Hari, Parameswaran

Abstract Abstract 54 Despite its curative potential, the role of allogeneic stem cell transplant (allo-SCT) in MM has been limited by high treatment related mortality (TRM). Autologous stem cell transplant (auto-SCT) thus remains the standard of care for eligible patients (pts) with MM. Recently interest in allo-SCT has been increasing due to the incurable nature of MM, better risk stratification models, improved supportive care and finally the increasing experience with less toxic reduced intensity conditioning. We analyzed the trends in practice of allo-SCT for MM over the past two decades. A total of 1211 pts undergoing allo-SCT for MM between 1989 and 2005, reported to the CIBMTR were analyzed in three cohorts based on year of allo-SCT: 1989–1994 (n=346), 1995–2000 (n=285), and 2001–2005 (n=580). Probabilities of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) and cumulative incidence estimates of TRM and relapse were calculated. Patient characteristics are summarized in table 1. Patients transplanted in the later cohort (2001–2005) were of higher age with 53% above age 50 years (vs. 12% in 1989–1994). There was decreasing use of myeloablative regimens and bone marrow grafts over time (82% vs. 62% vs. 9% for myeloablative regimens and 99%, 62% and 13% for marrow grafts respectively). Increasing number of pts in the later cohort received an auto-SCT prior to allo-SCT (Table 1). The proportion of unrelated allo-SCTs increased over time (5% vs. 21% vs. 33%). Graft versus host (GVH) prophylaxis changed over time with increasing use of cyclosporine with agents other than methotrexate and increasing use of ATG in the recent years. Median survival increased over the three time periods from 1989 – 2005: 11.1 months (mos.) vs. 12.2 mos vs. 20.3 mos. The 100 day mortality decreased steadily over successive time periods; 35% (95% CI; 29–31), 29% (24–35) and 19% (16–23) respectively. Similarly, the TRM at 5 years remained steady between the first two periods, but decreased in the last period (40 & 48% vs. 29%). The incidence of chronic GVHD increased in the later cohort but the incidence of acute GVHD was similar over the years. While PFS was the lowest for the most recent group (15% at 5 years), the overall survival at 5 years was similar among the groups (30, 32, and 29 mos). Long term PFS at 10 years was 18% in the 1989–1994 cohort and 17% in 1995–2000. Long term OS at 10 years was 23% in 1989 – 1994 and 1995–2000 cohorts. Results are summarized in table 1. A clear trend towards reduced intensity conditioning, unrelated donor SCT, use of PBSC grafts and selection of older patients was noted. There was increasing use of tandem auto-allo SCT with an increasing proportion of patients with a prior auto-SCT. While the TRM has decreased significantly in the last cohort, this did not translate into an improvement in survival primarily because of increased risk of relapse in the latter cohort. Long term (>10yr) progression free survival which may approach a cure has remained unchanged over the past two decades at <20%. Disclosures: Lonial: Celgene: Consultancy; Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Gloucester: Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 53 Prior studies have demonstrated a graft-versus-malignancy effect following allogeneic HSCT that is variably linked to acute or chronic GVHD. Although a graft vs. Myeloma (MM) effect has been shown after myeloablative allogeneic HSCT, a higher treatment related mortality (TRM) risk leads to inferior survival compared with autologous HSCT. Non-myeloablative (NMA) and reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) approaches are used to reduce the risk of TRM while preserving the graft vs. MM effect. The clinical benefit of lower intensity conditioning regimens is thus especially dependent on the impact of acute or chronic GVHD on graft vs. MM effect and TRM. We analyzed the outcomes of 177 matched sibling allogeneic HSCT recipients reported to the CIBMTR between 1997 and 2005 following NMA (n=120) or RIC (n=57) performed within 18 months of diagnosis. Median age was 50 (range 24-69) years and 62% were Durie-Salmon Stage III. Tandem autologous followed by allogeneic HSCT (autologous+ allogeneic) recipients (n=105) were more likely to receive NMA conditioning vs. recipients of an upfront allogeneic HSCT (n=72). Majority (98%) received peripheral blood stem cell grafts. Outcomes at a median follow-up of 36 (3 - 98) months are summarized in table 1. In order to assess the impact of GVHD on outcomes, Cox proportional hazards regression models were built with GVHD as the main effect treating it as a time dependent covariate (Table 2). Other covariates in the multivariate models included age, sex, performance status, IgG vs. non IgG myeloma, disease status and chemosensitivity, prior lines of chemotherapy, donor-recipient sex match, NMA vs. RIC and year of transplant. AGVHD was associated with an increased risk of TRM. Tandem autologous + allogeneic HSCT was associated with reduced relapse risk (RR= 0.49, p=0.008). AGVHD had no impact on relapse/progression of MM while cGVHD was associated with a reduced risk of relapse (Figure. 1). The protective effect of cGVHD on relapse was significant in the non IgG MM subgroup. AGVHD had no impact on PFS whereas cGVHD was associated with superior PFS and lower risk of treatment failure. Later year of HSCT was also associated with superior PFS. Overall survival was not affected by cGVHD while recipients of tandem autologous + allogeneic HSCT had a higher mortality in the presence of aGVHD (RR=3.60, p= 0.01). After matched sibling allogeneic HSCT for MM, aGVHD is associated with a higher risk of TRM whereas cGVHD decreases the risk of relapse and improves PFS. The effect of cGVHD may vary with the type of MM with greater impact in non IgG MM. Further study to identify subtypes of MM susceptible to an immune mediated graft vs. MM effect is suggested. Disclosures: Lonial: Celgene: Consultancy; Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Gloucester: Research Funding.

Abstract Background: Combination regimens incorporating bortezomib (VELCADE®, Vc), lenalidomide (REVLIMID®, Rev), dexamethasone (Dex) and cyclophosphamide (Cy) (Vc–Dex, Rev–Dex, Vc–Dex–Rev [VDR], and Vc–Dex–Cy [VDC]), have all shown substantial activity in previously untreated multiple myeloma (MM). A combination of all four agents (VDCR) may result in even greater activity. This randomized multi-center 3-arm phase I/II EVOLUTION study is investigating the efficacy and safety of VDR, VDC, and VDCR as initial therapy in previously untreated MM patients (pts). We now report safety and efficacy results from the phase l dose-escalation portion of the study, which sought to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of the VDCR regimen. These results represent the first clinical data with this novel 4-drug combination that includes bortezomib, lenalidomide, an alkylator, and a corticosteroid. Methods: Pts received Vc 1.3 mg/m2 IV (d 1, 4, 8, 11), Dex 40 mg PO (d 1, 8, 15), Rev 15 mg PO (d 1–14), plus Cy 100, 200, 300, 400, or 500 mg/m2 PO (d 1, 8) for up to eight 21-d cycles, followed by Vc 1.3 mg/m2 (d 1, 8, 15, 22) for four 42-d maintenance cycles. Pts received prophylactic antibiotics, acyclovir, transfusion support and concomitant anticoagulants as required. Eligible pts wishing to receive autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) could undergo stem cell mobilization any time after cycle 2, and discontinue therapy for ASCT any time after cycle 4. The MTD was defined as the highest dose of Cy in combination with VDR resulting in ≤1 dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) in 6 pts. A DLT was defined as: platelet count <25,000/mm3 lasting >7 days or any platelet count <10,000/mm3; grade 4 neutropenia lasting >7 days; any ≥grade 3 non-hematologic toxicity considered to be related to Cy except for inadequately treated nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea, or any toxicity resulting in a >2 week treatment delay. Results: Twenty-six pts were enrolled; 1 pt was not dosed due to a heart problem and was excluded (dose level 4) and 4 pts were not evaluable for DLT. In the 25 treated pts, median age was 61 years (range 49–79); 52% were male; 48% had ISS Stage lI and 4% Stage III disease, and 44% had KPS ≤80%. At data cut-off, 11 pts remain on treatment and 9 have undergone successful ASCT. To date, median treatment duration is 4 cycles (range 2–11). Two pts experienced DLT: 1 grade 4 febrile neutropenia at dose level 4 (Cy 400 mg/m2), and 1 grade 3 herpes zoster virus reactivation despite antiviral prophylaxis at dose level 5 (Cy 500 mg/m2). The recommended phase II dose of Cy in the VDCR regimen was the highest planned dose of 500 mg/m2. The most common treatment-emergent AEs were constipation (64%), fatigue (60%), and nausea (52%). Hematologic toxicities were acceptable, with grade 3 neutropenia in 16% of patients, grade 4 in 4%, and grade 4 thrombocytopenia in 4%. Peripheral neuropathy (56%), included 8% grade 3 but no grade 4; no deep-vein thrombosis/pulmonary embolism events were reported. Overall rate of serious AEs was 40%; the only SAE reported in >1 pt was febrile neutropenia (2 pts). Best responses to date by International Uniform Response Criteria are shown in the table. Preliminary response rates are: 100% ≥PR, 68% ≥VGPR, 32% CR/nCR, 28% CR/stringent CR and 20% sCR. Ten pts have undergone stem cell mobilization with median CD34+ yield of 4.95×106/kg. Conclusions: VDCR was well tolerated and hematologic toxicities were manageable. The current study shows that the VDCR regimen is feasible and highly active in newly diagnosed myeloma and merits further testing in clinical trials. Enrollment to the 3 arms (VDR, VDC and VDCR) of the phase ll portion of the study and testing for minimal residual disease by flow cytometry are ongoing. Best unconfirmed response to date with VDCR Dose level 1 2 3 4 5 Cyclophosphamide dose, mg/m2 100 200 300 400 500 Enrolled 3 4 4 8 7 Treated 3 4 4 7 7 Still on treatment – 1 1 2 7 Best unconfirmed response to date CR (sCR) 2 (2) 1 (1) 1 (1) 2 1 (1) VGPR (nCR) 1 – 3 (1) 4 2 PR – 3 – 1 4

Abstract Abstract 621 Background: Two- and three-drug regimens incorporating bortezomib (Velcade®, V), lenalidomide (Revlimid®, R), dexamethasone (D), or cyclophosphamide (C) have been shown to be effective and well tolerated in previously untreated multiple myeloma (MM). Combining all four drugs in a single regimen (VDCR) may further enhance efficacy. Published results from the phase 1 dose-escalation portion of the non-comparative, multi-center EVOLUTION study showed that the VDCR regimen was highly active and generally well tolerated (Kumar et al Leukemia 2010). Here we present updated results from the phase 2 portion of the trial, focusing on efficacy and safety of the VDCR, VDR, and VDC regimens. Methods: Previously untreated patients with measurable disease were randomized to one of four treatment groups receiving up to eight 21-d cycles of VDCR (V 1.3 mg/m2 d 1, 4, 8, 11; D 40 mg d 1, 8, 15; R 15 mg d 1–14; C 500 mg/m2 d 1, 8), VDR (VD as in VDCR but with R 25 mg d 1–14), VDC (VDC as in VDCR), or VDC-mod (as for VDC but with an additional dose of C on d 15) as induction therapy, followed by four 42-d maintenance cycles of V 1.3 mg/m2 (d 1, 8, 15, 22) (all treatment arms). Patients eligible for autologous stem cell transplant (SCT) could undergo stem cell mobilization any time after cycle 2 and SCT any time after cycle 4. The primary endpoint was the combined complete response (CR) + very good partial response (VGPR) rate; secondary endpoints included safety/tolerability, time to response, duration of response, progression-free survival, and rate of minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity. Responses were assessed according to International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) uniform criteria using an automated computer algorithm. Adverse events (AEs) were graded using the CTCAE v3.0. Results: Patient characteristics were similar among the groups with respect to age, performance status, ISS stage, and proportion of patients with high-risk cytogenetic features. Patients received a median of 5, 6, 6, and 6 treatment cycles in the VDCR, VDR, VDC, and VDC-mod arms, respectively; 65%, 60%, 52%, and 47% of patients had dose reductions of any drug. In the VDCR, VDR, VDC, and VDC-mod arms, respectively, 52%, 62%, 58%, and 65% of patients completed treatment; 31%, 43%, 24%, and 41%, respectively, underwent SCT. In the phase 2 response-evaluable patients (n=132), all treatment regimens showed substantial efficacy, with CR+VGPR rates of 59% (VDCR), 50% (VDR), 41% (VDC), and 59% (VDC-mod) (Table) (includes pre-transplant responses only in SCT patients). Of MRD-assessed patients, 46% (21/46) of those who achieved CR (including sCR) or nCR were MRD-negative; 48% (10/21), 75% (9/12), 0% (0/7) and 33% (2/6) in the VDCR, VDR, VDC and VDC-mod arms, respectively. Median time to first response was similar across arms (range 1.6–1.8 months); median time to best response of CR+VGPR was 4.0 months (VDCR), 3.4 months (VDR), 5.1 months (VDC), and 3.1 months (VDC-mod). Median duration of response has not been reached in any arm to date. All treatment regimens were generally well tolerated. In the VDCR, VDR, VDC, and VDC-mod arms, at least one grade ≥3 AE was observed in 81%, 76%, 79%, and 88% of enrolled patients, respectively; serious AEs were experienced by 42%, 40%, 21%, and 41% of patients, and AEs resulting in study discontinuation were reported for 19%, 17%, 12%, and 6% of patients. The five most common all-grade AEs across all treatment groups were fatigue (range 47–67%), nausea (36–67%), constipation (40–62%), diarrhea NOS (42–65%), and neutropenia (19–52%). The incidence of grade ≥3 (grade ≥2) peripheral neuropathy (PN) was 13% (40%) in the VDCR arm, 14% (45%) VDR, 9% (48%) VDC, and 18% (41%) VDC-mod; there was no grade 4 PN. Rates of grade ≥3 neutropenia/thrombocytopenia were 42%/10% for VDCR, 7%/7% VDR, 36%/12% VDC, and 65%/18% VDC-mod. Conclusions: All regimens appear highly active and generally well tolerated in previously untreated MM patients. The four-drug combination did not result in a substantial increase in response rate and was associated with a modest increase in the incidence of hematologic toxicities. Continuous weekly C in the VDC regimen was associated with high response rates and rapid responses, comparable to the VDR and VDCR arms. Outcome data will be presented following longer follow-up. Disclosures: Kumar: Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Genzyme: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cephalon: Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding. Off Label Use: Lenalidomide for treatment of newly diagnosed myeloma. Flinn:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Richardson:Celgene, Millennium, Novartis, Johnson & Johnson: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Hari:Celgene: Research Funding. Callander:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Noga:Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Ortho-Centicor: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Cephalon: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Stewart:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria. Rifkin:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Speakers Bureau; Cephalon: Speakers Bureau; Dendreon: Speakers Bureau. Wolf:Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Genentech and Multiple Myeloma Research: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; OrthoBiotech: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Estevam:Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Mulligan:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Shi:Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Webb:Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Employment.

Abstract Background: The use of clinical trial results to guide clinical practice is based on the assumption that results are externally valid and clinical trial subjects are a representative sample of patients to whom results can be applied. Multiple myeloma (MM) is primarily a disease of the elderly, and both tolerance to therapy and overall prognosis are influenced by age. MM biological characteristics and possibly response to therapy are different between Whites and racial-ethnic minorities (REM), particularly Blacks. We analyzed recent MM trials performed in the US to assess to what extent they included a representative sample of the MM population. Methods: We retrieved all therapeutic clinical trials performed exclusively in the US and published between 2007 and 2014 for information on age, gender and racial-ethnic distribution of subjects. For the latter, subjects were classified as Whites or REM (defined as Hispanic and/or non-White). Data on unselected patients with newly diagnosed MM from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER-18) program were used to estimate the expected proportion of REM and each gender for the clinical trial population. Results: We identified 128 published MM trials (8,869 subjects). Age of subjects was reported in 127 (99.2%) and gender distribution in 120 (93.8%) of trials, but racial-ethnic composition was reported in only 51 (39.8%) of trials (4,853 subjects). Trials reporting accrual of REM were larger (median 54 subjects, IQR 34.5-84.5) than other trials (median 35, IQR 24-50), P=0.004. Among industry-sponsored trials a higher proportion (57.1 %) reported REM accrual, than among NCI-sponsored (41.2%) or investigator-sponsored (29.0%) trials (overall P=0.013, P=0.003 for investigator vs. industry comparison). First line therapy trials had similar likelihood of reporting on accrual of REM (33.3%) than trials enrolling relapsed/refractory subjects (44.9%) or a mixed population (34.6%), P=0.4. Among subjects in the 51 trials that reported accrual of REM, 19.1% were minorities vs. expected 36.7% (ratio 0.52, 95% C.I. 0.49-0.55). In investigator-sponsored trials, the proportion of minorities was 15.9% (ratio 0.43, 95%CI 0.37-0.49) while among NCI-sponsored trials the proportion was 18.7% (ratio 0.50, 95% C.I. 0.45-0.50) and among industry-sponsored trials the proportion was 22.0% (ratio 0.61, 95% C.I. 0.55-0.68). Among subjects in the 120 trials that reported gender distribution, 56.7% were man vs. expected 56.9% (ratio 1.02, 95% C.I. 0.99-1.05).Median of median age of subjects enrolled in clinical trials was 61 years, in sharp contrast with the median age for MM diagnosis during the period that was 69 years. Only 9 (7.1%) trials the median age of subjects enrolled was higher than 65 years. Conclusions: The participation of REM in MM trials is greatly under reported, particularly among investigator-sponsored trials. REM and older individuals are underrepresented in MM trials, potentially compromising external validity of resuts.l Disclosures Hari: BMS: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Spectrum: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy. Kumar:Skyline, Noxxon: Honoraria; Celgene, Millennium, Onyx, Janssen, Noxxon, Sanofi, BMS, Skyline: Consultancy; Celgene, Millennium, Onyx, Novartis, Janssen, Sanofi: Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 127 Two- and three-drug regimens incorporating bortezomib (Velcade®, Vc), lenalidomide (Revlimid®, Rev), dexamethasone (Dex), and cyclophosphamide (Cy) (Vc–Dex, Rev–Dex, Vc–Dex–Rev [VDR], and Vc–Dex–Cy [VDC]), have been shown to be effective and well tolerated in previously untreated multiple myeloma (MM). Combining Vc and Dex with Rev and Cy in a novel four-drug regimen (VDCR) may result in even greater activity with improved quality and duration of response. Results from the phase 1 dose-escalation portion of the multi-center EVOLUTION study showed that the VDCR regimen is a highly active and generally well-tolerated induction therapy in previously untreated MM patients (pts). Here we report the efficacy and safety of VDR, VDC, and VDCR from the non-comparative phase 2 portion of the study. Methods: Pts were randomized to receive up to eight 21-d cycles of VDR (Vc 1.3 mg/m2 d 1, 4, 8, 11; Dex 40 mg d 1, 8, 15; Rev 25 mg d 1–14) or VDC (VD as in VDR, plus Cy 500 mg/m2 d 1, 8) or VDCR (VDC plus Rev 15 mg d 1–14) as induction therapy, followed by Vc 1.3 mg/m2 (d 1, 8, 15, 22) for four 42-d maintenance cycles in all treatment arms. Pts received prophylactic antibiotics, acyclovir, transfusion support, and anticoagulants as required. Eligible pts wishing to undergo autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) could undergo stem cell mobilization any time after cycle 2, and undergo ASCT any time after cycle 4. Response categories were based on the IMWG Criteria with the addition of near complete response (nCR). Adverse events (AEs) were graded using the CTCAE v3.0. Results: In the VDR, VDC, and VDCR arms 42, 32, and 43 pts (including 6 pts treated at the maximum planned dose of Cy (500 mg/m2) from phase 1) have been treated, and 42, 31, and 33 are evaluable for response, respectively, as of data cut-off (31 July 2009). Median ages in the VDR, VDC, and VDCR arms were 60, 62, and 62 years, respectively; 62%, 63%, and 66% had International Staging System stage lI/III disease, and 38%, 25%, and 33% had Karnofsky Performance Status ≤80%, respectively. The median number of VDR, VDC, and VDCR cycles received is 4.5, 6, and 4, respectively (range 1–12). Best unconfirmed response rates are shown in the Table; patients categorized as very good partial response (VGPR) include those who have no measurable M-protein but have not yet had bone marrow assessments to confirm CR/nCR status. The overall rates of treatment-emergent AEs were 95%, 97%, and 88% for the VDR, VDC, and VDCR arms, respectively, with ≥grade 3 reported in 67%, 59%, and 65%. Peripheral neuropathy (PN) was reported as grade 2/3 in 12%/12% in the VDR, 31%/3% in the VDC, and 12%/9% in the VDCR arms; there was no grade 4 PN reported. Grade 3/4 neutropenia was reported in 5%/5%, 28%/13%, and 23%/9% of pts in the VDR, VDC, and VDCR arms, and grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia in 5%/2%, 9%/0%, and 5%/0% of pts, respectively. One case of grade 3 deep-vein thrombosis was reported in the VDCR arm. Overall rates of serious AEs were 24%, 13%, and 37% in the VDR, VDC, and VDCR arms, respectively. Two pts have died in the VDCR arm, both due to renal failure, considered possibly treatment-related. To date, 6 pts have undergone ASCT in the VDR arm, 5 in the VDC arm, and 3 in the VDCR arm. Median CD34+ yield was 4.7, 6.3, and 6.8 × 106/kg in the VDR, VDC, and VDCR arms, respectively. Conclusions: VDR, VDC, and VDCR are highly active and generally well-tolerated regimens in previously untreated MM. Response rates in the VDCR arm appeared somewhat higher than in the VDR and VDC arms at this early time point, although there also appeared to be higher rates of serious AEs, including possible treatment-related mortality in the VDCR arm. Following an interim analysis, dosing in the VDC arm was modified to include Cy on day 15 to examine if this will improve CR rates. Ten pts have been enrolled to date. Disclosures: Kumar: CELGENE: Research Funding; MILLENNIUM: Research Funding; BAYER: Research Funding; GENZYME: Research Funding; NOVARTIS: Research Funding. Flinn:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Hari:Milennium Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Callander:Millenium: Research Funding. Noga:Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Stewart:Takeda-Millenium, Celgene, Novartis, Amgen: Consultancy; Takeda, Millenium: Research Funding; Genzyme, Celgene, Millenium, Proteolix: Honoraria. Raje:Celgene: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Research Funding. Rifkin:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc: 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; Amgen: Speakers Bureau; Cephalon: Speakers Bureau. Shi:Millennium Pharmaceutical Inc.: Employment. Webb:Millennium: Employment, Equity Ownership. Richardson:Keryx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Johnson and Johnson: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau.

Abstract Background: Treatment of multiple myeloma has evolved considerably in the past few years with availability of several news drugs as well as increasing use of multidrug combinations. These changes have no doubt led to the improved survival seen among patients with MM. We have previously shown that outcomes of patients intolerant or refractory to one of the IMiDs and bortezomib had a poor outcome. Since that time, other drugs of the same class as well as new classes of drugs have been introduced for the treatment of MM. We designed this retrospective study to estimate the outcomes in patients with relapsed myeloma, who have become refractory to the current generation IMiDs and proteasome inhibitors. Patients and Methods: Patients with relapsed multiple myeloma who have received at least 3 prior lines of therapy, is refractory to both an IMiD (lenalidomide or pomalidomide) AND a proteasome inhibitor (bortezomib or carfilzomib), and has been exposed to an alkylating agent were identified from multiple centers. The time patients met the above criteria was defined as T0, and details of all treatment regimens before and after T0 were collected using electronic CRFs. The study was approved by the IRB at the respective centers. Results: 543 patients were enrolled in this study; median age was 62 years (31-87) and 61% were males. Patients were enrolled from centers in North America (n=181), Europe (n=318), and Asia Pacific (n=44). Patients were diagnosed between 2006 and 2014, the median duration between diagnosis of myeloma and study entry (T0) was 3.1 years (0.3 to 9). The median (95% CI) estimated follow up from diagnosis and from T0 were 61 (57, 66) months and 13 (11, 15) months respectively. The median number of lines of therapy prior to T0 was 4 (3-13), 48% had a prior transplant. The median OS from T0 for the entire cohort was 13 (11, 15) months. For these 462 patients, the median number of recorded regimens was 2 (1-9). The overall response and the depth of response to each line of treatment following T0 are as shown in the table. The median (95% CI) PFS and OS from T0 was 5 (4, 6), and 15.2 (13, 17), respectively. The overall survival for the 81 patients with no treatment post T0 was only 2.1 months. In a multivariate analysis, duration from diagnosis to T0, ISS stage III and number of lines of therapy were all associated with inferior PFS, as well as OS, and in addition, serum creatinine>2 mg/dL at T0 also predicted inferior OS. Conclusions: The study provides the expected outcome following development of myeloma that is refractory to a PI and an IMiD. The outcomes of these patients appear to be better than we had seen historically in patients refractory/ intolerant to bortezomib and IMiDs, highlighting the increased treatment options available for these patients. However, there is decreasing response rate to sequential regimens highlighting the development of drug resistance. The data provides a bench mark for comparison of new therapies that are being evaluated in this disease. Table Table. Disclosures Dimopoulos: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genesis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kastritis:Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Genesis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Terpos:BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Genesis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria. Hillengass:Sanofi: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria. Leleu:TEVA: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria; LeoPharma: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Pierre Fabre: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria. Oriol:Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Expert board committee; Amgen: Honoraria, Other: Expert board committee. Cavo:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Millennium: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Mateos:Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Vij:Shire: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Jazz: Consultancy; Karyopharma: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Lokhorst:Genmab: Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. van de Donk:Amgen: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Mark:Onyx: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millenium: 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, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Ludwig:Amgen: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau. Jagannath:Novartis: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy. Usmani:Array: Research Funding; Britsol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Skyline: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BioPharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millenium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Dytfeld:Janssen Poland: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Moreau:Novartis: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Lee:Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Shustik:Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millenium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. de la Rubia:Celgene: Consultancy; Bristol Myers: Consultancy; Amgen,: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy. Durie:Takeda: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy.

Abstract Background: Triplet regimens combining a proteasome inhibitor, an immunomodulatory drug, and a steroid have been shown to be active and well tolerated in previously untreated MM pts. Extended treatment represents an alternative paradigm to induction followed by ASCT in this setting; however, agents for continuous therapy need to be convenient and well tolerated. The investigational agent ixazomib is the first oral proteasome inhibitor to be studied clinically. Phase 1 studies have indicated single-agent activity in relapsed/refractory MM and shown ixazomib to be well tolerated with a manageable safety profile, including limited peripheral neuropathy (PN) (Richardson PG et al, Blood 2014; Kumar SK, et al, Blood 2014). Weekly ixazomib plus lenalidomide-dexamethasone has been investigated in a phase 1/2 study in previously untreated MM pts (NCT01217957); treatment comprised triplet induction therapy followed by single-agent ixazomib maintenance therapy. Results of induction therapy have been previously reported (Kumar SK, et al, ASH 2012). Here we report phase 2 efficacy and safety data in pts receiving ixazomib maintenance. Methods: In phase 2, pts aged ≥18 yrs with measurable disease and no grade ≥2 PN received oral ixazomib 4.0 mg on d 1, 8, 15, lenalidomide 25 mg on d 1–21, and dexamethasone 40 mg on d 1, 8, 15, 22, for up to twelve 28-d induction cycles, followed by maintenance ixazomib on d 1, 8, 15 every 28 d until progression at the dose last tolerated during induction. Transplant-eligible pts could discontinue from study for ASCT after 6 cycles. The primary objective was CR+VGPR rate. Responses were assessed by IMWG criteria. Adverse events (AEs) were graded by NCI-CTCAE v4.02. Results: Fifty pts were enrolled in phase 2; 29 discontinued during induction (cycles 1–12), primarily to undergo ASCT (n=14) or due to AEs (n=6) or pt withdrawal (n=4). Twenty-one pts received ixazomib maintenance therapy (cycle ≥13); 13 (62%) were male, and median age was 68 (range 34–77) years. At data cut-off (June 11, 2014), pts had received a median of 27 treatment cycles (range 15–32), including both induction and maintenance, with a median treatment duration of 26.6 mos (range 13.4–29.6). Mean ixazomib relative dose intensity was 95% and 89% in the induction and maintenance phases, respectively. The mean ixazomib dose administered during maintenance was 3.6 mg weekly. At data cut-off, 11 (52%) pts remained on ixazomib maintenance. Among 49 evaluable phase 2 pts, 44 (90%) achieved ≥PR, including 29 (59%) ≥VGPR. All 21 pts who received ixazomib maintenance had responded to induction therapy. Overall best confirmed/unconfirmed responses in the 21 pts included ≥CR in 11 (52%, of which 4 [19%] were stringent CRs [sCR]), ≥near-CR in 13 (62%), and ≥VGPR in 15 (71%), plus 6 (29%) PR. Responses were rapid and improved during treatment. Median time to first response (≥PR) was 0.99 mos (range 0.92–5.78) and to best response was 7.46 mos (range 1.02–24.74); 33% of pts improved their response during maintenance, including 2 VGPR to near-CR, 3 VGPR to CR, 1 VGPR to sCR, and 1 CR to sCR. At data cut-off, median duration of response was 26.5 mos (range 5.6–26.6+). Among 15 pts achieving ≥VGPR, 5 (33%) had progressed; median duration of ≥VGPR was 23.0 mos (range 3.7–26.1+). All pts were alive after follow-up of 24.6–30.3 mos, including a median follow-up from start of maintenance of 16.9 mos (range 12.9–18.9). Ixazomib maintenance was well tolerated; 15 (71%) pts had drug-related AEs, with only 2 (10%) pts with grade 3 drug-related AEs (hypokalemia, thrombocytopenia) and no grade 4 AEs. The most common (>1 pt) grade 1–2 drug-related AEs were diarrhea (n=8, 38%), nausea, pain in extremity (each n=3, 14%), anemia, and headache (each n=2, 10%). No PN was reported. Serious AEs were reported in 3 (14%) pts during maintenance, including grade 3 acute myocardial infarction, grade 3 pneumonia, and grade 3 orthostatic hypotension; all were considered not related to treatment. Only 1 pt required an ixazomib dose reduction due to an AE (neuralgia). Conclusions: These data indicate that single-agent ixazomib maintenance for up to 1.5 yrs was feasible and generally well tolerated, improved responses following ixazomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone induction, and contributed to durable responses (median >2 yrs) in previously untreated MM pts not undergoing ASCT. The results support the ongoing phase 3 trial of ixazomib in the maintenance setting (NCT02181413). Disclosures Kumar: Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: The Takeda Oncology Co.: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi-Aventis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Array BioPharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Skyline Diagnostics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Off Label Use: Investigational proteasome inhibitor ixazomib in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone and as maintenance therapy for patients with previously untreated multiple myeloma.. Niesvizky:Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: The Takeda Oncology Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Lonial:Millennium: The Takeda Oncology Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding. Laubach:Novartis: Research Funding; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Hamadani:Millennium: The Takeda Oncology Company: Research Funding. Stewart:Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co.: Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy; Array BioPharma: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy. Hari:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Millennium: The Takeda Oncology Co.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding. Vescio:Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Millennium: The Takeda Oncology Co.: Speakers Bureau; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Speakers Bureau. Kaufman:Millennium: The Takeda Oncology Co.: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria; Merck: Research Funding. Berg:Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co.: Employment. Liao:Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co.: Employment. Hui:Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co.: Employment. Richardson:Millennium: The Takeda Oncology Co.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Abstract Oral mucositis (OM) is a commonly occurring side effect in patients (pts) undergoing AHSCT. Velafermin, recombinant human fibroblast growth factor-20, is under investigation for the prevention of severe OM. Previous studies demonstrated that velafermin at 30 mcg/kg was well tolerated and was effective in reducing the incidence of severe mucositis. The primary objective of this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled study was to confirm safety and efficacy of 30 mcg/kg velafermin for prevention of severe OM incidence (grade 3/4 OM based on the WHO grading system). The secondary objective was to evaluate safety and efficacy of 10 and 60 mcg/kg doses to better define the therapeutic range. Pts were randomized to receive placebo or velafermin at 30, 10 or 60 mcg/kg in a 3:3:1:1 ratio 24–36 hrs after stem cell infusion. Randomization was stratified by study center and OM risk factors identified from the previous placebo controlled study in a similar population including conditioning regimen and body mass index (BMI ≥30). Pts with multiple myeloma or lymphoma (≥18 y.o.) receiving ≥2X106 /kg CD34+ cells following chemotherapy with or without Total Body Irradiation (TBI) were eligible. OM status and safety data were collected for 30 days post treatment while mortality and disease progression were followed for 1 yr. An interim analysis by a data monitoring committee (DMC) was planned to assess safety and efficacy after 50% of pts completed the 30 day treatment period. A total of 390 pts who received melphalan (200 mg/m2) (n=239), BEAM (n=129), TBI (n=15), or other (n=7) were randomized and 384 pts were treated. The study drug was well tolerated in general and no pts discontinued study due to drug-related adverse events. There were 93 serious adverse events (SAEs) in 78 (20%) pts and no drug-related death was reported. Five infusion-related SAEs were reported including vasovagal episode (2), syncope (2), and anaphylactoid reaction (1). All 5 episodes occurred on the day of study drug infusion and resolved on the same day with no sequelae. Based on review of the results from the interim analysis, which included safety and efficacy data from 200 pts, the DMC recommended that the study continue to completion as planned. The last pt has completed the 30 day study period. The un-blinded results of the OM efficacy endpoints from velafermin treated groups or placebo as well as 30-day safety information from all pts will be reported.

Abstract Background: Persons of African ancestry (AA) have a 2-3-fold higher risk of multiple myeloma (MM) than persons of European ancestry (EA). Like other B-cell malignancies, genome-wide association scans (GWAS) have identified MM risk variants in the HLA region in persons of EA. We conducted a case-control analysis with data from the National Marrow Donor Program (NMDP)1comprising MM patients typed for bone marrow transplant to donor controls matched by race-ethnicity, and found associations between specific HLA alleles/haplotypes and MM risk that varied by race and ethnicity. To confirm our results and identify additional novel signals, we have now investigated associations between HLA alleles and haplotypes and MM risk in the African American Multiple Myeloma Study (AAMMS) Cohort. Methods: The source of subjects was the AAMMS, in which AA MM patients were identified from 10 cancer centers and 4 Surveillance, Epidemiology and End-Results (SEER) Program cancer registries in order to identify genetic risk factors for MM among AAs. A GWAS was conducted using the Illumina Human Core BeadChip array on DNA samples from 1,305 AA MM patients in the AAMMS comparing results to those from 7,078 AA controls with GWAS data generated from the Illumina 1MDuo2. The major histocompatibility complex (MHC) region single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were imputed to classical HLA variants using HIBAG. Unconditional logistic regression was used to estimate HLA associations, adjusting for sex, age and the first 2 principal components. P-values were adjusted for false discovery rate (FDR) for each locus group. Results: We did not identify any single HLA alleles associated with MM risk among AAs. However, several B*07:02-containing haplotypes were associated with MM risk (odds ratios [OR] ranging from 2.38 to 2.64 and FDR P-values ranging from 1.43 x 10-6 to 3.57 x 10-8). We found associations between MM risk and genotypes containing DRB3*02:02, including DRB3*02:02~DRB1*11:01+ DRB3*02:02~DRB1*11:01 (OR=1.93, PFDR= 9.36 x 10-5) similar to those observed in the NMDP study1. Novel findings included associations between MM risk and HLA Class I haplotypes B*53:01+ B*57:01 (OR=1.94, PFDR= 0.003) and C04:01~B*53:01+C*06:02~B*57:01 (OR=1.96, PFDR= 0.0050). Results from an ongoing meta-analysis between the two data sets (one based on an imputed GWAS and one based on NMDP HLA typing) will be presented. Conclusions: This study is the second to examine HLA alleles and risk of MM among AA's and is by far the largest. We confirmed a previously observed association between an HLA Class II DRB3 variant and MM risk and confirmed an association with B*07 haplotypes previously observed among EAs1. We also identified novel associations between other HLA Class I haplotypes and MM risk in AA's. Because HLA is highly polymorphic, many HLA alleles are rare variants for which genetic associations are difficult to detect without very large sample sizes. Further investigation with large sample sizes will be necessary to refine these associations in order to better identify the underlying causal alleles and determine the functional significance of these HLA associations. 1Beksac M, Gragert L, Fingerson S, et al.: HLA polymorphism and risk of multiple myeloma.Leukemia. 2016 Jul 27. doi: 10.1038/leu.2016.199. 2Rand KA, Song C, Hwang AE, et al. Genetic susceptibility markers of multiple myeloma in African-Americans. Abstract # 2030, 56th Annual American Society of Hematology Meeting, San Francisco, California, 2014. Disclosures Ailawadhi: Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Amgen Inc: Consultancy; Takeda Oncology: Consultancy. Nooka:Spectrum, Novartis, Onyx pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Zonder:Pharmacyclics: Other: DSMC membership; Prothena: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Lonial:BMS: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Millenium: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy.