Introduction: Advances in the understanding of disease biology, the introduction of new drugs, and better supportive care have improved outcomes in multiple myeloma (MM). Most improvements have been observed in clinical trial and tertiary referral center populations but questions remain about the generalizability of these findings to patients treated in the community. Methods: We studied all patients diagnosed with MM between 01/01/2001 and 12/31/2015 who had complete demographic and overall survival (OS) data available and were seen at Mayo Clinic (MAYO) or followed in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program (SEER, 18 registry data 2000 - 2016, 11/2018 submission). We retrieved age at diagnosis, sex, date of diagnosis, date of last follow-up, and OS for all patients. OS was defined as the time from diagnosis to death from any cause. Patients who were alive at the end of follow-up (12/31/ 2016) were censored. OS estimates were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Age- and sex-adjusted Cox models were used to assess the association between the 5-year interval of diagnosis and OS. Expected OS estimates were calculated based on United States general population rate tables (Human Mortality Database) using a conditional approach. Standardized mortality ratios (SMR) were calculated by dividing the number of observed deaths by the number of expected deaths in age- and sex-matched general United States population controls. Linear regression models were fit to test for linear trends in early mortality and SMR over time (per 5-year interval). P-values below 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Results: The median age at diagnosis was 3 years lower in patients at MAYO (64 years, 15% ≥ 75 years, 60% male, n = 3293) compared to SEER (67 years, 29% ≥ 75 years, 55% male, n = 61779). After a median follow-up of 2.8 years the median OS was longer in MAYO compared to SEER (5.4 versus 4.0 years, HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.78 - 0.86, p < 0.001) and remained statistically significant after adjusting for age and sex (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.86 - 0.95, p < 0.001). Early mortality (1-year mortality) decreased between 2001-2005 and 2011-2015: From 20% to 11% at MAYO and from 26% to 19% in SEER. When grouping OS by year of diagnosis (in 5-year-intervals) improvements were seen in both populations (A) and remained statistically significant after adjusting for age and sex. The relative improvements were similar comparing the 5-year period after the introduction of the novel therapies (2006 - 2010) to 2001 - 2005 and more pronounced in MAYO for the most recent 5-year interval (2011 - 2015, A). This trend was reflected in a steady temporal improvement in 5-year OS estimates in MAYO including the most recent 5-year interval (2011 - 2015, B bottom left). In SEER there was a comparable increase between the first two 5-year intervals but a lesser improvement in more recently (2011 - 2015, B bottom left). A diagnosis of MM remained associated with significant excess mortality in all age groups over time in both populations (B top). There was a decrease in excess mortality over time at MAYO (SMR decline per 5-year interval 1.3, 95% CI 0.9 - 1.8, p < 0.001) while there was little change in SEER (SMR decline 0.0, 95% CI -0.3 - 0.3, p = 0.917, B bottom right). Further stratifying by age at diagnosis, the decrease in excess mortality was observed mostly in patients < 75 years at MAYO (SMR decline per 5-year interval 1.7, 95% CI 1.5 - 2.0, p < 0.001, C bottom left) and to a lesser extent in older patients (SMR decline 0.4, 95% CI 0.2 - 0.6, p < 0.001, C bottom right). No such trends towards improvement were observed in either age group in SEER (C bottom). In older patients, early mortality remained approximately 30% in both populations despite continued improvements, while the 5-year OS estimates for the most recent 5-year interval (2011 - 2015) were 37% at MAYO and 26% in SEER (C top). Conclusions: Both early mortality and long-term survival have improved over time. Reductions in excess mortality were largely confined to younger patients with access to specialized care. Patients ≥ 75 years represent more than a quarter of all patients in the community, a third of them died within one year of the diagnosis, and only one in four was alive five years later. Older patients with MM remain a vulnerable population and have derived only limited benefit from recent advances in the field. Safe and effective therapies for older patients with MM remain an unmet need. Figure Disclosures Gertz: Ionis/Akcea: Consultancy; International Waldenstrom Foundation: Research Funding; Alnylam: Consultancy; Prothena Biosciences Inc: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Spectrum: Consultancy, Research Funding; Annexon: Consultancy; Appellis: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Medscape: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; Abbvie: Other: personal fees for Data Safety Monitoring board; Research to Practice: Consultancy; Teva: Speakers Bureau; Johnson and Johnson: Speakers Bureau; DAVA oncology: Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Proclara: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; i3Health: Other: Development of educational programs and materials; Springer Publishing: Patents & Royalties; Amyloidosis Foundation: Research Funding. Dispenzieri:Alnylam: Research Funding; Akcea: Consultancy; Takeda: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; Intellia: Consultancy; Celgene: Research Funding. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding. Maurer:Nanostring: Research Funding; Morphosys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Research Funding. Dingli:alexion: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Millenium: Consultancy; Rigel: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Research Funding. Kapoor:Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Glaxo Smith Kline: Research Funding; Cellectar: Consultancy. Leung:Takeda: Research Funding; Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Aduro: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Omeros: Research Funding. Kumar:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding.
Impact of minimal residual negativity using next generation flow cytometry on outcomes in light chain amyloidosis
AbstractWe evaluated bone marrow minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity in 44 patients with light chain (AL) amyloidosis using next generation flow cytometry (sensitivity ≥1 × 10−5; median events analyzed: 8.7 million, range: 4.8 to 9.7 million). All patients underwent MRD testing in 2 years from start of therapy (median: 7 months). The overall MRD negative rate was 64% (n = 28). The MRD‐negative rate after one‐line of therapy was 71% (20/28). And, MRD negative rates were higher with stem‐cell transplant as first‐line therapy (86%, 18/21) vs chemotherapy alone as first‐line treatment (29%, 2/7), P = .005. The MRD negative rate amongst patients in complete response was 75% (15/20), and in very good partial response, 50% (11/22). There were two patients in partial response/rising light chains (with renal dysfunction) who were MRD negative. There were no differences in baseline characteristics of MRD negative vs MRD positive patients, except younger age amongst MRD‐negative patients. Patients with MRD negativity were more likely to have achieved cardiac response at the time of MRD assessment, 67% (8/12) vs 22% (2/7), P = .04. Renal response rates were similar in both groups. Progression free survival was assessed in the 42 patients achieving CR or VGPR. After median follow‐up of 14 months, the estimated 1‐year progression free survival in MRD negative vs MRD positive patients was 100% (26 patients, 0 events) vs 64% (16 patients, five events), P = .006, respectively. MRD assessment should be explored as a surrogate endpoint in clinical trials and MRD risk‐adapted trials may help optimize treatment in AL amyloidosis.
Utility of serum free light chain ratio in response definition in patients with multiple myeloma
Key PointsPatients with an abnormal sFLC ratio because of LC suppression have outcomes similar to those with a normal ratio. sFLC ratio has prognostic value in patients achieving CR who have an absence of clonal BMPCs assessed by MFC.
Enhancing the R‐ISS classification of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma by quantifying circulating clonal plasma cells
AbstractOur prior studies identified the prognostic significance of quantifying cPCs by multiparametric flow cytometry (MFC) in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients. We evaluated if a similar quantification of cPCs could add prognostic value to the current R‐ISS classification of 556 consecutive NDMM patients seen at the Mayo Clinic, Rochester from 2009 to 2017. Those patients that had ≥5 cPCs/μL and either R‐ISS stage I or stage II disease were re‐classified as R‐ISS IIB stage for the purposes of this study. The median time to next therapy (TTNT) and overall survival (OS) for patients with ≥5 cPCs/μL at diagnosis was as follows: R‐ISS I (N = 110) ‐ 40 months and not reached; R‐ISS II (N = 69) ‐ 30 and 72 months; R‐ISS IIB (N = 96) ‐ 21 and 45 months and R‐ISS III (N = 281) ‐ 20 and 47 months respectively. Finally, ≥ 5 cPCs/μL retained its adverse prognostic significance in a multivariable model for TTNT and OS. Hence, quantifying cPCs by MFC can potentially enhance the R‐ISS classification of a subset of NDMM patients with stage I and II disease by identifying those patients with a worse than expected survival outcome.
Implications and outcomes of MRD‐negative multiple myeloma patients with immunofixation positivity
Abstract Background: Normalization of serum free light chain ratio (FLCr) following achievement of a complete response (CR) to therapy denotes a stringent CR in multiple myeloma, and is associated with improved overall survival (OS). However, its value in patients achieving less than a CR is not clear. We hypothesized that patients in whom FLCr normalizes with the initial anti-myeloma therapy will have an improved outcome, even in the absence of a CR. Methods: We analyzed the medical records of patients with MM who were evaluated at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN between January 2004 and December 2011, seen within 90 days of diagnosis. We selected patients with measurable disease on serum protein electrophoresis, defined as a serum M-spike ≥1 g/dl at the time of diagnosis. Then, we excluded all patients with negative immunofixation for monoclonal M-protein in serum and urine at their first response as well as those who did not have serum FLC results available from the time of their first best response. M protein measurements were collected serially from the time of diagnosis until the time of the first relapse or last follow up date if no relapse was recorded. Progression-free survival (PFS) and OS were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: Out of the 1354 MM patients seen at our institution during this period, a total of 453 patients were included in our study. The median age of the cohort at the time of diagnosis was 65 (range, 29-91); 49% were older than 65 years and 284 (63%) were male. The estimated median follow up for the whole cohort was 66 months (95% CI; 61, 71); 241 patients were alive with a median follow up of 4.7 years (range, 0.4 to 10). Three hundred and seventy three (82%) patients had relapsed following the initial therapy with a median time to progression (TTP) of 19.5 months (95% CI; 18, 22) and PFS of 19 months (95% CI; 17, 20). The median OS for the entire cohort is 67 months (95% CI; 59, 73). The median time to the best first response was 6.9 months (range: 0.3-83 months). At the time of the best first response 154 patients (34%) had normal FLCr. Patients with normal FLCr had a longer PFS (29 vs. 16 months, P< .0001) and OS (91 vs. 58 months, P= .0002). We then examined the impact of FLCr normalization on survival outcomes according to their IMWG response categories. We found that FLCr normalization had a favorable impact on PFS in each of the three groups [very good partial response (VGPR), Partial response (PR), and Stable disease (SD)], However, when looking at the OS, only patients with PR had a better OS associated with a normal sFLC κ/λ ratio (Table 1). Conclusions: Obtaining a normal sFLC ratio appears to confer a more favorable prognosis irrespective of the depth of the response, suggesting an important role for serial-sFLC measurements in disease monitoring even in patients who achieve only a PR to therapy as their best response. This supports the inclusion of sFLC at all levels of response included in the current International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) criteria. Abstract 3427. Table 1 Effect of FLCr normalization according to IMWG response categories SD PR VGPR Normal FLCr Abnormal FLCr p-value Normal FLCr Abnormal FLCr p-value Normal FLCr Abnormal FLCr p-value Number of patients 7 70 62 157 85 60 PFS, month, median (95% CI) 27 (14, 36) 7 (5, 12) < .02 26 (20, 36) 17 (13, 20) .0005 29 (23, 32) 21 (18, 26) .03 OS, months, median (95% CI) 68 (49, 68) 41 (31, 61) > .1 NR (65, NR) 61 (50, NR) .004 74 (67, 107) 73 (59, NR) > .9 Abbreviations: NR; statistically not reached Progressive disease (PD) was not included because none of the 12 patients achieved a normal FLCr. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.
Quality of Life and Outcomes in Multiple Myeloma Patients
Abstract Background: Multiple Myeloma (MM) patients have a substantially reduced Health related Quality of Life (HQOL) at diagnosis (dx) due to disease related symptoms like bone pain (58%) and fatigue (32%). HQOL monitoring is becoming increasingly important, owing to improved survival and the impact of treatment-related toxicity. As a result HQOL assessments are increasingly being used in clinical trials, but the literature regarding the relationship between HQOL and outcomes in MM is sparse. We used the Mayo Clinic “Hematology Patient Reported Symptom Screen” (HPRSS) to assess the impact of HQOL on outcomes in newly dx patients with MM. Methods:We retrospectively reviewed charts of 453 patients with newly dx MM seen at Mayo Clinic, Rochester from 2009 to 2014. All patients who visit Mayo clinic hematology clinic complete a 3-point questionnaire (HPRSS) on pain, fatigue and quality of life (QOL) (scored on a scale of 0-10; with 0 being the least fatigue or pain and 10 being the best QOL). Pain, fatigue and QOL scores documented at the time of dx and at 6 months were collected. JMP version 10 was used for the data analysis. Results: The median age at diagnosis was 67 years (range, 33-95); 60% were male. The estimated median OS for the cohort was 21 m (95% CI19, 23); 387 (85%) of the patients were alive at last follow up and the median OS for the population was not reached. The median (IQR) scores for pain, fatigue and QOL were 4 (2, 6), 3 (1, 5), and 7 (5, 9), respectively. First, we examined the relationship between each of the scores (dichotomized at the median) and the baseline characteristics. Higher fatigue scores were associated with lower Hb and serum albumin and higher beta 2 microglobulin, LDH and marrow plasmacytosis. Higher pain scores were seen in female patients, and associated with higher B2M, serum calcium and lytic bone lesions. Lower QOL scores were associated with lower absolute lymphocyte count and serum albumin levels. Next, we examined the relationship between the scores and the OS from diagnosis. The overall survival was inferior for patients with higher pain scores, fatigue scores and lower QOL scores (Figure). In a multivariable analysis, fatigue scores were most strongly associated with survival outcome. Patients with adverse scores in two or more of pain, fatigue and QOL had significantly inferior outcomes (Figure). In univariate analysis, age, B2M, LDH, FISH high risk and the presence of two or more adverse scores were all significantly associated with poorer OS. In a multivariable analysis, age, LDH and the presence >=2 adverse scores were all associated with shorter OS. Of the 453 patients included in the study, 222 patients had pain, fatigue and QOL scores at 6 month from diagnosis. At 6 months, the median (IQR) scores for pain, fatigue and QOL were 2 (1, 5), 4 (2, 5), and 7 (5, 9), respectively; suggesting improved pain, worsened fatigue and static QOL scores. Improvement in the scores by at least one point was seen in 50%, 49% and 38% for the fatigue, pain and QOL scores. While the pain and fatigue scores at 6 months correlated inversely with OS, improvements in the scores in any of the three were not associated with any improved outcomes. Conclusion: A simple, patient reported scoring system for pain, fatigue, and overall perceived QOL at the time of diagnosis is a powerful predictor of survival outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed MM and should be considered routinely in clinical practice. The results of these patient reported measures can be utilized to develop risk-adapted trials in patients with MM. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.
Lenalidomide and Low Dose Dexamethasone in Previously Treated Multiple Myeloma Patients with Impaired Renal Function: Efficacy Analysis of PrE1003, a Precog Study
Abstract Introduction: Lenalidomide (Len) and dexamethasone (dex) has proven to be a highly effective treatment for multiple myeloma (MM) and serves as the basis of other combinations in relapsed disease. However, nearly 1/3 of myeloma patients have renal insufficiency, and the optimal use of Len in this population is not well known. We undertook this study in 3 cohorts of pts: Group A had creatinine clearance (CrCl) of 30-60 ml/min, Group B with CrCl < 30 ml/min, and Group C, with CrCl < 30 ml/min and requiring dialysis. The Phase I component of the trial has been previously reported (ASCO 2014) demonstrating that full dose Len (25mg daily 21/28 days) can be given to all patients despite renal insufficiency, even when on dialysis. We now present data on response to treatment. Methods: In the Phase 2 component accrual was slow and the trial was terminated. However, prior to termination a modified exploratory analysis plan was established, including all 34 patients treated at the recommended phase 2 dose. This plan would declare the treatment worthy of further study if 18 or more of the 34 patients responded to treatment. This design had 84% power to distinguish a response rate of 60% from a null rate of 40%, using a 1-sided test with 10% type I error. Results: The Phase 2 efficacy cohort accrued 34 patients, consisting of 20 patients from Group A, 9 patients from Group B, and 5 patients from Group C. Response of PR or greater was seen in 17 patients, resulting in a 50% overall response rate (CI 37-63%). Treatment was well tolerated with expected adverse events; the most common adverse events were anemia, diarrhea, and fatigue. Eleven episodes of Grade 3 and one Grade 4 pneumonia were reported for 10 patients across all cohorts and dose levels; 3 were considered possibly related to treatment. Seventeen patients have remained on treatment for more than 12 cycles. In the exploratory analyses, median PFS was 7.5 months (95% CI, 3.6 - 19.7 months) and median OS was 19.7 months (95% CI, 10.4 - 42.5 months). Conclusions: Len Dex can be safely administered to patients with impaired renal function at full dose of 25mg daily 21/28 days, and is associated with a 50% response rate. Further investigation into other combinations with Len Dex in patients with renal impairment should be considered. Table Table. Disclosures Mikhael: Onyx: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Lonial:Merck: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Millenium: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy. Weiss:Novartis: Consultancy.
Prognostic Implications of Multiple Cytogenetic High-Risk Abnormalities in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma
Abstract Background: Cytogenetic evaluation using fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) at the time of diagnosis is essential for initial risk stratification in multiple myeloma. The presence of specific cytogenetic abnormalities is known to confer a poor prognosis, less is known about the cumulative effect of multiple cytogenetic high-risk abnormalities. We aimed to evaluate the prognostic implications of the presence of multiple cytogenetic high-risk abnormalities at the time of diagnosis. Methods: We studied 226 patients who were diagnosed with multiple myeloma between July 2004 and July 2014 at Mayo Clinic Rochester, underwent FISH evaluation within six months of diagnosis, and presented with cytogenetic high-risk abnormalities. High-risk cytogenetics were defined as t(4;14), t(14;16), t(14;20), del(17p), or gain(1q). Bone marrow aspirates were evaluated for deletions, monosomies, trisomies, and tetrasomies using chromosome- or centromere-specific FISH probes. IGH rearrangements were evaluated using an IGH break-apart probe and evaluating up to five potential partners (FGFR3, CCND1, CCND3, MAF, and MAFB). Kaplan-Meier overall survival estimates were calculated and the log-rank test was used to compare overall survival in patients with single and multiple cytogenetic high-risk abnormalities. A multivariable-adjusted Cox regression model was used to assess the effect of multiple cytogenetic high-risk abnormalities on overall survival adjusting for age, sex, and Revised International Staging System (R-ISS) stage. P-values below 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Results: The median age at diagnosis was 65 years (32 - 90), 129 (57%) of the patients were male. The median overall survival was 3.5 years (3.1 - 4.9) for the entire cohort (n = 226), 4.0 years (3.3 - 5.1) for those with one cytogenetic high-risk abnormality (n = 182, 80%), and 2.6 years (1.7 - 3.1) for those with two cytogenetic high-risk abnormalities (n = 44, 20%). There were no patients with more than two cytogenetic high-risk abnormalities. Ninety-eight patients (45%) had a high-risk translocation, 77 (35%) had del(17p), 39 (18%) had a high-risk translocation plus del(17p), and 5 (2%) had gain(1q) plus either a high-risk translocation or del(17p). Figure 1 shows the Kaplan-Meier overall survival estimates stratified by the number of cytogenetic high-risk abnormalities (n = 226). The presence of two cytogenetic high-risk abnormalities (compared to one) was of prognostic significance after adjusting for age, sex, and R-ISS stage (HR 2.01, 95% CI 1.27 - 3.19, p = 0.003, n = 205). Conclusions: Approximately one in five patients with newly diagnosed high-risk multiple myeloma presented with two high-risk abnormalities at the time of diagnosis. These patients experienced inferior overall survival suggesting a cumulative effect of multiple cytogenetic high-risk abnormalities. The relatively low number of observed gain(1q) was likely related to the fact that not all patients were evaluated for that abnormality. Therefore the presented hazard ratio represents a conservative effect estimate and may underestimate the true effect. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Dispenzieri: GSK: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jannsen: Research Funding; Alnylam: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; pfizer: Research Funding. Kapoor:Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding. Kumar:Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy; AbbVie: Research Funding; Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Skyline: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Array BioPharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Noxxon Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kesios: Consultancy; Glycomimetics: Consultancy.
Clinical Outcomes and Cytogenetic Features of Primary Plasma Cell Leukemia (pPCL) in the Era of Novel Agent Induction Therapy
BACKGROUND: pPCL is a rare and aggressive form of multiple myeloma (MM) with poor survival outcomes compared to that experienced by MM patients. It has been traditionally defined by the presence of an absolute plasma cell count of > 2000/microL or >20% circulating plasma cells (cPCs) in the peripheral blood. However, several recent studies have validated the optimal cutoff for defining pPCL to be >5% cPCs on a peripheral blood smear due to equally poor outcomes in this less restrictive cohort. Hence, given the rarity of this disease entity, we evaluated the clinical outcomes and cytogenetic features of patients diagnosed with pPCL at our institution with the new proposed definition of pPCL by >5% cPCs on peripheral blood smear that were treated with novel agent induction therapies. METHODS: We evaluated all patients with pPCL diagnosed between 2000 - 2018 evaluated at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota. Data regarding these patients were extracted from a prospectively maintained database and from the review of the electronic medical records. Patients were categorized as having high risk cytogenetics if any of the following abnormalities were present: del 17p, t(4;14), t(14;16) or t(14;20). Chi-square tests and Fisher exact tests were used to compare differences between the sub-groups of interest. Survival analysis was performed by the Kaplan-Meier method and differences assessed using the log rank test. RESULTS: This cohort consisted of 71 patients with pPCL with a median age of 62 years (range: 34-91) of which 33 (46%) were male. The median follow up was 46 months (95% CI: 41 - 90). The median bone marrow plasma cell content was 84% (Range: 10 - 100) and the median plasma cell percentage on the peripheral smear was 23% (range: 5 - 93). There were 48 (68%) patients with >20% cPCs in their peripheral blood smear. Only 23 (32%) patients had concurrent information on the number of cPCs by multiparametric flow cytometry at diagnosis and the median number of cPCs detected was 32,807 per 150,000 events analyzed (Range: 354 - 132,256). There were 15/54 (28%) patients who presented with a creatinine of 2 mg/dL or greater and 17/55 (31%) pts who presented with hypercalcemia (11 mg/dL or greater). Data for ISS classification was available in 45 patients and is as follows: Stage 1- 3 (7%) patients, Stage 2- 10 (22%) patients and Stage 3- 32 (71%) patients. Data on the presence of primary cytogenetic abnormalities were available in 60 (85%) patients of which 29 (49%) had high risk cytogenetics. The distribution of primary cytogenetic abnormalities among this cohort was as follows: t(11;14) - 27 (45%), t(4;14) - 5 (8%), t(14;16) - 8 (13%), t(14;20)- 3(5%) and del 17p- 15(25%). All patients received novel agent induction therapy with 40 (57%) of them having received at least one autologous stem cell transplant and 1 patient undergoing an allogeneic stem cell transplant. The median overall survival (OS) for all pPCL patients in this cohort was 23 months (95% CI: 19 - 38). The OS was similar in patient with 5-19% cPCs vs. >20% cPCs (24 vs. 23 months, P = 0.999). However, when the entire cohort was stratified by cytogenetic risk, the median OS was 51 months for standard risk vs. 19 months for high risk (P = 0.005) (FIGURE). There were only 17 (30%) patients in this cohort who were alive for 48 months or longer since diagnosis (i.e. twice the median OS of this cohort) and they were more likely to not have high risk cytogenetics at diagnosis (P = 0.05). CONCLUSION: In this analysis of one of the largest contemporary cohorts of pPCL patients, the outcomes of patients diagnosed with pPCL remain poor despite the use of novel agent induction therapy. However, some patients appear to do better than expected and this phenomenon may be influenced by the absence of high risk cytogenetics. Disclosures Kumar: Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Dispenzieri:Akcea: Consultancy; Intellia: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Pfizer: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Alnylam: Research Funding. Dingli:Karyopharm: Research Funding; Rigel: Consultancy; Millenium: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; alexion: Consultancy. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding. Kapoor:Glaxo Smith Kline: Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Cellectar: Consultancy; Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Research Funding. Russell:Imanis: Equity Ownership. Leung:Omeros: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Aduro: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Gertz:Celgene: Consultancy; Prothena Biosciences Inc: Consultancy; Appellis: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Springer Publishing: Patents & Royalties; Amyloidosis Foundation: Research Funding; International Waldenstrom Foundation: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; Ionis/Akcea: Consultancy; Alnylam: Consultancy; Annexon: Consultancy; Abbvie: Other: personal fees for Data Safety Monitoring board; Research to Practice: Consultancy; Teva: Speakers Bureau; Medscape: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Proclara: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Spectrum: Consultancy, Research Funding; i3Health: Other: Development of educational programs and materials; Johnson and Johnson: Speakers Bureau; DAVA oncology: Speakers Bureau.