Sidiqi, M Hasib

8516 Background: The role of induction therapy prior to autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) in immunoglobulin light chain (AL) amyloidosis remains controversial. Data on the prognostic impact of response to induction in a transplanted cohort are lacking. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of response to induction therapy on survival in patients undergoing ASCT for AL amyloidosis. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of all newly diagnosed AL amyloidosis patients who received induction prior to ASCT between January 2007 and August 2017 at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota. Patients receiving only corticosteroids prior to transplant were excluded as were those with an involved light chain of less than 5 mg/dL (not measurable for response). Results: 134 patients met inclusion criteria. The median age at diagnosis was 60 (range 36-74) and 85 (63%) were men. The most commonly used induction regimen was proteasome inhibitor-based (73.1%, n=98). The overall response rate to induction was 83% (complete response 17%, very good partial response 30% and partial response 36%). With a median follow up of 56.5 months, the median PFS and OS was 48.5 months and not reached, respectively. Response depth to induction therapy was associated with improved PFS and OS and was independent of the bone marrow plasma cell percentage. The median PFS was not reached for patients achieving ≥VGPR prior to ASCT and 33.8 months for patient achieving PR or less (P=0.001). The median OS was longer in patients with deeper responses (not reached for patients achieving ≥VGPR vs. 128 months for patients achieving PR or less (P=0.02). On multivariable analysis, independent predictors of OS were melphalan conditioning dose (RR= 0.38; P=0.018) and depth of response prior to transplant (RR 2.52; P=0.039). Conclusions: Hematologic response prior to transplant predicts post-transplant outcomes in patients with AL amyloidosis. [Table: see text]

8011 Background: Literature suggests that three or more organ involvement is a contraindication for autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) in light chain amyloidosis (AL). Most centers limit transplantation to patients who have no more than two organs significantly involved. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed all patients with AL Amyloidosis involving three or more organs and who had ASCT between 1996-2015 at Mayo clinic, Rochester, Minnesota. Results: Seventy five patients underwent ASCT with three or more organs involved. Median age at diagnosis was 54 years and 67% were males. The heart was involved in 95%, followed by kidneys (84%). Thirty eight patients (51%) had no induction treatment prior to ASCT. Full dose melphalan (200mg/m2) was given in 45%, and the remaining received a reduced dose (140mg/m2). Overall response rate (hematological) was 75%. The median progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 16.3 and 68.9 months, respectively. The 100-day mortality was 16% and overall forty four patients (59%) died during the follow up period. The most common causes of death were cardiovascular events (32%) and progressive amyloidosis (25%). On multivariable analysis, predictors for PFS were Mayo stage III/IV (RR 3.3, P = 0.0012) and hematological response (≥VGPR, RR 0.4, P = 0.012). An NT-ProBNP level of ≥2000 pg/ml was an independent predictor for shorter PFS (RR 2.6, P = 0.013). Predictors for OS included any hematological response (RR 0.1, P < 0.0001) and Mayo stage III/IV (RR 7, P < 0.0001). When looking at the NT-ProBNP, a level ≥2000 was prognostic (RR 5.5, P = 0.001). Number of organs involved (3 vs. 4-5) was not significant in either PFS or OS. Conclusions: We conclude that the high prevalence of cardiac involvement is the main driver for the poor outcome in patients who have three or more organs involved. Using selection criteria defined for safe transplantation in cardiac amyloidosis should result in low therapy-related mortality independent of the number of organs involved. The concept of considering patients with three organs involved ineligible for stem cell transplantation should be abandoned.

AbstractWe evaluated bone marrow minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity in 44 patients with light chain (AL) amyloidosis using next generation flow cytometry (sensitivity ≥1 × 10−5; median events analyzed: 8.7 million, range: 4.8 to 9.7 million). All patients underwent MRD testing in 2 years from start of therapy (median: 7 months). The overall MRD negative rate was 64% (n = 28). The MRD‐negative rate after one‐line of therapy was 71% (20/28). And, MRD negative rates were higher with stem‐cell transplant as first‐line therapy (86%, 18/21) vs chemotherapy alone as first‐line treatment (29%, 2/7), P = .005. The MRD negative rate amongst patients in complete response was 75% (15/20), and in very good partial response, 50% (11/22). There were two patients in partial response/rising light chains (with renal dysfunction) who were MRD negative. There were no differences in baseline characteristics of MRD negative vs MRD positive patients, except younger age amongst MRD‐negative patients. Patients with MRD negativity were more likely to have achieved cardiac response at the time of MRD assessment, 67% (8/12) vs 22% (2/7), P = .04. Renal response rates were similar in both groups. Progression free survival was assessed in the 42 patients achieving CR or VGPR. After median follow‐up of 14 months, the estimated 1‐year progression free survival in MRD negative vs MRD positive patients was 100% (26 patients, 0 events) vs 64% (16 patients, five events), P = .006, respectively. MRD assessment should be explored as a surrogate endpoint in clinical trials and MRD risk‐adapted trials may help optimize treatment in AL amyloidosis.

Introduction: There is a paucity of randomized trials to guide therapy for relapsed AL amyloidosis with treatment regimens generally extrapolated from experience in multiple myeloma. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of patients who relapsed after receiving autologous stem cell transplant at Mayo Clinic. Patients treated for first relapse between January 2004 and December 2018 were included. Results: Three hundred and twenty-one patients were seen for relapsed AL amyloidosis post ASCT during the study period. Baseline characteristics were typical for a cohort with AL amyloidosis and are listed in Table1. 39% received therapy prior to transplant, conditioning in the majority (75%) was melphalan 200mg/m2. The median progression free survival from transplant (PFS1) was 30.7 months. Of the 321 patients 294 received treatment for relapsed disease. We categorized treatment regimens according to commonly used combinations and drug classes to further analyze outcomes. 34 patients were excluded from this analysis as they either proceeded directly to second ASCT (n=10) or received an atypical regimen not commonly considered for AL amyloidosis (n=24). Five categories of therapy regimens were identified, thalidomide based (n=110), melphalan plus steroids (n=31), 2nd generation immunomodulatory (IMiD) drug +/- alkylator (n=76), proteasome inhibitor (PI) +/- alkylator (n=116), PI plus IMiD (n=16), or daratumumab based (n=9). Disease and treatment characteristics for patients treated with these regimens are listed in Table 2. Patients treated with thalidomide had the shortest PFS1 (17.7 months) but PFS1 was similar for those treated with melphalan plus steroids, PI+IMiD and 2nd generation IMiDs (25.5, 24.3 and 25.6 months respectively). Patients treated with a PI +/- alkylator and daratumumab based regimen had the longest PFS1 (36.7 and 41.9 months respectively). The median duration of therapy was longer in patients treated with a 2nd generation IMiD or daratumumab based regimen (10.2, 12, 6.1, 5.5, 6.2 and 5.9 months for Dara based, 2nd generation IMiD, PI+/- alkylator, PI+IMiD, melphalan plus steroids and thalidomide based respectively). Hematologic response rate was lowest in those treated with melphalan plus steroids or thalidomide based regimens (44% and 55% respectively) and highest for patients treated with a PI+/- alkylator, (Figure 1). Progression free survival from relapsed therapy (PFS2) was longest amongst patients treated with daratumumab based regimens, PI +/- alkylator and 2nd generation IMiDs (not reached, 29.9 and 26.7 months respectively), Figure 2A. Overall survival from time of relapsed therapy favored patients treated with daratumumab based regimens, 2nd generation IMiDs and PI +/- alkylator, Figure 2b). Conclusion: A second generation IMiD based regimen or PI +/- alkylator produce high response rates and prolonged progression free and overall survival for relapsed AL amyloidosis. Patients treated with daratumumab based regimens and those treated with a PI plus IMiD also appear to do well, although numbers were low in our study. Patients treated with melphalan plus steroids or thalidomide based combinations have inferior outcomes and these regimens should be avoided. Disclosures Dispenzieri: Celgene: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; Intellia: Consultancy; Akcea: Consultancy; Alnylam: Research Funding. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding. Dingli:Karyopharm: Research Funding; Rigel: Consultancy; Millenium: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; alexion: Consultancy. Leung:Takeda: Research Funding; Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Aduro: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Omeros: Research Funding. Kapoor:Glaxo Smith Kline: Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria; Cellectar: Consultancy; Amgen: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding. Kumar:Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Gertz:Medscape: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Prothena Biosciences Inc: Consultancy; Ionis/Akcea: Consultancy; Alnylam: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Spectrum: Consultancy, Research Funding; Appellis: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; Abbvie: Other: personal fees for Data Safety Monitoring board; Research to Practice: Consultancy; Teva: Speakers Bureau; Johnson and Johnson: Speakers Bureau; DAVA oncology: Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Proclara: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; i3Health: Other: Development of educational programs and materials; Springer Publishing: Patents & Royalties; Amyloidosis Foundation: Research Funding; International Waldenstrom Foundation: Research Funding; Annexon: Consultancy. OffLabel Disclosure: Daratumumab off label use for AL amyloidosis.

Introduction: Daratumumab is a human immunoglobulin (IgG-κ) that targets CD38 abundantly expressed on plasma cells. Data is emerging to show its efficacy as part of induction therapy for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) patients. Hematopoietic stem cells have been shown to express CD38 on the cell surface and therefore during mobilization, there is a theoretical risk of circulating daratumumab binding to and having downstream effects on these cells. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of MM patients treated with daratumumab prior to stem cell collection and autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) to identify any effects daratumumab therapy may have on the efficacy of the stem cells in bone marrow recovery. The study was conducted at Mayo Clinic Rochester from February 2018 to May 2019. Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor was the preferred agent used for stem cell mobilization and plerixafor was added in a demand-adapted fashion. All patients received melphalan infused at day -1 before their ASCT and the decision about dosing (200mg/m2 vs 140mg/m2) was at the physicians' discretion. Neutrophil engraftment was defined as the first date of three consecutive neutrophil counts >0.5 x 10^9/L and platelet engraftment was defined as the first date of three consecutive platelet counts >50 x 10^9/L in the absence of platelet transfusion in the preceding 7 days. Results: We identified 12 patients who received daratumumab as part of their first induction regimen (daratumumab cohort) and compared them to 129 patients who did not receive daratumumab prior to stem cell mobilization and transplant during the study period (no daratumumab cohort). Of the daratumumab cohort, 11 patients received daratumumab, ixazomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone and one received daratumumab, cyclophosphamide, bortezomib and dexamethasone. No differences were noted in terms of melphalan dose or the number of CD34+ stem cell infused. The median time from the last dose of daratumumab to stem cell collection was 3.9 weeks. In patients receiving daratumumab, the median time for neutrophil engraftment was three days longer compared with those who did not receive daratumumab (median of 19 days vs. 16 days, P=0.017) (Figure 1, A). Median platelet engraftment was delayed by one day, although this was not statistically significant (median of 18 days vs. 17 days, p=0.12) (Figure 1, B). A total of 6 patients (50%) from the daratumumab cohort and 52 (40%) from the no daratumumab cohort required hospital admission. Of these admissions, there was no difference between the two groups in rates of admission for fever (50% in the daratumumab group vs. 42% in the no daratumumab group, P=0.7). Conclusion: Our case series provides the first report of daratumumab delaying engraftment post transplant in myeloma patients receiving it prior to stem cell collection. A better characterization of this phenomenon is important given the increasing use of daratumumab as front line therapy prior to ASCT in patients with myeloma. Disclosures Gertz: Prothena: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Spectrum: Honoraria, Research Funding; Alnylam: Honoraria; Ionis: Honoraria. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding. Kapoor:Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Glaxo Smith Kline: Research Funding; Cellectar: Consultancy; Janssen: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria. Dispenzieri:Alnylam: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; Intellia: Consultancy; Akcea: Consultancy. Dingli:alexion: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Millenium: Consultancy; Rigel: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Research Funding. Kumar:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding.

Introduction Amyloidosis is a rare disease and there are currently no FDA approved therapies for AL amyloidosis. Most of the therapeutic and disease data come from expert guidelines, consensus and retrospective review papers. There is a paucity of data specifically for relapsed/refractory AL amyloidosis (RRAL). We conducted this systematic review of clinical trials, retrospective and prospective cohort studies to evaluate patterns of relapse and therapeutic options for RRAL. Methods PubMed and Clinicaltrials.gov were searched for clinical trials, retrospective and prospective cohort studies on RRAL. Studies were selected according to PRISMA guidelines. Cross-trial comparison of included studies and meta-analysis could not be performed for a number of reasons but mainly due to a limited number of studies on one particular treatment regimen. Results From a total of 511 studies, 11 studies (n= 698 patients) met our inclusion criteria. Five were phase I/II clinical trials, five retrospective cohort studies, and one prospective cohort study. Most studies had less than 50 patients. The largest study, a retrospective cohort by Tandon et al. included 366 patients. Mean age was 61.2. Three studies reported 2 median prior lines of therapy (n= 22, 28, and 84 patients); two reported 3 median prior lines of therapy (n= 25 and 24) and 6 studies didn't specify this data. Prior treatment options included proteasome inhibitors (PI), most commonly bortezomib (n= 259), followed by melphalan (n=211), high dose melphalan and stem cell transplant (HDM/SCT [n= 207]) and IMiDs most commonly lenalidomide (n=154). Time to progression (TTP) from first-line treatment was reported in only 4 studies as 1 month, 5 months, 5 months and 34 months respectively. The study reporting a TTP of 34-months had 11 patients who received HDM/SCT as first line treatment. Three studies reported information about their criteria for initiation of subsequent treatment. Subsequent treatment was mostly a combination regimen with dexamethasone or an alkylating agent. The only agent evaluated as single agent was bortezomib in a phase I/II clinical trial by Reece et al. Therapeutic options for RRAL are PI (non-specific) based therapy (n= 145), lenalidomide (n= 105), bortezomib (n= 99), IMiD (non-specific) based therapy (n=83), melphalan based therapy (n= 33), carfilzomib (n=28), pomalidomide (n=27), ASCT (n= 25), daratumumab (n=25) and bendamustine (n=22). Efficacy: Hematologic responses were reported to be following: bortezomib + dexamethasone/melphalan (85%, n=17/20), daratumumab + dexamethasone (76%, n= 19/25), HDM/ASCT (73%, n= 8/11), single agent bortezomib (67%, n=23/34), carfilzomib ± dexamethasone (63%, n= 15/24), lenalidomide + dexamethasone (61%, n=51/84), bendamustine + dexamethasone (55%, 11/22) and pomalidomide + dexamethasone (50%, 12/24). Five of eleven studies reported organ responses which ranged from 18% to 23%. The studies which reported organ responses had evaluated the following agents: single agent bortezomib, carfilzomib ± dexamethasone, lenalidomide + dexamethasone, and bendamustine + dexamethasone. Best survival outcomes were seen with bortezomib with median overall survival (OS) 62 months. With bendamustine and dexamethasone (retrospective cohort study n=22) median OS was 31 months. With lenalidomide + dexamethasone (prospective cohort study n=24 ) median OS was 14 months. For the remaining studies, the median OS was either not reported or not reached at the time of presentation of data. Conclusion AL amyloidosis patients progressing after front line therapy show good responses with bortezomib (median overall survival of 62 months). Novel combinations using lenalidomide, pomalidomide, carfilzomib, daratumumab, and bendamustine show promising efficacy. Ongoing trials of daratumumab (AMYDARA trial) and ixazomib (TOURAMALINE-AL1) will bring further insight into therapeutic armamentarium for RRAL patients. After relapse, a salvage HDM/ASCT can be considered. Comparisons of regimen efficacy between studies are not practical because of multiple factors which include but are not limited to heterogenous nature of AL patients, small sample sizes, variable prior treatments, exposure to novel agents, observational study versus clinical trial and variable endpoints. Table Disclosures Anwer: Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; In-Cyte: Speakers Bureau.

Introduction: Risk stratification of patients with light chain (AL) amyloidosis at diagnosis is invaluable. Currently, the Mayo 2012 staging system is mainly used to risk-stratify patients. We evaluated the role of increased mean corpuscular volume (MCV) at diagnosis in predicting survival. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of patients with newly diagnosed AL amyloidosis seen at Mayo Clinic, Rochester between January 2006 through December 2015. The diagnosis of AL was confirmed with biopsy and the determination of organ involvement was according to consensus criteria. Staging was done according to the Mayo 2012 staging system and patients with stage III/IV were considered to have advanced stage disease. Patient and disease factors were compared for categorical and continuous variables using the χ2 and the Wilcoxon signed rank tests, respectively. Overall survival (OS) was defined as the time from diagnosis to death of any cause. Survival analysis was done using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: A total of 1064 patients were identified and were divided into two groups: those with an MCV ≥ 96 fl (Elevated MCV, n=180) and those with an MCV <96 fl (Low MCV, n=884). The median age at diagnosis for the whole cohort was 64, with an interquartile range (IQR) of 57-71. Overall, 222 (23%) had Mayo 2012 stage 1, 199 (21%) had stage 2, 239 (25%) had stage 3, and 290 (31%) had stage 4 disease. Patients with an elevated MCV were more likely to be more than 65 years old compared to patients with a low MCV (61% vs. 44%, p<0.0001). They were also likely to have an advanced Mayo 2012 stage (68% vs. 53%, P=0.0008). The median OS was significantly lower in patients with an elevated MCV compared to patients with a low MCV (median PFS 13 months vs. 41 month, respectively, P<0.0001)(Figure 1). On a univariable analysis, predictors of OS were advanced Mayo 2012 stage (RR 3.26, P<0.001) and MCV ≥ 96 (RR 1.6, P<0.0001). On the multivariable analysis, both variables remained predictors of OS [advanced Mayo 2012 stage (RR 3.19, P<0.001) and MCV ≥ 96 (RR 1.3, P=0.016)]. Conclusion: The median OS was shorter by 28 months in newly diagnosed AL amyloidosis patients with an MCV ≥ 96 compared to patients with an MCV<96. An elevated MCV was predictive of shorter survival, independent of the Mayo Stage. This variable is easily available, measured in all newly diagnosed patients, and provides valuable prognostic information for the treating physician. Disclosures Dispenzieri: Intellia: Consultancy; Takeda: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; Alnylam: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Akcea: Consultancy. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding. Dingli:alexion: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Millenium: Consultancy; Rigel: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Research Funding. Leung:Takeda: Research Funding; Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Omeros: Research Funding; Aduro: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kapoor:Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria; Cellectar: Consultancy; Janssen: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Glaxo Smith Kline: Research Funding. Gertz:i3Health: Other: Development of educational programs and materials; Alnylam: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Appellis: Consultancy; Teva: Speakers Bureau; Spectrum: Consultancy, Research Funding; Annexon: Consultancy; Springer Publishing: Patents & Royalties; Amyloidosis Foundation: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy; Medscape: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; Abbvie: Other: personal fees for Data Safety Monitoring board; Research to Practice: Consultancy; Ionis/Akcea: Consultancy; Prothena Biosciences Inc: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; International Waldenstrom Foundation: Research Funding; Proclara: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Johnson and Johnson: Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; DAVA oncology: Speakers Bureau. Kumar:Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Introduction: Patients who develop therapy-related myeloid neoplasms (t-MN) have dismal outcomes. Previous studies reported the incidence and risk factors associated with t-MN development. Lenalidomide, in the setting of oral, but not intravenous, melphalan is associated with a higher risk of t-MN (Palumbo et. al, Lancet Oncology, 2014). We carried out this study to evaluate the clinical and pathologic features of t-MN, therapies employed, and factors that predict long-term survival after diagnosis. Patients and methods: We identified patients who received the first ASCT 1998-2016 at our institution. t-MN was defined per the WHO 2016 classification. Median overall survival (OS) was calculated from the time of t-MN diagnosis to last follow-up or death. Statistical analyses were performed using SAS (JMP v14.1) or GraphPad Prism (v7). Results: Out of 2115 patients that underwent at least one ASCT, 53 (2.5%) developed t-MN. Thirty-five of 53 (66%) patients who developed t-MN had received lenalidomide. Among 2062 patients that did not develop t-MN, 916 (44.4%) patients received lenalidomide. Lenalidomide exposure was associated with development of t-MN (χ2 with Yate's correction 8.9, p=0.003). Ten patients were excluded from further analyses due to lack of follow up. Clinical characteristics are shown in Table 1a (N=43). Median age at t-MN diagnosis was 70 years (range 44-79). Median time from ASCT to t-MN was 5 years (range 1-15). After a median follow-up of 70 months (95% CI, 38-134), the median OS was 12 months (95% CI, 9-17, Figure). Primary causes of death were t-MN (71%), MM (12%), both (6%), and other including infection, GVHD, and unknown (12%). Seven (16%) had t-AML and 36(84%) had t-MDS. Three (42%) of 7 patients with t-AML had pure erythroid phenotype. At the time of last follow-up, 9 (21%) were alive. Seven (17%) underwent two ASCT, 16 (36%) received more than 2 years cumulative dose of lenalidomide. Median number of cycles of alkylator therapy including high-dose melphalan (HDM) used for ASCT was 2 (range 1-6). On univariate analysis, factors predicting OS from t-MN diagnosis were ≥ 2 alkylator vs. < 2 cycles (11 vs. 27 months, p=0.02), ≥10% vs. <10% blast at the time of t-MN diagnosis (5.5 vs. 17 months, p=0.01), and the presence of complex karyotype (CK) vs. not (11 vs. 17 months, p=0.03). There was no difference in survival among t-MDS patients who transformed to t-AML vs. those who did not, those who received 1 vs. 2 ASCT, and those with lenalidomide duration ≥ 2 vs. <2 years. On multivariate analysis, the number of alkylator therapies and CK, but not % blasts predicted OS from t-MN diagnosis (Figure). Eight (19%) patients proceeded to receive an autologous (n=4) or allogeneic (n=4) transplant for t-MN (Table 1b). There was no survival advantage for patients who underwent SCT for t-MN, compared to those who did not (17 vs. 10 months, p=0.3). Similarly, there was no survival advantage for patients who received allo SCT compared to auto SCT (21 vs. 16 months, p=0.7). Survival for t-MDS and t-AML was also not different (15 vs. 6 months, p=0.2). There is only one long-term survivor in the transplant group (s/p allogeneic SCT). Four of seven (57%) patients died of progressive t-MN, 1 died of progressive MM, progressive MM and t-MN, and TRM each. Conclusions: Lenalidomide, in the setting of HDM, is associated with an increased risk of t-MN. Increased exposure to alkylators, a higher tumor burden, and the presence of CK predict poor survival in t-MN. As HDM/ASCT followed by lenalidomide maintenance remains the standard of care for eligible patients, minimizing exposure to other alkylator regimens may be prudent. While considered the standard, only a minority undergo transplant; and post-transplant outcomes remain poor. Studies to identify prognostic genetic and epigenetic risk factors are ongoing. Disclosures Al-Kali: Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Kumar:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Patnaik:Stem Line Pharmaceuticals.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Background: Two-year follow-up from ZUMA-1 trial for axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) CD19 chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CART) in aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) demonstrated that patients (pts) achieving complete remission (CR) as their best response have the longest progression free survival (PFS), while PFS remained poor for others. Majority of the best response are achieved by month 3 post-infusion. Moreover, a subset of pts who do not achieve CR by month 1 may still achieve CR while others will progress within months. Having a clinically available test to predict for durable response can assist clinicians in selecting pts who can be observed for continued response vs. those who may need intervention earlier. Peak CAR-T expansion has been correlated with best clinical response to axi-cel. However there is no clinically available test to quantify CART cells post treatment. Given the prolonged lymphotoxic effect of the lymphodepletion (LD) chemotherapy administered before CART infusion, we hypothesize that the peak expansion of absolute lymphocyte count (ALC, ALCpeak) after infusion likely corresponds to CART expansion. We examined for correlation between ALCpeak and clinical response at month 3 post-infusion for pts who received axi-cel. Methods: Data was collected from pts who received axi-cel between June 2016 and March 2019 at Mayo Clinic Rochester (NCT02348216, NCT03153462, and standard of care). All infused pts were included in the intention to treat analysis for response and event-free survival (EFS). Lugano 2014 criteria were used for clinical response. EFS was defined as the date of infusion until progression or death due to any cause and evaluated using Kaplan Meier curves with log-rank test. Comparison between subgroups was investigated using Fisher's exact test and Wilcoxon test for categorical and continuous variables, respectively. Statistical analysis performed using JMP Pro 14.1. Results: Of the thirty-six NHL pts treated with axi-cel, the median age was 56 yrs (range 26-65); 78% (28) were male; 44% (16) had DLBCL; the median number of prior therapies was 3 (2-6), 47% (17) had stem cell transplant. Nineteen (53%) pts received bridging therapy after leukapheresis. All pts received fludarabine and cyclophosphamide for LD chemotherapy and achieved ALC nadir by the day of CART infusion (median 0.03 x 10^9/L, range 0.01-0.11). As CART expansion were found to peak within the first two weeks in ZUMA-1 trial, we examined ALC trend over 15 days post infusion and found that ALCpeak generally happened within the same timeframe (median ALCpeak day: 9, range 6-15). At 3 months post infusion, 33.3% (12/36) of pts achieved CR, 8.3% (3/36) pts were in partial remission (PR). No correlation was found between CR response and clinical characteristics: age >60 years, stage III/IV, B symptoms, elevated LDH, IPI score 3-4, number of previous treatments, use of bridging therapy, peak CRP and ferritin. However, the ALCpeak was significantly different between CR and non-CR pts (median, range: 1.09, 0.35-2.55; 0.67, 0.15-1.03; p=0.04). Using receiver operator curve (ROC)-derived area under the curve (AUC) estimates, ALCpeak 1.08 x 10^9/L was identified as the best threshold to discriminate patients at different likelihood to achieve CR at month 3. Pts achieving ALCpeak ≥ 1.08 showed a strong increased likelihood of achieving CR at month 3 (OR 2.8; 95% CI, 1.12-6.99; P=0.02). There was no statistical difference between the ALCpeak high and low groups in terms of use of bridging therapy, occurrence of any grade or higher grade cytokine release syndrome or neurotoxicity, or the use of tocilizumab or steroid. Interestingly, for pts who had changes in clinical response from month 1 to month 3, all 3 pts who converted to CR by month 3 had ALCpeak≥1.08, while the 13 of the 15 pts who had progressed by month 3 had ALCpeak<1.08. In addition, EFS was significantly different between pts who had ALCpeak above and below 1.08 (6 months EFS rate 75% vs. 25%, respectively, Figure 1). Conclusions: We found that the ALC expansion occurred in the first 15 days post axi-cel infusion, consistent with the known time frame for CART expansion. Higher ALCpeak level in this timeframe correlated with higher likelihood of achieving CR, and is associated with conversion to CR. This study is limited by the small sample size and limited follow-up, but the results are promising for further prospective investigation in a larger cohort of patients. Disclosures Paludo: Verily Life Sciences: Research Funding; Verily Life Sciences: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Ansell:Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Trillium: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Trillium: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Trillium: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Regeneron: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Bennani:Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Seattle Genetics: Other: Advisory board; Adicet Bio: Other: Advisory board; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Kite Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Adicet Bio: Other: Advisory board; Seattle Genetics: Other: Advisory board; Adicet Bio: Other: Advisory board; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Other: Advisory board; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Other: Advisory board; Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory board. Dingli:alexion: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Millenium: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Rigel: Consultancy. Kapoor:Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Research Funding; Cellectar: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Glaxo Smith Kline: Research Funding. Kenderian:Novartis: Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Tolero: Research Funding; Humanigen: Other: Scientific advisory board , Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Lentigen: Research Funding; Morphosys: Research Funding; Kite/Gilead: Research Funding. Kumar:Takeda: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding.

AbstractRisk stratification of multiple myeloma (MM) at diagnosis is critical. We examined the ability of hematopoietic indices including mean corpuscular volume (MCV), hemoglobin (Hgb), and platelet (Plt) to predict outcomes. This was a retrospective study of patients treated at Mayo Clinic between January 2004 and April 2018. We incorporated three variables (Hgb < 10 g/dL, Plt < 150 × 109/L, and MCV > 96 fL), assigning a score of 1 to each. We identified 1540 newly diagnosed MM patients, of whom 707 (46%) had a score of 0, 513 (33%) had a score of 1, 260 (17%) had a score of 2, and 60 (4%) had a score of 3. The score risk stratified patients into four groups with differing survivals. The median PFS was 32.3 months for score 0, 24.8 months for score 1, 21.7 months for score 2, and 18.3 months for score 3, for P < .001. The median OS was 80.7 months for score 0, 59.9 months for score 1, 51.7 months for score 2, and 31.3 months for score 3, P < .0001. Predictors of OS on the multivariable analysis were age ≥ 65 (HR, 1.93; P < .0001), R‐ISS stage (1‐2 vs 3) (HR, 0.48; P < .0001), and hematopoietic score (0‐2 vs 3) (HR, 0.51; P = .006). A hematopoietic score can predict survival in newly diagnosed myeloma patients.