Weiss, Matthias

LBA3 Background: Bortezomib (btz) combined with lenalidomide (len) and dexamethasone (dex) (VRd) is a standard initial therapy for NDMM. Carfilzomib (cfz), a next-generation proteasome inhibitor, in combination with len-dex (KRd) has shown higher efficacy in phase II trials. This randomized phase III trial was designed to examine if KRd improves progression free survival (PFS) compared to VRd in NDMM (current results), and whether indefinite maintenance with len improves OS compared with two-year maintenance (to be analyzed once data matures). Methods: Patients (Pts) with NDMM, were randomized to receive VRd or KRd in a 1:1 fashion for 36 weeks followed by a second randomization (1:1) to indefinite versus two years of len maintenance. Pts without del17p, t (14;16), t(14;20), plasma cell leukemia or high-risk GEP70 profile, were enrolled. VRd arm included btz 1.3 mg/m2 on days(d) 1, 4, 8, and 11 (d 1, 8 for cycles 9-12), len 25 mg d 1-14, and dex 40 mg d 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, 12 of a 3-week (wk) cycle for 12 cycles, while pts in the KRd arm received cfz 36 mg/m2 d 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16 with len 25 mg daily on d 1-21 and dex 40 mg wkly, in 4 wk cycles for 9 cycles. Maintenance included len 15mg d 1-21 every 4 wks. The study was designed to detect a hazard ratio (HR)=0.75 with 80% power at 1-sided 2.5% alpha and 399 PFS events (progression or death regardless of intervening therapy). Results: The study accrued 1087 pts (VRd=542, KRd=545). The median age was 65y. Treatment, efficacy, and toxicity data are in the table. At the second of 3 planned interim analyses, with PFS HR=1.04 (95% CI, 0.8 to 1.3, p=0.74), futility was met. Median PFS was VRd=34.4m and KRd=34.6m; no differences were seen based on age (<65 or ≥65), presence or absence of t(4;14) or ISS stage. The three-year OS (95% CI) was similar: VRd 84% (80 to 88) and KRd 86% (82 to 89). Conclusions: In this randomized phase 3 trial, KRd did not improve PFS compared with VRd in NDMM. A significantly higher rate of cardio-pulmonary and renal toxicity was observed with KRd, while neuropathy rates were higher with VRd. VRd remains the standard triplet induction regimen in standard and intermediate risk NDMM, and a suitable backbone for 4 drug combinations. Clinical trial information: NCT01863550 . [Table: see text]

e19136 Background: Patient reported side effect bother is needed to understand tolerability of cancer drugs. We examined whether increase in side effect bother from baseline to cycle 7 as measured by a single item (GP5) from the FACT-G, “I am bothered by side effects of treatment”, was associated with early treatment discontinuation (ETD) in a multiple myeloma (MM) trial. Methods: Data were drawn from the induction phase of ECOG ACRIN E1A06, a two arm, phase 3 trial conducted in patients with untreated MM. The induction phase occurred over twelve, 28-day cycles. GP5 was assessed at registration and cycle 7. ETD was defined as completion of less than 12 cycles of treatment. We tested whether increase in side effect bother on the GP5 from baseline to cycle 7 was associated with months to ETD in two ways. At each timepoint, GP5 was rated with these response options: “Not at all”, “A little bit”, “Somewhat”, “Quite a bit”, “Very Much”. First, we stratified Kaplan Meier curves by patients with versus without substantially increased side effect burden from registration to cycle 7 on the GP5, defined as an increase of > 2 response categories; Cox regression was used to calculate a hazard ratio. Second, we fit a joint model of the GP5 change trajectory on months to ETD that substituted the estimated slope of a longitudinal logistic regression model into the hazard function of a Cox model. In this model, GP5 was dichotomized as 0 = “Not at all/”A little bit”; 1 = “Somewhat”/ “Quite a bit”/ “Very Much”. Results: 159 patients were followed during induction for a median of 11 months (range: 0.2-16.0). 10 patients (6%) reported a substantial increase on GP5 from registration to cycle 7. After 16 months, these patients had a significantly higher hazard of ETD as estimated by Kaplan Meier methods: 40% experienced ETD vs. 24% of patients without substantial GP5 increase [hazard ratio (HR): 3.08 (95% CI: 1.18-8.02)]. In the joint model, the effect of GP5 on hazard of ETD was larger [HR: 9.56 (95% CI: 2.41-37.82)]. Conclusions: This study found initial evidence that increase in side effect bother as measured by the GP5 predicts ETD and may therefore reflect treatment intolerability in cancer drug trials. The effects found in this study will be tested for replication in additional ECOG-ACRIN trials with diverse designs, treatments, and cancer types. Clinical trial information: NCT00602641 .

e19132 Background: The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–General has an item about patient tolerability of treatment: “I am bothered by side effects of treatment” (GP5). We examined the predictive value of this single item for early treatment discontinuation in clinical trials. Methods: GP5 level prior to protocol therapy (rated using a 5-point Likert scale) and treatment start/end dates and off treatment reason data at each treatment phase were drawn from five phase III clinical trials conducted by ECOG-ACRIN. In the present analysis, GP5 was dichotomized as 0 = “Not at all”/“A little bit” and 1 = “Somewhat”/“Quite a bit”/“Very Much”. Early treatment discontinuation was defined either as receiving less than protocol specified cycles of treatment when maximum cycles specified in the protocol (E1A06 induction, E1912 induction, E1609 induction, E1105 induction, E5103 adjuvant), analyzed using logistic regression via odds ratio [OR]), or treatment cessation for reasons other than progressive disease or death when treatment continued until progression or intolerability (E1A06 maintenance, E1912 maintenance, E1609 maintenance, E1105 maintenance), analyzed using Cox proportional hazard model via hazard ratio [HR]. Results: GP5 prior to treatment was significantly associated with early discontinuation of E1A06 maintenance, E1609 maintenance, E1912 maintenance, and E1912 induction. No significant association was found for other therapies examined in the study. Conclusions: High GP5 level prior to treatment is associated with higher likelihood of early treatment discontinuation in patients who have received previous treatment. The limited predictive value of GP5 for treatment naïve patients is more limited, serial on-treatment assessment should be considered in this setting. Clinical trial information: NCT00602641 . [Table: see text]

TPS8052 Background: The most common translocation in multiple myeloma (MM) is t(11;14)(q13;q32), present in approximately 20% of cases. MM cells with t(11;14) usually have a favorable high BCL-2 level and inferior outcomes compared to standard risk MM. Venetoclax (VEN) is a potent, selective, orally available small-molecule BCL-2 inhibitor that induces cell death in MM cell lines and primary samples. VEN has single agent activity in relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM) with an acceptable safety profile, especially in t(11;14) MM; however, non- t(11;14) MM patients may benefit from single agent VEN and VEN incorporated in multi-agent RRMM regimens. Dexamethasone (d) promotes Bcl-2 dependence in MM resulting in sensitivity to VEN and this combination with bortezomib (Vd-VEN) has an acceptable safety profile with high response rates in heavily pre-treated MM. Combination therapy with daratumumab and bortezomib (DVd) has become a standard of care in RRMM. Our hypotheses are that the addition of VEN will improve upon this standard and be most effective in the t(11;14) positive subset. Methods: Eligibility criteria include RRMM with measurable disease, not bortezomib refractory, platelet count > 100K. t(11;14) is an integral biomarker with status (positive or negative) established at registration. After a Ph1 study to determine the recommended phase 2 VEN dose, patients are randomized to DVd +/- VEN [stratified by prior lines of therapy and R-ISS]. The primary Ph2 objectives are to compare 8-cycle minimal residual disease (MRD) negative rate and to inform the role of t(11;14) as a biomarker. The Ph2 design proposed by Freidlin et al. follows a decision algorithm as outlined in the table below. Simulations were run to establish an optimal sample size given various parameters including biomarker prevalence and power to make appropriate decisions for a Ph3 design. Target Ph2 accrual is 240 patients with a 1/3 positive:2/3 negative t(11;14) split. Clinical trial information: NCT03701321. [Table: see text]

8001 Background: Smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM) is a precursor to myeloma, wherein current standard of care is observation (obs). Data from a randomized Spanish trial (Mateos et al, NEJM 2015) suggest that lenalidomide(len)/dexamethasone improves time to developing myeloma (TTP) and overall survival (OS) for patients (pts) with high risk (HR) SMM over obs. However, pts were not screened with advanced imaging techniques, used a HR definition that is not routinely available, and combination therapy limited the ability to isolate the effect of len, and thus has not become standard of care. Methods: E3A06 is a randomized phase III intergroup trial, testing the effect of single agent len compared with obs for pts with intermediate or high risk SMM. In an initial phase II run in all pts received len to demonstrate safety. Eligibility required ≥10% PCs and abnormal serum FLC ratio (<0.26 or >1.65). The primary endpoint was progression PFS was estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the one-sided stratified log-rank test. Results: PII enrolled 44 pts and PIII randomized 182 pts to either len (n=90) or obs (n=92) [stratified on time since SMM diagnosis ≤1y vs >1y]. Baseline characteristics were similar between the arms. 80% (PII) and 51% (PIII) are off len, primarily due to adverse events (AE) or pt withdrawal. Among the len treated pts, G3/4 non-hematologic AE occurred in 28% of PIII pts with fatigue being most common (n=5). G4 hematologic AE rate was 5.7%, primarily neutropenia (n=4). 3-year cumulative incidence of invasive SPMs was 5.2% (len) and 3.5% (obs). Overall response rate was 47.7% for the phase II study, and in phase III, 48.9% for the len arm, and 0% for the obs arm. Median follow up was 71 months (PII), and 28 months (PIII). 3-year PFS was 87% for the PII cohort. One, 2 and 3-year PFS was 98%, 93%, and 91% for len, and 89%, 76%, and 66% for the obs arm (HR 0.28, p=0.0005) favoring the len arm. No difference in QOL score was noted between arms. Conclusions: Overall, this trial represents the largest randomized trial in SMM to date. In conjunction with the Spanish data, this trial may support a change in clinical practice. Clinical trial information: NCT01169337. [Table: see text]

8592 Background: Accrual to NCI clinical trials(CT)is often slower than planned at times mandating premature closure resulting in loss of valuable resources and delay of scientific progress. Methods: The NCI-MYSC AWG identified 10 potential BtA. SWOG, ECOG and Alliance investigators were queried and agreed that these barriers impede accrual (results stratified for academic and community sites). The MYSC AWG developed in collaboration with NCI and FDA strategies to overcome these barriers. Results: Strategies listed for the 3 most often cited BtA: 1. Reimbursement for CT related expenses:increase awareness of improved reimbursement for phase II CT; tailor reimbursement according to CT complexity; request funds from industry and other sources ( http://biqsfp.cancer.gov ) for qualifying ancillary CT components. 2. Spectrum of available treatment options influences CT participation: educate patients and providers about the significance of a new CT using social media, presentations at national meetings and by adding educational material to CT protocol; encourage opinion leaders and advocacy groups not to promote a new therapy as “standard” in the absence of phase III data. 3. Requirement of CT specific therapy at NCI designated sites only: “MYSC AWG Drug Administration Table” describes NCI/FDA approved rules for CT specific drug administration; CT protocol will outline which standard treatment components of a CT can be administered at any site as long as protocol specific guidelines are followed and conduct is supervised by enrolling investigator. Examples of additional strategies to overcome identified BtA: determine feasibility, indication and insurance coverage of CT specific tests during protocol development; discourage narrow eligibility criteria; avoid competing CT; allow up to 1 cycle of commercially available therapy prior to enrollment; CIRB support for phase II CT. Conclusions: The MYSC Accrual Working Group developed in collaboration with NCI and FDA strategies to overcome barriers to myeloma clinical trial accrual. These strategies may be applicable to NCI-sponsored clinical trials evaluating interventions in other diseases.

e19517 Background: Investigators cite complicated test (T) schedules as barriers to the conduct of clinical trials, especially T that do not contribute to outcome or pt safety. In MM protocols, some T are prone to being done inaccurately (e.g. UPEP, 24 hour urine collections), or are not useful (e.g. uric acid, AST/ALT) in determination of response (R) or safety. These T lead to increased cost, protocol violations, and do not enhance outcome. Methods: We analyzed data submitted for pts on E4A03 to examine frequency of missing data for R T: serum and urine (U) PEP, immunofixation (IFE) bone surveys (BS), and safety labs for C1-4. Results: Table outlines % pts with completed T. Most had T for serum M protein, as well as heme T but serum and U PEP, and IFE dropped off by C4. Other T e.g. uric acid were completed in 77%. Only 79% of pts had a BS repeated at C4. Incorrect or missing U data led to categorization of 16/445 (3.6%) pts as ineligible and was most frequent reason for ineligibility (69%). Missing U data led to 13/26 pts not evaluable. Analysis of SAE during the C1-4 revealed no SAE for hyperuricemia and < 5 SAE for AST/ALT. Only 5% of pts had lab-based SAE filed in 4 C. Conclusions: Required U T and BS to assess R in E4A03 were missing or completed inadequately and caused pts to be ineligible and or not evaluable. Such T need to be eliminated or replaced. Strategies to monitor data submission in real time may reduce subject loss due to T error. The requirement for routine T should be reassessed to create simpler trial design. Clinical trial information: NCT00098475. [Table: see text]

PURPOSE Observation is the current standard of care for smoldering multiple myeloma. We hypothesized that early intervention with lenalidomide could delay progression to symptomatic multiple myeloma. METHODS We conducted a randomized trial that assessed the efficacy of single-agent lenalidomide compared with observation in patients with intermediate- or high-risk smoldering multiple myeloma. Lenalidomide was administered orally at a dose of 25 mg on days 1 to 21 of a 28-day cycle. The primary end point was progression-free survival, with disease progression requiring the development of end-organ damage attributable to multiple myeloma and biochemical progression. RESULTS One hundred eighty-two patients were randomly assigned—92 patients to the lenalidomide arm and 90 to the observation arm. Median follow-up is 35 months. Response to therapy was observed in 50% (95% CI, 39% to 61%) of patients in the lenalidomide arm, with no responses in the observation arm. Progression-free survival was significantly longer with lenalidomide compared with observation (hazard ratio, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.12 to 0.62; P = .002). One-, 2-, and 3-year progression-free survival was 98%, 93%, and 91% for the lenalidomide arm versus 89%, 76%, and 66% for the observation arm, respectively. Only six deaths have been reported, two in the lenalidomide arm versus four in the observation arm (hazard ratio for death, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.08 to 2.53). Grade 3 or 4 nonhematologic adverse events occurred in 25 patients (28%) on lenalidomide. CONCLUSION Early intervention with lenalidomide in smoldering multiple myeloma significantly delays progression to symptomatic multiple myeloma and the development of end-organ damage.

Abstract Abstract 3165 Background: Accrual to large oncology group studies in the United States is often slower than planned, especially in less common malignancies such as Multiple Myeloma (MM). To improve the treatment of patients with MM, it is essential that we address the barriers to accrual (BtA) to national clinical trials. The NCI Myeloma Steering Committee (MYSC) formed the Accrual Working Group (AWG), charged to analyze this problem. Methods: The members of the MYSC have developed a list of 10 potential BtA to NCI MM-CT under the leadership of the AWG at meetings conducted in person and by monthly telephone conference. This list was distributed via Survey Monkey among investigators and research staff of the SWOG, ECOG/ACRIN and Alliance research bases for the purpose of ranking the perceived importance of the 10 selected BtA. Responses based on a 0–5 Likert Scale were analyzed as continuous and categorical. For the latter, responses were grouped: Impedes Accrual – No (0,1), Yes (2–5); Significantly Impedes Accrual – No (0–3), Yes (4,5). Results: 246 survey responses were received. 50 participants who indicated that they had never attempted to or actually never enrolled a patient into a MM-CT were excluded. Of 196 responders, 61% had enrolled at least 5 patients, 43% practiced in academic centers (A) and 57% in community centers (C). 26% identified themselves as research staff, 74% as primarily physician investigators including Principal Investigators (12%). 78% have current access to NCI MM-CT. 46% identified their research base affiliation with SWOG, 20% with ECOG/ACRIN, 17% with Alliance, 17% as CTSU, NRG and other. The majority of survey responders confirmed agreement in the perception that all 10 identified BtA impede accrual, ranging from 60–84% depending on the specific barrier identified, while significant impediment to accrual ascribed to these BtA ranged from 22–47%. The perceived barriers most often cited as impeding accrual were (1) spectrum of available treatment options, (2) level of reimbursement for clinical trial related expenses and (3) patient‘s need for prompt treatment intervention (84%, 80%, 76% respectively). The first two barriers along with the requirement that patients receive their treatment exclusively at the NCI designated treatment site were rated most often as significantly impeding accrual (37%, 47%, 34% respectively). The first two were also identified most often as perceived BtA independent of practice setting (A, C), type of research engagement (physician investigator, research staff) and level of experience with MM-CT. Interestingly, the perception that patients must receive their treatment at the NCI designated treatment site and competing industry sponsored clinical trials were substantially more often cited as impeding accrual in academic centers compared to community centers and by physician investigators compared to research staff. The complexity of required diagnostic work up and the complexity of the treatment protocol and follow up testing were substantially more often cited as BtA in the community setting and by research staff compared to their peers in the academic setting and by physician investigators. The NCI MYSC AWG has proposed specific solutions to potentially lower perceived BtA. These include guidelines to allow protocol specific administration of commercially available agents by the patient‘s local oncologist, a simplified diagnostic work up and treatment plan and eligibility inclusion of patients who have received up to one cycle of specified urgent therapy prior to enrollment in MM-CT. Conclusions: We have queried experienced clinical investigators and research staff on 10 potential MM-CT specific BtA and found substantial consensus among responding participants in this survey. There are apparent differences in perceived BtA between the respondents from academic and community centers as well as between research staff and physician investigators. These data suggest that a structured approach to identification of BtA to clinical trials is feasible and creates opportunities to overcome them. This may have application to clinical trials across other diseases and may also lead to improvements in accrual. Disclosures: Barlogie: Celgene, IMF, MMRF, Millennium, Genzyme: Consultancy; Celgene, IMF, Millennium: Honoraria; Celgene, Novartis, NCI, Millennium, Onyx, Icon: Research Funding; GEP: Patents & Royalties.

Abstract The treatment and natural history of smoldering myeloma has been an area of intense preclinical and clinical study. Historical attempts to treat these patients have not demonstrated benefit, likely as a consequence of lack of attention to the vast heterogeneity contained within the diagnosis. More recent risk criteria from both US and Spanish investigators have identified a cohort of smoldering myeloma patients at high risk for progression in a short time, using different methodology. Recently the PETHEMA group published a randomized clinical trial testing lenalidomide/dexamethasone vs observation among high risk smoldering patients, and demonstrated a clear benefit in terms of progression free and overall survival favoring early intervention. However, the risk criteria utilized a highly sensitive method of flow cytometry, a test not routinely available in the US. It is not clear that the group of patients defined in the PETHEMA study share similar outcomes with those defined as high risk using the ECOG/Mayo criteria. A recent publication demonstrated only 25% overlap for the highest risk smoldering patients when using either the PETHEMA or the ECOG criteria. To further evaluate the potential benefit of early intervention in a high risk smoldering cohort, the ECOG myeloma group designed a phase II/III trial testing the safety and efficacy of single agent lenalidomide. We report here on the safety and efficacy of the phase II portion of the trial. The phase II group of patients received lenalidomide alone at a dose of 25 mg days 1-21 every 28 days. The primary endpoint for the safety study was the rate of any treatment-related grade 4-5 non-hematologic toxicity plus grade 3 non-hematologic toxicity that affects vital organ function (such as cardiac, hepatic, or thromboembolic events) observed within 6 cycles of treatment. Patients were to be diagnosed with high-risk smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM) within the past 12 months, as confirmed by both of the following: bone marrow plasmacytosis with >= 10% plasma cells or sheets of plasma cells and an abnormal serum free light chain ratio (<0.125 or >8.0) by serum FLC assay. Patients must have had measurable levels of monoclonal protein. Patients must have had no lytic lesions on skeletal surveys and no hypercalcemia (i.e. >= 11 mg/dL). Among the final phase II cohort (n=44 patients), 55% were female, and 43% were 65 years and older. Enrollment began in January 2011 and lasted 2 years with the last patient completing 6 cycles of treatment in August 2013. The median treatment duration of the entire cohort is 13.5 cycles (range 1-30 cycles). Mean percentage lenalidomide dose over the first 6 cycles was 94, 89, 82, 79, 76, 72. With a median follow up of 17 months, 2 patients had progression on therapy. Fifteen patients are off treatment for the following reasons: disease progression (n=2), AE/complication (n=5), death (n=2), patient withdrawal/refusal (n=5), other (n=1); 6 of the 15 patients ended treatment before completing 6 cycles. Of 44 patients assessed for toxicity, 11 patients [25.0%, 95% CI: (13.2%-40.3%)] experienced worst grade treatment-related non-hematologic toxicity of grade 3 or higher based on CTCAE v4, with neutropenia and fatigue being the most frequent. This includes 2 fatal deaths (MI and TE). Two patients [4.6%, 95% CI: (0.1%-15.5%)] experienced a serious adverse event as defined for the purposes of the phase II toxicity analysis that included treatment-related grade 4-5 non-hematologic toxicity or any grade 3 toxicity affecting vital organ function (such as cardiac, hepatic, or thromboembolic events) during the first 6 cycles of treatment. Twelve patients achieved partial response or better [33.3%, 95% CI: (15.0%-42.8%)] along with 25 patients reporting stable disease. Lenalidomide has shown promise in the treatment of high-risk smoldering myeloma and based on this analysis, accrual to the phase III portion is ongoing. In the context of the encouraging data from the PETHEMA group, completion of the phase III portion of this study is needed to validate their findings using a different criteria, and using a steroid sparing approach. This study was coordinated by the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (Robert L. Comis, M.D., Chair) and supported in part by Public Health Service Grants CA23318, CA66636, CA21115, CA13650, CA32102 and from the National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health and the Department of Health and Human Services. Disclosures: Lonial: Millennium: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy.