et. al. ASH 2013

38. Preliminary efficacy results from Mayo Clinic investigator-sponsored trial of imetelstat in myelofibrosis
Geron’s independent efficacy analysis of the first 22 MF patients enrolled in the study
Tefferi et. al. ASH 2013
– 10 –

39. Preliminary efficacy results from Mayo Clinic investigator-sponsored trial of imetelstat in myelofibrosis
Geron’s independent efficacy analysis of the first 22 MF patients enrolled in the study
Tefferi et. al. ASH 2013
– 10 –

40. Change in Spleen Volume at Week 12 by Dose Cohort
Median % Change in Spleen Volume*
Percentage Change From
Baseline at Week 12
n=7
n=38
n=9
*Only patients with baseline and week 12 data were included.
INCB ASH Mascarenhas et. al

41. Improvement in TSS at Week 12 by Dose Cohort
≥50% Reduction in TSS*
Median % Change in TSS†
n=6
n=34
n=8
Percentage Change From
Baseline at Week 12
Percentage of Patients
n=9
n=43
n=10
*Patients who discontinued prior to the week 12 visit were considered nonresponders; 20%-33% of patients in each group discontinued prior to week 12.
†Only patients with baseline and week 12 data were included.
INCB ASH Mascarenhas et. al

42. Mean Hemoglobin Levels Over Time by Dose Cohort
100 mg BID
200 mg BID
600 mg QD
Mean (±SEM) Hemoglobin (g/dL)
Mean (±SEM) Hemoglobin (g/dL)
Weeks
Weeks
All Patients
Patients entering the study without transfusion requirements*
n, patients
n, patients
100 mg BID
200 mg BID
600 mg QD 10 9 8 6
100 mg BID 45 41 43 39 37
200 mg BID 29 21
600 mg QD 7 6 4 24 22 23 21 19 15 5
*Receipt of 2 or more units of red blood cell product transfusions in the 12 weeks prior to day 1.
INCB ASH Mascarenhas et. al

43. MPNs – Cumulative Benefits Difficult PV-ET
Clinical Status
STUDY (ET and PV)
MPD-RC 112 Peg Inf a2a vs. Hydroxyurea (PH III)
NCT
STUDY (ET and PV)
MPD-RC 111 Peg Inf a2a AFTER Hydroxyurea
(PH III)
NCT
Improved Marrow Dysfunction
Improved Survival
STUDY (PV)
AOP Peg Inf a2a vs Hydroxyurea (PH III)
NCT
Improved Spleen Burden
STUDY COMBINATION (PV)
Ruxolitinib Vs. Hydroxyurea (RELIEF)
NCT
Improved Symptom Burden
FUTURE STUDY COMBINATION
JAK2 Inhibitor Plus PEG INFa 2a/b
Improved Vascular Event Risk (?PV)

44. Individualizing MPN Pharmacotherapy
Patient Goals & Input
Improving Symptom Burden
/HR QOL
“Balancing” Spleen/
Cytoses/ Cytopenias
Extending Life
CURE
©2011 MFMER |

46. Acknowledgements ©2011 MFMER | 3133089-46 Argentina Ireland Sweden
Ana Clara Kneese, MD
Mary Francis McMullen, MD
Andreasson Bjorn, MD
Federico Sackmann, MD
Israel
Elisabeth Ejerblad, MD
Australia
Martin Ellis, MD
Gunnar Birgegard, MD
David M Ross  MBBS, PhD
Italy
Jan Samuelsson, MD
Cecily Forsyth
Alessandro M. Vannucchi, MD
Johanna Ablesson, MD
John Seymour, MBBS, PhD
Francesco Passamonti, MD
Peter Johansson, MD
Karen Hall, MD
Giovanni Barosi, MD UK
Kate Burbury MD
Tiziano Barbui, MD
Anthony Green, MD
Tam Constantine, MD
Netherlands
Claire N. Harrison, MD
Canada
Harry Schouten, MD, PhD
Deepti Radia, MD 
Lynda Foltz, MD
Jan Jacques Michiels, MD
Uruguay
Vikas Gupta, MD
Karin Klauke, MD
Pablo Muxi, MD
China
Peter te Boekhorst, MD
USA
Hsin-An Hou, MD
Sonja Zweegman, MD PhD
Alison Moliterno, MD
Huan-Chau Lin,
Stephanie Slot, MD
Brady Stein, MD MHS
MD Hung Chang, MD
Suzan Commandeur, MD
Casey O'Connell
Ming-Shen Dai, MD
New Zealand
Catriona Jamieson
Yuan-Bin Yu, MD
Hilary Blacklock, MD
Daniel Rubin, ND
Yung-Chen Su, MD
Panama
Elizabth Hexner
Zhijian Xiao, MD
Francis Guerra, MD
Hala Simm
Denmark 
Singapore 
Jason Gotlib, MD
Christen Lykkegaard Andersen, MD
Wee Joo Chng, MB ChB
Jeff Sloan, PhD
Hans Hasselbalch, MD
Spain 
Jessica Altman, MD
France 
Ana Kerguelen Fuentes, MD
Joseph Prchal, MD
Brigitte Dupriez, MD
Carlos Besses, MD
Kimberly Hickman
Jean-Jacques Kiladjian, MD
Francisco Cervantes, MD
Martin Tallman, MD
Jean-Loup Demory MD
Dolores Fernandez-Casados
Mike Boxer, MD  
Magali Demilly, PhD
Olatoyosi Odenike, MD
Germany
Robert Silver, MD
Heike L. Pahl, PhD
Ross Levine, MD
Soo Jin Kim
Srdan Verstovsek, MD
©2011 MFMER |