Stewart, A. Keith

Abstract Abstract 332 Background: The high response rates seen with the bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRD/RVD) regimen (Kumar S, et al. Blood 2012; Richardson PG, et al. Blood 2010) highlight the feasibility of combining a proteasome inhibitor with an immunomodulatory agent and a steroid in patients with previously untreated multiple myeloma (MM). MLN9708 is an investigational, oral, reversible proteasome inhibitor with promising anti-MM effects and favorable toxicity profile with low rates of peripheral neuropathy (PN). Here we report phase (Ph) 1 and preliminary Ph 2 results of the first study of MLN9708 in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone in patients with previously untreated MM (NCT01217957). Methods: Patients aged ≥18 yrs with measurable disease, ECOG performance status 0–2, and no grade ≥2 PN, received oral MLN9708 (days 1, 8, and 15) plus lenalidomide 25 mg (days 1–21) and dexamethasone 40 mg (days 1, 8, 15, 22) for up to twelve 28-day cycles, then maintenance therapy with MLN9708 (same schedule) every 28 days until progression. Patients could undergo stem cell collection after 3 cycles and discontinue for autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) after 6 cycles. In Ph 1, dose escalation (1.68–3.95 mg/m2) proceeded using a standard 3+3 design, based on cycle 1 dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs). Ph 1 primary objectives were determination of safety, maximum tolerated dose (MTD), and recommended Ph 2 dose (RP2D); the Ph 2 primary objective was CR+VGPR rate. Secondary and exploratory objectives included characterization of MLN9708 pharmacokinetics (PK) and measurement of minimal residual disease using multiparameter flow cytometry. Responses were assessed by IMWG criteria. Adverse events (AEs) were graded by NCI-CTCAE v4.02. Results: From 22 November 2010 (Ph 1) and 14 October 2011 (Ph 2) to data cut-off (June 27, 2012), 65 patients (36 male) have been enrolled, 15 in Ph 1 and 50 in Ph 2. Median age was 66 yrs (range 34–86); 43% and 13% had ISS stage II and III. Patients have received a median of 5 cycles (range 1–15) – 6 cycles (range 1–15) in Ph 1 and 5 cycles (range 1–8) in Ph 2. 42 (65%) patients remain on treatment, 4 (27%) in Ph 1 and 38 (76%) in Ph 2. At 10 August 2012, 22 patients have discontinued: 16 to receive ASCT, 4 due to AEs (3 drug-related, 1 not drug-related GI bleed), 2 for other reasons (1 disease progression, 1 due to investigator decision). Of those who have undergone stem cell mobilization, a median yield of 9.1 × 106 CD34+ cells/L was reported. MLN9708 MTD was established as 2.97 mg/m2 and RP2D was selected as 2.23 mg/m2; RP2D converts to a 4.0 mg fixed dose based on population PK results. At 27 June, all-grade AEs related to any regimen drug and seen in ≥25% of patients were fatigue (32%), nausea (31%), and vomiting (25%). Grade 3 any-drug-related AEs were reported in 26 (40%) patients, including erythematous rash, nausea and vomiting (5% each). Grade 4 any-drug-related AEs were end-stage renal disease (related to progressing MM) and deep vein thrombosis in 1 patient each. One patient experienced grade 3 PN at the RP2D. At 10 August, 3 patients discontinued due to drug-related AEs – 1 in Ph 2 who stopped due to grade 1 resting tremor, grade 2 occasional memory loss (neurologic work-up was negative), and grade 2 peripheral sensory neuropathy, 1 patient in Ph 2 due to drug-related RSV pneumonia who subsequently died on study due to this AE, and 1 patient in Ph 1 with syncope (a DLT). Among all 65 patients (at 10 August), median patient follow-up was 3.88 months (Ph 1: 9.03 months, Ph 2: 3.68 months). The overall response rate (ORR; ≥PR, confirmed/unconfirmed) was 88% (100% in Ph 1 and 84% in Ph 2); this includes 40% ≥VGPR (53% in Ph 1 and 36% in Ph 2) and 18% CR (33% in Ph 1 and 14% in Ph 2). Median cycle number is limited, but 50 patients have received ≥4 cycles: ORR was 96%, with 44% ≥VGPR and 26% CR. Analyses by cytogenetic status will be presented at the meeting. At data cut-off, 50 of 52 responders remained in response, with responses durable for up to 13.2+ months. Median time to first response was 0.92 months (range 0.89–6.44). Conclusions: The combination of weekly oral MLN9708 plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone appears generally well tolerated, with one grade 3 PN at the RP2D. Preliminary data show antitumor activity at the RP2D in patients with previously untreated MM, and at data cut-off, 96% of patients had achieved ≥PR, including a ≥VGPR rate of 44% and a CR rate of 26%, with responses consistent with those reported with VRD/RVD. Disclosures: Kumar: Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Genzyme: Research Funding; Cephalon: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding. Off Label Use: A study of the investigational agent MLN9708 in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone for the treatment of patients with previously untreated multiple myeloma. Niesvizky:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Lonial:Onyx: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Meyers Squibb: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Stewart:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding. Hari:Celgene: Consultancy. Vescio:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Speakers Bureau. Berg:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Lin:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Di Bacco:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Gupta:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Hui:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Richardson:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen Pharmaceuticals and Janssen-Cilag: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Abstract Background Carfilzomib is a proteasome inhibitor that irreversibly binds its target and has been validated as both relapse and upfront therapies for multiple myeloma. To optimize pre transplant response, we combined carfilzomib with the widely accessible backbone of cyclophosphamide-thalidomide-dexamethasone (CTD). We previously reported results of the Phase I component of the trial (in which no MTD was reached); we now report results for the MTD and fully accrued expansion cohorts at the MTD of the CYCLONE trial NCT01057225. Methods Newly diagnosed myeloma patients intended for stem cell transplant were eligible. All patients were treated on a 28 day cycle with carfilzomib IV Days 1,2,8,9,15,16 (see Table below for dosing per cohort) along with cyclophosphamide 300 mg/m2 PO Days 1,8,15, thalidomide 100 mg PO Days 1-28 and dexamethasone 40 mg PO Days 1,8,15,22. The initial phase I/ II regimen is shown below – as no DLTs were observed, we increased dosing of carfilzomib to 36 and then 45mg/m2 and have now nearly fully accrued to the Phase II dose level +1 (27mg/m2) and expansion MTD (36mg/m2). Treatment was for 4 cycles with planned SCT post induction. The primary endpoint of the trial is the proportion of patients who have ≥very good partial response (VGPR) to treatment. All patients received herpes zoster prophylaxis and ASA daily. Results A total of 54 patients have been accrued to the trial, 6 in the initial Phase 1, 21 in the initial Phase II (CFZ 27mg/m2), and 27 at CFZ 36-45mg/m2. Median age was 63 (range 27-77) and 52% were male. ISS Stage was advanced (II-III) in 57% The overall partial response rate or better following 4 cycles of CYCLONE at dose level 0 or greater is 91%: CR 18%, VGPR 58%, PR 16%, MR 2%, SD 4%. One patient withdrew from the trial after cycle 1. At dose level 2, 3/7 patients experienced dose-limiting toxicity in cycle 1 including: grade 3 alanine aminotransferase increase (possibly related); grade 3 infusion reaction (probably related); and grade 4 heart failure with grade 3 dyspnea, atrial fibrillation, and fatigue (all possibly related). No dose-limiting toxicity was observed in 6 patients at dose level 1 and thus DL1 was deemed the MTD. Across dose levels, adverse events are fully evaluable in 48 patients. AEs of grade 3 or higher at least possibly related to CYCLONE occurred in 26 (54%) – 35% non hematological and 33% hematological. Most commonly reported non hematological toxicities (all grades) included fatigue (63%), constipation (46%), elevated creatinine (27%), hyperglycemia (27%), lethargy (25%) peripheral sensory neuropathy (25% - all grade 1), and somnolence (21%); however, grade 3/4 toxicities occurring in >5% were uncommon: hypertension (8%), thromboembolic event (6%) and hyperglycemia (6%). Three cases of pneumonia required hospitalization. There were no cardiac events seen in greater than 5% of patients. Grade 3/4 hematological toxicities included lymphopenia (23%) and neutropenia (17%). All patients advancing to SCT successfully collected stem cells. One patient died on study from pneumonia. 90% completed at least 4 cycles. With median follow-up of 16 months (range 0-64), 1-year PFS was 90% and 1-year OS was 98%. Conclusion The 4 drug CYCLONE regimen is highly efficacious with an overall response rate after only 4 cycles of 91% (76% ≥VGPR) at the dosing level of carfilzomib IV 20/27-36 mg/m2 in newly diagnosed myeloma. Toxicities are manageable, with only grade 1 neuropathy and minimal cardiac or pulmonary toxicity. CYCLONE is a combination that results in rapid and deep responses with minimal neuropathy prior to stem cell transplant. Comparative studies of this regimen with longer duration of therapy (as induction or consolidation) at the defined MTD should be considered. Disclosures: Mikhael: Celgene: Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding. Reeder:Millenium: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Costa:Otsuka: Research Funding. Stewart:Celgene: Honoraria; Millenium: Honoraria, Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 2942 Background: Pomalidomide (pom) is a distinct immunomodulatory (IMid) drug with high response rates in relapsed MM, including patients previously treated with thalidomide, bortezomib and lenalidomide. However, its duration of response and long term outcome is unknown. We evaluated the long term outcomes of the first Mayo Clinic cohort of pts treated with Pom. Methods: Pts with relapsed/refractory myeloma with 1–3 prior therapies were enrolled. Pom 2 mg/d was given orally continuously on 28 day cycle with weekly dexamethasone 40 mg. All pts received DVT prophylaxis with aspirin, heparin or warfarin. Results: 60 pts with relapsed MM were enrolled from Nov 2007-Aug 2008. Median age was 65.5; 36 were male. Median time from diagnosis was 45.6 mo (9.–-192.5). Nineteen (32%) were high-risk according to mSMART (msmart.org), and 78% were ISS Stage 2/3. Prior therapies included transplant (65%), bortezomib (33%), thalidomide (47%), lenalidomide (35%) [previous IMiD 60%] and radiation (38%). Toxicities at least possibly attributed to Pom included G3/4 anemia (5/0%), leukopenia (17/3%) and thrombocytopenia (3/0%). G3/4/5 non-hematological toxicities occurred in 30 (50%) and included fatigue (18/0/0%), pneumonia (8/2/2%), hyperglycemia (5/0/0%) and constipation (5/0/0%). Only one pt had grade 3 neuropathy. Treatment adjustment for occurred in 30 pts (50%) for pom (mostly for neutropenia) and 35 pts (58%) for dex. A median of 11.5 cycles were administered. With median follow up of 30.1 months (mo), overall response was seen in 39 (65%) [4 sCR, 5 CR, 16 VGPR, 14 PR]. Median time to first reponse (≥PR) was 1.7 mo (0.8–14.8). Median duration of response (in responders of ≥PR) was 21.3 mo. Median PFS was 13 mo and the 2 year OS rate was 76%. Standard risk pts had median PFS of 18.4 mo and 2 year OS rate was 85%; high risk pts had median PFS of 9.2 mo and 2 year OS rate was 57%. (Figure 1) Conclusions: Pom/dex is highly effective and well tolerated in relapsed MM, with a response rate of 65% even in pts with multiple prior therapies, including other IMiDs, bortezomib and transplant. The response is also durable, with median duration in excess of 21 months. Pom/dex provides long term benefit with median PFS 13 months and 2 year OS rate of 76%. Disclosures: Kumar: Merck: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Stewart:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millenium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding. Fonseca:Consulting :Genzyme, Medtronic, BMS, Amgen, Otsuka, Celgene, Intellikine, Lilly Research Support: Cylene, Onyz, Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 1024 Background: The MMRC is a non-profit, disease-focused consortium founded in 2004. Sixteen North American member institutions with expertise in multiple myeloma (MM) work collaboratively with the MMRC Inc. (Norwalk, CT) and numerous pharmaceutical partners to speed development of new treatment options to MM patients. In December 2007, MMRC Inc. implemented business solutions to address barriers to rapid activation of phase I-II trials and established benchmarks for initiating and conducting these studies. In December 2010, we reported significantly faster trial start up and accrual data from previous years1,2. Today, we update and expand on MMRC performance data and analysis of progress. Methods: Twenty-five (25) trials conducted within the Consortium from May 2006 to July 2011 had sufficient start up trial data for review. FPFD was defined as the time from the member institutions' receipt of the final protocol (FP) from the trial sponsor, to the time the first patient was dosed on the trial at any participating MMRC member institution. With respect to enrollment, pre-study enrollment commitment (EC) established between MMRC and the study sponsor was defined as the total number of subjects committed to receive at least one dose of study drug across all participating MMRC centers on a trial; baseline enrollment timeline (BET) was prospectively defined as the target time period to attain EC. Results: Mean time to FPFD in the recent group of trials (RG; n=18; Sept 08-Jul 11) held steady at 131 calendar days from receipt of FP as compared to 181 days for the early group of trials (EG; n=7; Jun06-Sept08) representing a 28% reduction in time to FPFD. More importantly, there was a 20% decrease in time to FPFD by all participating MMRC centers on any MMRC trial from 189 days in the RG compared to 236 days in the EG representing an important achievement especially in the Phase I/II arena. MMRC trial accrual data was available for 17/25 trials (2 EG trials were missing data and 6 RG trials continue enrolling). The pre-study mean MMRC EC was 44 subjects per trial (n=19 trials; 849 patients); the mean actual MMRC enrollment was 49 subjects per trial (n=19; 935 patients through July 11) representing a 10% over enrollment versus committed enrollment. A total of 17/19 evaluable trials (89%) met their EC; 12/19 trials met EC within BET (71%) of which 8/12 trials (67%) reached EC 34% faster than their BET (representing a mean reduction of 4.5 months). The overall pre-study mean BET for 19 trials was 13.6 months. MMRC's actual mean enrollment timeline was 12.8 months for the group of 17 evaluable trials representing improvement over the original BET by a mean of 10%. Discussion: MMRC's acceleration of clinical trials provides physicians and patients with rapid access to novel compounds; industry with data for important drug development decisions; and academic institutions with more trials of high scientific interest. Even so, our data uncovered opportunities for improvement. The submission time from receipt of the final protocol from the trial sponsor to Scientific Review Committee (SRC) took an average 30 calendar days across all trials. A reduction to half this time could make a difference to patients and therefore warrants further exploration. Conclusion: Today, drug development in multiple myeloma is fast-paced and highly competitive. MMRC's frequent review of trial metrics provides valuable insight to continually speed answers to physicians, patients and industry. Disclosures: Richardson: Multiple Myeloma Research Consortium: Annual grant in support Clinical Trial Project Management. Vij:Multiple Myeloma Research Consortium: Annual grant in support of clinical trial Project Management. Lonial:Multiple Myeloma Research Consortium: Annual grant in support of clinical trial Project Management. Siegel:Multiple Myeloma Research Consortium: Annual grant in support of clinical trial Project Management. Jakubowiak:Multiple Myeloma Research Consortium: Annual grant in support of clinical trial Project Management. Reece:Multiple Myeloma Research Consortium: Annual grant in support of clinical trial Project Management. Jagannath:Multiple Myeloma Research Consortium: Annual grant in support of clinical trial Project Management. Hofmeister:Multiple Myeloma Research Consortium: Annual grant in support of clinical trial Project Management. Stewart:Multiple Myeloma Research Consortium: Annual Grant in support of clinical trial Project Management. Wolf:Multiple Myeloma Research Consortium: Annual grant in support of clinical trial Project Management. Krishnan:Multiple Myeloma Research Consortium: Annual grant in support of clinical trial Project Management. Zimmerman:Multiple Myeloma Research Consortium: Annual grant in support of clinical trial Project Management. Kumar:Multiple Myeloma Research Consortium: Annual grant in support of clinical trial Project Management. Roy:Multiple Myeloma Research Consortium: Annual grant in support of clinical trial Project Management. Fay:Multiple Myeloma Research Consortium: Annual grant in support of clinical trial Project Management. Anderson:Multiple Myeloma Research Consortium: Annual grant in support of clinical trial Project Management.

Abstract Abstract 602 The molecular target(s) which co-operate with proteasome inhibition in inducing drug sensitivity or resistance in Multiple Myeloma (MM) remain unknown. We therefore conducted a genome scale small interfering RNA (siRNA) lethality study in KMS11 MM cells in the presence or absence of bortezomib without regard to pre-conceived mechanistic notions. Primary screening was performed in a single-siRNA-per-well format with the human druggable genome siRNA set V4 comprising 13,984 siRNA targeting 6,992 genes and comprising two RNAi per gene. siRNA were transfected at low concentration (13nM) to minimize off-target effects using conditions that resulted in transfection of >95% cells and <5% background cytotoxicity. Bortezomib was added (at the IC10, 25, 70 and 90) 24 hours post transfection. After 96 hours (72 hours after bortezomib), viability was measured by ATP-dependent luminescence. In primary screening 320 candidate bortezomib sensitizing genes were identified and rescreened with four siRNA oligos each gene. 57 of the top sensitizer hits were selected for which at least two distinct siRNA decreased the EC50 by 2 standard deviations from cells treated with control siRNAs. By cross referencing gene expression profile (GEP) data of KMS11, we furthered pared the list to 37 plausibly expressed targets (0.5% of those genes originally screened) as bortezomib sensitizers. After silencing, 50% of these 37 genes also sensitized the lung cancer cell line A549 to bortezomib. After further parsing of genes which also modulated the sensitivity of MM to Melphalan (non specific chemosensitizers), 34 genes remained: The strongest sensitizers to bortezomib were the proteasome subunits PSMA5, PSMB2, PSMB3, PSMB7 but included less obvious targets such as BAZ1B, CDK5, CDC42SE2, MDM4, NME7, TFE3, TNFAIP3, TNK1, TOP1, VAMP2 and YY1 were also identified. Of these, the most potent synergetic effects were observed with siRNAs against the proteasome subunits and against cyclin dependent kinase 5 (CDK5), which caused the greatest shift in EC50. CDK5 is of particular interest as a therapeutic target as it is expressed at high levels in MM and neural tissues but has low expression in other organs. Using viral shRNA expression, silencing CDK5 consistently increased the sensitivity of genetically variable MM cell lines (n=5) to all of the proteasome inhibitors tested: bortezomib, carfilzomib and PR047, and the effect could be at least partially rescued by overexpression of an RNAi resistant CDK5. To explore therapeutic relevance the small molecule CDK5 inhibitor, Roscovitin, was shown to be synergistic or additive with bortezomib in both MM cell lines and primary patient samples. Gene expression profiling was then performed to seek an explanation for the CDK5 sensitization effect and regulation of a proteasome subunit PSMB5 by CDK5 was identified as a probable route to sensitization. In summary inhibition of the existing proteasome either directly by suppression of proteasome subunits, or indirectly by suppression of modulators such as CDK5 appears to confer the greatest sensitization effect suggesting that combinations of bortezomib with other unique proteasome inhibitor drugs or combinations with inhibitors of CDK5 is a logical avenue for clinical exploration. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Abstract 127 The precise molecular mechanism of action and targets through which thalidomide and related immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs) exert their anti-tumor effects remains unclear. A landmark paper has recently identified cereblon (CRBN) as a primary target of thalidomide teratogenicity. We hypothesized that this protein would also be required for myeloma (MM) cytotoxicity. To examine this issue we first tested 12 MM cell lines: 4 of which (OCIMY5, OPM1, SKMM2 and KMS12 PE) were very resistant to treatment with both lenalidomide and pomalidomide. Of these, OCIMY5 and OPM1 showed CRBN gene expression levels at the bottom 10% across the human MM cell lines. We next used CRBN shRNA lentiviral expression constructs to knock down CRBN in 5 human-derived myeloma cell lines (HMCLs) (KMS18, MM1.S, H929, OPM2 and JJN3). HMCLs infected with CRBN shRNAs have a significant reduction of CRBN expression and subsequent diminished cell viability (reduced 65–78%). Surviving MM cells with CRBN knock down demonstrate an acquired (essentially complete) resistance to lenalidomide when compared with controls but retained sensitivity to melphalan, dexamethasone and bortezomib. Gene expression changes induced by lenalidomide were dramatically suppressed in those CRBN depleted cells, e.g., OPM2 cells only showed 30 down regulated (3% of control) and 150 up-regulated genes (24% of control) after lenalidomide treatment, further emphasizing that CRBN is required for lenalidomide activity. We next compared by array comparative genomic hybridization the differences between MM1.S (lenalidomide sensitive) and its isogenic lenalidomide resistant line (MM1.S res), generated by culturing MM1.S in gradually increasing concentrations of lenalidomide. Only three structural abnormalities were noted differentiating the two lines one of which was deletion of CRBN. In fact the baseline MM1.S cell line has a minor population of 9% of cells with CRBN depletion which becomes dominant after lenalidomide treatment. However, further scrutiny of CRBN status in additional HMCLs and MM patients (irrespective of therapy and stage) suggested that copy-number abnormalities affecting this gene are uncommon events in MM, with 12% of HMCLs (7 out of 60) and only 1.2% of MM patients (3 out of 238) showing CRBN monoallelic deletion. Next, we examined by quantitative polymerase chain reaction (Q-PCR) ten MM patients who had become resistant to lenalidomide therapy. CRBN expression level by Q-PCR in 8 of 10 patient samples had a significant reduction (20% to 90% reduction compared to baseline) at time of drug resistance, suggesting CRBN expression as a potential biomarker to predict IMiD response. Notably however some clearly resistant patients have normal CRBN, demonstrating that while CRBN is absolutely required for response, multiple resistance mechanisms are likely present. By gene and protein expression downstream targets of CRBN were examined and included interferon regulatory factor 4 (IRF4) previously reported to also be a target of lenalidomide. In summary, we demonstrate here that CRBN is essential for IMiD activity and preliminary data support that low levels of CRBN predict for poor drug response. In addition, our data suggest that CRBN is a critical molecule but not the unique source of IMiD resistance. We suggest that the “IMiDs” be renamed Cereblon binding small molecules to more accurately reflect their mechanism of action. Disclosures: Orlowski: Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 3853 Poster Board III-789 Background Light chain (AL) amyloidosis is a clonal plasma cell disorder characterized by progressive multiorgan deposition of amyloid fibrils derived from immunoglobulin light chains. Treatment strategies for AL have typically targeted the clonal plasma cell and have paralleled that for myeloma, with recent clinical trials evaluating the role of novel agents such as immune modulatory drugs (IMiDs). Lenalidomide has activity in patients with AL, and given the synergy seen with alkylating agents, we designed a phase 2 clinical trial of cyclophosphamide added to lenalidomide and dexamethasone. Methods Patients (Pts) with newly diagnosed or previously treated AL, with adequate hematological and organ function, were enrolled between December 2007 and November 2008. Treatment consisted of 28-day cycles with Lenalidomide at 15 mg daily (days 1-21), oral cyclophosphamide 300 mg (days 1, 8, 15) and dexamethasone 40 mg weekly. All patients received aspirin for thromboprophylaxis. Hematological and organ responses were assessed using conventional response criteria. Results Thirty-five pts, 11 (31%) previously treated, with a median age of 64 yrs (range 44-82) were enrolled. Median time from diagnosis to trial enrollment was 1.6 mos (range; 0.1- 129) and 23 (66%) were alive at the time of analysis with a median follow up of 8.7 mos (range; 1.5-17.6). Three or more organs were involved in 10 (28%) pts with cardiac and renal involvement present in 22 (63%) and 27 (77%) respectively. Fifteen pts (44%) had advanced stage III disease by the troponin/ NT-ProBNP staging system. Seven (20%) pts had previous stem cell transplant, one pt had thalidomide and others had melphalan, dexamethasone or a combination of the two. The median duration on study was 6.5 months and the median number of cycles administered was 6, with 27 (77%) patients completing at least 3 cycles of therapy. Thirteen patients still remain on study, with the most common reason for study discontinuation being toxicity (10 pts, 45%). There were 15 (43%) and 24 (69%) episodes of Grade 3 or 4 hematologic and non-hematologic adverse events respectively. The most common non-hematologic toxicities seen were fatigue, edema, constipation and rash. Six patients died while on study due to sepsis (1), multiorgan failure (1), arrhythmia (1), or heart failure (3). The overall hematologic response rate was 60% (21 pts; CR (2), VGPR (10) and PR (9)); 79% for stage I and II pts and 40% for stage III patients. Among those patients receiving at least four cycles, the response rate was 20/23 (87%); 2CR, 10 VGPR and 8 PR. At least one organ response was documented in 8 (24%) patients. The median overall survival (OS) for all enrolled patients is 16.1 mos (95% CI; 10.8-NR). The median OS was not reached for stage I and stage II patients, and was 7 mos (95% CI; 4.6 - 16.1) for stage III pts. The median time to hematologic progression was 16.1 mos and to hematologic or organ progression was 6.7 mos (95% CI; 6.3, 16.1). The median OS among those with a hematologic response was 16.1 mos, and not reached among the group with a VGPR or better. Among the 31 patients with measurable FLC, those (n=24) with a ≥50% decrease in the difference between light chains had superior OS compared to the rest (16.1 mos vs. 4.3 mos). The six patients who died on study all had cardiac involvement and significantly higher NT-ProBNP/ BNP compared to the rest. Conclusion The combination of cyclophosphamide, lenalidomide and dexamethasone has significant activity in patients with light chain amyloidosis. Toxicity is manageable with dose reductions, but patients with advanced cardiac involvement are at a higher risk for toxicity and early discontinuation of therapy. Future trials with this combination should compare this regimen with other treatment approaches in selected patients, as well as pursue a dose-adapted strategy in those with advanced cardiac involvement. Disclosures: Kumar: CELGENE: Research Funding; MILLENNIUM: Research Funding; BAYER: Research Funding; GENZYME: Research Funding; NOVARTIS: Research Funding. Gertz:celgene: Honoraria; millenium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Dispenzieri:Celgene: Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 3884 Poster Board III-820 Background and Objective Thalidomide/dexamethasone (thal/dex) combination has shown high activity in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) (Rajkumar SV. at al, J Clin Oncol 2006;24:431-436). In newly diagnosed patients, lenalidomide/dexamethasone (len/dex) has demonstrated superiority compared with high-dose dexamethasone alone (Zonder JA et al, Blood 2007;110:77). Although both thal/dex and len/dex are active in newly diagnosed MM, no randomized trial has been reported comparing these two regimens, and unfortunately none are ongoing or planned. We compared the efficacy and the toxicity of thal/dex and len/dex as primary therapy in 411 newly diagnosed MM patients treated at the Mayo Clinic. Patients and methods 411 consecutive patients seen at Mayo Clinic between 2001 and 2008, who received induction with thal/dex (n=183) or len/dex (n=288) were retrospectively studied. Thalidomide was given at a dose ranging from 100 mg/day to 400 mg/day continuously; the lenalidomide dose was 25 mg/day, days 1-21 on a 28-day cycle. All patients received dexamethasone, either at high-dose (40 mg orally on days 1-4, 9-12, and 17-20) or at low-dose (40 mg orally day 1, 8, 15, 22); each cycle was repeated every 4 weeks. In addition, a case-matched subgroup analysis that adjusted for age, gender and transplantation status was performed among patients who received high-dose dexamethasone comparing the thal/dex (n=72) and len/dex (n=72) groups. Outcome was analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. The Chi-square or the rank sum tests were used to compare variables. Time-to-event analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method and all comparisons were determined by the log-rank test and by the Cox proportional hazards model. Results On intention-to-treat analysis, of 411 patients, 80.3% versus 61.2% patients, respectively in the len/dex group and in the thal/dex group (p < 0.001), achieved at least a partial response. A significant difference between the 2 groups was found in terms of both very good partial response or better (34.2% vs 12.0%, p < 0.001) and complete response rate (13.6% vs 3.3%, p < 0.001). Duration of therapy was significantly longer in len/dex patients as compared to thal/dex patients: 36.7% vs 12.6% of patients who did not stop treatment to receive SCT were still receiving therapy at 1 year (p < 0.001).Time-to-progression was significantly better in the len/dex group than in patients receiving thal/dex (median 27.4 vs 17.2 months, HR 0.64; 95% CI 0.44-0.93; p = 0.019). Similarly, progression-free-survival was significantly higher in len/dex patients (median 26.7 vs 17.1 months, HR 0.69; 95% CI 0.48-0.98; p = 0.036). This translated into an increase in overall survival (OS) (median not reached for len/dex group compared to 57.2 months in thal/dex patients, HR 0.60; 95% CI 0.40-0.92; p = 0.018). Survival advantages were evident in patients presenting with International Staging System Stage (ISS) I/II (HR 0.57; 95% CI 0.32-1.00; p = 0.052) at diagnosis but not in patients with ISS stage III in subgroup analysis. There was a trend toward better OS in len/dex group compared to thal/dex group both for patients who underwent transplant and for patients who did not. A similar rate of patients experienced at least one grade 3 or higher adverse event (57.5% vs 54.6% in len/dex and thal/dex groups, respectively, p = 0.568). However, the toxicity profile was different in the two groups: major grade 3-4 toxicities of len/dex were hematological, in particular neutropenia (14% with len/dex vs 0.6% with thal/dex, p<0.001) while the most common toxicities in thal/dex were venous thromboembolism (15.3% vs 9.2%, p = 0.058) and peripheral neuropathy (10.4% vs 0.9%, p < 0.001). The data on efficacy and safety shown above were also confirmed in the subgroup case-matched analysis which included only high-dose dexamethasone patients. Conclusions This cohort study shows the superiority of len/dex in terms of response rates and survival, compared to thal/dex. The toxicity profile of the 2 regimens is different and len/dex treatment, although more active, was not associated with increased toxicity (grade 3-4 AEs). These data need to be carefully evaluated and randomized prospective phase III studies are necessary to confirm these results and determine the optimal initial therapy for MM. Disclosures: Off Label Use: research drugs in combination to standard care. Lacy:celgene: Research Funding. Gertz:celgene: Honoraria; genzyme: Honoraria; millenium: Honoraria; amgen: Honoraria. Kumar:celgene: Research Funding; millenium: Research Funding; bayer: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Genzyme: Research Funding. Dispenzieri:celgene: Research Funding. Bergsagel:amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; genetech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; merck: Research Funding; celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Witzig:celgene: Research Funding. Fonseca:medtronic: Consultancy; genzyme: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; amgen: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; otsuka: Consultancy. Greipp:celgene: Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 429 Background: Patients with MM who have progressed after multiple novel agents have limited treatment options. Pomalidomide (CC4047) is the newest immunomodulatory (IMiD) agent that has demonstrated response rates of 63% in a Phase 2 trial of Pom/dex in patients with relapsed MM (in press, JCO). To better define the response rate in this group, we treated an additional cohort of patients who were truly resistant/refractory to lenalidomide. Methods: To be eligible, patients must:be refractory to lenalidomide therapy defined as relapsing on or within 60 days of stopping lenalidomide. Pomalidomide was given orally 2 mg daily on days 1–28 of a 28-day cycle. Dexamethasone was given orally at a dose of 40 mg daily on days 1, 8, 15 and 22 of each cycle. Response was assessed by the International Myeloma Working Group Uniform Response criteria. All patients received aspirin 325 mg daily as prophylaxis against DVT. Pom/dex regimen would be declared promising if we observed at least 4 confirmed responses out of 34 patients based on a single stage Fleming design. Results: 34 patients (23 male and 11 female) resistant/refractory to lenalidomide were enrolled. The median age was 62 years (range, 39-77). The median time from diagnosis to enrollment was 62 months (range 8-179). 12 patients had high risk molecular markers including loss of 17p (6 pts), t(4;14) (1 pt) and del 13 by cytogenetics (5 pts). 70% had ≥3 prior regimens including 38% with ≥5 prior regimens; 56% had prior thalidomide, 59% had prior bortezomib, and 68% had prior SCT. Toxicity (at least possibly related to treatment) was mild and consisted primarily of myelosuppression: grade 3/4 neutropenia (21%); grade 3 thrombocytopenia (9%); and grade 3 anemia (12%). Grade 3/4 non-hematologic toxicities occurred in 24%: pneumonia (3%), non-infectious pneumonitis (3%), hyperglycemia (3%), edema(3%), fatigue(9%) skin rash(3%). Neuropathy occurred in 18% (12% grade 1; 6% grade 2). No thromboembolic events have occurred so far. Nine (26%) patients were confirmed responders (all PR), surpassing the threshold for a positive trial, and 18 (53%) had SD. With a median follow-up of 4 months (range:0-8), 65% remain progression free; 88% remain alive; and 12% have died, all due to progressive MM. Conclusions: Pom/dex is active and well tolerated in this heavily pre-treated population of lenalidomide-refractory MM patients. The majority of patients have not progressed and objective responses are seen in 26%. This study confirms that pomalidomide has non-cross resistance with lenalidomide and offers benefit for patients who have relapsed after other novel therapies. Disclosures: Lacy: Celgene: Research Funding. Gertz:celgene: Honoraria; millenium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kumar:celgene: Honoraria; millenium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Bergsagel:Genentech, Inc.: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Merck: Research Funding. Stewart:Takeda-Millenium, Celgene, Novartis, Amgen: Consultancy; Takeda, Millenium: Research Funding; Genzyme, Celgene, Millenium, Proteolix: Honoraria.

Abstract Abstract 616 Background: We have shown the three drug combination of cyclophosphamide, bortezomib and dexamethasone (CyBorD) to be highly active therapy in newly diagnosed myeloma while allowing stem cell harvest and transplantation (Reeder et al. Leukemia 2009; 23:1337-1341). However, twice weekly bortezomib and high dose dexamethasone have been shown to cause significant toxicities. In a prospective Phase II we modified CyBorD by using bortezomib once weekly and reducing the dexamethasone to “low dose dex” after the first two cycles in an attempt to reduce toxicity (cohort 2). We report the efficacy and toxicity of this modified regimen and compare the results to standard CyBorD (cohort 1). Patients and methods: 63 untreated symptomatic patients were enrolled on this Phase II trial (33 on cohort 1 and 30 on cohort 2). All are evaluable for response and toxicity. Treatment on cohort 2 consisted of oral cyclophosphamide 300 mg/m2 and IV bortezomib 1.5 mg/m2 days 1, 8, 15 and 22 and dexamethasone 40 mg by mouth days 1-4, 9-12, 17-20 in cycles 1 and 2, then 40 mg po days 1, 8, 15, 22 in cycles 3 and beyond. Cohort 1 used standard dosing of bortezomib and high dose dexamethasone throughout. Each cycle was 28 days. Acyclovir and a quinolone antibiotic prophylaxis were routinely used. Patients were evaluated for response and toxicity every cycle and were offered stem cell harvest and transplant after the 4th cycle but could continue up to 12 cycles maximum. Results: The median age for all 63 patients was 61 (36-74) years and 48% were female. Durie-Salmon stages were 47% II and 50% III and ISS stages I 43%, II 36%, and III 21%. Twenty-four percent of patients were genetic high risk (t(4;14) or deletion 17). Cohorts I and II were matched for age, gender and ECOG PS. ISS stages were higher in cohort 1 than cohort 2 (II/III 67% vs. 44%). The intent to treat (ITT) ORR (≥PR) for all 63 patients (cohorts 1 and 2) is 90% with 60% ≥VGPR. For cohort 2 (modified CyBorD) the ITT overall response (≥PR) was 93% (CR: 5, nCR: 7, VGPR: 6, PR: 10) with 60% ≥VGPR and 40% ≥ nCR. Those completing all 4 cycles of therapy had 92% ORR (24/26) and 65% (17/26) ≥VGPR. A comparison of response rates in cohorts 1 and 2 is shown in table 1. These high and comparable response rates were associated with fewer grade 3+ adverse events (AE's) than in cohort 1 (37% vs. 48%) and no grade 3 peripheral neuropathy (PN). The median follow-up for all 63 patients is 12.4 (2.8-29.2) months and 95% of patients are alive with 87% free from progression. Conclusions: Modified CyBorD with weekly bortezomib and reduced dexamethasone retains the high activity seen in standard CyBorD, but is less toxic and more convenient. Interestingly, this modified regimen allowed higher overall doses of bortezomib (5.2 vs. 6.0 mg/m2 per cycle) yet overall neuropathy rates were similar. This combination of a weekly alkylating agent with bortezomib and dexamethasone is well tolerated and produces high response rates in newly diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma. Disclosures: Reeder: Millennium (MPI): Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Reece:Ortho Biotech: Honoraria, Research Funding. Chen:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Ortho Biotech: Honoraria. Hentz:Millennium (MPI): Research Funding. Fonseca:Otsuka: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Medtronic: Consultancy; Genzyme: Consultancy. Bergsagel:Merck: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy. Stewart:Proteolix: Honoraria; Millennium (MPI): Research Funding.