Belch, Andrew R.

AbstractThe phase 3 FIRST trial demonstrated significant improvement in progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) with an immune‐stimulatory agent, lenalidomide, in combination with low‐dose dexamethasone until disease progression (Rd continuous) vs melphalan +prednisone + thalidomide (MPT) in transplant‐ineligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). Rd continuous similarly extended PFS vs fixed‐duration Rd for 18 cycles (Rd18). Outcomes in the Canadian/US subgroup (104 patients per arm) are reported in this analysis. Rd continuous demonstrated a significant improvement in PFS vs MPT (median, 29.3 vs 20.2 months; HR, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.49‐0.97]; p = 0.03326) and an improvement vs Rd18 (median, 21.9 months). Median OS was 56.9 vs 46.8 months with Rd continuous vs MPT (p = 0.15346) and 59.5 months with Rd18. The overall response rate was higher with Rd continuous and Rd18 (78.8% and 79.8%) vs MPT (65.4%). In the 49.0%, 52.9%, and 29.8% of patients with at least very good partial response in the Rd continuous, Rd18, and MPT arms, respectively, the median PFS was 56.0, 30.9, and 40.2 months, respectively. The most common grade 3/4 treatment‐emergent adverse events were neutropenia (28.4%, 30.1%, and 52.0%), anemia (23.5%, 21.4%, and 23.5%), and infections (37.3%, 30.1%, and 24.5%) with Rd continuous, Rd18, and MPT, respectively. These results were consistent with those in the intent‐to‐treat population, confirming the benefit of Rd continuous vs MPT in the Canadian/US subgroup and supporting the role of Rd continuous as a standard of care for transplant‐ineligible patients with NDMM.

Abstract Introduction: The NCIC CTG previously reported the results of a dose-finding trial testing the combination of Melphalan (M) and Lenalidomide (L) in previously untreated patients with multiple myeloma who were ineligible for stem cell transplantation because of older age and/or comorbidity (White, Blood2007; 110: 63a). Using a 28-day schedule, M (dose indicated as mg/m2/day given on days 1–4) and L (dose indicated in mg/day given on days 1–21) was associated with excess toxicity with the regimens M9L10, M4L15 and M6L10. We concluded that phase II testing of M5L10 was warranted and now report the results of this testing. Methods: Previously untreated symptomatic and consenting patients with tissue-confirmed plasmacytosis and a measurable M-protein were eligible provided that they had acceptable hematologic and biochemical laboratory parameters and no precluding comorbidities. Planned treatment consisted of M 5 mg/m2 days 1–4 and L 10 mg days 1–21, given every 28 days for 12 cycles. As our intent was to determine dose levels that could be given independently of G-CSF, primary prophylaxis with G-CSF was not included but use of G-CSF for established neutropenia was permitted. A hematologic dose limiting toxicity (H-DLT) was defined as the need for 2 dose attenuations of L or 1 dose attenuation of M occurring within the first 3 treatment cycles. Responses to treatment were classified using 1998 EBMT criteria and assessed after 2 and 6 cycles of therapy. Results: The intended sample size was 41 patients; 35 patients (1 ineligible) were enrolled before the study was closed due to observing a frequency of DLTs that surpassed predefined boundaries. Of the 34 eligible patients, median age was 73.4 yrs and ISS was stage I = 13, stage II = 11 and stage III = 10. Prior to study closure, 27 patients were evaluable for DLT; 7 (26%) did not experience a DLT. Among the remaining 20 (74%) patients, non-hematologic (N=2) and hematologic (N=18) DLTs requiring dose attenuations were seen within the first 3 treatment cycles; the H-DLTs included severe or prolonged neutropenia (N=11), thrombocytopenia (N=2) or both (N=5). One fatal serious adverse event was observed, this was due to a stroke. The other non-hematologic DLT was a cranial nerve III palsy which subsequently resolved. Responses after 2 cycles were evaluable in 21 patients and included partial response (PR) = 11, minimal response = 6, no change = 2 and progressive disease (PD) = 2. For those patients without PD after 2 cycles, responses after 6 cycles were evaluable in 8 and included PR = 6, stable response = 1 and PD = 1. Conclusion: Although M + L is an active combination for previously untreated myeloma patients, the regimen is associated with considerable myelosuppression. Without the routine use of GCSF, the doses used in the MY.11 study were not tolerable. Inability to use planned doses may have compromised the efficacy of the combination.

Abstract Introduction. The NCIC CTG is conducting phase II testing to establish the tolerability and estimate the efficacy of combining lenalidomide (L) + melphalan (M) over multiple cycles for previously untreated patients with multiple myeloma who are ineligible for stem cell transplantation. We report the data from the preliminary safety phase of this trial. Methods. The MY.11 trial was initially designed as a randomized phase II test of M 9 mg/m2 given on days 1–4 (M9) plus either L 10 mg (L10) or 20 mg given on days 1–21 of a 28 day cycle. Primary prophylaxis with G-CSF was not included, but use of G-CSF for established neutropenia was permitted; our intent was to determine dose levels that could be given independently of G-CSF. A dose attenuation schedule was developed for neutropenia and/or thrombocytopenia that was severe and occurred during the administration of L or was persistent and caused a delay in the next treatment cycle. A hematologic dose limiting toxicity (H-DLT) was defined as the need for 2 dose attenuations of L or 1 dose attenuation of M. Prior to the randomized phase of the trial, a safety run-in phase testing M9+L10 in 6 patients was planned; closure of this arm was to occur if, during the first 3 treatment cycles, there were ≥ 3 H-DLTs or any non-hematologic serious adverse event (SAE) judged to be treatment related. Four of the planned 6 patients were entered; during their first 3 treatment cycles, each experienced a H-DLT and one died from sepsis. The study was therefore amended with the intent to conduct a randomized phase II test of M 4 mg/m2 days 1–4 plus L 15 mg days 1–21 (M4L15) and M 6 mg/m2 days 1–4 plus L 10 mg days 1–21 (M6L10). Prior to the randomized phase of testing, each regimen was tested in non-randomized safety run-ins that included 6 patients per arm. The same parameters as above for study arm closure were applied. If the M6L10 arm was closed, the trial would proceed to test M 5 mg/m2 days 1–4 and L 10 mg days 1–21 (M5L10). Results. Six patients were enrolled to M4L15: during their first 3 treatment cycles, 4 patients experienced H-DLTs related to severe or persistent grade 3–4 neutropenia and one other patient experienced an SAE related to hallucinations and multiple constitutional complaints. This arm was therefore closed to accrual. Six patients were enrolled to M6L10: during their first 3 treatment cycles, 3 patients experienced H-DLTs related to severe or persistent grade 3–4 neutropenia. One of these patients was hospitalized with pulmonary edema and another with febrile neutropenia. This arm was therefore closed and the MY.11 trial amended to proceed as a single-arm phase II testing M5L10. Conclusion. Although M + L holds promise as an effective combination for previously untreated myeloma patients, the regimen is associated with considerable myelosuppression. The efficacy of the combination when given at tolerable doses remains to be established.

