Shustik, Chaim

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 MM has a median age at presentation of 65–68 years, rarely occurring in pts before age 40. Here, we present clinical, laboratory and survival data in the largest ever-analyzed cohort of young pts compared with pts aged ≥ 40 years. 259 pts aged < 40 and 8,296 aged ≥ 40 years were enrolled. These 8.555 pts were part of the cohort analyzed for the ISS staging project. Previously untreated pts entered into randomized trials with standard (SDT) or high dose treatment (HDT). Clinical data were available for all pts, 526 pts had karyotypic analysis and 454 pts testing for Del 13 testing by FISH. The Chi-Square test was used to identify significant prognostic factors. A maximum likelihood model was used to estimate relative excess risk (RER) for younger versus older pts treated with SDT or HDT. Observed survival was adjusted by life expectancy depending on age, gender, and nationality. Young pts had significantly lower ISS stage I than older pts (stage I; 39% vs. 28%, stage II: 28 vs. 39%, stage III 33% vs. 33%, p<. 001, p<001, p=0.863, respectively) due primarily to a lower prevalence of high ß2m levels and low albumin levels in the younger age group. Paradoxically, the younger pts more frequently presented with higher M-component levels and Durie Salmon stage III (65% vs. 54%, p<0.001). Prevalence of other important prognostic parameters like Hb, platelet count, creatinine, calcium, CRP, LDH and bone marrow PC infiltration was similar in both groups. Younger pts had more frequently good ECOG performance status (PS) (0–2), (87% vs. 81%, p<0.01). Karyotypic abnormalities and Del 13 were similarly distributed between both cohorts. Median OS was significantly longer in young pts (median: 4.8 years vs. 3.7 years; hazard ratio (HR): 1.46; 95%, CI (1.27, 1.68); p=<0.001). Better outcome in the younger cohort was seen in all three ISS stages, independent of gender. Median OS survival was significantly longer after SDT in the young cohort (median: 49 months (mos) vs. 39 mos; HR 1.49; CI (1.27, 1.75); p<0.001). Median survival: 86 mos in young and 68 mos in older pts on HDT; this did not translate into a statistical difference (HR 1.8; CI (0.81,1.44); p=0.6). Risk estimates in a maximum likelihood analysis revealed that, apart from ISS Stage, young age followed by female sex was statistical significant for a good outcome for pts treated with SDT (Age RER: 1.43, CI (1.20, 1.70), p<0.001; Sex RER: 1.07, CI (1.02, 1.14); p < 0.013). For pts treated with HDT, only ISS Stage was found to be a risk factor, but not age or gender. Conclusions: Patients < 40 have better prognosis and survival than older patients. The most important features of young patients are low SßM, normal S. Alb, and good performance status.

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 Background: The initial therapies for multiple myeloma have changed significantly in the recent years with routine incorporation of combinations containing IMiDs and proteasome inhibitors. However, patients with MM invariably relapse after their initial treatment and undergo successive therapies for continued control of their disease. The increasing access to new therapies for treatment of relapsed disease has led to improved survival of patients with MM. Many recent phase 3 trials have studied the impact of new agents on outcome of patients with MM who are relapsing after the initial lines of therapy for relapsed disease. However, the natural history of relapsed myeloma earlier in the course of relapsed disease has not been studied in detail. Patients and methods: We designed a global, multicenter, retrospective study to examine the current treatment approaches for initial relapses in MM and patient outcomes following application of successive treatment regimens. Patients with multiple myeloma who experience a first relapse between January 1, 2007 and December 31, 2011 were identified at participating sites. Clinical and laboratory data pertaining to the time of diagnosis and from the time of individual relapses up to and including the third relapse will be obtained from the clinical records. The first date of treatment with an anti-myeloma regimen for first disease relapse was termed time zero (T0). Results: Three hundred and fifteen patients were enrolled; median age at diagnosis was 59 years (range: 35 - 86), 59% were male. Patients were enrolled from North America (33%), Europe (35%) or Asia (32%). The patients were diagnosed between 1997 and 2011 and the median time to T0 from diagnosis was 23.9 months (range: 0.8 - 131.9 months). An IMiD (thalidomide or lenalidomide), bortezomib or alkylator (melphalan or cyclophosphamide) was part of the initial therapy in 63%, 36% and 51% of patients, respectively; 93 (33%) patients had stem cell transplantation as part of initial treatment. The median follow up from the study entry was 56 months; 117 were alive at the time of data extraction. A second line, third line and fourth line of treatment were recorded in 307, 163 and 84 patients respectively. An IMiD (thalidomide, lenalidomide, or pomalidomide), proteasome inhibitor (bortezomib or carfilzomib) or alkylator (melphalan or cyclophosphamide) was part of the therapy for first relapse in 50%, 59% and 33% of patients, respectively. The responses to the regimens after T0, the TTNT, PFS and OS to each line of therapy are provided in the Table. Conclusion: The current study provides an assessment of the current treatment approaches used for initial treatment of MM and the salvage treatment options utilized. The study again demonstrates the progressively shorter duration of disease control with each successive treatment regimen, reflecting ongoing development of drug resistance. The overall survival of over 3 years from the time of therapy for first relapse highlights the impact of the newer therapies that have been introduced for this disease. Table. Treatment outcomes after initial relapse Endpoint 2nd line therapyN=307 3rd line therapyN=163 4th line therapyN=84 Partial response or better Median in Months (95% Confidence Interval) Overall Survival 36.1 (30.2, 42.4) 18.4 (14.5, 26.8) 12.6 (10.4, 19.0) Progression-Free Survival 13.4 (11.8, 15.8) 8.3 (6.5, 11.2) 6.4 (5.0, 8.1) Time to Next Treatment 15 (12,17) 9.8 (7.4, 12.0) 6.6 (5.8, 8.7) Figure 1. Figure 1. Disclosures Kumar: Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Skyline: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding. Dimopoulos:Novartis: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Genesis: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Onyx: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Leleu:Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; TEVA: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Pierre Fabre: Honoraria; LeoPharma: Honoraria; Chugai: Honoraria. Moreau:Celgene, Janssen, Takeda, Novartis, Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Lahuerta:Janssen Cilag, Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Vij:Takeda, Onyx: Research Funding; Celgene, Onyx, Takeda, Novartis, BMS, Sanofi, Janssen, Merck: Consultancy.

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 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.

Abstract Btz (VELCADE®) is approved for patients (pts) with relapsed MM. This study characterized PK/PD of btz at 2 doses (1.0, 1.3mg/m2) after single- and multiple-dose administration, and evaluated their relationship. 24 pts with relapsed MM and creatinine clearance ≥50mL/min were randomized to btz 1.0 (n=12) or 1.3mg/m2 (n=12) on D 1, 4, 8 and 11 of a 21-D cycle (C). Pts could continue therapy for ≥8 Cs if beneficial. PK/PD samples were drawn at multiple time points on D1 and D11 of C1 and C3 over 48h. Plasma concentrations of btz were similar following administration of 1.0 and 1.3mg/m2; differences in mean plasma Cmax and AUC values were within the degree of intersubject variability (Table). There was a decrease in clearance and an increase in terminal half-life of btz on D11 vs D1 of C1.The volume of distribution of btz suggests extensive peripheral tissue distribution. After single or repeat administration, mean maximum percent inhibition of 20S proteasome activity (vs baseline) in whole blood was 70–84% and 73–83% for the 1.0 and 1.3mg/m2 doses, respectively. The percentage of pts who had >90% inhibition was greater in subsequent doses vs first dose. Reversibility of 20S proteasome inhibition in whole blood was demonstrated. PK/PD modeling revealed an exposure-response relationship, with Emax and EC50 values consistent across study days. These results confirm btz is a potent inhibitor of the 20S proteasome. The efficacy of single-agent btz has been explored and validated in the pivotal phase 2 SUMMIT and phase 3 APEX trials at 1.3mg/m2, and explored in the phase 2 CREST trial at 1.0mg/m2. Complete safety and efficacy data by dose will be presented. Mean±SD PK parameters of btz in plasma 1.0mg/m2 1.3mg/m2 1.0mg/m2 1.3mg/m2 D1/C1 (n=11) D11/C1 (n=12) an=5;bn=11;cn=10;dn=7;en=11;fn=9 Tmax (h) 0.13±0.13 0.11±0.06 0.07±0.03 0.20±0.29 Cmax (ng/mL) 56.7±36.3 112±122 106.2±46.7 88.6±47.6 AUC48h(ng·h/mL) 26.5±12.4 34.6±19.8 82.8±35.9b 82.4±28.6b AUClast (ng·h/mL) 22.6±12.6 31.5±18.6 137±106 122.2±67.4 CL (L/h) 102.1±48.1 111.6±73.6 23.2±17.8 28.0±19.8 Vβ (L) 1976±2498a 2015±2974d 1659±752c 2415±1711 t1/2λz(h) 30.7±44.8a 11.5±12.7d 78.9±50.9c 75.6±49.9 D1/C3 (n=12) D11/C3 (n=12) Tmax (h) 0.12±0.12 0.10±0.05 0.16±0.17 0.10±0.05 Cmax (ng/mL) 66.5±42.6 120.3±70.7 83.9±69.3 114.9±98.3 AUC48h(ng·h/mL) 66.4±24.1 79.4±24.5b 101.6±58.2b 85.2±18.7f AUClast (ng·h/mL) 74.8±35.8 86.0±27.6 227±181 160.7±67.1 CL (L/h) 32.2±19.0 32.1±15.4 15.1±13.9 18.2±9.2 Vβ (L) 1852±951d 2059±1231 3294±2993e 2505±1641 t1/2λz (h) 39.9±14.4d 49.1±34.6 193±169e 108.6±64.8

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

Abstract Abstract 743 Background There has been considerable recent focus upon the molecular classification of myeloma. However, the prognostic impact of molecular changes has mostly been assessed from small and/or incomplete studies from single institutions or groups. There has been no large scale analysis of molecular features linked to ISS stage. Methods In order to clarify the overall impact of molecular changes we undertook a collective analysis of 9,897 patients through the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG). Within this population 2,295 patients had presence of cytogenetic abnormalities (Any CA); 1,713 hypodiploidy; 1,673 hyperdiploidy; 2,309 cytogenetic deletion 13; 3,226 deletion 13 by FISH; 1,573 FISH t(4;14); 1,486 FISH del p17; 1, 683 FISH t(11:14); and 366 FISH t(4;16). Enrolled patients had complete clinical and treatment details available including baseline standard prognostic factors, ISS stage, as well as both progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) information. Data came from 14 sites: 3 from the US and the remainder from Europe, Asia, and Latin America as for the ISS staging system analyses. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. Results Each of the known adverse molecular features had a negative impact upon both PFS and OS (p=002 - <0.0001). Among the deleterious FISH abnormalities the t(4;14) abnormality was the most highly correlated with poorer outcomes by PFS: 4 year estimate: 32% vs. 60% (p<0.0001). The t(4;14) abnormality combined with ISS Stage also significantly enhanced predictive capability: ISS Stage I without t(4;14) OS 81% @ 4 years; ISS Stage III with t(4;14) OS 22% @ 4 years (P<0.0001) [Figure 1]. The best outcomes were for ISS Stage I in the presence of t(11;14): OS 89% @ 4 years. Absence of any one adverse feature correlated with 80-81% OS @ 4 years for Stage I. Presence of any one adverse feature had a more variable impact and correlated with 22%-40% OS at 4 years for Stage III. In univariate correlations the most predictive correlations with OS were presence of Any CA, t(4;14), 17p-, hypodiploidy, cytogenetic 13q- with R2 values of 6.9%, 4.5%, 4.1% and 3.8% respectively. In multivariate analyses, ISS stage provided the best predictions: R2 values = 13.3%. The added contributions from molecular features were: t(4;14) 3.8%; cytogenetic 13q- 2.9%; Any CA 2.3%; and 17p- 1.0%. The maximum total R2 for OS was 22%. Conclusions This large multicenter analysis confirms the correlations between abnormal molecular findings and outcomes. Combinations with ISS Stage provide the best predictive capability. Presence of Any CA, t(4;14), 17p-, hypodiploidy and cytogenetic 13q- contribute to poorer outcomes by ISS stage. The presence of hyperdiploidy and/or t(11;14) contribute to better outcomes. There is thus validation of prior molecular studies related to prognosis utilizing this large IMWG database. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Background:The pivotal FIRST trial, the largest study conducted in transplant‐ineligible (TNE) patients (pts) with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM), examined lenalidomide plus low‐dose dexamethasone until disease progression (Rd continuous), Rd for 18 cycles (Rd18), and melphalan, prednisone, and thalidomide (MPT). The study, conducted in 18 countries in Europe, North America, and Asia Pacific, demonstrated that Rd continuous significantly improved progression‐free survival (PFS) vs MPT (median 26.0 vs 21.9 mos; HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.59‐0.79; P < .00001). PFS was similarly extended for Rd continuous vs Rd18 (median 21.0 mos; HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.60‐0.81). Furthermore, median overall survival (OS) was significantly longer with Rd continuous vs MPT (median 59.1 vs 49.1 mos; HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.67‐0.92; P = .0023). These results support the use of frontline oral, alkylator‐free continuous therapy for TNE NDMM pts and established Rd continuous as a standard of care as reflected by clinical guidelines in Canada, the US, and Europe.Aims:To report outcomes in the subset of patients from Canada and the US.MethodsPts with TNE NDMM were randomized 1:1:1 to Rd continuous (with lenalidomide given on days 1‐21 of 28‐day cycles until disease progression), Rd18 (with lenalidomide given on days 1‐21 of eighteen 28‐day cycles), or MPT (twelve 42‐day cycles). Rd18 and MPT were both 72 weeks in duration. Stratification factors included country and Rd continuous vs MPT was the primary comparison. The primary endpoint was PFS and secondary endpoints included OS, time to next therapy (TTNT) and safety. Time from randomization to second progression or death (PFS2) was an exploratory analysis. Response assessment used for PFS and PFS2 analysis was determined by investigators based on International Myeloma Working Group criteria. Data is presented as of the January 21, 2016 cutoff used for the final OS analysis.Results:A total of 312 pts from Canada (n = 252) and the US (n = 60) were enrolled (104 in each arm). Consistent with results from the intent‐to‐treat (ITT) analysis, the Canada/US subgroup also demonstrated a significant improvement in PFS with Rd continuous vs MPT (median 29.3 vs 20.2 mos; HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.49‐0.97; P = .03326) and an improvement vs Rd18 (median 21.9 mos; HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.51‐1.02; Table). Median OS was 56.9 vs 46.8 mos for Rd continuous vs MPT (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.53‐1.11; P = .15346). Median PFS2 was longer for Rd continuous vs MPT (median 39.3 vs 35.1 mos; HR, 0.69; 95% CI 0.50‐0.95) as was TTNT (median 39.1 vs 24.6 mos; HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.37‐0.78). Additional details, including safety data, will be presented at the meeting.Summary/Conclusion:In the Canada/US subpopulation of pts from FIRST, Rd continuous extended median PFS by 9 mos vs MPT and > 7 mos vs Rd18. Rd continuous also delayed median TTNT > 14 mos and resulted in a longer PFS2 vs MPT, suggesting that the benefit from frontline Rd continuous is maintained at relapse. These results are consistent with that from the ITT population confirming the advantage of Rd continuous vs MPT in the Canada/US subgroup and supporting the role of Rd continuous as a standard of care for TNE pts with NDMM. The efficacy observed with Rd continuous raises the question on the role of immunostimulatory effects by the immunomodulatory agents in NDMM.image