Rajkumar, S. Vincent

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

Abstract Monoclonal gammopathies, including multiple myeloma (MM), represent a group of plasma cell (PC) disorders that comprise of mostly incurable hematopoietic malignancies with an increasing incidence in the US. Previous epidemiological studies demonstrated a 2-3 fold higher incidence of monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) and a similarly higher incidence of MM along with a ~4-year younger age of onset among African Americans (AA) compared to European Americans (EAs) (Fonseca, Leukemia, 2017). This suggests a possible ancestral-associated genetic predisposition of AAs to the development of monoclonal gammopathies (Landgren, Blood, 2006). When access to care is equal, AAs have a better overall survival compared to EAs suggesting that AAs may have a genetic predisposition that renders them better responders to treatment or have more favorable cytogenetic subtypes of MM (Waxman, Blood, 2010). Previous efforts to understand this disparity have relied on self-reported race rather than genetic ancestry. We hypothesize that quantifying genetic ancestry is necessary to fully understand the genetic mechanisms of racial disparities of monoclonal gammopathies. We describe our study of 881 patients with monoclonal gammopathies who had undergone uniform testing to identify MM-specific cytogenetic abnormalities. DNA from the bone marrow samples was genotyped on the Precision Medicine Research Array. Biogeographical ancestry was assessed using the Geographic Population Structure Origins tool, which provides the ancestral breakdown of 36 admixture components for each individual representing different geographic regions and outputs admixture proportions corresponding to those ancestries (Elhaik, Nat Commun, 2014). We evaluated whether an increase in the percentage of African Ancestry altered the odds of any primary cytogenetic abnormality. We demonstrated that a 10% increase in the percentage of African ancestry was associated with a 6% increase in the odds of detecting either an t(11;14), t(14;16) or t(14;20) (odds ratio = 1.06, 95% CI: 1.02 - 1.11; p-value = 0.05). Although we observed an increase in the odds of each of the individual translocations with 10% increase in African ancestry, l t(11;14) (OR=1.03) t(14;16) (OR=1.11) and t(14;20) (OR=1.10), these three abnormalities were combined to achieve greater statistical power. The differences in cytogenetic abnormalities were most striking among individuals with ≥80.0% African (n=120) compared to individuals with <0.1% African ancestry (n=235). Using these cutoff values comparing the ≥80.0% and <0.1% African ancestry cohorts, there was a higher prevalence of t(11;14), t(14;16) and t(14;20) (51% vs. 33%, respectively, p-value=0.008) and a lower prevalence of trisomies (with or without IgH translocations) (48.3% vs. 61.3%, respectively, p-value=0.066). In addition, the ≥80% African ancestry cohort also displayed a slightly lower prevalence of monosomy 13/13q deletion compared to the cohort with <0.1% African ancestry (34.2% vs. 38.7%, respectively, p-value=0.021). Further, we observed a significantly higher prevalence in the proportion of females with monoclonal gammopathies among the ≥80% African ancestry cohort compared to the cohort with <0.1% African ancestry (56.7% vs. 42.1%, respectively, p-value=0.028). We complement our past studies that relied on self-reported race and characterized patients' demographic and uniformly collected cytogenetic data in relation to genetically defined African ancestry. We demonstrate the prevalence of having one of three specific subtypes (i.e., t(11;14), t(14;16), or t(14;20)) was significantly higher in those with highest (≥80%) compared to lowest (<0.1%) African ancestry demonstrating African ancestry is associated with a subtype distribution of MM that differs from non-African individuals. These differences were only revealed after analysis of individuals with the highest and lowest percentage of African ancestry. Since 38.3% of the individuals with ≥80% African ancestry have the favorable t(11;14) translocation (in comparison to 26.8% of <0.1% African individuals), this finding may explain improved survival with equal access to care. Understanding the genetic mechanisms of this disparity is a fundamental step to understanding differences in incidence and outcomes of patients with monoclonal gammopathies. Disclosures Elhaik: DNA Diagnostics Center: Consultancy. Baird:DNA Diagnostics Center: Employment. Cerhan:Jannsen: Other: Scientific Advisory Board; Nanostring: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Stewart:Amgen Inc., BMS, Celgene, Takeda, Roche, Seattle Genetics, Janssen, Ono: Consultancy; Amgen Inc., Celgene, Roche, Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Dispenzieri:Celgene, Takeda, Prothena, Jannsen, Pfizer, Alnylam, GSK: Research Funding. Kumar:Novartis: Research Funding; KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction: Thrombocytopenia is a major dose-limiting hematologic toxicity of anti-myeloma therapy. Clinical trial data in the relapsed/refractory setting have linked the development of thrombocytopenia during therapy with bortezomib with improved response to treatment. Less is known about the prognostic significance of early treatment related thrombocytopenia during initial therapy for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) using novel agents. Aims: The aim of this study was to characterize the effect of new, treatment related thrombocytopenia during initial therapy for newly diagnosed MM with novel agents on survival and clinical response. Methods: We identified 690 patients with newly diagnosed MM treated at Mayo Clinic, Rochester from January 2004 to December 2015 through a retrospective record review. All patients received novel agents including proteasome inhibitors (PI) and/or immunomodulatory drugs, were evaluable using the International Myeloma Working Group uniform response criteria, and had platelet counts greater than 150,000/µL prior to initial treatment. Survival outcomes and response were compared in patients who became thrombocytopenic within two cycles of first line treatment, defined as a nadir platelet count less than 150,000/µL, and in patients who did not develop thrombocytopenia. Survival estimates were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and the log-rank test was used to compare survival in subgroups. Multivariable-adjusted proportional hazards regression models were fit to adjust for known prognostic factors including age, sex, International Staging System (ISS) stage, and the presence of cytogenetic high-risk abnormalities. Logistic regression was performed to evaluate for differences in response between groups. P-values less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Results: Of the 690 patients treated with novel agents, 495 patients (72%) received a PI as initial therapy. Median follow up was 3 years (0.1-13.2), median overall survival (OS) was 6.6 years (95% CI 5.9-8.0), and median progression free survival (PFS) was 4.84 years (95% CI 3.53-8.98). 123 patients (18%) developed thrombocytopenia within two cycles of first line therapy; two patients developed platelet counts less than 20,000/µL and none developed counts less than 10,000/µL. Differences in survival estimates for OS and PFS for patients who did not develop thrombocytopenia and those who became thrombocytopenic are illustrated in Figure 1. Median OS in patients who did not develop thrombocytopenia was 7.4 years (95% CI 5.9-8.9), compared to 4.6 years (95% CI 4.1-6.0) in those who became thrombocytopenic (p = 0.003), while median PFS was 5.4 years (95% CI 3.63-NR) and 3.53 years (95% CI 0.49-NR), respectively (p = 0.008). Similar results for both OS and PFS were observed when using a platelet nadir of less than 100,000/µL. These relationships remained statistically significant when adjusting for the effect of known prognostic factors including age, sex, ISS stage, and high-risk cytogenetics, for both OS and PFS (HR = 1.70, 95% CI 1.12-1.59, p = 0.013, n = 387 and HR = 1.56, 95% CI 1.03-2.37, p = 0.036, n = 387, respectively). Multivariable-adjusted estimates were similar for the subset of patients receiving PI containing regimens. Development of thrombocytopenia within two cycles was not associated with very good partial response or better (VGPR+) (p = 0.588) or with complete response (CR) (p = 0.968). This was also true for the subset of patients receiving PIs (p = 0.827 and p = 0.772, respectively). Conclusions: Our results suggest that the development of new, treatment related thrombocytopenia within two cycles of first-line therapy with novel agents is independently associated with inferior survival in newly diagnosed MM. This was also true in the subset of patients receiving PI containing regimens. In contrast to prior studies, there was no association between early treatment-related thrombocytopenia and response to treatment for either novel agents in general or PI based therapies. Figure 1: Kaplan-Meier progression free and overall survival estimates stratified by platelet count ≥ 150,000/µL (no thrombocytopenia) and <150,000/µL (new thrombocytopenia) within two cycles of initial therapy with novel agents. Figure 1. Figure 1. Disclosures Lacy: Celgene: Research Funding. Gertz:Prothena: Honoraria; Teva: Consultancy; Ionis: Honoraria; Alnylam: Honoraria; Research to Practice: Consultancy; Apellis: Consultancy; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; janssen: Consultancy; spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Medscape: Consultancy; annexon: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy. Dispenzieri:Celgene, Takeda, Prothena, Jannsen, Pfizer, Alnylam, GSK: Research Funding. Kapoor:Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Kumar:AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Abstract Aims: Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is an important component in the treatment of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM). However, relapse following ASCT is considered almost inevitable, with a median time to progression (TTP) of approximately 23-26 months (without maintenance) and 40-46 months (with maintenance)(Attal MA et al. N Engl J Med 2012; 366:1782-1791; McCarthy PM et al. N Engl J Med 2012; 366:1770-1781). However, some patients can experience a prolonged period of remission with ASCT. The purpose of this study was to identify and characterize patients who have an exceptional response to upfront ASCT without maintenance therapy, and to determine the frequency of relapse in such patients. Methods: We searched the Mayo Clinic Multiple Myeloma bone marrow transplant database for patients who were diagnosed with MM between Aug 1, 1988 to Jan 3, 2006, and underwent ASCT within 12 months of initial diagnosis. For the purposes of this study, we defined exceptional responders as patients who were free of progression for 96 months or more, which is 2-3 fold more than the median TTP expected in this population. Since maintenance therapy was not standard of care at the time, only a small minority (6) of patients with prolonged TTP had received maintenance therapy; these patients were excluded since the study was focused on exceptional response with ASCT alone. One patient who had a tandem autologous transplant was excluded. Results: 509 patients underwent transplant during the study period. Of those, 46 (9%) met criteria for exceptional response. Twenty seven (59%) were female, 19 (41%) were male. Median age was 57.28 years, range, 31.9-73.0. Of 45 patients with response data available, the best response status was complete response or better in 32 patients (73.3%), VGPR in 4 patients (8.9%), and PR in 8 patients (17.7%). FISH data were available during the disease course for 41 patients. Of these, the majority, 28 patients (68.3%), had no abnormalities detected by the probes used; 3 patients (7.3%) had high risk cytogenetics (t(4;14) in 2 patients and t(14;16) in one patient) , 4 (9.8%) had trisomies; 6 patients had other isolated abnormalities. At last follow up, 23 patients have progressed (50%); 14 (30.4%) have died, including one who died without progression to MM. The median overall survival from time of diagnosis of the exceptional responders was 18.5 years, range 9.2-22 years. From the landmark time of 96 months, the median TTP was 6.2 years, range, 0.4-10.6 years (Figure 1); No plateau was seen in the TTP curve. From the landmark time of 96 months, the median OS was 10.5 years, range, 0.4-14 years. Conclusions: We conclude that approximately 10% of patients with newly diagnosed myeloma have an exceptional response to a single ASCT without maintenance therapy. These patients have a remarkable overall survival, both from diagnosis and from the landmark time point where they are classified as having achieved an exceptional response. Although TTP from the landmark time point is excellent, with median TTP of 6.2 years, there appears to be no plateau in the curve indicating ongoing risk of relapse despite a prolonged period of disease stability. Exceptional responders tended to have normal FISH studies (likely an indicator of responsive, low-tumor burden disease), and nearly 20% achieved this state despite not attaining a complete response. Figure. Figure. Disclosures Gertz: Research to Practice: Consultancy; Apellis: Consultancy; spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria; Medscape: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; janssen: Consultancy; Teva: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; annexon: Consultancy; Ionis: Honoraria; Alnylam: Honoraria; Prothena: Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy. Kumar:KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Research Funding; KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Dispenzieri:Celgene, Takeda, Prothena, Jannsen, Pfizer, Alnylam, GSK: Research Funding. Dingli:Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.. Russell:Vyriad: Equity Ownership. Kapoor:Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction The 2-3 fold excess risk of multiple myeloma (MM) among family members of cases suggests a heritable contribution to risk. Recently, a genome-wide association study (GWAS) identified two genome-wide significant and one promising novel loci associated with multiple myeloma risk. To confirm these associations and identify additional novel risk loci, we performed a four-center, genome-wide association meta-analysis. Methods A fixed effects model was used for the meta-analysis which included a total of 1248 cases and 1485 controls, all of European descent, genotyped and analyzed at four separate centers with samples contributed by 10 studies. After quality control and imputation using the 1000 Genomes Project, the analysis included ∼9.5 million variants (λ=1.024). Associations between (single nucleotide polymorphisms) SNP genotypes and MM risk were evaluated under a log-additive model of inheritance, with each study adjusting for age, sex, and up to 10 principal components to control for population stratification. Promising results were replicated in an independent set of 1587 cases and 1770 controls using TaqMan, for a total of 2835 and 3255 cases and controls, respectively, in a combined meta-analysis. Results The discovery meta-analysis did not reveal any genome-wide significant associations (defined as p<5 x 10-8). We used a novel pruning algorithm to identify the top 35 most promising single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) to advance to replication. We successfully genotyped 22 SNPs in the replication set. In the combined discovery and replication meta-analysis, rs1345359 at 12q23.1 was the most strongly associated SNP (P=9 x 10-8, Table 1). The variant allele C was associated with reduced risk (odds ratio discovery set [OR]= 0.69, OR replication set = 0.78, OR combined = 0.74). A second locus at 20q13.2 (rs150220835), was associated with a two-fold increased risk (P=1.22 x 10-6), a borderline increased risk (P=0.0900) and 45% increased risk (P=2.44 X 10-5) in the discovery, replication, and combined analysis sets respectively (Table 1). We also confirmed the association between MM risk and two previously published SNPs (rs4487645, p=0.0007and rs105251, p=0.0044) (Broderick et al., Nat. Genet., 2011). The third previously suggested SNP (rs6746082) was of nominal significance (p=0.0517) in the meta-analysis. Discussion We confirmed the association between MM risk and two previously published SNPs and identified a possible association with a novel SNP in chromosome 12q23.1 (rs1345359). This SNP is not located in a gene nor associated with biofeatures in ENCODE, thus further examination of correlated SNPs is necessary to identify a functional SNP linked to this locus. We also found suggestive evidence for a second locus at 20q13.2 requiring additional replication. Larger studies would improve risk variant discovery for this rare hematologic malignancy. Disclosures: Wolf: Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Millenium: Honoraria; Onyx: Honoraria. Anderson:Celgene, Millennium, BMS, Onyx: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Acetylon, Oncopep: Scientific Founder , Scientific Founder Other.

Abstract Background: The introduction of novel therapeutics has led to improved outcomes in patients with multiple myeloma (MM). MM and its precursor lesion smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM) have traditionally been associated with increased mortality despite treatment. We aimed to assess the impact of a diagnosis of SMM and MM compared to the general population in the context of established prognostic factors. Methods: We studied the overall survival of 1697 patients with smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM, n = 582) and multiple myeloma (MM, n = 1115) diagnosed at Mayo Clinic between 01/2005 and 12/2015. Expected survival accounting for age and sex was calculated using the United States general population (US) as the reference group. Observed and expected overall survival was expressed as the standardized mortality ratio (SMR) of observed to expected deaths. Kaplan-Meier overall survival estimates were calculated and the log-rank test was used to compare overall survival in subgroups. The subgroups of interest were based on the International Staging System (ISS) and the presence of fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) high-risk cytogenetics: t(4;14), t(14;16), t(14;20), and del(17p). Proportional hazards regression models were used to assess the associations between the aforementioned prognostic factors and overall survival. P-values below 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Results: The median age at diagnosis in patients with SMM and MM was 65 (32 - 92) and 63 years (24 - 90), respectively. Two hundred forty-nine patients (57%) and 663 (60%) were male. The median follow-up in patients with SMM and MM was 4.7 (0.1 - 11.0) and 2.6 years (0.2 - 9.5). The median overall survival for patients with SMM and MM was 9.0 (95% CI 8.4 - 9.7) and 7.9 years (6.4 - 8.7). With age- and sex-matched population controls as the reference, the SMRs in patients with SMM and MM were 2.6 (95% CI 2.2 - 3.0) and 4.6 (4.1 - 5.2). Among those MM patients with available data on ISS staging and FISH cytogenetics, 30% (236/780) had ISS III and 21% (188/878) had high-risk cytogenetics. Patients with MM (compared to SMM) experienced worse overall survival (HR 1.5, 95% CI 1.2 - 1.8, p < 0.001, n = 1697). Patients with ISS I/II MM (compared to SMM) experienced similar survival (HR 1.0, 95% CI 0.8 - 1.3, p = 0.698, n = 1131). Patients with ISS III MM (compared to MM with high-risk cytogenetics) experienced similar survival (HR 1.3, 95% CI 0.9 - 2.0, p = 0.128, n = 329). Conclusions: Patients with SMM and MM in this cohort experienced excess mortality compared to the general population. In the absence of universal screening the true morbidity and mortality of patients with SMM and MM remains unknown and is likely overestimated in hospital-based cohorts. Overall survival in patients diagnosed with SMM and patients with ISS I/II MM receiving contemporary anti-myeloma therapy was clinically indistinguishable. Patients treated for ISS III MM experienced overall survival similar to patients with cytogenetic high-risk disease. MM remains associated with excess mortality, the magnitude of which varies considerably based on the presence of additional tumor and host factors. The outcomes with modern therapy among the ISS I/II patients highlight the potential for improving outcomes of SMM by early intervention, especially for the higher risk patients. Figure. Figure. Disclosures Lacy: Celgene: Research Funding. Gertz:Medscape: Consultancy; Alnylam: Honoraria; janssen: Consultancy; spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria; Ionis: Honoraria; annexon: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; Teva: Consultancy; Prothena: Honoraria; Apellis: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Research to Practice: Consultancy. Dispenzieri:Celgene, Takeda, Prothena, Jannsen, Pfizer, Alnylam, GSK: Research Funding. Russell:Vyriad: Equity Ownership. Kapoor:Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Kumar:Roche: Research Funding; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction Recent advances in the understanding of the WM pathobiology led to the expansion of our therapeutic options in this disease. A number of targeted drugs are either available or under investigation and are poised to change the chemo-immunotherapy paradigm in the treatment of WM. Now more than ever, an individualized treatment approach for patients with WM is possible, where patient characteristics and preferences can be matched by different treatment goals and side effect profiles. While deep responses have been associated with longer disease-free survival in other hematologic malignancies, data on patients with WM are sparse. We report the impact of depth of response in disease-free and overall survival (OS) in WM. Methods WM patients consecutively seen at Mayo Clinic between 01/1998 and 12/2016 were reviewed for response to therapy and disease burden. The best response achieved after the treatment of interest (TOI) was classified using the IWWM-7 Response Criteria. The included TOI were: BR, DRC, BDR and high-dose chemotherapy followed by ASCT. All time-to-event analyses were performed from the TOI initiation date using the Kaplan-Meier method and the log-rank test. A landmark analysis from the date-of-best response was also performed for OS to prevent immortal-time bias. Univariate and multivariate analyses of progression-free survival (PFS) and time-to-next therapy (TTNT) were performed using the Cox regression method. Results A total of 181 patients had disease response assessed after the TOI. Baseline characteristics at time of diagnosis are summarized in table 1. The median follow up from TOI was 3.8 years (95% CI: 3-4), the majority of patients received TOI as salvage therapy [n=112 (63%); median 2nd line (rage 1-11)]. Best response rates with the corresponding 5-year PFS and TTNT are summarized in table 2. The median OS from TOI was longer in patients who achieved at least a PR [median 7.2 years (95% CI: 5-NR) vs 3.7 years (95% CI: 1.6-NR), p=0.01]. A trend towards a longer OS was also seen with deeper responses (PR or better) achieved with frontline therapy [median 5.8 years (95% CI: 5.8-NR) vs 3.4 years (95% CI: 1.6-NR), p=0.24]. Figure 1 shows the correlation between deeper responses with PFS and TTNT. Among patients achieving a PR or VGPR, those with a normal FLC ratio post TOI demonstrated a longer PFS and TTNT [PFS: median NR (95% CI: 3.4-NR) vs 4.9 years (95% CI: 2.8-8.7), p=0.01; TTNT: median NR (95% CI: 3.5-NR) vs 5.2 years (95% CI: 4.2-9.4), p=0.04], figure 2. In a multivariate analysis including normal FLC ratio, normal IgM level and minimal BM involvement (<5%) post TOI, normal FLC ratio remained an independent prognostic factor for longer PFS and TTNT. Similar trends were seen when considering treatment naïve and relapsed/refractory patients independently (data not shown). Discussion Our results not only suggest an association between depth of response with PFS and TTNT, but also with OS in patients with WM. A normal FLC ratio (not part of the IWWM-7 response criteria) seems to predict a longer disease-free interval in patients achieving a PR or VGPR. Disclosures Gertz: Ionis: Honoraria; Apellis: Consultancy; annexon: Consultancy; Prothena: Honoraria; janssen: Consultancy; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; Alnylam: Honoraria; Teva: Consultancy; spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria; Medscape: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; Research to Practice: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy. Kapoor:Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Ailawadhi:Amgen: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy. Reeder:Affimed: Research Funding. Witzig:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Dispenzieri:Celgene, Takeda, Prothena, Jannsen, Pfizer, Alnylam, GSK: Research Funding. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding. Kumar:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Ansell:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Celldex: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Merck & Co: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding.

Abstract Background : Ibrutinib, a Bruton's tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor was approved for the treatment of Waldenstrom Macroglobulinemia (WM) in January, 2015 based on the results of a clinical trial of 63 previously-treated patients with WM. Data on outcomes with ibrutinib outside of clinical trials are limited. Methods : Medical records of patients with WM seen consecutively between 02/01/2015 and 06/01/2018 at Mayo Clinic, MN, FL and AZ were reviewed and those treated with ibrutinib at any point during their disease were included. Refractoriness to prior therapy was defined as disease progression on therapy or within 2 months of stopping treatment. The response rates were assessed by WM VI International Workshop Criteria. Adverse events were graded using National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events (AEs) v4.03. All time-to-event analyses were performed from the time of initiation of ibrutinib. Results : Eighty patients [previously treated, n=67 (84%), treatment-naïve, n=13 (16%)] received ibrutinib for active WM. Median follow-up was 18 months (95% CI: 12-19) and the median overall survival (OS) was not reached (NR) (95% CI: 27-NR) for the entire cohort at the date of last follow-up. The median age was 67 years (range: 50-88) and the median ECOG performance score was 1 (range: 0-3) at the time of ibrutinib initiation. Median lines of therapies prior to ibrutinib for the previously-treated patients was 2 (range: 1-9) and 35 patients (44%) had received ≥3 prior lines of therapy. Of the 80 patients, 52 patients (43 previously treated, 9 treatment-naïve) had data for response assessment. The baseline characteristics and laboratory parameters at initiation of ibrutinib are outlined in Table 1a and prior therapies are mentioned in Table 1b. Overall response rate (ORR) was 90% (100% in patients with ibrutinib as primary therapy and 88% in salvage therapy setting); major-response rate (MRR) was 77%. Median time to first and best response was 2.1 months (95% CI: 1.5-3.5) and 5.4 months (95% CI: 3.5-13), respectively. Other clinically relevant endpoints and AEs related to ibrutinib therapy are outlined in Table 2 and 3, respectively. The median time-to-next therapy was 33 months (95% CI: 28-NR). At last follow-up, 25 (32%) patients had discontinued ibrutinib therapy. The reasons for discontinuation was progression (n=8), elevated liver enzymes (n=4), cognitive changes (n=1), inability to achieve better than MR (n=1), atrial fibrillation (n=3), consolidation with autologous stem cell transplantation after PR with ibrutinib (n=1), transition to hospice care due to progressive head and neck cancer (n=1), infection in lower extremity (n=1), transformation to DLBCL (n=1), blistering rash which resolved after ibrutinib discontinuation (n=1), obscure GI bleed that resolved after ibrutinib discontinuation (n=1), fatigue (n=1) and for unclear reasons recorded as treatment intolerance (n=1). Following discontinuation of ibrutinib, 21 patients received salvage therapy. Of these, data regarding the response to salvage therapy was available in 9 (43%) patients (VGPR=2, PR=3, SD=3 and progressive disease=1); median PFS from the salvage therapy following ibrutinib discontinuation was 18 months (95% CI: 2-25). Of the 4 patients who were not treated following ibrutinib discontinuation; 1 elected hospice care due to concurrent head and neck cancer progression, and the other 3 patients elected to be monitored off therapy (one had achieved SD and two had PR from ibrutinib). Fourteen patients were evaluable for IgM rebound following ibrutinib discontinuation. Of those, 5 (36%) had sudden increase in IgM level [median: 158% from the IgM level after ibrutinib discontinuation (range: 22%-1368%)] within a median of 2 months (range: 1-3 months) and 1 patient required plasmapheresis for symptomatic hyperviscosity. Four of 5 patients received salvage therapy between 0-15 months. At last follow-up, 11 patients (14%) had died of whom 3 were on ibrutinib at the time of death [CNS involvement, (n=1), causes unrelated to WM, (n=2)]. Conclusions : Ibrutinib is an effective agent in WM patients with MYD88L265Pmutation. Our data regarding outcomes in non-trial setting appear comparable to the results observed in the pivotal clinical trial. Hematologists should be aware of unique ibrutinib associated toxicities and clinically relevant IgM rebound phenomenon following abrupt discontinuation of ibrutinib. Disclosures Ailawadhi: Celgene: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy. Gertz:janssen: Consultancy; Prothena: Honoraria; Medscape: Consultancy; Teva: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; annexon: Consultancy; Alnylam: Honoraria; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria; Apellis: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Ionis: Honoraria; Research to Practice: Consultancy. Kumar:Novartis: Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding. Dispenzieri:Celgene, Takeda, Prothena, Jannsen, Pfizer, Alnylam, GSK: Research Funding. Witzig:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Dingli:Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding. Kapoor:Celgene: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding.

Abstract We retrospectively reviewed all patients receiving bortezomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone induction followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) within 12 months of diagnosis for multiple myeloma at the Mayo Clinic. 243 patients treated between January 2010 and April of 2017 were included in the study. Median age was 61 (interquartile range, 55-67) with 62% of patients being male. High risk cytogenetic abnormalities (HRA) were present in 34% of patients. 166 (68%) patients received some form of maintenance/other therapy post transplant (no maintenance (NM, n=77), lenalidomide maintenance (LM, n=108), bortezomib maintenance (BM, n=39) and other therapy (OT, n=19)). Overall response rate was 99% with complete response (CR) rate of 42% and 62% at day 100 and time of best response post transplant respectively. The four cohorts categorized by post transplant therapy were well matched for age, gender and ISS stage. HRA were more common amongst patients receiving bortezomib maintenance or other therapy post transplant (NM 18% vs LM 22% vs BM 68% vs OT 79%, p<0.0001). Two year and five year overall survival rates were 90% and 67% respectively with an estimated median overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS) of 96 months and 28 months respectively for the whole cohort. OS was not significantly different when stratified by post-transplant therapy (Median OS 96 months for NM vs not reached for LM vs 62 months for BM vs not reached for OT, p=0.61), however post-transplant therapy was predictive of PFS (median PFS 23 months for NM vs 34 months for LM vs 28 months for BM vs 76 months for OT, p=0.01). High risk cytogenetics was associated with a worse OS but not PFS when compared to patients with standard risk (median OS: not reached for standard risk vs 60 months for HRA, p=0.0006; median PFS: 27 months for standard risk vs 22 months for HRA, p=0.70). In patients that did not receive maintenance therapy presence of HRA was a strong predictor of OS and PFS (median OS: not reached for standard risk vs 36 months for HRA, p<0.0001; median PFS: 24 months for standard risk vs 7 months for HRA, p<0.0001). Patients receiving maintenance therapy appeared to have a similar PFS and OS irrespective of cytogenetics (median OS: not reached for standard risk vs 62 months for HRA, p=0.14; median PFS: 35 months for standard risk vs 34 months for HRA, p=0.79).On multivariable analysis ISS stage III and achieving CR/stringent CR predicted PFS whilst the only independent predictors of OS were presence of HRA and achieving CR/stringent CR. The combination of bortezomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone followed by ASCT is a highly effective regimen producing deep and durable responses in many patients. Maintenance therapy in this cohort may overcome the poor prognostic impact of high risk cytogenetic abnormalities. Table Table. Disclosures Dispenzieri: Celgene, Takeda, Prothena, Jannsen, Pfizer, Alnylam, GSK: Research Funding. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding. Dingli:Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.. Kapoor:Celgene: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Kumar:KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Gertz:Abbvie: Consultancy; Apellis: Consultancy; annexon: Consultancy; Medscape: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; Prothena: Honoraria; spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy; janssen: Consultancy; Ionis: Honoraria; Teva: Consultancy; Alnylam: Honoraria; Research to Practice: Consultancy; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy.

Abstract Background: We previously reported successful treatment of myeloma with an oncolytic virus, MMV-NIS. Preexisting immunity against measles made use of that virus unsatisfactory. The Indiana strain of Vesicular Stomatitis Viruses (VSV) are being developed as anticancer drugs for the treatment of a variety of malignancies. To ensure tumor selective replication and spread, we designed the VSV to encode interferon beta. Expression of IFNβ also serves as a STING agonist to activate host immunity against the cancer. The sodium iodide symporter (NIS) is inserted as a reporter gene into the viral genome to enable noninvasive monitoring of viral spread using PET/CT imaging. We report a Phase I clinical trial of intravenous administration of VSV-IFNβ-NIS for relapsed hematological malignancies including MM, AML, and TCL. Methods: Arm A consisted of patients with low tumor burden. Arm B included patients with high tumor burden. Both arms consisted of a classical 3+3 phase I trial, starting at 5x10^9 TCID50 (dose level 1) through 5x10^11 TCID50 (dose level 4), given as a single IV dose. In order to obviate potential toxicity from high interferon levels, Arm B received ruxolitinib 15 mg twice daily for 10 days beginning on day -1. The primary objective was determining the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of VSV-IFNβ-NIS alone and in combination with ruxolitinib; secondary objectives include estimating the safety profile and preliminary efficacy. Correlative objectives include monitoring the pharmacodynamics of viral replication through SPECT/CT imaging with NIS gene, viremia, virus shedding, changes in the immune profile of peripheral blood leukocytes, and immunohistochemistry for immune cell infiltrates in tumors. Adverse events (AEs) are reported herein based on CTCAE v4 with the exception of cytokine release syndrome (CRS) which is based on Lee (Blood 2014; 124(2):188-195) criteria. Results: To date, 10 patients have received IV VSV-IFNβ-NIS; 8 in Arm A and 2 in Arm B. In Arm A, 3 patients were treated at dose level 1, 3 at dose level 2 and 2 at dose level 3. At dose level 1, there were three grade 3 hematologic AEs (neutropenia [1], lymphopenia [2]), and no grade 3+ non-hematologic AEs. At dose level 2, there were two grade 3 hematologic AEs (anemia [1], lymphopenia [1]), and two grade 3 non-hematologic AEs (nausea [1], dehydration [1]). A grade 2 CRS by Lee criteria was also observed. At dose level 3, 2 patients have been enrolled and data are maturing for DLT evaluation. In Arm B (VSV + rux), 2 patients have been enrolled and data are maturing for dose limiting toxicity (DLT) evaluation. Other grade 1 and 2 toxicities have included fever, hypertension, headache, electrolyte abnormalities, nausea, vomiting, transient elevation of liver function tests and creatinine. All grade 1 and 2 toxicities resolved within 72 hours. Among the 6 patients evaluable for response, there was one partial remission (TCL patient treated at dose level 2), and 5 with progressive disease. Multiple cytokines increased at 4h post infusion of virus, but most returned to baseline levels by 24h.Viremia was detectable in all patients at the end of infusion, and to varying levels at 30 mins, 1, 2, 4, 24, 48h or 72 hours post virus infusion. No persistent viremia was observed. No infectious virus was recovered in buccal swabs or urine and neutralizing anti-VSV antibodies were present by day 29. Extensive immune phenotyping and ELIspot assays for shared antigens are ongoing. Conclusion: In the lowest dose levels tested to date, VSV-IFNβ-NIS has not led to any observed dose limiting toxicity. Dose escalation is ongoing and updated results will be reported. Disclosures Lacy: Celgene: Research Funding. Peng:Vyriad: Equity Ownership. Russell:Vyriad: Equity Ownership. Dueck:Bayer: Employment; Phytogine: Employment; Pfizer: Honoraria. Witzig:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Dispenzieri:Celgene, Takeda, Prothena, Jannsen, Pfizer, Alnylam, GSK: Research Funding. Gertz:spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; Ionis: Honoraria; janssen: Consultancy; Medscape: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; Apellis: Consultancy; Prothena: Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy; annexon: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Research to Practice: Consultancy; Teva: Consultancy; Alnylam: Honoraria. Dingli:Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding. Kapoor:Celgene: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Al-Kali:Novartis: Research Funding. Naik:Vyriad: Equity Ownership. Kumar:AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.