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 Abstract 813FN2 Introduction: Carfilzomib is a next-generation proteasome inhibitor that selectively and irreversibly binds to its target, resulting in sustained inhibition absent of off-target effects relative to bortezomib. Carfilzomib has demonstrated durable anti-tumor activity and an acceptable tolerability profile in patients with multiple myeloma (MM). Final results will be presented for the bortezomib-naïve group of PX-171-004, a phase 2 study of single-agent carfilzomib in patients with relapsed and/or refractory MM. Herein we report the most recent data analysis available at time of abstract submission. Updated final results for the bortezomib-naïve group of PX-171-004, including OS data, will be presented at the meeting. Methods: Patients received either 20 mg/m2 for all treatment cycles (Cohort 1) or a stepped-up dose-escalating regimen of 20 mg/m2 for Cycle 1 and 27 mg/m2 for all treatment cycles thereafter (Cohort 2). Carfilzomib was administered over 2–10 minutes on Days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16 of every 28-day cycle, for a maximum of 12 cycles. The primary endpoint was the best overall response rate (ORR; [CR + VGPR + PR]) determined according to the IMWG Uniform Response Criteria. Secondary endpoints included the clinical benefit response rate (CBR; [ORR + MR per EBMT criteria]), progression-free survival (PFS), time to progression (TTP), duration of response (DOR), OS, and safety. The result of efficacy analysis from disease assessment by the Independent Review Committee is presented in this abstract. Results: 127 of 129 enrolled bortezomib-naïve patients were evaluable for response. Prior therapies included thalidomide (59%), lenalidomide (59%), alkylating agents (81%), and stem cell transplant (73%). Patients had received a median of 2 prior regimens (1 in 54 patients, 2 in 40 patients, 3 in 28 patients, and ≥4 in 7 patients). 84 patients (65%) were disease refractory to their most recent therapy, defined as ≤25% response or progression during or within 60 days after completion of therapy. The median duration of carfilzomib treatment is 7 cycles (range 1−12) in Cohort 1; 8 patients were receiving drug as of February 2011 in Cohort 2 with a median treatment of 6.5 cycles (range 1−13) at that time. Best ORR was 42% in Cohort 1 and 52% in Cohort 2. Median TTP was 8.3 months and median DOR was 13.1 months in Cohort 1. The median TTP and DOR for Cohort 2 have not been reached at the time of this interim analysis; the lower bound of the 95% CI for the median TTP was 10.2 months, and 84% were estimated to have DOR ≥1 year at the time of data cutoff. Higher response rates for Cohort 2 compared with Cohort 1 do not appear to be associated with higher toxicities. Patients with unfavorable cytogenetic characteristics (≥1 abnormality) per mSMART criteria had an ORR of 37% and CBR of 42% compared with 50% and 65%, respectively, for patients with no abnormality. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs), regardless of relationship to carfilzomib in Cohorts 1 and 2, respectively, were fatigue (71%, 54%), nausea (54%, 43%), anemia (46%, 37%), and dyspnea (49%, 33%). These were primarily ≤Grade 2 in severity. The most common Grade 3/4 AEs were anemia (15%), lymphopenia (15%), thrombocytopenia (13%), pneumonia (12%) and neutropenia (12%). Treatment-emergent peripheral neuropathy (PN) was mild and infrequent (16%). Only 1 case of Grade 3 PN (0.8%) was observed. Overall, 38 patients (30%) completed 12 cycles and 22 of these patients continued to receive carfilzomib therapy under a safety extension protocol (PX-171-010), an ongoing, multicenter, open-label phase 2 study to monitor long-term use of single-agent carfilzomib. Conclusions: To date we have seen robust and durable single-agent activity for carfilzomib in bortezomib-naïve patients with relapsed and often refractory MM with an ORR of 42−52% and a CBR of 59−63% from 2 separate dose cohorts in a population wherein 92% received an immunomodulatry drug and 73% had undergone an autologous stem cell transplant previously. These data are suggestive of a dose–response relationship and are being further evaluated in the exploratory phase 1b/2 study PX-171-007. Carfilzomib was associated with minimal PN and excellent long-term tolerability, with nearly one-third of patients completing 12 cycles and 22 of these continuing treatment beyond 1 year in the extension protocol PX-171-010. Disclosures: Vij: Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Speakers Bureau. Kaufman:Millenium: Consultancy; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Keryx: Consultancy; Merck: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Jakubowiak:Ortho Biotech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Exelixis: Consultancy, Honoraria. Wang:Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Jagannath:Millennium: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; Merck: Honoraria; OrthoBiotec.Imedex: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Medicom World Wide: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Optum Health Education: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; PER Group: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kukreti:Celgene: Honoraria. Alsina:Millennium: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Allergan: Research Funding. Belch:Celgene: Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding. Gabrail:Millennium: Research Funding. Matous:Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Millenium: Speakers Bureau; Cephalon: Speakers Bureau. Vesole:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Speakers Bureau. Orlowski:Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kunkel:VLST biothech: Consultancy; Threshold: Consultancy; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Wong:Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Employment, Equity Ownership. Stewart:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 3861 Poster Board III-797 Previous studies have reported that multiple myeloma (MM) patients (pts) with t(4;14) identified by FISH who are treated with a single ASCT as part of first-line therapy have worse outcomes than those lacking this adverse cytogenetic marker; two trials have described a median progression-free survival (PFS) of only 8-9 months and median overall survival (OS) of 18 mos in this setting (Chang H, et al. Bone Marrow Transplant 2005; 36: 793; Gertz M, et al. Blood 2005; 106: 2837). Since the novel agent bortezomib appears to have efficacy in patients with t(4;14), we designed a phase II protocol in which pts receive induction with pegylated liposomal doxorubicin, bortezomib and dexamethasone (DBD) x 4 cycles, followed by post-induction therapy with oral cyclophosphamide 300 mg/m2 days 1,8 15, 22 with bortezomib 1.5 mg/m2 days 1,8,15 and prednisone 100 mg q 2 days of a 28-day cycle (CyBor-P) x 8 additional cycles. Maintenance therapy with dexamethasone (dex) 40 mg/month was then administered until progression. Although elective stem cell collection was recommended after induction, routine ASCT was not performed in the absence of disease progression. Between February 2008-August 2009, 153 newly diagnosed MM pts were screened for t(4;14) in 7 Canadian centers, and 14 (9%) were found to be positive by FISH. Four did not meet the critieria for symptomatic MM, 2 had received ≥ 2 mos of prior therapy while 8 were entered onto study. One of these was later determined to have a variant abnormality of chromosome 4 but not t(4;14) and underwent ASCT after induction; this pt is included in the safety analysis only. The median age was 56 (49-69) and 43% were male. The median percent nuclei positive for t(4;14) was 30% (10-41%), serum β2-microglobulin 394 nmol/L (190-1695) and albumin 34 g/L (28-39); one pt had ISS stage 1,3 had stage 2 and 3 had stage 3 MM. Immunoglobulin subtype included IgGκ in 2 and IgAκ in 2 and IgAλ in 3. All pts have completed DBD induction, with the best response in the 7 evaluable pts consisting of PR in 2 and VGPR in 5; one in PR progressed quickly after induction and has achieved nCR after D-PACE followed by ASCT and lenalidomide maintenance. Four are receiving post-induction therapy with CyBor-P currently, with VGPR in 3 and PR in 1. No SAEs or grade3/4 neutropenia or thrombocytopenia has occurred; other toxicities were mild, with grade 2 skin toxicity noted in 37.5% and grade 2 neurotoxicity observed in 7.4%. All pts are alive at a median follow-up (F/U) of 8 mos (2-11), and 6 (86%) are free of progression. We conclude: 1) the incidence of t(4;14) in newly diagnosed MM pts appears to be lower than the 15% anticipated; 2) 28% of newly diagnosed pts with this entity have asymptomatic MM; 3) preliminarily, DBD induction has resulted in ≥ PR in all pts although 1 progressed quickly; 4) this bortezomib-based regimen is very well-tolerated; 5) longer F/U is required to determine the PFS and OS with this approach. Disclosures: Reece: Ortho Biotech: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Off Label Use: Use of bortezomib as part of initial therapy with pegylated liposomal doxorubicin and dexamethasone. Piza Rodriguez:Ortho Biotech: Honoraria. Belch:Ortho Biotech: Honoraria, Research Funding. Shustik:Ortho Biotech: Honoraria. Bahlis:Ortho Biotech: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. White:Ortho Biotech: Honoraria, Research Funding. Chen:Ortho Biotech: Honoraria. Kukreti:Celgene: Honoraria. Stewart:Genzyme, Celgene, Millenium, Proteolix: Honoraria; Takeda, Millenium: Research Funding; Takeda-Millenium, Celgene, Novartis, Amgen: Consultancy. Trudel:Ortho Biotech: Honoraria, Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 1603 Background: We have previously reported similar outcomes for patients with bulky stage I or II mediastinal HL treated with combined modality therapy either with ABVD + radiotherapy or the Stanford V regimen in the North American Intergroup trial E2496 (Advani et al, ASH 2010 abstract 416). In the current analysis, we compare the patterns of failure between the two groups. Methods: Patients with stage I/II bulky mediastinal HL (maximum mediastinal mass width > 1/3 of intrathoracic diameter) were randomized to receive chemotherapy (CT) on either Arm A (ABVD x 6–8 cycles administered q 28 days) or Arm B (12 weeks of Stanford V administered weekly). Two-3 weeks after completion of chemotherapy all patients received modified involved field radiotherapy (RT) (36 Gy) delivered to the mediastinum, hila, and supraclavicular regions. Patients on Stanford V arm also received involved field RT to any other sites ≥ 5 cm at diagnosis. Patients were assessed 3, 6 and 12 months after completing RT with computed tomography scanning and then every 6 months for 5 years. The primary end points were failure free survival (FFS) and overall survival (OS). Disease progression was defined as 'in-field', 'distant' or both relative to the radiation fields prescribed in the E2496 protocol. Distant sites of failure were further characterized as intra-thoracic, intra-abdominal or other (bone, bone marrow and axillae, if not previously irradiated). Results: Two hundred and sixty-seven patients were randomized: 136 on the ABVD arm and 131 on the Stanford V arm. Patient characteristics were well matched with no differences between two arms in overall response rates (ORR), FFS and OS. (Advani et al ASH 2010 abstract 416). At a median follow up of 5.5 years 40 patients have relapsed with no difference in ABVD (n=18, 13%) versus Stanford V (n=22, 17%) (p=0.49). Central review of RT fields available in 37/40 patients found major violations with under treatment of tumor noted in 7/37 (19%). Patterns of failure are shown in Table 1. There were no differences in patterns of relapse for the two study arms. In-field relapses occurred in <10% in both study arms. Conclusion: For patients with stage I/II bulky mediastinal HL, combined modality therapy with either ABVD +RT or the Stanford V regimen results in excellent disease control. In-field relapse was uncommon. These results set a benchmark for assessing ongoing trials omitting RT in patients with stage I/II bulky mediastinal HL. Future research efforts should focus on risk stratification to identify the small subset of patients who are likely to fail standard upfront therapy. US cooperative group efforts in this subset of patients are ongoing that use interim PET-CT imaging based risk-adapted strategies. Disclosures: Horning: Genentech: Employment, Equity Ownership.

Abstract Abstract 39 Three randomized trials have previously reported a progression-free survival (PFS) advantage for patients receiving thalidomide (T) maintenance post ASCT in MM. Two trials reported an overall survival (OS) advantage but the largest trial reported shows no OS advantage and in very high risk MM the use of T was deleterious. Recent trial reports demonstrate a PFS but not yet an OS advantage for patients receiving maintenance lenalidomide. We report results of NCIC CTG MY.10 which compared treatment with T (200 mg daily) and prednisone (50 mg alternate days) (T/P) until progression versus observation alone when used as maintenance therapy following ASCT. Importantly, OS was the 1ry endpoint of this study, 2ry endpoints were PFS, quality of life (QoL), toxicity, and the incidence of venous thromboembolism events (VTE). Eligibility: Patients with MM who had ASCT within 1 year of beginning initial treatment for their disease. Patients were randomized 60–100 days post ASCT and had no other medical condition precluding long term use of T/P. Results: 332 patients were enrolled. Median age was 58 years and the arms were balanced. Patients were stratified by age (<60 or >60), and CR status post transplant. Median follow up is 4 years. Only 14% of patients were in CR post transplant. 111 patients died (50 versus 61 in T/P vs. observation). The median OS was 5 years for observation, and has not yet been reached for T/P, however T/P maintenance therapy did not significantly prolong OS: p = 0.18, HR of maintenance vs. observation 0.77 (95% CI 0.53–1.13). The 4 year survival rate was 68% for T/P and 60% for observation. Age and response to transplant had no significant association with OS (p=0.21), while higher disease stage was associated with shorter OS (p=0.03). The median PFS was 28 months for T/P versus 17 months for observation: p<0.0001, HR of T/P vs. observation 0.56 (95% CI 0.43 – 0.73). The 4 year PFS rate was 32% for T/P treated patients versus 14% for patients on observation. At relapse, treatment by arm (T/P vs observation) included lenalidomide (39 vs 34%), T (13 vs 22%) or bortezomib (50 versus 46%). Non hematologic toxicities were seen in more patients with treatment (Grade 3: 92% T/P vs 49% observation, grade 4: 16% vs 7%). Common toxicities of all grades that were significantly higher in T/P treated patients included hyperglycemia, edema, hypertension, fatigue, Cushingoid appearance, constipation, mouth dryness, dyspepsia, anxiety, memory loss, sensory neuropathy, tremor, blurred vision, depressed consciousness, cataracts, dyspnea and bruising. 7% of patients on maintenance T/P developed a VTE in the absence of prophylaxis versus 0% on observation. NCIC CTG standardized response analysis was use to compare QoL data between the 2 treatment arms. Overall, patients on T/P had worse QoL specifically in physical (p=0.07), role (p=0.08), cognitive (p = 0.01) and global (p=0.06) domains, and worse symptoms with dyspnea (p = 0.0007), constipation (p<0.0001), thirst (p=0.003), swelling in leg (p=0.03), numbness (p=0.02), dry mouth (p<0.0001), and balance problems (p<0.0001). However, patients on T/P reported improvement in appetite (p 0.02), and sleep (p=0.04). Conclusions: T/P maintenance did not improve overall survival, the primary objective of this trial, although a trend in favor of T/P was seen. In contrast, PFS was significantly improved in the T/P arm while toxicity was demonstrably increased and quality of life diminished. Disclosures: Stewart: Millennium: Consultancy; Celgene: Honoraria. Trudel:Celgene: Honoraria. Bahlis:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. White:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Meyer:Celgene: Honoraria.

Abstract Abstract 1938 Background: Carfilzomib (CFZ), a selective, epoxyketone proteasome inhibitor, produces potent, sustained proteasome inhibition and lacks many of the off-target activities associated with bortezomib (BTZ). Durable single-agent activity with CFZ has been observed in patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (R/R MM) who have received multiple prior therapies as well as in pts with advanced stage disease or significant comorbidities (Jagannath et al. ASCO 2009 Meeting. Abstract 8504). PX-171-004, is an ongoing Phase 2 study of single-agent CFZ in pts with relapsed or refractory MM following 1–3 prior therapies. Here we present updated data on the BTZ-naïve pts and report on activity observed in pts with significant comorbidities or poor-risk cytogenetic or FISH markers for myeloma. Methods: Enrolled pts received either 20 mg/m2 for all treatment cycles, or a stepped-up, dose-escalating regimen of 20 mg/m2 for Cycle 1 and 27 mg/m2 for all treatment cycles thereafter. CFZ was administered on Days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15 and 16 every 28 days (one cycle), for a maximum of 12 cycles. Dexamethasone, 4mg, was administered prior to CFZ in Cycle 1 only. For the present analyses, pts were stratified according to several baseline criteria including ECOG performance score, cytogenetic or FISH markers of high-risk disease per mSMART criteria [del17p, t(4;14), t(14;16), del13 by karyotype and hypodiploidy] and serum ß2-microglobulin. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) per International Uniform Response Criteria for Multiple Myeloma. Results: Data are available for 110 BTZ-naïve pts. Baseline pt characteristics included: 60% of ECOG PS ≥1; 53% baseline neuropathy Grade 1/2; 30% moderately impaired renal function (CrCl <60 mL/min), and 17% diabetes. Approximately 13% of pts had cytogenetic or FISH markers of poor prognosis. The ORR for the entire BTZ-naïve population was 48%; the ORR for BTZ-naïve pts receiving 20–27 mg/m2 was 54%. The ORRs stratified according to dose and baseline measurements are detailed in the following table. The most common treatment-emergent AEs, regardless of relationship to study drug, were fatigue (61%), nausea (43%), anemia (39%), dyspnea (36%), cough (34%), headache (31%), thrombocytopenia and upper respiratory infections (30% each) and were primarily ≤ Grade 2 in severity. Grade 3/4 AEs occurring in >5% of pts included lymphopenia, neutropenia, pneumonia, thrombocytopenia, anemia and fatigue. Of note, there were no discontinuations for peripheral neuropathy and only 1 pt with impaired renal function at baseline was discontinued for creatinine increases. Twenty-four pts remain on study and 23% have completed the protocol-specified 12 cycles of therapy. Seventeen pts (20%) elected to continue CFZ on an extended treatment protocol (PX-171-010); no cumulative toxicities have been noted. Conclusions: Single-agent CFZ achieves high response rates in BTZ-naïve pts with relapsed myeloma, with minimal neuropathy, even in the setting of high-risk disease. In addition, single-agent CFZ continues to demonstrate long-term tolerability even in pts with comorbid conditions, including renal insufficiency and diabetes, who may benefit from a steroid-sparing treatment regimen. The data from this ongoing trial show that CFZ is a promising new treatment for multiple myeloma in the relapsed or refractory setting. Disclosures: Vij: Onyx: Honoraria. Kaufman:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millenium: Consultancy; Merck: Research Funding. Jakubowiak:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Centocor Ortho Biotec: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Exelixis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Jagannath:Millenium, OrthoBiotec, Celgene, Merck, Onyx: Honoraria; Imedex, Medicom World Wide, Optum Health Education, PER Group: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Kukreti:Celgene: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Ortho Biotech: Honoraria. Alsina:Millenium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy. Gabrail:Millenium: Research Funding. Vesole:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Millenium: Speakers Bureau. Le:Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Wang:Celgene: Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding; Millenium: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 303 Background: Carfilzomib (CFZ) is a novel proteasome inhibitor that binds its target selectively and irreversibly, resulting in greater and more sustained proteasomal inhibition compared to BTZ (Demo et al, Cancer Res 2007). CFZ overcomes BTZ-resistance in vitro (Kuhn et al, Blood 2007) and in a previous Phase 2 study (PX-171-003), single-agent CFZ achieved durable responses and maintained disease control [e.g. ≥ Stable Disease (SD)] in patients with progressive multiple myeloma (MM) despite treatment with essentially all available agents. PX-171-004 is an ongoing Phase 2 study of CFZ monotherapy in MM patients with relapsed or refractory disease following 1–3 prior therapies. Here we report updated data for the BTZ-treated cohort. Methods: Patients with relapsed or refractory (defined as < 25% response or disease progression during therapy) MM were enrolled and stratified based on prior BTZ exposure (e.g. BTZ-naïve and BTZ-treated). For the BTZ-treated cohort, tolerability and response to prior BTZ [≥ Minor Response (MR)] was not required. CFZ 20 mg/m2 IV was administered on Days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15 and 16 every 28 days, for up to 12 cycles. The primary endpoint was Overall Response Rate (ORR) [≥ Partial Response (PR)] by IMWG criteria. Secondary endpoints included Clinical Benefit Response (CBR = ORR + MR) and safety. Results: Thirty-five BTZ-treated patients were enrolled. Six (17%) patients had previously received BTZ exclusively as a single agent, 15 (43%) received BTZ as part of a chemotherapy combination and 10 (29%) received BTZ as part of a stem cell transplant (SCT) regimen. An additional 4 (11%) received BTZ in a chemotherapy combination as well as part of a separate transplant regimen. Other prior therapies included alkylators (89%), SCT (81%), thalidomide (69%), lenalidomide (37%), and anthracyclines (31%). Six (17%) patients had disease refractory to BTZ and 9 (26%) additional patients had discontinued BTZ due to toxicities. At baseline, 19 (54 %) patients had an ECOG score ≥ 1, 17 (49%) patients had neuropathy of Grade ≥ 1, 9 (26%) patients had impaired renal function (CrCl <60 mL/min) and 9 (26%) had diabetes. The median time since diagnosis was 3.6 years (range 1.2–13.2). To date, the mean number of CFZ doses administered was 29.3 (∼5 four-week cycles; range 4–72 doses, 0.7–12 cycles). Thirty-three patients who initiated therapy were evaluable for response per protocol. The ORR was 18% (6/33), including 1 CR and 5 PRs. An additional 4 (12%) patients had MR (CBR= 30%) and 13 (39%) had SD for ≥ 6 weeks. For evaluable patients who were either refractory or intolerant to their prior BTZ therapy, responses to CFZ included 1 PR and 1 MR and 8 SDs. The most common adverse events (AEs) (≥ 30% patients) were primarily Grades 1/2 and included fatigue (57%), nausea (54%), vomiting (37%), dyspnea (34%), diarrhea (34%), anemia (31%), increased creatinine (31%) and upper respiratory tract infection (31%). Grade 3/4 AEs occurring in ≥ 10% of patients were anemia (14.3%) and neutropenia (11.4%). There were no reports of febrile neutropenia. Dose modifications were rarely required. Peripheral neuropathy (PN) was uncommon (4 patients, 11%); only 1 patient had a Grade 3 event that lasted < 36 hours and did not result in missed doses or dose modification. None of the 9 patients with baseline renal impairment were discontinued for renal AEs. To date, 6 (17%) patients have completed the full 12-cycle protocol at the initial dose and schedule, 6 (17%) remain on study and 1 patient has received > 19 cycles on a recently initiated extended treatment protocol. Conclusions: In a BTZ-exposed population that includes BTZ treatment failures and significant comorbidities (e.g. diabetes, renal insufficiency, etc), the 18% ORR (CBR 30%) is notable for this steroid- and anthracycline-sparing regimen. Single-agent CFZ is well tolerated, even in patients with renal insufficiency, and both myelosuppression and PN are uncommon. These data support the continuing evaluation of CFZ as a safe and effective treatment option in MM. Disclosures: Siegel: Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Wang:Proteolix, Inc.: Research Funding. Stewart:Genzyme, Celgene, Millenium, Proteolix: Honoraria; Takeda, Millenium: Research Funding; Takeda-Millenium, Celgene, Novartis, Amgen: Consultancy. Kukreti:Celgene: Honoraria. Jakubowiak:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Centocor Ortho Biotech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Exelixis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers-Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Jagannath:Millennium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. McDonagh:Proteolix: Research Funding. Belch:Ortho Biotech: Honoraria, Research Funding. Bahlis:Celgene: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Ortho Biotech: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Le:Proteolix, Inc.: Employment. Kunkel:Proteolix: Consultancy, Employment. Bennett:Proteolix: Employment. Kauffman:Proteolix, Inc.: Employment. Vij:Proteolix, Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding.