Vogl, Dan T.

The treatment landscape for multiple myeloma (MM) is evolving rapidly and includes several new options. The management must be tailored to the individual. The NCCN Guidelines for MM provide a framework to base decisions regarding diagnosis, workup, treatment, and follow-up of both newly diagnosed and previously treated relapsed/refractory MM. This manuscript outlines the recommendations from NCCN Guidelines for MM specific to newly diagnosed MM (NDMM).

Abstract Purpose: R,R-1,2 cyclohexanediamine-pyrophosphato-platinum(II) (PT-112) is a novel immunogenic cell death–inducing small molecule under phase II development in several cancer types. It inhibits ribosome biogenesis and causes organelle stresses, leading to selective immunogenic cell death in cancer cells. The possibility of PT-112’s pyrophosphate moiety driving high drug concentrations to bone sites of disease has led to an interest in PT-112’s use in multiple myeloma. In this study, we present findings from phase I and in vivo studies for PT-112 in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. Experimental Design: PT-112 biodistribution was analyzed in mice via laser ablation inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry. The activity of PT-112 was assessed in de novo and transplantable Tg(Igkv3-5*-MYC)#Plbe (Vk*MYC) multiple myeloma mouse models as monotherapy or combination therapies. M-spike levels and survival were measured. A phase I dose escalation study of PT-112 monotherapy was conducted using a 3 + 3 design in patients with heavily pretreated relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma with exhausted available therapies. Results: In vivo biodistribution imaging revealed high concentrations in the bone, kidney, lung, skin, and liver. PT-112 was active in Vk*MYC multiple myeloma mouse models, both alone and in combination. Phase I data showed that PT-112 monotherapy was safe and well-tolerated, establishing a recommended phase II dose of 360 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle. Confirmed responses and other signals of activity were observed. Conclusions: These results suggest a lack of cross-resistance with the standard of care and support the translational value of the Vk*MYC model system. Further clinical investigation of PT-112 is warranted in multiple myeloma.

The NCCN Guidelines for Multiple Myeloma (MM) provide recommendations for diagnosis, initial workup, treatment, follow-up, and supportive care for patients with MM. These NCCN Guidelines Insights highlight the important updates and changes specific to systemic therapy for patients with newly diagnosed as well as previously treated MM included in Version 1.2025 of the NCCN Guidelines for MM.

Background: 24-hour urine (24HRU) assessments are a key component of International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) response criteria for multiple myeloma (MM) and are requested longitudinally in clinical trials even if not routinely used in real-world practice. Several analyses have suggested a limited role for 24HRU if serum immunofixation or free light chain (LC) testing is abnormal (Dejoie Blood 2016, Lahuerta Blood 2023). Adopting urine-free response criteria (with 24HRU removal from every level of IMWG response) may change responses in <5% of patients (Natsuhara et al, Leuk Lymph 2023) but not have been studied in terms of progression-free survival (PFS) in a larger population. Methods: This was a secondary analysis of data from the Phase 3 BMT CTN 0702 (STaMINA) trial (Stadtmauer et al, JCO 2019) studying post-autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) strategies. Only patients evaluable for Day +56 response following ASCT were included, and patients with progressive disease (PD, n=8) at this timepoint were excluded. Post-ASCT responses relative to diagnosis were calculated by two sets of criteria. First, traditional responses were calculated per IMWG criteria (Kumar et al, Lancet Onc 2016) as stable disease (SD), partial response (PR), very good PR (VGPR), or complete response (CR, including stringent CR). Second, urine-free response assessments were calculated as follows: negative 24HRU immunofixation no longer required for CR, 24HRU M-protein < 100 milligrams (mg) per day no longer required for VGPR, and no 24HRU M-protein thresholds (e.g., < 200 mg per day or > 90% reduction) required for PR. PFS was estimated (using PD by traditional IMWG criteria or death as events) using proportional hazard models. Results: Of 636 evaluable patients (84% of all BMT CTN 0702 participants), LC-only disease was noted in 18.9% (n=120). Pre-enrollment 24HRU testing at diagnosis was done in 28.9% of patients (n=184). IMWG responses were as follows: CR, 29.4% (n=187) traditional vs 29.7% (n=189) urine-free; VGPR, 37.0% (n=235) traditional vs 36.6% (n=233) urine-free; PR, 30.7% (n=195) for both; SD, 3.0% (n=19) for both. A total of 4 responses (0.6%) changed with urine-free criteria. Three patients were ‘upgraded’ (VGPR to CR, n=2, PR to VGPR, n=1) because 24HRU requirements for CR/VGPR were no longer required. One patient without a measurable serum paraprotein was ‘downgraded’ from a traditional VGPR (with negative 24HRU immunofixation) to a urine-free PR based on LC-only criteria. Among the subset of 184 patients with 24HRU electrophoresis results at diagnosis, there were no differences between traditional and urine-free IMWG responses. Median PFS and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were the same at each depth of both traditional and urine-free criteria: 63.0 months (50.8 - 71.4 months) for CR, 49.6 months (42.6 - 55.1 months) for VGPR, 44.9 months (37.2-54.8 months) for PR, and 34.4 months (14.0-51.5 months) for SD. Urine-free IMWG criteria were highly prognostic for PFS (p = 0.006, 95% CI 1.05-1.36). The achievement of urine-free CR vs urine-free ≤CR was also prognostic (p = 0.005, 95% CI 0.54 - 0.89). Urine-free VGPR vs urine-free ≤VGPR was of borderline significance (p = 0.102, 95% CI 0.66 - 1.04), with median PFS 53.8 months (48.0 - 57.6 months) vs 44.6 months (36.3 - 54.7 months) respectively. Discussion: In this secondary analysis of a Phase 3 trial, omitting 24HRU assessments from IMWG criteria changed <1% of responses and had no impact on PFS prediction at any response depth. 24HRU assessments had been performed for less than a third of patients as standard of care prior to study entry, underscoring its infrequent use outside of trials. Urine-free IMWG assessments would reduce time toxicity and discomfort for patients, particularly for those with limited dexterity. If implemented in trials, they would also simplify study logistics and lower operational costs. Outside of situations such as AL amyloidosis where 24HRU assessments remain critical or for patients with urine as their only measurable MM biomarker, our results support the removal of 24HRU assessments from future iterations of IMWG response criteria. Funding: Grants #U10HL069294 and #U24HL138660 to the BMT CTN from the NHLBI and the NCI; contributions by Celgene Corporation and Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; funding by The Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology, the ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group and SWOG.

8009 Background: Measuring response among patients with multiple myeloma is essential for the care of patients. Deeper responses have been associated with better progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Serum (SIFE) and urine immunofixation are the currently used markers for biochemical documentation of CR after which marrow is tested for plasma cell clearance. Next generation flow cytometry and sequencing are used to document the presence of minimal residual disease (MRD). Mass spectrometry of blood by MALDI (Mass-Fix) is a new simple, inexpensive, sensitive, and specific means of detecting monoclonal immunoglobulins. To better test the hypothesis that Mass-Fix is superior to existing methodologies to predict for survival outcomes—especially SIFE-- samples from the STAMINA trial (NCT01109004), a trial comparing 3 transplant approaches among patients who have already received induction, were employed. Methods: Five-hundred and seventy-five patients were included. Samples from enrollment post-induction (post-I) and 1-year post enrollment (1YR) were tested when available. Four response parameters were assessed univariately: Mass-Fix, SIFE, complete response, and MRD by next generation flow cytometry. Mass spectrometry spectra were evaluated in a blinded fashion. Complete response was according to the 2006 International Myeloma Working Group criteria. Multivariate Cox proportional hazard models using stepwise regression were developed to explore the independent effect of the different response parameters on PFS and OS and interactions with other risk factors. Results: Of the 4 response measures, only MRD and Mass-Fix predicted for PFS and OS at multiple testing points on multivariate analyses (Table). Of the 4 post-I measurements, only MRD predicted for PFS; however, Mass-Fix was the only post-I measurement to predict for OS. Of all the 1-year measures, both 1YR Mass-Fix and 1YR MRD positivity predicted for inferior PFS and OS. In models including MRD and Mass-Fix, SIFE and CR were not prognostic for PFS or OS. Conclusions: Mass-Fix is a powerful means to track monoclonal proteins. The full utility of Mass-Fix was not exploited given the absence of a diagnostic sample and the fact that only serum (and not urine) was tested. Despite these limitations, it performed well at pre-induction and at 1 year. Mass-Fix provides a convenient and non-invasive means of predicting for myeloma outcomes. Clinical trial information: NCT01109004. [Table: see text]

AbstractTriple‐class‐refractory multiple myeloma (MM) describes MM refractory to proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulatory agents, and anti‐CD38 monoclonal antibodies. In the Phase IIb STORM study (NCT02336815), oral selinexor plus low‐dose dexamethasone (Sel‐dex) demonstrated a 26.2% overall response rate in triple‐class‐refractory MM. Here, we compare overall survival (OS) of 122 patients with triple‐class‐refractory MM who received Sel‐dex in STORM Part 2 with that of 64 similar patients treated with other available therapies in a Flatiron Health Analytic Database (FHAD) cohort. OS from the date that the patients’ MM became triple‐class‐refractory was longer in STORM versus FHAD, with an unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 0.43 (P = .0002; adjusted HR 0.35 [P = .011]). In a subset analysis of highly resistant patients receiving further therapies after their MM first became at least triple‐class‐refractory (i.e., who received Sel‐dex in STORM,n = 64, and non‐Sel‐dex in FHAD,n = 36), the OS was significantly longer in STORM with an unadjusted HR of 0.52 (P = .0331; adjusted HR 0.33 [P = .041]). Within the limits of this analysis, the OS of patients with at least triple‐class‐refractory MM was significantly better with Sel‐dex versus available therapies, suggesting that Sel‐dex may be associated with a meaningful OS benefit in these patients.

Background: PT-112 is a novel pyrophosphate-platinum conjugate with a multi-modal mechanism of action that induces immunogenic cell death and is not susceptible to DNA-repair drug resistance pathways. In phase I studies in solid tumors, PT-112 demonstrated safety and efficacy as single agent and in combination with PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitor avelumab, crossing a range of dose levels (DL) and tumor types, including in heavily pre-treated patients (pts) non-responsive to immunotherapy and refractory to other modalities. Non-clinical, in vivo research using advanced imaging technology demonstrated that PT-112 reached the highest concentrations in bone tissue (osteotropism). Moreover, PT-112 was highly active in the orthotopic, immune-competent Vk*MYC mouse model of multiple myeloma, including drug-resistant transplant variants. Thus, a rationale for PT-112 as an investigational candidate in multiple myeloma was established. Here, we present results of a phase I dose escalation study of PT-112 in pts with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Methods: A 3+3 design was used to determine the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) for PT-112 (28-day cycle IV days 1, 8, 15) in pts with evaluable RRMM who had exhausted available therapies (Tx), with adequate bone marrow (abs neutrophil count ≥ 1.0 x 109/L; platelet count ≥ 50 x 109/L; and hemoglobin ≥ 8.0 g/dL) and renal function (calculated creatinine clearance ≥ 30 mL/min), and ECOG PS 0-2. Results: A total of 24 pts were treated with PT-112 monotherapy across 6 DLs: 125 mg/m2, 3 pts; 180 mg/m2, 4 pts; 250 mg/m2, 5 pts; 300 mg/m2, 4 pts; 360 mg/m2, 4 pts; 420 mg/m2, 4 pts. Patients had a median age of 72 years and were heavily pre-treated, with a median of 8 prior lines of systemic Tx: 22 (92%) pts were triple-class refractory with 19 (79%) pts penta-refractory, and 3 (13%) pts refractory to BCMA-based therapies. The most common treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were thrombocytopenia (58%), neutropenia (42%), diarrhea (38%), and nausea (38%). 38% of pts had ≥1 grade 3 non-hematologic TRAE, with no grade 4 non-hematologic TRAEs reported. One dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) of grade 4 neutropenia occurred at the 420 mg/m2 DL. In addition, due to frequent dose reductions and modifications at this DL, the safety committee declared 360 mg/m2 as the RP2D. Among 8 patients who received a starting dose at / above the RP2D, 2 had stable disease and 4 experienced responses to PT-112 Tx. These included a confirmed partial response (PR) achieved in a 79-year-old pt with kappa free light chain (FLC) disease treated at 360 mg/m2, whose previous Tx included combination regimens with most approved therapies (penta-refractory) and stem cell transplantation. FLC levels declined by 65% from baseline on PT-112 therapy and the pt remained progression free for 4.5 months. A 72-year-old pt treated at the 420 mg/m2 DL, reduced to 250mg/m2 every other week over the course of Tx due to grade 3-4 cytopenias, had a confirmed minor response. Prior Tx with multiple lines given over 9 years included stem cell transplantation, most approved therapies (penta-refractory), prior investigational antibody and CAR-T cell Tx (primary refractory to CAR-T). The patient was M-protein negative, kappa FLC levels declined by 32% following the first dose reduction, and the pt remained progression free and clinically stable without complaints for 4.5 months. Additionally, two transient, unconfirmed PRs occurred in patients at the 420mg/m2 DL: in a triple-class-refractory 82-year-old previously treated with 5 lines of Tx, with 70% reduction in kappa FLC during cycle 1; and in a penta-refractory 85-year-old, who experienced disappearance of M-protein during cycle 1 and Gr 4 neutropenia (DLT). Conclusions: PT-112 monotherapy was feasible and well tolerated in this heavily pre-treated, multi-refractory multiple myeloma population, and the Phase I clinical data appear to validate the developmental hypothesis, built upon activity in the Vk*MYC mouse model of multiple myeloma. Responses were confirmed in 25% of patients treated at / above the RP2D using single-agent PT-112, an encouraging result in a dose escalation trial conducted in heavily refractory patients. Activity of PT-112 in RRMM patients may be explained by its osteotropism and its unique mechanism of action compared to other drug classes used to treat this disease. Further clinical study of PT-112 in RRMM is warranted in a phase 2 clinical trial. Disclosures Ailawadhi: Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Medimmune: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Cellectar: Research Funding; Phosplatin: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria. Vogl:Janssen: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; MorphoSys: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Active Biotech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy. Ames:Phosplatin Therapeutics: Current Employment, Current equity holder in private company. Yim:Phosplatin Therapeutics: Current Employment, Current equity holder in private company. Price:Phosplatin Therapeutics: Current Employment, Current equity holder in private company. Jimeno:Phosplatin Therapeutics: Current Employment, Current equity holder in private company.

8014 Background: TCR-MM is defined as being refractory to immunomodulatory agents, proteasome inhibitors, and anti-CD38 mAbs, representing an urgent unmet medical need with a median OS of 3-5 months( Pick M et al, Eur J Haem 2018; Gandhi U et al, ASH 2018). Sd has shown a 26.2% overall response rate (ORR) in 122 patients (pts) with TCR-MM in the Phase 2b STORM study ( Chari A et al, ASH 2018). Here, we evaluate the OS of pts in the STORM study with Sd and in pts with bortezomib, carfilzomib, lenalidomide, pomalidomide, and daratumumab (“penta”)-exposed, TCR-MM from an observational cohort not receiving Sd. Methods: Data were drawn from STORM and a retrospective cohort from the nationally representative Flatiron Health Analytic Database (FHAD). All pts from both sources had penta-exposed TCR-MM. In order to align study populations, OS was evaluated in pts in STORM whose first therapy after their MM reached TCR status was Sd and in pts in the FHAD who received ≥1 therapy after their MM reached TCR status. The index date for this evaluation was the start date of treatment after their MM reached TCR status. A Cox proportional hazards regression model was performed to assess the survival impact of Sd. In STORM, ORR was assessed by an Independent Review Committee based on IMWG criteria. Results: In the FHAD, 69 pts with TCR-MM were identified. Characteristics of the two groups of pts were similar, except that pts in STORM were more heavily pretreated, had a higher frequency of high-risk MM, a longer time since initial diagnosis of MM, and higher baseline hemoglobin and platelet values. Among the 122 pts in STORM, 64 received Sd as their first therapy after their MM became TCR, and ORR was 32.8%. Among the 69 pts from FHAD, 37 received ≥1 therapy after their MM became TCR. Median OS (N = 64) was 10.4 months for pts receiving Sd in STORM and 5.2 months (N = 37) for pts not receiving Sd in FHAD (HR = 0.49, p = 0.0241). Conclusions: The prognosis of TCR-MM in the real-world population appears very poor. Within the limits of this analysis, median OS of pts receiving Sd as their first therapy after their MM becomes TCR is significantly better than those not receiving Sd, suggesting that Sd may be associated with an OS benefit in pts with TCR-MM. Clinical trial information: NCT02336815.

Introduction: Selinexor is a novel, oral selective inhibitor of nuclear export (SINE) which forces nuclear retention and activation of tumor suppressor proteins. Selinexor plus low dose dexamethasone (Sel-dex) was recently approved in the United States based on data from the STORM study wherein, Sel-dex induced an overall response rate (ORR) of 26.2% in patients with penta-exposed, triple-class refractory multiple myeloma. The presence of high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities is known to have a poor prognosis in multiple myeloma, with transient responses. We performed post-hoc analyses to determine the outcomes in patients with relapsed/refractory myeloma treated with Sel-dex based on the baseline cytogenetic abnormalities. Methods: STORM was a phase 2b, open-label study which enrolled patients with relapsed and refractory myeloma. Selinexor 80 mg in combination with dexamethasone 20 mg was administered orally, twice weekly. The primary endpoint was ORR. For this analysis, we pooled 78 patients (48 quad-refractory and 30 penta-refractory) from STORM, part 1 and 122 patients (penta-exposed and triple class refractory) from STORM, part 2 to compare outcomes between high-risk and standard risk cytogenetics groups. High-risk cytogenetics was defined as having at least 1 of the following abnormalities by fluorescence in-situ hybridization (FISH) at baseline: del(17p), t(4;14), t(14;16), and gain(1q) in >5% of screened plasma cells. The FISH analyses were performed at a central laboratory and used to assess cytogenetic risk status. Results: Of the 200 patients, 122 (61%) had high-risk disease (del(17p): 36%, t(4;14): 18%, t(14;16): 5%, and gain(1q): 36%). The ORR in high-risk patients was 20.5% (very good partial response [VGPR)]: 5.7% and partial response [PR]: 14.8%) and the ORR was 29.5 % (complete response [CR]: 2.6%, VGPR: 3.8%, and PR: 23.1%) in standard-risk patients. The clinical benefit rate (CBR) was 35.2% in high-risk patients compared with 38.5% in standard-risk patients. Median duration of clinical benefit (DOCB) was 4.4 and 6.2 months in the high-risk and standard-risk patients respectively. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 3.8 and 4.2 months and overall survival (OS) was 8.6 and 9.4 months in the high-risk and standard-risk patients, respectively. Efficacy by specific cytogenetic abnormality is presented in Table 1 below (Due to the small sample size (n=11), data for the t(14;16) subgroup are not presented separately). Conclusions: Sel-dex demonstrated a similar CBR in patients with high risk and standard risk disease and preserved clinical benefit in heavily pre-treated patients who had rapidly proliferative disease and high-risk cytogenetics at baseline. The benefit was maintained across cytogenetic risk subgroups with a higher ORR in the t(4;14) and gain(1q) subgroups. The DOR and OS was similar across all the subgroups. These analyses support the use of Sel-dex in patients with high-risk cytogenetics and warrant further evaluation of selinexor in combination with other anti-myeloma therapies in high-risk disease. Disclosures Nooka: GSK: Honoraria, Other: advisory board participation; Amgen: Honoraria, Other: advisory board participation; BMS: Honoraria, Other: advisory board participation; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: advisory board participation; Spectrum pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Other: advisory board participation; Adaptive technologies: Honoraria, Other: advisory board participation; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: advisory board participation; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: advisory board participation. Yee:Adaptive: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Huff:Karyopharm, Sanofi, MiDiagnostics: Consultancy; Member of Safety Monitoring Board for Johnson and Johnson: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Vogl:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Active Biotech: Consultancy. Chari:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding; Array Biopharma: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Millennium/Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Oncoceutics: Research Funding. Moreau:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria. Dingli:Karyopharm: Research Funding; Rigel: Consultancy; Millenium: Consultancy; alexion: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy. Lonial:Genentech: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; GSK: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding. Dimopoulos:Sanofi Oncology: Research Funding. Vij:Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria; Karyopharm: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Genentech: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding. Tuchman:Karyopharm: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Prothena: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Alnylam: Honoraria, Research Funding. Biran:Bristol Meyers Squibb: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria. Siegel:Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb Company: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Richardson:Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Liu:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Joshi:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Shah:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Shacham:Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Patents & Royalties. Kauffman:Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Jagannath:Medicom: Speakers Bureau; Multiple Myeloma Research Foundation: Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy.

Introduction: Selinexor is a first-in-class Selective Inhibitor of Nuclear Export (SINE) compound that selectively binds and inactivates XPO1, therefore forcing the nuclear retention and re-activation of cell cycle regulators such as p53, FOXO, IkB, and Rb. Selinexor in combination with low dose dexamethasone (Sel-dex) was recently approved based on data from the STORM study, which induced an overall response rate (ORR) of 26.2% in patients with penta-exposed, triple-class refractory multiple myeloma (TCR-MM). Patients with TCR-MM often present with plasmacytomas along with serological markers of MM. Methods: Here we analyzed the effects of Sel-dex in patients from the STORM study who had baseline plasmacytomas. Results: 122 patients were in enrolled in the STORM study including 27 with a baseline plasmacytoma. The majority of plasmacytomas were soft tissue (22 patients) and 5 patients had soft tissue disease extension from a bone (rib (2), iliac (2), sacral vertebral). The median age of patients with plasmacytomas was 64 years, the median prior therapies were 7 (range 4 - 15), and 8/27 patients with a plasmacytoma had high risk cytogenetics. Of the 27 patients, 11 patients did not have a follow up plasmacytoma assessment: 6 were not evaluable for response as they came off therapy due to clinical progression and/or adverse events, 4 had stable disease (SD) with no evidence of plasmacytoma change, and 1 had progressive disease (PD) on serum M-protein with no evidence of plasmacytoma change. Sixteen of the 27 patients did have follow-up plasmacytoma assessments (methods of measurements included PET, CT, MRI or Clinical). The median days from baseline plasmacytoma evaluation to follow up was 41 days (range 22 - 119). Five patients had objective responses, based upon para-protein and plasmacytoma reductions according to IMWG criteria (1 very good partial response [VGPR], 4 partial responses [PR]) for an ORR of 18.5%. In addition, 2 patients had a minimal response (MR), 4 had SD and 5 had objective PD. Among the 5 patients with ≥PR, 3 plasmacytomas completely resolved, 1 showed near complete resolution, and another showed size reduction with no metabolic activity on PET. Of the 2 patients with a MR, 1 plasmacytoma completely resolved and 1 showed reduced PET uptake. Among the 4 patients with SD, 1 plasmacytomas completely resolved, 1 increased in size and 2 had unknown outcomes as they were assessed clinically. Among the 5 patients with PD, 1 plasmacytomas decreased in size, 1 increased in size, and 3 had unknown outcomes as they were assessed clinically. Conclusions: Of the 16 patients with TCR-MM and a follow up plasmacytoma assessment enrolled on STORM, 9/16 of the plasmacytomas either completely resolved or decreased in size and/or metabolic activity. Effects on plasmacytomas occurred in patients with objective responses (≥PR), as well as in patients with MR, SD and PD. These observations support the finding that Sel-dex is active in patients with plasmacytomas and heavily pretreated TCR-MM. Disclosures Yee: Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Adaptive: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding. Huff:Member of Safety Monitoring Board for Johnson and Johnson: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm, Sanofi, MiDiagnostics: Consultancy. Chari:Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Oncoceutics: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Millennium/Takeda: 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; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Array Biopharma: Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Vogl:Active Biotech: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy. Gavriatopoulou:Genesis: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses; Amgen: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses. Nooka:Adaptive technologies: Honoraria, Other: advisory board participation; Spectrum pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Other: advisory board participation; GSK: Honoraria, Other: advisory board participation; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: advisory board participation; Amgen: Honoraria, Other: advisory board participation; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: advisory board participation; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: advisory board participation; BMS: Honoraria, Other: advisory board participation. Moreau:AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria. Dingli:Karyopharm: Research Funding; Rigel: Consultancy; Millenium: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; alexion: Consultancy. Lonial:Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; GSK: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy. Dimopoulos:Sanofi Oncology: Research Funding. Vij:Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria; Karyopharm: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Genentech: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding. Tuchman:Prothena: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Honoraria; Alnylam: Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Hoffman:Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Costa:Abbvie: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Fujimoto Pharmaceutical Corporation Japan: Other: Advisor. Biran:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol Meyers Squibb: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria. Siegel:Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb Company: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Shah:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Picklesimer:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Saint-Martin:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Li:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kauffman:Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Shacham:Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Patents & Royalties. Richardson:Takeda: 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; Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Jagannath:Multiple Myeloma Research Foundation: Speakers Bureau; Medicom: Speakers Bureau; Merck: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy.