Greipp, Philip R.

Abstract Abstract 1802 Poster Board I-828 Background Heterogeneity in multiple myeloma (MM) leads to disparate outcomes with a wide variation in overall survival (OS). Based upon the evidence predominantly gathered from newly diagnosed patients treated with standard chemotherapy and/or transplantation, the current Mayo (mSMART) prognostic model uses a combination of metaphase cytogenetics, fluorescence in-situ hybridization (FISH) and plasma cell labeling index (PCLI) for risk-stratification at diagnosis of MM. The objective of our study was to evaluate the significance of this stratification model in the era of novel therapies, and to assess the independent prognostic value of each of the components in the model. Methods Data were abstracted from a cohort of 1556 consecutive patients with MM who presented to our institution between January 1999 and March 2009 within ninety days of diagnosis of MM A total of three hundred and eighty six patients had been evaluated with conventional cytogenetics near diagnosis in addition to interphase FISH. Out of this cohort, three hundred and sixty six patients had availability of all the three tests, including the slide-based PCLI. High-risk MM was defined as presence of any one or more of the following: cytogenetics: hypodiploidy, monosomy of chromosome 13 or deletion 13q ; FISH: deletion of p53 (locus 17p13) or immunoglobulin heavy chain (IgH) translocations, t(4;14) (p16.3;q32) or t(14;16)(q32;q23); PCLI ≥3%. Survival estimates were created using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared by log-rank tests. The impact of each of the three tests was assessed by a multivariate (MV) analysis using Cox proportional hazards model. Results The median OS of the cohort of 366 patients was 65 months from presentation. One hundred and twelve (31%) patients were deemed high risk by any one or more of the three tests: Metaphase cytogenetics, FISH or PCLI (current mSMART definition of high-risk MM). The median OS of high risk patients was 52 months versus 71 months for standard-risk (P=0.007). We then studied the prognostic value of the three tests separately. Patients classified as high risk by FISH had a median OS of 35 months versus 65 months for the standard risk, HR= 2.3, P<0.001. Similarly, cytogenetics alone was also able to classify patients into high and standard risk with a comparable HR of 2.1 (P=0.008, median survival 37 vs. 64 months). In contrast, PCLI did not have a significant prognostic value (HR =1.41, P=0.32). This was confirmed on multivariate analysis in a model that included all 3 tests. FISH (HR=2.36, P=0.001) and cytogenetics (HR=1.99; P=0.017) emerged as independent determinants of prognosis in the multivariable analysis, while PCLI (HR=1.03, P=0.93) did not provide additional prognostic value. We then examined whether the prognostic value of FISH contributed additionally in patients classified into high and standard risk by conventional cytogenetics, and vice versa. Those classified as high risk by cytogenetics (n=44, 11 %), were further categorized into 2 groups by additional prognostic information obtained by FISH (median survival 18 vs. 52 months; P=0.005). Similarly, those classified as standard risk by cytogenetics (n=342, 89 %), were further categorized into 2 groups (median survival 52 vs. 71 months; P=0.017) by additional FISH-based stratification. Similarly, high-risk patients defined by FISH (n=65, 17 %) were further classified into 2 groups with significant difference in median OS (18 vs. 52 months, P=0.004), based on the presence or absence of high-risk features on cytogenetics. In contrast, no additional prognostic information was gained by cytogenetics in patients who were stratified as standard risk by FISH alone (n=321, 83%). Conclusion Our study validates high risk features defined by FISH and conventional cytogenetics in the mSMART risk stratification model among patients treated after the introduction of novel therapies. Either test identifies a high risk cohort with a hazard ratio of approximately 2 (median survival ∼37 versus ∼65 months). In patients known to have high risk disease by one of the two tests, knowledge of the other appears to add additional prognostic value. Disclosures Fonseca: Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Otsuka, Genzyme and Medtronic: Consultancy. Gertz:celgene, millennium: Honoraria. Dispenzieri:celgene: Research Funding. Kumar:celgene, genzyme, millennium, novartis, bayer: Research Funding; genzyme: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Abstract Abstract 1988 Background With the utilization of novel agent-based combination therapies and autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) in multiple myeloma (MM), the rigorous response category of stringent complete remission (sCR) in the international uniform response criteria is increasingly becoming attainable. In addition to the standard criteria for complete remission (CR), sCR requires normalization of the free light chain ratio and disappearance of clonal cells as determined by the marrow immunofluorescence or immunohistochemistry. We have previously validated the new response category of sCR created in by the International Myeloma Working Group and demonstrated that sCR represents a deeper level of response, translating into a superior OS. Herein we report the survival outcomes of patients attaining sCR or standard CR, from a 2-year landmark after ASCT in a cohort of patients with extended follow-up. Additionally, we report the outcome of patients who remained in sCR for at least 6 months (sustained-sCR) after ASCT. Patients and Methods Maximal response rates of four hundred and forty-five consecutive patients who underwent ASCT within 12 months of diagnosis of MM were determined. The population achieving varying degrees of complete remission (n=237) is the focus of this study. We performed a landmark analysis 2 years after ASCT to ensure that all the patients attaining at least CR had sufficient time to reach the response levels being studied. Patients were categorized as having sustained sCR (sus-sCR) if the duration of sCR was at least 6 months. Overall survival (OS) was estimated by the Kaplan Meier method and the survival curves were compared by log-rank test. Results The median follow-up of the entire cohort was seventy-seven months (95% CI: 73–82 months). The sCR rate after ASCT was 24% (n=109). Median time to progression (TTP) of patients attaining sCR was 50 months from ASCT, and median overall survival (OS) is not reached, in contrast to those attaining standard CR (n=37, TTP=20 months, OS=81 months) or near CR/nCR (n=91; TTP= 19 months, OS=60 months, p<0.0001 for both TTP and OS). OS of patients surviving at least 2 years from ASCT (Figure 1a) continued to remain superior for those attaining sCR (n=105, median: not reached) versus 70 months for the CR group (n=32; p=0.004). Among patients achieving sCR (n=109), OS of patients with sus-sCR (n= 75) at 6 months from ASCT is not reached (5-year OS=91%, 7-year OS=86%) versus median OS of 66 months (5-year OS=49%, 7-year OS=37%; p<0.0001) for those who had non-sustained-sCR (n=34) after ASCT (Figure 1b). Conclusion In our landmark analysis of patients with MM who survived at least 2 years from ASCT, those attaining sCR have a markedly superior outcome compared to those attaining standard CR. However, among patients attaining sCR, those with sustained sCR of 6 months or greater had the best outcome. Myeloma trials reporting response rates should identify patients achieving sCR and CR separately owing to markedly disparate outcomes of the two categories. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

PURPOSE: To study the prognostic value of plasmablastic morphology after autologous stem-cell transplantation for relapsed or primary refractory myeloma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seventy-five patients were studied. Investigators blinded to the clinical details of the individual cases reviewed bone marrow aspirate slides to determine plasmablastic classification. Plasmablasts were defined using strict, well-described criteria. Plasmablastic morphology was considered to be present (plasmablastic myeloma) when 2% or more plasmablasts were present in the plasma-cell population. RESULTS: Patients underwent transplantation 5 to 88 months (median, 20 months) after the initial diagnosis of myeloma. Twenty-eight percent of patients had plasmablastic morphology. A significantly greater proportion of patients with plasmablastic morphology had abnormal cytogenetics compared with those with nonplasmablastic classification (73% v 31%, respectively; P = .003). The overall survival rate measured from the time of transplantation was significantly worse in patients with plasmablastic morphology compared with those without (median survival time, 5 months v 24 months, respectively; P < .001). Progression-free survival time was shortened also, with a median time of 4 months compared with 12 months, respectively (P < .001). In the multivariate analysis, plasmablastic classification was the most powerful prognostic factor after transplantation for both overall (P = .001) and progression-free survival rates (P < .001). We also identified three risk groups based on plasmablastic morphology: plasma-cell labeling index, lactate dehydrogenase, and cytogenetics. The median overall survival time was 38 months when none of these factors was abnormal, 17 months with one abnormal factor, and 8 months with two or more abnormal factors (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Plasmablastic morphology is a powerful independent predictor of poor survival rate after autologous stem-cell transplantation for relapsed or primary refractory myeloma.

PURPOSE: Based on the success of hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT) for multiple myeloma, HSCT is being used to treat patients with primary systemic amyloidosis (AL). This article addresses the extent to which eligibility to undergo HSCT is a favorable prognostic feature and explores prognostic factors within the subset of eligible patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The Mayo Clinic amyloid database was queried for all patients with AL seen at the Mayo Clinic from 1983 through 1997 who would have been eligible for peripheral-blood stem-cell transplantation. Inclusion criteria included biopsy-proven amyloid, symptomatic disease, absence of a clinical diagnosis of multiple myeloma, age ≤ 70 years, cardiac interventricular septal thickness ≤ 15 mm, cardiac ejection fraction more than 55%, serum creatinine ≤ 2 mg/dL, and direct bilirubin ≤ 2.0 mg/dL. RESULTS: Median age was 56 years (range, 25 to 70) with 79 (34%) older than 60 years. One hundred patients had early cardiac involvement; 41, hepatic involvement; 167, renal involvement; and 39, nerve involvement. The 229 patients have had a median follow-up of 52 months, and 151 have died. The median survival was 42 months with 5- and 10-year survival rates of 36% and 15%, respectively. Important predictors of survival were size of M-component in 24-hour urine, number of involved organs, alkaline phosphatase, performance score, and weight loss. CONCLUSION: The same patients who are eligible for HSCT are a good-risk population who do relatively well with chemotherapy (median survival, 42 months), substantially better than the expected median survival of 18 months for all patients with AL. A randomized trial is needed to assess the true effect of HSCT.

PURPOSE: Primary systemic amyloidosis is an immunoglobulin deposition disorder in which insoluble light chains cause organ dysfunction and death. The established conventional therapy is treatment with melphalan and prednisone. We investigated whether treatment with multiple alkylating agents improved the response rate or survival time, compared with melphalan and prednisone therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We treated 101 patients with biopsy-proven primary amyloidosis. The patients were randomly assigned to receive melphalan and prednisone (52 patients) or vincristine, carmustine, melphalan, cyclophosphamide, and prednisone (49 patients). Patients were stratified according to the presence of cardiac involvement, time from diagnosis to randomization, serum beta2-microglobulin level, and whether peripheral neuropathy was the major manifestation of the disease. RESULTS: The median duration of survival after randomization was 29 months, with no differences in survival time between the two groups. There were 29 patients who fulfilled the response criteria: 15 in the vincristine, carmustine, melphalan, cyclophosphamide, and prednisone arm and 14 in the melphalan and prednisone arm. CONCLUSION: Therapy with multiple alkylating agents did not result in a higher response rate or longer survival time, compared with standard melphalan and prednisone treatment in patients with primary systemic amyloidosis.