Hájek, Roman

Abstract Recent therapeutic advances, including bispecific antibodies (bsAbs), have improved outcomes for patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). However, early mortality (EM) remains a significant challenge, even in the era of novel immunotherapies. We conducted a multicenter, retrospective analysis of real-world patients with RRMM treated with commercial bsAbs to evaluate the incidence and causes of EM. Between May 2022 and June 2025, a total of 441 patients were treated across 7 countries. EM, defined as death within 12 months of therapy initiation, occurred in 148 patients (34%), with a median time from bsAb initiation to death of 2.87 months (interquartile range, 1.38-6.85). The leading cause of EM was progressive disease (72%), followed by infection (13%); regardless of the cause of death, 82% had active disease at the time of death. Our findings highlight that despite encouraging efficacy, EM remains high among real-world bsAb recipients, emphasizing the need for improved disease control strategies and supportive care interventions.

Abstract Multiple myeloma (MM) with t(11;14)(CCND1;IGH) remains the only subset sensitive to the BCL2 inhibitor venetoclax. However, not all patients with t(11;14)(CCND1;IGH) respond to treatment, and some progress early after initial response. To investigate this, we examined 44 whole-genome and whole-exome sequencing data samples from 34 patients with t(11;14) MM treated with venetoclax. The presence of mutations in the RAS pathway was strongly associated with shortened progression-free survival (PFS) and was validated in an independent cohort of 21 patients with MM. The presence of 1q gain was also associated with shorter PFS in patients without RAS mutations. In 10 patients with paired prevenetoclax and postvenetoclax treatment samples, postvenetoclax progression was recurrently driven by the selection of genomic events in the BCL2/MCL1 and RAS pathways and of high-risk features (eg, loss of TP53 and CDKN2C). Overall, our study shows that comprehensive genomic profiling can identify most mechanisms underlying resistance to BCL2 inhibition in t(11;14)(CCND1;IGH) MM.

Abstract Introduction: Elranatamab (Elra) is a bispecific antibody (BsAb) targeting BCMA that is approved for patients with triple class exposed relapsed refractory myeloma (RRMM) on the basis of the MagnetisMM-3 phase 2 trial. For BCMA naïve patients, an overall response rate (ORR) of 61.0% and median progression free survival (PFS) of 17.2m was observed with a median overall survival (OS) of 24.6m. However, efficacy and safety information in the real world is lacking. Methods: This was an international retrospective study of patients with RRMM treated with Elra monotherapy outside of clinical trials. Data was collected through the International Myeloma Foundation Immunotherapy Database from 7 countries (UK, USA, Canada, Greece, Spain, Czech Republic and Singapore). High-risk cytogenetic abnormalities (HRCA) were defined as 1q+, t(4;14), t(14;16), t(14;20), and/or del(17p). Response was assessed using IMWG consensus criteria. Patient characteristics were summarized by frequency (percentage) or median (range). PFS, OS were evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method and reported with 95% confidence intervals. Results: 79 patients were included. Median age was 67 years (range: 41-95y) with 20% ≥75 years. Racial distribution was: 75% White, 16% Black/African American, 8% Asian/Pacific. 55% were ECOG performance status (PS) 1-2. Patients received a median of 5 prior lines (range 1-11), and 35% were BCMA exposed (9% CAR-T, 5% ADC, 7% BsAb, 8% BsAb plus CAR-T, 4% ADC plus BsAb). Of those with available data, 45% had HRCA,13% had extramedullary disease (EMD) and 32% had penta-drug refractory RRMM. Overall, 48% would not have been eligible for the MagnetisMM-3 trial. Median follow-up was 6.3m (range 0.5-35.0). ORR was 53% (PR 11%, VGPR 33%, CR 8%, sCR 1%) and 67% for BCMA naïve patients. Responses were significantly lower for BCMA exposed patients (ORR 31%) but did not differ by age (51% <75yrs vs 60% ≥75yrs). On univariate analysis, prior BCMA exposure, platelets <50, presence of HRCA and penta-refractoriness were significantly associated with a lower response rate. PFS for the whole cohort at 6 and 12m was 64% (95%CI, 54-77%) and 52% (40-67%); for BCMA naïve patients, it was 77% (65-90%) and 67% (54-84%), respectively. Within the whole cohort, PFS was shorter for: BCMA exposed (median 4.0m vs not reached (NR)), platelets <50 (2.0 vs 21.7m), HRCA (7.2m vs NR), penta-refractory (4.3m vs NR). PFS did not differ significantly by EMD, PS, age, or creatinine clearance. OS for the whole cohort at 6 and12m was 74% (64-85%) and 58% (45-74%); for BCMA-naïve patients, it was 80% (43-85%) and 70% (57-87%), respectively. Within the whole cohort, OS was shorter for: BCMA exposed (median 10.3m vs NR), platelets <50 (4.3m vs NR), HRCA (10.7m vs NR) and penta-refractory (10.3m vs NR). Univariate regression analysis demonstrated that prior BCMA exposure, platelets <50 and penta-refractoriness were significantly associated with a worse PFS and OS, and HRCA predicted poorer survival CRS was observed in 41% of patients (grade(G)1: 35%, G2: 5%, ≥G3: 0%) with most occurring with the first step up dose (SUD): SUD1: 29%, SUD2: 15%, full dose: 4%. Tocilizumab was used in 20% and steroids in 3%. ICANS was observed in 4 cases (5%): G1: 2, G2: 1, G4: 1. Treatment was with steroids (n=3) and tocilizumab (n=2). G3-4 thrombocytopenia was observed in 19% and 14% required platelet transfusions. G3-4 neutropenia occurred in 25% with overall 31% requiring GCSF. Infections were reported in 33 (42%) patients with median time to infection of 41 days. A total of 94 infection episodes were observed over 581 personal months. There were 2 infection-related deaths reported (1 had IVIG, 1 did not). 64% had hypogammaglobulinemia (IgG < 400mg/dl) and IVIG was given in 65% of patients. Conclusions: In this first international real world analysis, Elranatamab achieved a response rate of 67% and a 12m PFS of 67% in BCMA naïve patients, similar to the MagnetisMM-3 trial despite almost half not meeting trial eligibility. However, prior BCMA exposure, platelets <50, high risk cytogenetics and penta refractory status were predictors of poorer outcomes. Acknowledgements: The International Myeloma Foundation, International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG)

Abstract Background: BCMA- and GPRC5D-targeting immunotherapies including CART cell therapy and Bispecific antibodies are currently approved for the treatment of multiple myeloma. However, clinical outcomes after dual antigenic exposure remain undefined. Herein we report the first report of BCMA-GPRC5D dual targeted multiple myeloma (DEMM). Methods: We conducted a retrospective multi-center study of RRMM patients treated with both BCMA- and GPRC5D-targeted treatments (TT) (CAR T, bispecific antibodies, ADCs) between November 1, 2022, and July 1, 2025. Outcomes included PFS1 (post-dual exposure), and overall survival (OS). Kaplan-Meier estimates and event-free probabilities were calculated. Results: One hundred and fifty patients who underwent TCE treatments were included and 49 patients met the criteria for inclusion. Median age was 65 years, 22.4% had creatinine clearance <=30 and ECOG 2 or greater was present in 22.2%; 57% had high-risk cytogenetics (IMWG 2016), and 60.5% were penta-refractory. Patients received a median of 6 prior lines of therapy (LOT) before 1st TCE and 9 prior LOT before DEMM. 65.3% received 1 TCE, 30.6% received 2 TCE and 4.1% received 3 TCE before DEMM. Similarly, 67.3% received 1 BCMA, 24.5% received 2 BCMA TT and 4.1% received 3 BCMA TT before DEMM. Prior TT included- BCMA CART (57.1%), BCMA Bispecific (57.1%), BCMA ADC (18.4%), other TCE (10.2%). The last dual exposure was GPRC5D Bispecific in 91.8%, BCMA Bispecific in 6.1% and BCMA CART in 2%. The median followup post relapse was 3.4 months (range 0.0-16 mos). The median PFS during the last dual exposure TT was 3.98 months (95% CI: 2.96–6.70). 32.7% did not receive any subsequent LOT and died due to progressive disease. 67.3% of patients had progressive MM and received next LOT. Median PFS1 was 1.77 months (95% CI: 1.28–6.21) with 3-, 6-, and 12-month event-free probabilities of 44%%, 19% and 0% respectively. Median OS was 5.7 months (95% CI: 2.53-12.16) for DEMM from the time of refractoriness to dual antigenic targets. Conclusions: Patients dual-exposed to BCMA- and GPRC5D-directed therapies have a poor prognosis, 32.7% had not received further treatment and in those who received treatment the PFS1 was less than 2 months and an OS of 5.7 months from progression. This reflects an area of high unmet need for the patients that are dual-exposed to BCMA- and GPRC5D-directed therapies. Further data on the cohort will be updated at the meeting. Acknowledgements include, the International Myeloma Foundation, IMWG.

PURPOSE The combination of the Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor ibrutinib with bendamustine-rituximab for first-line treatment of mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) prolonged progression-free survival (PFS), but without improvement in overall survival (OS), likely because of toxicity. Acalabrutinib was shown to be efficacious and less toxic than ibrutinib in a head-to-head trial in chronic lymphocytic leukemia and therefore might lead to better outcomes in MCL. METHODS Patients 65 years and older with previously untreated MCL received acalabrutinib (100 mg twice daily) or placebo (until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity), plus six cycles of bendamustine (90 mg/m 2 once daily; days 1 and 2) and rituximab (375 mg/m 2 as a single dose; day 1) followed by rituximab maintenance in responding patients for 2 years. Crossover to acalabrutinib at disease progression was permitted. The primary end point was PFS per the independent review committee; overall response rate and OS were secondary end points. RESULTS In total, 598 patients were randomly assigned, with 299 in each arm. At a median follow-up of 49.8 months using the reverse Kaplan-Meier method, the median PFS was 66.4 months in the acalabrutinib arm and 49.6 months in the placebo arm (hazard ratio [HR], 0.73 [95% CI, 0.57 to 0.94]; P = .0160). Benefit was seen across all subgroups, including those with high-risk features. Overall response/complete response rates were 91.0%/66.6% and 88.0%/53.5% in the acalabrutinib and placebo arms, respectively. OS was not significantly different (HR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.65 to 1.13]; P = .27). Grade 3 or greater adverse events were reported in 88.9% and 88.2% in the acalabrutinib and placebo arms, respectively. CONCLUSION The combination of acalabrutinib with bendamustine-rituximab significantly improved PFS. Clinical benefit of acalabrutinib with bendamustine-rituximab was achieved with manageable toxicity.

Background Emerging evidence has demonstrated rare subacute to late neurological toxicities (NTs) after BCMA CAR T-cell therapy (CAR-T) in multiple myeloma (MM). These adverse events can be categorized as: 1) Parkinsonism (PD), 2) cranial nerve (CN) palsies, and 3) peripheral neuropathies/Guillan Barré syndrome (GBS). These toxicities can cause significant morbidity, but given their relative rarity in clinical trials, there is limited data regarding evaluation and treatment. To our knowledge, this is the largest and only global registry of delayed NTs after BCMA CAR-T. Methods We retrospectively established a registry of NTs via the Immune Therapy Working Committee of the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG). We gathered data pertaining to demographics, MM characteristics, MM response, NT signs/symptoms, diagnostic workup, and treatment. Result A total of 52 patients with delayed neurotoxicity were included from 14 institutions and 6 countries; 92% received ciltacel, 4% idecel, and 4% investigational CAR-T. Median age at CAR-T infusion was 65 years; 69% were male and 88% were Caucasian. Median bone marrow plasma cell (PC) burden was 15% prior to CAR-T (range 0-95%). Patients received a median of 4 prior lines of therapy (LOT), with 67% progressing on last LOT. Seventeen percent had pre-existing neurological diagnoses (including stroke, epilepsy, migraines). We identified sixteen cases of PD (94% with movement disorder, 69% with cognitive impairment, 75% with personality changes), occurring at a median of 26 days (range: 15-87) after CAR-T. Ninety four percent had CRS (grade (G)1 50%, G2 38%, G3 6%, G4 0%), while 19% had ICANS (G1 13%, G2 6%, G3-G4 0%). Median peak absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) was 9.5 x 109/L, peak C-reactive protein (CRP) 60.9 mg/L, and peak ferritin 1893.5 ug/L within the first 30 days. Concurrently, 3 upper respiratory infections (URIs) and 2 low-level HHV7 in the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) were detected. A median of 73% of T-cells in the CSF were CAR-T, based on a flow cytometry assay. Ten patients received steroids (median 19 days after symptoms, 70% partial response, 20% no response, 10% unknown), 2 received intrathecal (IT) methotrexate-based therapy (median 32 days after symptoms, 1 with no response, 1 unknown), 5 received intravenous (IV) cyclophosphamide (median 31 days after symptoms, 40% full response, 20% partial response, 40% no response), 4 received high-dose IVIG ≥1g/kg for one or more dose (50% partial response, 50% no response), and 6 received dopamine agonists. There were 37 CN palsies (76% CN7, 15% CN6, 7% CN5, 2% CN3), occurring at a median of 37.5 days (range: 7-482) after CAR-T. Eighty one percent had CRS (G1 68%, G2 14%, G3-G4 0%); 11% had G1 ICANS (G2-G4 0%). Median peak ALC was 4.1 x 109/L, CRP 25.4 mg/L, and ferritin 543 ug/L within the first 30 days. We identified 2 concurrent URIs, 4 CMV viremia (50% with viral load >1500 IU/mL), 1 HHV6 viremia, and 1 HSV in the CSF. Thirty-two (86%) received steroids for a median duration of 12 days, 50% with full response, 3% with no response, and 47% with partial response (of which 43% had later full recovery without further intervention). One received IT methotrexate and another received IV cyclophosphamide without response. Thirteen (41%) received IVIG, of which 38% was high-dose IVIG. Four patients with CN palsies developed peripheral neuropathy/GBS. Eight patients (15%) in this cohort were not heavily pre-treated (≤1 prior LOT); 7 developed CN palsies (6 after ciltacel, 1 after investigational CAR-T) and 1 PD (after idecel). These patients had median <5% PC; none had extramedullary disease. Median ALC was 4.14 x 109/L, CRP 33 mg/L, and ferritin 448.5 ug/L within the first 30 days. Conclusions Delayed NT requires prompt recognition, evaluation for alternative causes, and treatment. In our cohort, the majority of patients were male and Caucasian, suggesting that sex and race may impact the likelihood of developing NT. Individuals with PDs had greater inflammatory response (CRS, ALC, CRP, ferritin) compared to those with CN palsies. CN palsies responded to steroids and/or IVIG, whereas PD had at best partial response to steroids, prompting additional therapy. These toxicities notably did occur in less heavily pre-treated patients, perhaps driven by immune fitness and greater circulating T-cells rather than MM burden. At the time of the annual meeting, data will be updated with additional NTs from less heavily pre-treated patients.

Background Panobinostat (Pano), a pan-histone deacetylase inhibitor, is approved for the treatment of relapsed or relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) in combination with bortezomib and dexamethasone (FVd) in patients who have received ≥2 prior lines of therapy, including bortezomib and an immunomodulatory agent (IMiD). The pivotal phase 3 PANORAMA 1 trial, which used intravenous (i.v.) bortezomib, demonstrated significant progression-free survival benefit with FVd compared with placebo-Vd; however, adverse events (AEs) were also more frequent (San-Miguel J. et al., Lancet Oncol. 2014). The randomized phase 2 PANORAMA 3 study was conducted to optimize FVd by comparing three regimens with varying dose and schedule of Pano and by incorporating subcutaneous (s.c.) bortezomib. Methods PANORAMA 3 (NCT02654990) was a randomized, open-label, international, multicenter phase 2 study conducted in compliance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Eligible patients were ≥18 years old with 1‒4 prior lines of therapy, including an IMiD. Patients refractory to bortezomib were excluded. Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to Pano 20 mg three times weekly (TIW; the currently approved dosing regimen; Days 1, 3, 5, 8, 10, 12), Pano 20 mg twice weekly (BIW; Days 1, 4, 8, 11), or Pano 10 mg TIW (Days 1, 3, 5, 8, 10, 12), all administered in 21-day cycles. Randomization was stratified by number of prior treatment lines (1 vs 2 vs 3 or 4) and by age at screening (≤75 vs >75 years). For Cycles 1-4, all patients ≤75 years old received s.c. bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2 BIW (Days 1, 4, 8, 11) and oral dexamethasone 20 mg (Days 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, 12). Patients aged ≤75 years from Cycle 5 onwards, and patients >75 years for all cycles, received bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2 weekly (Days 1 and 8) and dexamethasone 20 mg on Days 1, 2, 8, and 9. Patients were treated until progressive disease or death, or until discontinuation due to toxicity or withdrawal of consent. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR; IMWG 2011 criteria) after up to 8 treatment cycles by Independent Review Committee assessment. Secondary endpoints included best response, time to response (TTR), duration of response (DOR) and safety. Results In total, 248 patients were randomized (Pano: 20 mg TIW, N=82; 20 mg BIW, N=83; 10 mg TIW, N=83) and 241 patients received treatment (Pano: 20 mg TIW, N=79; 20 mg BIW, N=82; 10 mg TIW, N=80). Mean (SD) age was 65 (9) years; 55% of patients were male. Overall, patients had a median (range) time since diagnosis of 49 months (7‒242) and a median (range) of 2 (1-4) prior lines of therapy; 17% and 2% of patients were refractory to lenalidomide and pomalidomide, respectively. In total, 68% of patients had relapsed and 32% had relapsed/refractory disease. High-risk molecular findings were present in 15% of patients, with either del(17p) or t (4;14) at screening by fluorescence in situ hybridization. For the Pano 20 mg TIW, 20 mg BIW, and 10 mg TIW arms, respectively, median (range) number of treatment cycles completed was 9 (1; 50), 8 (1; 40) and 7 (1; 39); ORR (95% CI) after up to 8 treatment cycles was 62% (51; 73), 65% (54; 75), and 51% (39; 62); median TTR was 1, 2, and 3 months, with a median (95% CI) DOR of 22 (14, not estimable), 12 (9, 21), and 11 (6, 14.5) months. Best responses are presented in Table 1. In the Pano 20 mg TIW, 20 mg BIW, and 10 mg TIW arms, respectively, treatment-related AEs Grade ≥3 were reported in 78%, 72%, and 54% of patients; serious AEs were reported in 54%, 48%, and 44% of patients; and discontinuations due to AEs occurred in 29.5%, 28%, and 15% of patients, respectively. Most common treatment-emergent AEs (≥20% patients) are presented in Table 2. Grade ≥3 diarrhea occurred in 11.5%, 10%, and 5% of patients, respectively. There were 14 (6%) on-treatment deaths during the study (20 mg TIW, n=5; 20 mg BIW, n=3; 10 mg TIW, n=6), with none causally related to therapy and with 12 of 14 directly attributable to progressive disease. Conclusion In patients with RRMM, the 20 mg TIW and 20 mg BIW dosing regimens provided favorable outcomes, with most durable and deepest responses observed in the 20 mg TIW arm. The rate of AEs, including diarrhea, with Pano 20 mg TIW was lower than those observed with the same dosing regimen in PANORAMA 1, suggesting s.c. administration of bortezomib improves tolerability compared with i.v. administration. Moreover, all three regimens of FVd proved generally manageable; Pano 20 mg TIW had greatest efficacy, while 10mg TIW proved best tolerated. Disclosures Schjesvold: Celgene, Amgen, Janssen, Oncopeptides: Research Funding; Amgen, Celgene, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Oncopeptides, Sanofi, Takeda: Consultancy; Amgen, Celgene, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Oncopeptides, Sanofi, SkyliteDX, Takeda: Honoraria. Dimopoulos:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Personal fees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Personal fees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Personal fees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Personal fees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Personal fees. Lech-Marańda:Roche, Amgen, Gilead: Speakers Bureau; Roche, Novartis, Takeda, Janssen-Cilag, Amgen, Gilead, AbbVie, Sanofi: Consultancy. Spicka:Celgene, Amgen, Janssen-Cilag, Takeda, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Hajek:Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; PharmaMar: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Consultancy. Wróbel:Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda, Celgene, Janssen, Amgen, AbbVie, Teva, Sandoz: Consultancy, Honoraria. Sureda Balari:Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Merck Sharpe and Dohme: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead/Kite: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Incyte: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Speakers Bureau; Roche: Honoraria; Celgene/Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria. Beksac:Janssen&janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Deva: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Goncalves:Janssen, Takeda, Amgen, Bayer, Novartis, Merck, Bayer, Celgene, GSK, BMS: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Bladé Creixenti:Celgene: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Oncopeptides: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria. Chari:Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria; Oncopeptides: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Antengene: Consultancy; Sanofi Genzyme: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Secura Bio: Consultancy; Adaptive Biotechnology: Honoraria; Array BioPharma: Honoraria; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Glaxo Smith Kline: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; The Binding Site: Honoraria. Lonial:JUNO Therapeutics: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Personal fees; Abbvie: Consultancy; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Personal fees; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Personal fees, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Personal fees, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Personal fees; Takeda: Consultancy, Other: Personal fees, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Personal fees; Onyx: Honoraria; Genentech: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium: Consultancy, Honoraria. Spencer:Haemalogix: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Grant/Research Support; Secura Bio: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pharmamar: Other; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Grant/Research Support; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Grant/Research Support, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; TheraMyc: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Grant/Research Support; BMS: Honoraria, Other: Grant/Research Support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; Servier: Consultancy, Other: Grant/Research Support; Takeda: Honoraria, Other, Speakers Bureau; Antegene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Maison-Blanche:Chiesi Pharmaceutical, Sanofi, Novartis: Honoraria. Moreau:Novartis: Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene/Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Richardson:Celgene/BMS, Oncopeptides, Takeda, Karyopharm: Research Funding. San-Miguel:Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Takeda, Sanofi, Roche, Abbvie, GlaxoSmithKline and Karyopharm: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

8000 Background: The diagnostic criteria for MM were revised in 2014, recategorizing ultra-high risk (i.e., 80% at two years) as active myeloma requiring therapy. The removal of patients at the highest risk of progression from the smoldering group requires reassessment of current risk stratification models. Methods: We designed a multicenter, retrospective study of SMM patients to develop a risk stratification model. Patients diagnosed with SMM on/after January 1, 2004 were included if they had no disease progression within 6 months, had baseline data from diagnosis (+/- 3 months), had a follow up of ≥1 year, and did not participate in a therapeutic trial of SMM. Various clinical and laboratory factors were explored to identify factors that predicted progression at 2 years. Univariate Cox regressions were run for each factor. For factors with p-values ≤ 0.25, optimal cut points were identified using Youden’s index. Binary factors were used in stepwise regression to fit multivariable Cox model and significant risk factors were determined (F-test). Results: Overall, 2004 patients were included (ages 26-93, 51% female). Factors independently associated with progression (optimal cutoffs) included: Serum M protein (2 g/dL), involved to uninvolved serum-free light chain ratio (20), and marrow plasma cell % (20%). Patients were stratified using the risk factors: Low- (0 factors), Intermediate- (1), and High-Risk (≥2). Previously used high risk markers such as Bence Jones proteinuria (≥500 mg/24 hours) and severe immunoparesis (50% decrease in uninvolved immunoglobulin levels) were both significant in univariate analysis, but were eliminated on step wise selection. Compared to the low risk group, intermediate- and high-risk groups had significantly higher rate of progression (Table). Within the high-risk group, having all 3 risk factors (n=61) versus 2 did not add to the model, with insufficient separation between 2 and 3 factors. Conclusions: We have developed a risk stratification model for SMM that incorporates revised cutoffs for previously used parameters (20/2/20) that can be universally applied. Additonal analysis are being conducted to develop models that utilize common cytogenetic abnormalities, as well as those without FLC given lack of availability of all tests across the world. [Table: see text]

8517 Background: An increased risk of SPM in MM pts treated with len has been reported. We performed an IPD metanalysis to estimate the incidence of SPM according to len exposure. Methods: Randomized studies of MM, from PubMed and ASCO/IMW/ASH (after 2000), that met the following criteria, were included: randomization to treatment with len (len-trials); randomization to treatment including new drug but not len (no-len-trials); available SPM data. Primary aim was to estimate cumulative incidence of SPMs by len exposure, corrected for death (competing event). Results: Data from 6,383 pts (3,218 from 8 len-trials, 3,165 from 10 no-len-trials) were analyzed. Median age was 69 years. During follow-up (median=30 mos) 420 (6.6%) SPMs were reported: 188 (2.9%) hematologic and 232 (3.6%) solid cancers. Solid tumors occurred with similar incidence in all groups. Incidence of hematologic SPM was significantly higher in patients receiving len (3.2 vs 1.1, p=0.04), but risk is limited to patients treated with melphalan+len (4.1, 95%CI: 2.4-5.8) with no excess in other combinations (len without melphalan: 1.2, 0.0-2.6; melphalan without len: 1.1, 0.0-2.7) (p=0.003). The cumulative incidence of death for any cause was much higher than the risk of SPM. Conclusions: The risk of hematologic SPMs was higher in pts receiving melphalan+len. The benefit/risk profile of len treatment remains positive. Cumulative incidence (%) of SPMs and death (95%CI). [Table: see text]

8095 Background: Multiple myeloma (MM) remains incurable and invariably relapses after initial therapy. There is no uniform approach to management of relapsed MM and is dictated by type of initial therapy and the response seen, and availability of new drugs. The outcomes associated with current approaches have not been systematically examined. Methods: We enrolled 383 patients (pts) with myeloma who had a documented relapse between Jan 2007 and June 2010, including 220 from Europe, 106 from Asia, and 31 from South America and 26 from North America. Time Zero (T0) was defined as date of treatment after first relapse. Results: Across the study, 61% were male and 49% were over 65 years at T0. ISS stage distribution at diagnosis included 26, 40 and 33% of patients in stages 1, 2 and 3, respectively. Among regimens used at first relapse; bortezomib (Btz) containing regimens were most common (54%), followed by lenalidomide (Len, 25%) and cyclophosphamide (21%). The overall response rate (>=PR) to first therapy after relapse was 58% including 14% with a CR. There was a progressive decrease in the response rates with successive regimen; 45%, 30% and 15% for regimens 2, 3 and 4 respectively. Len use was considerably lower in the Asian cohort, while Btz use was comparable across the regions. The median PFS from T0 was 13 mos and OS was 35 mos, for the entire cohort. The PFS to first salvage regimen was similar across the regions, while OS was shorter for the Asian and South American cohorts. In a univariate analysis, ISS stage 3, presence of cytogenetic abnormalities, history of plasma cell leukemia or extramedullary disease (EMD), bone marrow PC% > 33% and presence of renal insufficiency were all associated with a shorter PFS as well as shorter OS (P<=0.01). In a multivariate model, ISS stage 3 and presence of EMD were most associated with short OS. Conclusions: Median PFS for current second line regimens, typically containing Btz or Len appear to be 1 yr with an OS from first relapse of about 3 yrs. The OS from first relapse is nearly double that seen in a cohort of patients in first relapse prior to introduction of new drugs. Clear-cut regional differences can be seen in terms of patterns of drug use and likely reflect drug availability and healthcare costs.