Knight, Robert

7522 Background: Lenalidomide (len), an analog of thalidomide (thal) is a novel, oral immunomodulatory agent that is effective against multiple myeloma (MM). Two randomized, Phase III trials (MM009 and MM010) have recently demonstrated superior responses and overall survival (OS) for patients (pts) treated with len and dexamethasone (dex) in comparison with dex-placebo. This is a prospective subgroup analysis to assess the impact of prior therapy with thal on the sensitivity of MM to subsequent lenalidomide. Methods: We evaluated 692 pts from both trials (MM009 and MM010). The pts had relapsed/refractory MM, were not refractory to dex and were randomized to receive either len (25 mg daily for 3 weeks (wks) every 4 wks) plus dex (40 mg on days 1–4, 9–12, 17–20 every 4 wks for 4 cycles, then 40 mg on days 1–4 every subsequent cycle) or placebo plus dex. Standard criteria were used to evaluate response and TTP. Results: Pooled data from 692 pts showed superior median TTP (48.1 vs 20.1 wks) and OR (59.2% vs 22.5%) in pts treated with len/dex compared to dex-placebo (p <0.001). Although subgroup analysis of pts with prior thal therapy revealed that pts who received len/dex had significantly improved OR, PR CR and median TTP than pts who received dex-placebo, OR, CR and TTP were highest in len/dex pts not previously treated with thal. Multivariate analysis indicates that after controlling for the treatment factor and baseline disease characteristics, whether or not pt had prior exposure to thal is a marginally significant variable to predict TTP. The risk of deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism in these subgroups will be updated on further analysis. Conclusions: Lenalidomide in combination with dexamethasone is more effective than dexamethasone-placebo regardless of prior thalidomide in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. [Table: see text] [Table: see text]

7517 Background: Thalidomide plus dexamethasone (Thal/Dex) yields superior response rates versus dexamethasone (Dex) but its impact as primary therapy for multiple myeloma (MM) is unknown. Methods: Patients (pts) with previously untreated, symptomatic MM were eligible and were randomized in this double-blind trial to Thal/Dex (Arm A) or placebo plus Dex (Arm B). Pts in Arm A received Thal 50 mg PO daily, escalated to 100 mg on day 15, and to 200 mg from day 1 of cycle 2; Dex 40 mg PO was given on days 1–4, 9–12, and 17–20. Pts in Arm B received placebo instead of Thal, and Dex as in Arm A. Cycles were 28 days long, repeated until progression or undue toxicity. The primary endpoint was time to progression (TTP) defined using EBMT criteria. All analyses were intent to treat. Planned sample size was 218 eligible pts in each arm. Full information for one-sided log rank test with significance level of 0.025 (allowing for 1interim analysis) to have 80% power to detect a 40% improvement in TTP (16.8 mo in Arm A vs. 12 mo in Arm B) would be achieved when 282 pts have progressed. A pre-planned interim analysis of the primary endpoint and safety was performed by an independent Data Monitoring Committee (DMC). P value < 0.0015 at this interim analysis would indicate that Arm A is superior to Arm B based on an alpha-spending function of the O’Brien-Fleming type. The DMC recommended release of results. Results: 470 pts were enrolled: 235 randomized to Thal/Dex and 235 to placebo/Dex. Median follow-up was 25 months. Median age was 65 yrs. TTP was significantly superior with Thal/Dex vs placebo/Dex, median TTP 17.4 months (95% CI: 8.1 months-NE) vs 6.4 months (95% CI: 5.6–7.4 months), respectively, P < 0.000065, crossing the upper boundary for superiority. DVT was higher with Thal/Dex vs placebo/Dex, 15.4% vs 4.3%, respectively. Median survival was not reached in either arm. Conclusions: Thal/Dex is significantly superior to Dex alone as first-line therapy for multiple myeloma. [Table: see text] [Table: see text]

Abstract Background Melphalan, prednisone and thalidomide (MPT) is a standard therapy for NDMM recognized worldwide based on a statistically significant advantage in overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) vs. MP (Facon Lancet 2007; Fayers Blood 2011; NCCN 2013). The combination of lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone (Rd) increased OS with fewer adverse events (AEs) than treatment with lenalidomide and high-dose dexamethasone in NDMM pts (ECOG E4A03) (Rajkumar Lancet Oncol 2010). The FIRST trial is a multicenter, open-label, phase III trial comparing the efficacy and safety of Rd versus MPT in transplant-ineligible NDMM pts. Methods NDMM pts either ≥ 65 years of age, or not candidates for SCT were randomized to one of three arms: Rd in 28-day cycles until disease progression (Arm A), Rd in 28-day cycles for 72 weeks (18 cycles, Arm B), or MPT in 42-day cycles for 72 weeks (12 cycles, Arm C). Assessments by International Myeloma Working Group criteria were done after each cycle. Pts with renal impairment were enrolled; however, pts on dialysis were excluded. Starting doses of lenalidomide and dexamethasone were adjusted based on renal function and age, respectively. Melphalan starting dose was adjusted based on age, absolute neutrophil count, platelet count, and renal function; and thalidomide was adjusted for age. Dose adjustments were permitted for AEs. All pts were required to receive anti-thrombotic prophylaxis. Stratification factors included age, International Stage System, and country. The primary endpoint was a comparison of PFS in Arm A vs. Arm C. Secondary endpoints included OS, overall response rate (ORR), time to response, duration of response (DOR), safety, and quality of life (QOL). A preplanned additional analysis included time from randomization to second progression event or death (PFS2). The final preplanned analysis of independently adjudicated progressive disease (PD) events in Arm A vs. Arm C conducted after 960 events of death or PD, and an interim of OS in 64% of survival events (574/896 events) are presented in this abstract. Comparisons of PFS and all secondary endpoints, including OS for all three arms, will be presented at the meeting. Results A total of 1,623 pts were randomized 1:1:1 in three arms. As of today, 121 pts continue to receive lenalidomide on study (Arm A). The median age was 73 (40.0–92.0) years; 35% pts were aged ≥ 75 years; and 41% of pts had ISS stage 3 disease. After a median follow-up of 37 months, the trial met its primary endpoint (PFS), demonstrating a 28% reduction in risk of progression or death (HR=0.72; p= 0.00006). The preplanned interim analysis of OS demonstrated a 22% reduction in risk of death in favor of Arm A vs. Arm C (HR=0.78, p=0.01685); however, the pre-specified boundary (p<0.0096) was not crossed. All other secondary endpoints consistently showed improvement in favor of Arm A vs. Arm C; ORR (PR or better) 75% vs. 62% (p < 0.00001), DOR (HR=0.63; p<0.00001), and PFS2 (HR=0.78, p=0.0051). Relevant Grade 3/4 adverse events in Arm A vs. Arm C were neutropenia (28% vs. 45%), thrombocytopenia (8% vs. 11%), febrile neutropenia (1% vs. 3%), infection (29% vs. 17%), neuropathy (5% vs. 15%), and deep-vein thrombosis (5% vs. 3%). The incidence of secondary primary malignancies (SPM) was evaluated. Hematologic malignancies were 0.4% in Arm A vs. 2.2% in Arm C; the overall incidence of solid tumors was identical (2.8%). Conclusion Continuous treatment with the all oral doublet Rd significantly improved the primary endpoint of PFS compared with the standard triplet, MPT. All secondary endpoints support the clinical benefit of continuous Rd treatment. The safety profile of Rd was manageable, with reduced hematologic SPM compared to MPT. Disclosures: Facon: Celgene: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Off Label Use: Lenalidomide as treatment for NDMM. Dimopoulos:Celgene, Orthobiotech: Honoraria. Dispenzieri:Celgene, Millenium, Jansenn, Pfizer: Research Funding. Catalano:Celgene, Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Hulin:Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Cavo:Celgene, Janssen, Millennium, Onyx, Brystol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Pinto:Mundipharma: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Weisel:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Ludwig:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Bahlis:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Delforge:Celgene: Honoraria. Chen:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Lundbeck: Consultancy; Johnson & Johnson: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria; GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding. Oriol:Celgen: Consultancy. White:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Binder:Celgene: Research Funding. Anderson:Acetylon, OncoPep: Equity Ownership; Celgene, Onyx, Sanofi Aventis, Gileod: Consultancy. Moreau:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Attal:Janssen: Lectures, Lectures Other, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene Corporation: Lectures Other, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Knight:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Chen:Celgene: Employment. Van Oostendorp:Celgene: Employment. Jacques:Celgene: Employment. Ervin-Haynes:Celgene: Employment, Patents & Royalties. Benboubker:Celgene: Consultancy.

Abstract Introduction: Multiple myeloma (MM) accounts for about 20% of deaths from hematological cancers and remains incurable despite conventional and high-dose chemotherapy. Two phase III trials in patients with relapsed or refractory MM (MM-009 and MM-010) showed that lenalidomide combined with dexamethasone resulted in significantly improved response rates and significantly prolonged median time to progression (TTP) and overall survival (OS) compared with dexamethasone alone. This current sub-analysis of lenalidomide plus dexamethasone therapy assessed whether there was a survival benefit in maintaining patients on therapy after achieving their best response and what the impact of early discontinuation on TTP and OS was. Methods: Of the 353 patients from MM-009 and MM-010 treated with lenalidomide plus dexamethasone, 32 did not respond. Of the remaining 321 responding patients, 214 had a partial response (PR) or better and 107 patients had stable disease (SD). In this post-hoc sub-analysis, we first assessed the outcome of continuing treatment for ≤10 months vs. >10 months in all 321 patients who achieved SD or better, after they achieved their best response. In this landmark analysis, OS was measured from the time of achieving best response to death from any cause or to last contact. In a second analysis, we assessed the impact of early discontinuation due to adverse events or withdrawn consent on OS and TTP in all patients who achieved SD or better. Therefore, we excluded patients who discontinued treatment due to disease progression, death, or lack of efficacy. Patients who achieved SD or better and who continued on therapy were compared with those who discontinued. OS and TTP were assessed from time of randomization. Results: In the landmark analysis, of the 321 responding patients (≥PR, n=214; SD, n=107), 223 patients received treatment for ≤10 months after achieving their best response and 98 patients for >10 months after achieving their best response. Patients who continued therapy for >10 months after achieving their first best response had significantly longer OS vs. those who received therapy for ≤10 months (not reached vs. 23.4 months; p<0.0001). At 24 months after achieving their best response, significantly more patients were alive if they continued therapy >10 months vs. ≤10 months (93.8% vs. 48.4%, p<0.0001). In the second analysis, in order to evaluate the impact of discontinuation in patients achieving SD or better, we excluded 134 patients due to disease progression, death, or lack of efficacy. Of the remaining 187 responding patients, 72 discontinued treatment for AE (n=42) or withdrew consent (n=30), while the remaining 115 patients continued treatment. Median OS and TTP were significantly longer for patients who continued vs. those who discontinued treatment (median OS: not reached vs. 29.5 months, p<0.0001; median TTP: not reached vs. 13.6 months, p<0.0001). Conclusions: In patients achieving SD or better, prolonged duration of treatment was associated with significantly longer OS and TTP. In contrast, early discontinuation of treatment led to reduced OS and TTP. Therefore, efforts should be made to manage adverse events while maintaining patients on therapy. Furthermore, maintaining treatment with lenalidomide and dexamethasone after achieving the optimal response ensures a significant improvement in OS for patients with relapsed or refractory MM.

Abstract Background: The use of low-dose dexamethasone (Dex) in combination with lenalidomide (Len), an immunomodulatory compound, improves overall survival (OS) compared with high-dose Dex plus Len in patients (pts) with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) (Rajkumar et al. 2007). Two phase III randomised trials of pts with relapsed/refractory MM showed that Len/Dex had significantly better overall response (OR), complete response (CR), OS and time to progression (TTP) than Dex alone. Dex dose reductions were permitted in relation to severity of adverse events (AEs). We investigated the effect of Dex dose reductions on efficacy and tolerability of Len/Dex in relapsed/refractory MM. Methods: Data were pooled from the MM-009/010 studies for pts treated in the Len/Dex group who had an unchanged Len dose (n=233). Pts were treated with Len (25mg/day on day 1–21 of each 28-day cycle) and Dex 40mg on day 1–4, 9–12, and 17–20 (for the first four cycles). After four cycles, Dex 40mg/day was administered only on day 1–4. Dex dose reductions were: 40mg day 1–4 every 2 weeks (level -1), 40mg day 1–4 every 4 weeks (level -2), and 20mg day 1–4 every 4 weeks (level -3). Response to therapy, TTP, OS, and progression-free survival (PFS), as well as AEs were assessed. Response rate and TTP were based on data obtained before unblinding (June/August 2005 [MM-009/010]. Results: Of 233 pts in this post-hoc analysis, 177 pts were treated with Dex 40 mg/day throughout the study and 46 received Dex dose reductions. Forty-one pts received a dose reduction due to AEs. Baseline characteristics were balanced between treatment groups. Pts who received Dex dose reductions had a significantly higher OR rate, including a higher CR, compared with those who received standard Dex dose (Table). Pts in the Dex reductions group had significantly longer median TTP, median OS, and median PFS, compared with those who received Dex at the assigned dose. At the end of the study, rates of serious AEs, grade 3–4 AEs, treatment-related AEs and withdrawals because of AEs were comparable between pts who received Dex dose reductions and those who received an unchanged Dex dose. Although most Dex dose reductions were made for an AE, by reducing the dose pts were able to maintain a similar safety profile to those who did not require dose reductions. Grade 3–4 haematological AEs in pts who received Dex dose reductions and those who did not were neutropenia (23.7% and 32.6%, respectively), thrombocytopenia (8.5% and 6.8%, respectively) and anaemia (6.8% and 6.2%, respectively). No febrile neutropenia was reported in these pts. Conclusion: Dex dose reductions improved the efficacy of Len/Dex without affecting tolerability in pts with relapsed/refractory MM. Len/Dex Dex unchanged (n=177) Dex reduced (n=46) P *Most conservative median estimate obtained assuming all censored patients die right right after the censor date Response, % OR 50.8 69.6 <0.05 CR 13.0 23.9 <0.01 nCR 19.8 37.0 <0.01 PR 18.1 8.7 <0.01 Median TTP, weeks* >24.1 >59.9 0.002 Median OS, weeks* >109.7 >121.9 0.19 Median PFS, weeks* >24.1 >59.9 0.001

Abstract Background: MDSs are clonal hematopoietic stem cell malignancies characterized by cytopenias resulting from ineffective hematopoiesis. A phase 2 study of lenalidomide (MDS-002) demonstrated hematological improvement in patients with MDS without an associated deletion 5q cytogenetic abnormality (List AF, et al. Haematologica2006;91[suppl1]:379[abst 1032]). We now report multicenter results after 〉2 yrs follow-up. Methods: A total of 214 pts with transfusion-dependent anemia were categorized into the following IPSS MDS risk groups after central review of bone marrow morphology, karyotype, and peripheral blood findings: Low/Int-1 (168 [78%]); Int-2/High (8 [4%]); and unclassified (38 [18%]). Patients were unclassified for missing or inadequate marrow studies for central review (morphology [29] or cytogenetic [7]) or other diagnoses (AML [1], atypical CML [1]). Patients were evaluated for frequency and duration of red blood cell transfusion independence (RBC-TI) (IWG criteria), hemoglobin (Hgb) response, and safety. The starting dose of lenalidomide was 10 mg (daily or daily × 3 wks q28d cycle). Results: Overall, 56 (26%) of 214 enrolled patients achieved RBC-TI. Median time to RBC-TI was 5 wks, median duration of RBC-TI response was 41.0 wks (range, 8.0–136.4), and median Hgb increase achieved during RBC-TI was 3.2 g/dL (range, 1.0–9.8). An additional 36 patients experienced a ≥ 50% reduction in RBC transfusions (overall hematological improvement in 92 [43%] patients). Overall, 47 (22%) patients had an abnormal karyotype at baseline and 9 (19%) patients achieved a cytogenetic response (4 complete). The most common drug-related grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) were neutropenia and thrombocytopenia (25% and 20%, respectively). Deep vein thrombosis occurred in only 2 (1%) patients. The duration of RBC-TI was ≥ 52 weeks in 21 (38%) patients. Among these 21 patients, 14 (67%) did not require a lenalidomide dose reduction during the first 52 weeks of treatment. Analyses of response variables will be presented. Dose-limiting neutropenia/thrombocytopenia was not reported after 52 weeks. The most commonly reported AEs after 52 weeks were mild-moderate diarrhea and fatigue (38% and 29%, respectively). Conclusion: Lenalidomide is an active, well-tolerated treatment in MDS patients with transfusion-dependent anemia that is not associated with a deletion 5q abnormality. The rate of erythroid hematologic improvement and duration of RBC-TI is encouraging and offers a possible alternative to cytokine therapy.

Abstract Purpose: Updated results, including response rate data, from a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study comparing thalidomide plus dexamethasone versus dexamethasone alone as primary therapy for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM). Methods: Patients (pts) with previously untreated, symptomatic MM were eligible. Pts were randomized to Thal/Dex (Arm A) or placebo plus Dex (Arm B). Pts in Arm A received Thal 50 mg PO daily, escalated to 100 mg on day 15, and to 200 mg from day 1 of cycle 2; Dex 40 mg PO was given on days 1–4, 9–12, and 17–20. Pts in Arm B received placebo instead of Thal, and Dex as in Arm A. Each cycles was 28 days long. Treatment was continued until progression or undue toxicity. The primary endpoint was time to progression (TTP) defined using EBMT criteria. All analyses were conducted on an intent to treat basis. An independent data monitoring committee recommended release of results. Results: 470 pts were enrolled: 235 were randomized to Thal/Dex and 235 to placebo/Dex. Median follow up is 18 months. Median age was 65 yrs. The response rate (CR+PR) was significantly higher with Thal/Dex compared to placebo/Dex, 59% vs 42%, respectively, P<0.001. Eighty-two percent of patients have gone off-study. TTP was significantly superior with Thal/Dex vs placebo/Dex, median TTP not reached with Thal/Dex versus 8.1 months (95% CI: 6.5–12.8 months) with placebo/Dex, P<0.001. Major grade 3–4 events are summarized in the Table below. Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) was higher with Thal/Dex vs placebo/Dex, 15.4% vs 4.3%, respectively. Conclusions: Thal/Dex yields superior response rates and TTP compared to Dex alone when used as first-line therapy for multiple myeloma. Major Grade 3–4 adverse events Adverse Event Thal/Dex (n=234) Placebo/Dex (n=232) Venous thromboembolism (Grade >=3) 17.9% 4.3% Cerebral ischemia (Grade >=3) 3.0% 1.3% Myocardial ischemia (Grade >=3) 3.8% 2.2% Neuropathy (Grade >=3) 3.0% 0% Any toxicity (Grade >=4) 30.3% 22.8%

Abstract Background: Myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) are hematological disorders characterized by chronic anemia, and are often refractory to cytokine therapy. Two phase 2 studies evaluating lenalidomide in MDS (MDS-001 and MDS-003), demonstrated a high frequency of erythroid response in patients with a chromosome 5q31 deletion (List AF et al., N Eng J Med2005; 352:549–557 and List AF et al., in press). Herein we report on the durability of response with long term follow-up approaching 4 years. Methods: All enrolled subjects were evaluated for frequency and duration of red blood cell transfusion independence (RBC-TI), change in hemoglobin (Hgb), pathologic and cytogenetic response, and safety. Results: Ten 5q31- patients achieved a cytogenetic and/or major erythroid response in MDS-001. Four of these patients have maintained a major response for at least 2 years (range 2.2 to 3.7 years). In MDS-003, 99 (67%) of 148 enrolled patients achieved RBC-TI. Of the 99 responders 83 were Low/Int-1, 3 were Int-2/High and 13 were not classified. Median increase in Hgb from baseline to maximum achieved during RBC-TI was 5.4 g/dL (range 1.1, 11.4). The estimated median duration of response was 115.9 weeks, and 52 (53%) of 99 responders remain on study with ongoing RBC-TI response as of 30 June 2006. Duration of response was at least 52 weeks for 63 (64%), 78 weeks for 52 (53%), and 104 weeks for 36 (36%) of 99 responding patients. Variables (or co-variates) associated with longer duration of TI in multivariate analysis included low baseline transfusion requirement (<4 units per 8 wks, p=0.002), 5q- syndrome (p=0.01) and low IPSS (p=0.02) classifications. Among 85 evaluable patients, major cytogenetic responses were achieved in 37 (44%) and minor responses in 24 (28%). Cytogenetic responses occurred in patients with complex karyotypes as well as those with an isolated 5q31 deletion. The frequencies of major and minor cytogenetic responses were similar among patients with and without 5q- syndrome. The most common drug-related adverse events (AE) were Grade 3/4 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia, reported in 87 (59%) and 74 (50%) of 148 patients, respectively although hematologic AEs led to study discontinuation in only 13 (9%) of patients. Pneumonia was the only serious adverse event that occurred in >10% of patients (15/148; 10%). Adverse events were manageable through supportive treatment and dose reduction. Conclusion: Lenalidomide is an effective treatment in MDS patients with an associated chromosome 5q31 deletion, with RBC-TI and major erythroid response maintained for median duration > 2 years.

Abstract Lenalidomide (Len), an analog of thalidomide (thal) is a novel, oral, immunomodulatory agent that is effective against multiple myeloma (MM). In 2 prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase III trials. Len with dexamethasone (Dex) induced a significantly higher overall response rate (OR) and complete remission rate (CR), as well as longer time-to-progression (TTP) in comparison with Dex alone. This prospective analysis assessed whether prior thalidomide exposure might induce subsequent resistance to Len/Dex. We evaluated 704 patients (pts) from both trials (MM009, MM010) who had relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma, had not been resistant to Dex and were randomized to receive either oral Len (25 mg daily for 3 weeks every 4 weeks) plus Dex (40 mg on days 1–4, 9–12, 17–20 every 4 weeks for 4 cycles) or placebo plus Dex. Two hundred seventy four pts (39%) received prior thal, while 430 (61%) had not. The prior thal exposed pts and thal-naive pts were similar in regard to age, Beta-2-microglobulin, hemoglobin, serum M protein, albumin and history of previous transplantation. The frequency of deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism (DVT/PE) with prior thal exposure was higher at 14% with Len/Dex than 4% with Dex alone (p < 0.01). However, the frequency of DVT/PE with no prior thal exposure was similar at 8% with Len/Dex to 6% with Dex alone (p = 0.49). In the prior thal pts, severe neuropathy occurred in 4% with Len/Dex, not significantly different from the 1% with Dex alone (p=0.2). The pooled data from all 704 pts showed that pts treated with Len/Dex, compared with those treated with Dex alone, had superior median Time-To-Progression (TTP) (48 vs 20 weeks) and OR (60% vs 22%, p <0.001). Similarly, among the subgroups exposed or not exposed to thal, Len/Dex was superior to Dex alone in OR and TTP. For the 126 patients who received prior thal, the OR with Len/Dex was significantly less (43%) among 54 Pts resistant to thal than that observed for 72 Pts who had been sensitive to thal (63%, p < 0.05). Multivariate analysis using Cox proportion hazards model indicated that after controlling for treatment (Len/Dex vs Dex) and baseline disease characteristics, independent and significant predictors of shorter TTP included prior thal exposure, duration of myeloma and number of prior therapies. Len in combination with Dex was more effective than Dex in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma despite prior thal exposure. Results with Len/Dex were superior for those not exposed to thal, suggesting some, but not complete, cross resistance between Len and thal. Len/Dex vs Dex with or without Prior Thal Thal (N=274) No Thal (N=430) LD D p LD D p Intent-to-Treat (n) 126 148 227 203 TTP (med. weeks) 36.9 19.9 <.001 61.3 20.4 <.001 OR (%) 54.0 14.9 <.001 63.4 27.6 <.001 PR (%) 42.1 12.8 <.001 32.2 23.2 <.05 NCR (%) 4.0 0.7 <.001 13.2 2.0 <.001 CR (%) 7.9 1.4 <.01 18.1 2.5 <.001

Abstract Background: Lenalidomide (Revlimid®) in combination with dexamethasone was approved in the US on June 29, 2006 for the treatment of subjects with multiple myeloma who had received at least one prior therapy. On February 28, 2005 based upon a positive interim analysis of two pivotal placebo-controlled Phase III studies, an independent Data Safety Monitoring Board recommended the studies be unblinded and all subjects in both studies be given access to lenalidomide. In April 2005, the FDA in association with myeloma patient advocacy groups requested Celgene establish an expanded access program to make lenalidomide plus dexamethasone available to subjects with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma while the treatment was awaiting approval. Aim: To provide lenalidomide to multiple myeloma subjects with a high likelihood of benefit and to obtain additional safety data. Methods: Subjects with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma that received at least 1 prior therapy were eligible. Subjects received 25 mg lenalidomide plus high-dose dexamethasone in 4-week cycles until disease progression was documented, study drug was discontinued, or lenalidomide became commercially available for this indication. Results: Between September 8, 2005 and July 25, 2006, approximately 1400 subjects in the US and Canada were enrolled into the study. A data snapshot taken March 17, 2006 demonstrated that 746 subjects had been enrolled, median age was 63 years, 60% were male, and 66.5% had Stage III disease. Median time on study was 7.1 weeks (0.1–24.4) and median daily dose was 20.5 mg. At least one Grade 3 or 4 adverse event was reported in 261 (35%) of the 746 subjects. Most commonly reported Grade 3–4 events were neutropenia (7.9% of subjects), thrombocytopenia (6.0%), fatigue (3.6%), anemia (3.5%), pneumonia (3.1%) and hyperglycemia (2.0%). These most commonly reported Grade 3–4 adverse events were the same as those found in the previous pivotal studies, however, their frequencies of occurrence were lower in the current study probably due to ongoing data collection and differences in study maturity. Likewise, the most commonly reported adverse events (all grades) were the same as those reported in the two previous pivotal studies. Conclusion: Preliminary data from this expanded access program in over 1400 subjects with multiple myeloma are consistent with results from two earlier Phase III pivotal studies. The EAP of lenalidomide plus dexamethasone in multiple myeloma represents a model of how government, advocacy groups, healthcare providers and industry can work together to quickly provide treatment to subjects in need while a clearly active treatment regimen is awaiting approval.