Karve, Sudeep

Background: Continuous single-agent ibrutinib (Ibr) treatment has been associated with extended progression-free survival in patients with Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM). Previous clinical studies have shown that Ibr dose reductions (DRs) improved or resolved adverse events (AEs) in most patients, while hematologic responses were sustained. However, real-world data on long-term outcomes for patients with WM undergoing Ibr DR in first-line (1L) settings remain limited. Methods: Medicare Fee-for-Service (FFS) medical and pharmacy records were used to identify patients diagnosed with WM who initiated 1L single-agent Ibr (420 mg/day) or 1L Ibr + rituximab from January 1, 2015, to September 30, 2022. Observed patients were enrolled in Medicare FFS ≥12 months before and after 1L treatment initiation and had ≥1 qualifying post-treatment initiation AE of special interest (AESI; both prevalent and incident AEs), as identified via ICD-9-CM or ICD-10-CM diagnosis codes. Ibr DR was defined as a reduction of the starting dose (420 mg/day) following the first AESI during 1L treatment. Patients without an Ibr DR were defined as those who had received Ibr at 420 mg/day during 1L treatment. Patients without an AESI post-Ibr initiation and prior to DR were excluded from the analysis. Demographics, clinical characteristics, time to AESI, duration of therapy (DOT), and time to treatment discontinuation (TTD) were assessed in cohorts with and without DRs. DOT was measured at the date of Ibr treatment initiation through treatment discontinuation (end of 1L treatment). Patients were considered to have discontinued treatment if they received a subsequent systemic therapy after the 1L regimen, had a gap of ≥120 days with no systemic therapy following the last administration, or died while on the 1L regimen. Patients without a discontinuation were censored at the earliest date of end of follow-up or disenrollment. TTD was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. A Cox proportional hazards model adjusted for patient demographics and clinical characteristics was used to identify factors associated with treatment discontinuation. Results: A total of 407 patients with WM were included in the analysis (DR, n=55 [14%]; no DR, n=352 [86%]). Patients in the DR and no DR cohorts, respectively, had similar a median age (78 years vs 77 years), Charlson Comorbidity Index score (3 vs 4), and prevalence of the most common baseline comorbidities: hypertension (67% vs 68%) and cardiovascular conditions (31% vs 28%). The median time between treatment initiation and the occurrence of the first AESI was 89 days versus 76 days, and total Ibr DOT mean ± SD [median] was 786.1 ± 692.6 [661] days versus 454.8 ± 510.4 [279] days (P=0.001) for DR cohort versus no DR cohort. Following DR, patients remained on Ibr for mean ± SD [median] 336.0 ± 422.8 [179] days until the end of 1L therapy. After adjusting for variations in baseline characteristics, patients with a DR had significantly longer TTD post-treatment initiation than those without a DR (median TTD, DR vs no DR: 22.5 months vs 9.3 months; adjusted HR [95% CI], 0.52 [0.37-0.72]). Conclusion: This real-world evidence study suggests that implementing DRs to manage AEs can be a valuable strategy in supporting patients with WM to remain on 1L Ibr longer, thus maintaining beneficial clinical outcomes. These findings are consistent with previous studies, demonstrating that Ibr DRs help to improve tolerability while maintaining treatment efficacy.

Background: A pivotal clinical trial comparing the efficacy and safety of ibrutinib with zanubrutinib in patients with Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM) did not achieve its primary endpoint of complete response or very good partial response. In addition, median progression-free survival was not reached in either treatment arm. In the absence of treatment effectiveness differentiation based on clinical trial evidence, we conducted a real-world study to assess patient characteristics, treatment patterns, and all-cause healthcare resource utilization (HRU) in patients with WM who received ibrutinib or zanubrutinib as first-line (1L) therapy. Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, we used the ConcertAI Database to collect claims data of patients with WM aged ≥18 years who initiated single-agent ibrutinib (420 mg/day) or zanubrutinib (320 mg/day) as 1L therapy on or after 9/1/2021 (index date). A 6-month washout period of guideline-recommended WM antineoplastic agents was required to confirm 1L status. Patients were excluded if they were receiving ibrutinib and zanubrutinib concurrently, died within 30 days of the index date, had a record of hematopoietic stem cell transplant, had a record of other ibrutinib indications in the 6 months before index, or were participating in a clinical trial. Baseline demographics and clinical characteristics, therapy duration (number of days between the first and last day of the medication supply), and HRU (all-cause and WM-specific) per-patient-per-month (PPPM) were assessed. Results: The study included 51 patients (ibrutinib, n=30; zanubrutinib, n=21). In both cohorts, most participants were male (ibrutinib, n=20 [67%]; zanubrutinib, n=16 [76%]), and the mean age at baseline was 73 years and 75 years, respectively. At baseline, the median Charlson Comorbidity Index was 0, and the WM-related and ibrutinib/zanubrutinib-related clinical events were similar between the two cohorts. While the zanubrutinib cohort had a higher prevalence of infections (33% vs 3%) and musculoskeletal pain (24% vs 7%) at baseline, the ibrutinib cohort had a higher prevalence of hypertension (20% vs 14%). The baseline prevalence of anemia was similar in both cohorts (ibrutinib, 27%; zanubrutinib, 29%). Mean follow-up was 6.9 months (ibrutinib) and 6.3 months (zanubrutinib). The mean ± SD duration of therapy was 152 ± 112 days (ibrutinib) and 113 ± 99 days (zanubrutinib; p=0.195). The ibrutinib cohort had a significantly lower all-cause HRU PPPM (4.53 ± 3.96 vs 8.53 ± 6.66, p=0.020) and lower WM-specific HRU PPPM (0.11 ± 0.26 vs 0.54 ± 1.14, p=0.104). Conclusions: In this real-world analysis, patients with WM treated with 1L ibrutinib had a numerically longer duration of therapy and lower all-cause and WM-specific HRU PPPM, compared to those treated with 1L zanubrutinib. Due to a small sample size and short follow-up, these findings should be interpreted cautiously.

Abstract Background: Initial studies with venetoclax, a BCL-2 inhibitor, alone or in combination with either dexamethasone or bortezomib and dexamethasone has shown considerable anti-tumor activity in t(11;14) MM with relapsed disease. Based on preclinical studies suggesting synergy when combined with bortezomib and phase 1 data showing efficacy for venetoclax, this combination was compared with bortezomib and dexamethasone (BortDex) in relapsed MM. While the BELLINI (NCT02755597) trial did demonstrate improved PFS with the combination, there were limited number of patients with t(11;14) treated with BortDex. The objective of this study was to assess real-world effectiveness of BortDex in patients with t(11;14) positive relapsed/refractory MM. Patients and methods: This non-interventional, retrospective observational cohort study included patients with t(11;14) MM from the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) retrospective study of t(11;14) MM. From the overall cohort, patients with t(11;14) MM receiving BortDex in ≥2 nd and ≤4 th line were initially selected. The cohort was further limited to patients with no evidence of allogeneic SCT within 16 weeks or autologous SCT within 12 weeks prior to BortDex initiation. Finally, patients non-refractory to prior PI regimen and not receiving BortDex regimen as part of a clinical trial were included in the study. Patient demographic and clinical characteristics along with real-world effectiveness outcomes including best response, overall survival (OS), and time to next therapy (TTNT) as a surrogate measure for progression-free survival (PFS) were assessed. All analyses were descriptive in nature and were conducted using the SAS 9.4 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA). Results: Overall, 144 patients who met the inclusion criteria were analyzed. Median age was 62.5 years, 62% were male. Patients had a median of 1 prior line (range 1-3) at start of BortDex, at a median of 18.4 months (range, 1-100) from diagnosis; 29% had a prior transplant. A PR or better was observed in 53% of patients with BortDex. The median TTNT for this cohort was 8.4 months and median OS was 46.1 months. Conclusions: This retrospective study of non-trial patients with t(11;14) MM provides a benchmark for newer therapies in this patient population for comparison with both venetoclax dexamethasone as well as combinations using the -BortDex backbone. Disclosures Emechebe: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company; Pharmaceutical/Biotech Companies: Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company. Kumar: Tenebio: Research Funding; KITE: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Carsgen: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche-Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Beigene: Consultancy; Antengene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy; Merck: Research Funding; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Adaptive: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding. Goldschmidt: Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Mundipharma: Research Funding; MSD: Research Funding; Molecular Partners: Research Funding; Dietmar-Hopp-Foundation: Other: Grant; Sanofi: 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; Incyte: Research Funding; GSK: Honoraria; Chugai: 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; Celgene: 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; Johns Hopkins University: Other: Grant. Mateos: Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Regeneron: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Honoraria; Sea-Gen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncopeptides: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene - Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bluebird bio: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GSK: Honoraria; Oncopeptides: Honoraria. Kim: Janssen, BMS: Research Funding. Dimopoulos: Janssen: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Beigene: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria. Ludwig: Janssen, Celgene-BMS, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen, Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Handa: Kyowa Kirin: Research Funding; Chugai: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Ono: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Honoraria; MSD: Research Funding; Shionogi: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding. Fernandez de Larrea: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; GSK: Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy. Reece: Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; GSK: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria; Millennium: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Raje: Celgene, Amgen, Bluebird Bio, Janssen, Caribou, and BMS: Other. Karve: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Arriola: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company. Ross: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company. Durie: Amgen: Other: fees from non-CME/CE services ; Amgen, Celgene/Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen, and Takeda: Consultancy.

Abstract Background: Real-world data (RWD) derived from electronic health records are becoming increasingly important for deriving insights from clinical practice to complement findings from clinical trials. Response to treatment in multiple myeloma (MM) is assessed using the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) response criteria based on MM-specific laboratory measures (i.e. monoclonal [M] protein in serum and urine, free light chain [FLC] levels), as well as radiological images and bone marrow (BM) investigations when appropriate. As healthcare providers do not routinely collect all the information required by the IMWG response criteria, RWD data are often incomplete. Here, we present a derived real-world response (dR) algorithm based on IMWG criteria that accounts for lab measures routinely collected in the clinical care of MM patients and evaluate its ability to accurately assess response to treatment using clinical trial patient-level data. Methods: Treatment response is assessed using a rule-based algorithm integrating longitudinal laboratory measures routinely captured in RWD (Xu et al. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2021) as e.g. by the Flatiron MM database. The rules are based on 'relaxed' IMWG criteria, which entail exclusion of BM biopsies data and of imaging results, and reduction in either serum or urine M protein levels (rather than both) to assign partial response. This algorithm was applied to patient-level clinical trial data from the Bellini trial (Kumar et al. Lancet Oncol 2020) with response assignment made by an independent review committee (IRC) in the trial used as the 'ground truth'. Agreement between the IRC's and algorithm's assignments of response was estimated using Cohen's Kappa statistic. Differences in overall response rate (ORR) between treatment and placebo arms were calculated using stratified Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel tests based on strata at randomization with number of prior lines of therapy and previous proteasome inhibitor treatment status variables used for stratification. Results: The Bellini trial is a Phase 3 clinical trial with 2:1 design enrolling 194 and 97 patients in its treatment and placebo arms, respectively (291 patients in total). Regular assessments of M protein and FLC levels were performed (median 13 or 14 measurements), providing detailed trajectory of patient response (Table 1). Comparison between the IRC's and algorithm's assignments of responders classified as Partial Response or better (PR+) resulted in almost perfect agreement with Cohen's Kappa 0.82 (274/291 assignments in agreement). It is worth noting that the Cohen's Kappa between the IRC's and Investigator's assessments is 0.85, indicating that the algorithm's error is within some expected uncertainty. Due to the exclusion of BM information, agreement decreased to 0.56 when depths of response were considered separately as opposed to grouping PR+ patients together with most cases being overestimated as complete response (CR) or stringent CR. In assessing treatment effect, differences in ORR between the intervention and placebo arms in the trial based on IRC's assessment could be accurately recapitulated (68% [66/97] vs 71% [69/97] responders in the placebo arm and 82% [159/194] vs 87% [169/194] in the intervention arm for IRC's and algorithm's assessment, respectively). Based on these results, algorithm response assignment led to consistent conclusions about treatment efficacy in the Bellini trial. Implementation of criteria to characterize very good partial response or better (VGPR+) also led to a conclusion consistent with the Bellini trial IRC's assessment, while implementation of criteria of CR+ resulted in estimates of treatment efficacy that were higher, but directionally consonant (Table 2). Conclusions: We present a fully automated rule-based algorithm for response assessment in MM relying on longitudinal lab measurements during treatment. The algorithm uses 'relaxed' IMWG criteria to account for routine clinical practice settings and demonstrates very high agreement with the assessment of trained clinicians, while reliably reproducing the efficacy analysis in the Bellini trial when ORR and VGPR+ are considered. We envision that, if the concordance observed here is confirmed in other independent cohorts, this algorithm can be used in the assessment of response in RWD and can facilitate response assessment when suboptimal amounts of data are available. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Tyanova: F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Current Employment. Xu: F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG: Current Employment. Williamson: Amgen: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Genentech: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Rocci: Novartis: Other: Wife is and employee of Novartis and holds Novartis stocks; Sanofi Aventis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Received travel sponsorship ; Janssen-Cilag Ltd: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Received travel sponsorship ; Owner of 100% stocks of Harlock Healthcare Consulting Ltd (UK privately-held company currently not active).: Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company; Roche: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Received travel sponsorship , Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy; NHS: Ended employment in the past 24 months; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.: Current Employment; AbbVie: Other: Received travel sponsorship . Hong: Imago BioSciences: Current Employment; Genentech, Inc.: Ended employment in the past 24 months; Stock options in Imago BioSciences: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Jin: Genentech Inc: Current Employment; Roche: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Karve: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Roose: Flatiron Health, Inc.: Current Employment; Roche: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Sawas: Seattle Genetics: Honoraria; Affimed: Research Funding; Roche: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Flat Iron Health: Current Employment; Acrotech: Honoraria; Daiichi-Sankyo: Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Speakers Bureau. Kumar: Antengene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Research Funding; Adaptive: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Carsgen: Research Funding; Tenebio: Research Funding; Beigene: Consultancy; Oncopeptides: Consultancy; KITE: Consultancy, 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, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy; Roche-Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding.

Abstract Background: Treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) commonly encompasses combination of drugs within the three drug classes including proteasome inhibitors (PIs), immunomodulators and (IMiDs), and monoclonal antibodies, both for newly diagnosed and relapsed disease. With increasing appreciation of disease heterogeneity based on underlying genetic abnormality, and demonstration of efficacy of venetoclax in patients with t(11;14) MM, the outcomes with commonly used MM regimens among the different cytogenetic subgroups are of great interest. Venetoclax, a BCL-2 inhibitor, is being studied in t(11;14) positive MM patients who have received at least two prior lines of treatment (NCT03539744; CANOVA). However, outcomes in previously treated t(11;14) MM patients using standard of care approaches in the real-world setting is limited. Patients and methods: This non-interventional, retrospective observational cohort study included patients with t(11;14) MM from the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) retrospective study of t(11;14) MM. From the overall cohort, patients with t(11;14) MM receiving pomalidomide + dexamethasone (PomDex) in ≥3 rd line were selected, similar to those being enrolled in the ongoing CANOVA trial. Patients were also required to have prior exposure to lenalidomide and a PI without a history of transplant within 16 weeks prior to PomDex initiation. Patients enrolled in a clinical trial were excluded. Overall best response, time to next therapy (TTNT) as a surrogate measure for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were assessed after initiation of PomDex. All analyses were descriptive in nature and were conducted using SAS 9.4 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA). Results: Fifty-two patients who met the inclusion criteria were analyzed. Median age was 63 years, 60% were male. Patients had a median of 3 prior lines at start of PomDex, at a median of 4.3 years from diagnosis; 52% had a prior transplant. A PR or better was observed in 34% of patients with PomDex. The median TTNT for this cohort was 6.1 months and median OS was 19.2 months. Conclusion: This retrospective study of non-trial patients with t(11;14) MM provides a benchmark for newer therapies in this patient population for comparison with both venetoclax dexamethasone in the ongoing CANOVA study as well as combinations using the pomalidomide backbone. Disclosures Karve: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Kumar: Roche-Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; KITE: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Carsgen: Research Funding; Antengene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Oncopeptides: Consultancy; Beigene: Consultancy; Tenebio: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Adaptive: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding. Gonzalez De La Calle: Celgene-BMS, Janssen, Amgen: Honoraria. Mangiacavalli: GSK: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria. Kastritis: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Genesis Pharma: Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Esteves: AbbVie: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy. Delforge: Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Yee: Karyopharm: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Oncopeptides: Consultancy; Adaptive: Consultancy; GSK: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy. Arriola: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company. Ross: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company. Manthena: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company. Durie: Amgen, Celgene/Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen, and Takeda: Consultancy; Amgen: Other: fees from non-CME/CE services .

Introduction: MM is an incurable disease with risk categorizations by cytogenetic abnormalities. Prognostic implications of chromosome translocation t(11;14)+ are important to inform development of biomarker-targeted therapies such as the B-cell lymphoma-2 (BCL-2) pathway inhibitors. This study aims to evaluate MM treatment (Tx) patterns and outcomes of t(11;14)+ compared with other cytogenetic cohorts in US routine clinical practice. Methods: A retrospective observational cohort study of the Flatiron Health database, which comprises de-identified electronic health record-derived patient (pt)-level data from over 280 community and academic cancer clinics in the US. Pts aged ≥18 years who received a first-line (1L) induction Tx within ≤60 days of MM diagnosis from 1/1/2011 to 1/31/2020, and were not enrolled in a clinical trial were identified at the start of each Tx line (index date) and followed up (f/u) until 1/31/2020. Only cytogenetic results by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) were used to stratify the cohort into: t(11;14)+; standard risk, excluding t(11;14)+ (SR); and high risk, (HR; del 17p, t(4;14), t(14;16), t(14;20), chromosome 1 abnormalities as a proxy for 1q gain; and t(11;14) where it co-occurs). Descriptive analyses of pt characteristics and Tx were conducted. Kaplan-Meier analyses were used to evaluate median time to next treatment (TTNT) and overall survival (OS) with log-rank test for significance. The cohort was stratified by age ≤70/>70 years (yrs) as a proxy for transplant eligibility. Results: Of 10,703 pts with MM in the database, 5982, 3059 and 1595 pts were eligible for 1L, second-line (2L), and third-line (3L) analysis, of which 76%, 84%, and 86%, respectively, had FISH test results before Tx initiation. 14% of pts with FISH test results were t(11;14)+, ~55% SR and ~35% HR. Included pts were predominately male (55%), ~90% treated in the community setting and ~16% African-American. Pts in the 3L cohort were younger at diagnosis with a median age (interquartile range) of 67 (59 ̶ 74) yrs compared with 69 (61 ̶ 76) yrs in both 1L and 2L. The 1L Tx pattern was consistent across cytogenetic cohorts with bortezomib (V), lenalidomide (R), dexamethasone (d) as the most common Tx (>42%). Together, VRd, Rd, Vd, and cyclophosphamide (Cy) in combination with Vd represented ≥90% of 1L Tx (Figure 1). Across 2L cytogenetic cohorts, the most common Tx regimens (≥25%) were VRd and Rd. The use of regimens containing carfilzomib (K) and daratumumab (D) was emerging in 2L: KRd in 8% of t(11;14)+ and HR and 5% in SR; Kd 5% in all groups; DRd in 4% of t(11;14)+ and 3% in SR and HR (Figure 1). 3L Tx pattern was fragmented with different Tx regimens. Rd was the most common 3L Tx option: 9% in t(11;14)+, 10% in SR and 7% in HR (Figure 1). Across all lines of Tx, t(11;14)+ had similar Tx outcomes to SR, and HR had poorest outcomes (Table 1). Pts TTNT shortened as they advanced to later lines of Tx (Table 1). Although TTNT did not differ by age across lines of Tx, OS was superior in pts <70 yrs across all 3 cytogenetic risk cohorts, especially in 1L where transplant in those ≤70 yrs vs >70 yrs at diagnosis was 44% vs 11% for t(11;14)+, 47% vs 10% for SR and 49% vs 9% for HR. Conclusions: This study identified cytogenetic subgroups across 1L to 3L in a predominately community setting in the US. MM t(11;14)+ pts had similar 1L and 2L Tx patterns to SR and HR. Across all lines of Tx, the outcomes of t(11;14)+ and SR pts were comparable and better than HR pts. TTNT was reduced as pts advanced to later lines of Tx. Pts continuing to 3L Tx were younger at diagnosis, but there was not a clear-cut standard of care. While TTNT did not differ by age across lines of Tx, OS was superior in pts <70 yrs across all 3 cytogenetic risk cohorts. This study sets the benchmark for novel treatment options, such as BCL-2 pathway inhibitors, primarily wherever available biomarker-driven therapy is considered appropriate. Disclosures Atrash: Takeda, Amgen, Karyopharm, BMS, Sanofi, Cellactar, Janssen and Celgene: Honoraria; BMS, Jansen oncology, Sanofi: Speakers Bureau; Amgen, GSK, Karyopharm.: Research Funding. Flahavan:F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Roche Products Ltd.: Current Employment. Xu:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Current Employment, Other: All authors received support for third party writing assistance, furnished by Scott Battle, PhD, provided by F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Basel, Switzerland.. Ma:Genentech, Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Karve:AbbVie: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Hong:F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Genentech, Inc.: Current Employment. Jirau-Lucca:Genentech, Inc.: Current Employment; AbbVie: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; BMS: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Celgene: Divested equity in a private or publicly-traded company in the past 24 months. Nixon:Genentech, Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Ailawadhi:Takeda: Honoraria; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Cellectar: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Medimmune: Research Funding; Phosplatin: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Research Funding.

TPS8554 Background: BCL-2 is an anti-apoptotic protein important for myeloma cell survival. Venetoclax (Ven) is a highly selective, potent, oral BCL-2 inhibitor, that has shown promise in clinical studies as monotherapy or in combination with other agents in patients with t(11;14)-positive relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM; Kumar et al. Blood. 2017; Costa et al. ASH 2018. Abstr. #303; Harrison et al. ASH 2019. Abstr. #142; Bahlis et al. ASH 2019. Abstr. #925; Kaufman et al. ASH 2019. Abstr. #926). Notably, t(11;14)-positive MM is more dependent on BCL-2 for cell survival, which, together with these clinical data, suggests that Ven combined with dexamethasone (Dex) may provide greater clinical benefit versus standard therapies, like pomalidomide (Pom), in this biomarker-defined patient population. This ongoing Phase 3 study (CANOVA; NCT03539744) aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of VenDex vs PomDex in t(11;14)-positive RRMM. Methods: Eligible patients (≥18 years) must have t(11;14)-positive RRMM per central lab, an ECOG performance status ≤2, received ≥2 prior lines of therapy, previously received a proteasome inhibitor, and must be refractory to lenalidomide and last line of therapy. Patients cannot have history of treatment with Ven, Pom, or other BCL-2 inhibitors. Patients will be randomized 1:1 to Ven (800 mg orally, once-daily) or Pom (4 mg orally, once-daily on days 1-21 of 28-day cycles). Patients in both groups will receive 40 mg Dex (20 mg for patients ≥75 years) once weekly. Treatment will continue until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal from study. Patients will be stratified based on age at randomization ( < 65 vs ≥65 years), prior lines of therapy (2 to 3 vs ≥4), and International Staging System stage at screening (I vs II vs III). The primary endpoint is progression-free survival (PFS) per independent review committee (IRC) assessment based on International Myeloma Working Group criteria. The final PFS analysis will be performed when approximately 147 PFS events per IRC are observed. Secondary endpoints are response rate, patient-reported outcomes, overall survival, duration of response, times to response and progression, minimal residual disease negativity rate, safety, and Ven pharmacokinetics. Approximately 244 patients will be enrolled; as of January 21, 2020, 28 patients have been randomized (from 19 sites in 12 countries) and enrollment is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT03539744 .

Background: Despite treatment advances, multiple myeloma (MM) remains a condition with high unmet medical need as patients (pts) relapse and become resistant to therapy. MM pts experience a range of serious disease-related symptoms and side effects impacting their functioning and health-related quality of life (HRQL). The median overall survival (OS) has improved with the advent of new treatments in the last two decades, however, the impact of newer combination treatments on pt quality of life remains unknown (Beckner, N et al. Cancer Res. 2011;183:25; Bharat, N et al. J Clin Oncol 2019;37:15(suppl):8039). Venetoclax is a novel, orally bioavailable small molecule inhibitor of BCL-2 activity in MM. In the Phase 3 double-blind, randomized clinical trial (M14-031, BELLINI) progression free survival (PFS) was studied in relapsed/refractory (RR) MM pts receiving venetoclax or placebo in combination with bortezomib and dexamethasone. In addition, patient-reported outcomes (PRO) data focused on physical functioning, pain, and fatigue from BELLINI were evaluated to better understand the overall impact on pt HRQL of adding venetoclax to bortezomib and dexamethasone-based doublet therapy. Methods: The BELLINI Phase 3 study (NCT01794520) enrolled patients ≥18 y old with R/R MM who had received 1-3 prior lines of therapy. The study met its primary endpoint of PFS (HR 0.63, 95% CI=0.44-0.89) but higher risk of death (HR 2.027, 95% CI=1.04-3.95) was observed in the treatment arm compared with placebo, although the OS data are not yet mature (Kumar, S et al. EHA Library. Jun 16 2019;273254:LB2601). The secondary HRQL endpoints included in this study were pain severity, fatigue, physical functioning (PF), and global health status, which were measured using the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-SF), PROMIS Fatigue Short Form surveys, and the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30). Change from baseline to day 1 of each cycle visit (up to 25 cycles or last treatment visit) was assessed for each measure in both the treatment and placebo groups. Summary analyses compared mean and median scores between arms at each cycle. The treatment effect was evaluated in a mixed effect model controlling for the patient's baseline score, total visits (or cycles of treatment), age (<65 or ≥65), prior therapy lines, and prior proteasome inhibitor exposure. The model also included an interaction term examining treatment by visits. Results: The intention-to-treat (ITT) dataset included 194 pts (median age: 66y; 53% with 2 or 3 prior lines of therapy) in the treatment group and 97 pts (median age: 65y; 55% with 2 or 3 prior lines of therapy) in the placebo group (2:1 randomization). There was no clear evidence for an independent effect of treatment on PF (P=0.522). Pain scores across multiple measures showed a similar trend, with a statistically non-significant improvement of unadjusted average "Worst Pain" scores for the venetoclax group (P=0.289; Figure B). Non-inferiority in pain results were replicated by the pain subscale of the QLQ-30 (P=0.778), the BPI pain severity index (P=0.418), and the related BPI pain interference subscale score (P=0.603). Fatigue scores likewise demonstrated no significant differences between treatment arms whether using PROMIS Cancer Fatigue t-scores (P=0.442), raw scores (P=0.568), or the 3-item QLQ-C30 subscale (P=0.959), although there was a positive trend across cycle summary scores for the treatment group compared with the placebo group. Unadjusted QLQ-C30 PF subscale scores showed declines from baseline that were generally worse in the placebo group across 25 treatment cycles, although differences were smaller and non-significant in the adjusted model (Figure A). Conclusions: Comparable HRQL in pain severity, fatigue, and PF was observed in RRMM pts receiving venetoclax in combination with bortezomib and dexamethasone compared to pts receiving bortezomib and dexamethasone. The summary scores showed outcomes that were comparable or slightly improved for those randomized to the venetoclax combination. Results of concurrent measures of the same or associated concepts reinforced confidence in these results. Additional analyses of subgroups are ongoing (eg, t(11;14), BCL-2 expression status) and may provide further insights surrounding HRQL in these populations. Figure Disclosures Gasparetto: BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations, or other expenses paid or reimbursed ; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations, or other expenses paid or reimbursed ; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations, or other expenses paid or reimbursed . Popat:Takeda: Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: travel support to meetings; AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kumar:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Cavo:celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel accommodations, Speakers Bureau; janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel accommodations, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; novartis: Honoraria; sanofi: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; bms: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. de la Rubia:Janssen: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy. Hungria:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Consultancy, 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; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Salwender:Sanofi: Honoraria, Other: Travel or accommodations; Amgen: Honoraria, Other: Travel or accommodations; Janssen Cilag: Honoraria, Other: Travel or accommodations; AbbVie: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Other: Travel or accommodations; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Travel or accommodations; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel or accommodations. Suzuki:Ono: Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Maciel:Amgen: Other: funding for travel, teaching, participation in advisory boards; Janssen: Other: funding for travel, teaching, participation in advisory boards. Moreau:Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Harrison:Celgene: 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, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; GSK: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: investigator on studies, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Jia:AbbVie: Employment, Other: Stock/stock options. Karve:AbbVie: Employment, Other: stock/stock options. Ma:Genentech: Employment, Other: stock options; AbbVie: Other: Alliance Partner. Devine:Genentech: Employment, Other: stock options; AbbVie: Other: Alliance Partner. Benjamin:AbbVie: Employment, Other: stock/stock options.