Citations

Abstract Abstract 4954 Background Multiple Myeloma (MM) remains incurable with current approaches and newer therapies targeting the abnormal disease biology need to be developed. The malignant plasma cell is highly dependent on the marrow microenvironment, which promotes tumor cell proliferation as well as survival. There is increased bone marrow vascular density in patients with MM and the degree of neo-angiogenesis appear to be prognostic in this disease. Studies have also shown that vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) is intricately involved in the interaction between the marrow microenvironment and the myeloma cell. These findings suggested that the VEGF pathway may be a valuable target for therapeutic approach in this disease. Patients and Methods We designed a phase 2 trial of Sunitinib in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma who had received less than three prior therapies. Sunitinib malate (SU11248; Sutent) is a novel, multi-targeted, small molecule inhibitor of the receptor tyrosine kinases (RTKs), including vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-1 (VEGFR-1), -2, and -3, and platelet-derived growth factor receptor (PDGFR) -α and -β. The treatment consisted of Sunitinib 37.5 mg given daily in a continuous fashion in six-week cycles. Toxicities were graded according to CTCAE response version 3.0 and responses were assessed according to the International Myeloma Working Group consensus criteria. Response rate of single agent Sunitinib was the primary endpoint of the study. Results 13 patients were accrued between July of 2007 and April 2009 before the study was closed. The median age of the study population was 61 years (range, 53 - 84), and included nine females (69%). The median time from diagnosis to registration was 39.2 months (range, 4.5 - 88) and 10 patients had received previous stem cell transplant. Previous therapy included lenalidomide in 7 patients, thalidomide in 5 patients and bortezomib in 2 patients. All 13 patients were alive at last follow up with a median follow-up of 11.2 months (range, 1.3 -21.2). All patients have gone off study, disease progression being the most common cause (9 patients), followed by adverse events (3 pts) and alternate treatment in the remaining patient. A hematological grade 3 or higher adverse event was documented in 6 patients and a grade 3 or higher non-hematological adverse event was seen in 8 patients. A grade 3 or higher neutropenia was observed in 5 pts and thrombocytopenia in 2 pts. Fatigue was common and was seen in 11 pts. The median number of cycles administered was one (range, 1-5) and the total number of cycles across 13 patients was 22. Treatment delays or interruptions were seen in five and six patients respectively. The most common reason for treatment delays was hematologic adverse events. No responses (PR or better) were seen, and stable disease was seen in eight of the 13 patients as the best response. The median time to progression was 2.9 months. Conclusions Single agent Sunitinib has no clinically relevant efficacy in this group of patients with relapsed myeloma with one or two previous therapies. Hematological toxicity was higher than anticipated. Whereas these results indicate that VEGFR TK inhibitors are not active in previously treated myeloma, it does not preclude the possibility that VEGF targeting strategies may enhance the efficacy of other therapies. 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 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.

Abstract Background: The combination of lenalidomide and dexamethasone (RD) has been shown to be highly effective as initial therapy for multiple myeloma. More recently, a phase III trial demonstrated improved survival with use of lenalidomide and low dose dexamethasone (Rd). Further improvements by incorporating other active agents may increase the depth of response and may improve long-term outcome. We report the results from a phase II trial combining lenalidomide and low dose dexamethasone with cyclophosphamide (RCd) as initial therapy for newly diagnosed MM. Methods: The trial was initiated in July 2006 and completed the initial target accrual of 33 patients by July 2007 (Cohort 1). Due to high rate of dose reductions in cohort 1, between July 2007 and May 2008 an additional 20 patients were enrolled with lower doses of cyclophosphamide (Cohort 2). The treatment protocol consisted of lenalidomide given orally at a dose of 25 mg daily on days 1–21 of a 28-day cycle. Dex was given orally at a dose of 40 mg on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of each cycle. Cyclophosphamide at a dose of 300 mg/m2 was given on days 1, 8, and 15 of each cycle in cohort 1 and 300 mg on days 1, 8, and 15 of each cycle in cohort 2. Patients also received an aspirin once daily as thromboprophylaxis. Response was defined as a decrease in serum monoclonal (M) protein by 50% or higher and a decrease in urine M protein by at least 90% or to a level less than 200 mg/24 hours. Responses were assessed on intent to treat basis. Results: 53 patients were enrolled. The median age was 64 years (range, 37–82). 14 patients (29%) had ISS stage III disease. The median number of cycles was 4 (range: 1 – 20). The best response based on all enrolled patients on an intent to treat basis was 83%, including CR:1 (2%), VGPR: 20 (38%), PR: 23 (43%), and less than PR: 9 (17%). The CR plus VGPR rate was 40%. Among the 20 patients in cohort 2 who were enrolled after optimization of the cyclophosphamide dosing, 16 (80%) have already achieved a partial response or better with 17 patients in this cohort still receiving study treatment. Overall, 25 of the 53 enrolled patients have discontinued study treatment. Reasons for ending treatment are: completed study per protocol (14), disease progression (5), adverse event (3) and alternate treatment (3). This includes 3 patients from cohort 2, one completed treatment per protocol, one went to alternate therapy and one patient went off for progression. Hematological toxicity was the most common with grade 4 toxicity seen in 8 patients (only 1 from cohort 2). Non-hematological toxicities included neuropathy, diarrhea, cystitis, and thrombosis. There were 6 patients with grade 4 non-hematological toxicities (none from cohort 2) attributed to the drug (thrombosis, confusion, depression and sepsis). Thirteen patients had dose adjustments, most commonly due to hematological toxicity attributed to lenalidomide or cyclophosphamide. One patient has died off study, of intracranial hemorrhage. The median follow-up for the remaining patients is 7.8 months. Conclusions: The combination of lenalidomide, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone (RCd) has excellent activity in the setting of newly diagnosed myeloma. Seventeen patients continue on study and the response rates are likely to be higher with additional followup. Myelosuppression was a significant toxicity leading to dose reductions and cycle delays, and is lower with decreased dose of CTX in cohort 2 without any apparent loss of responses.

Abstract Abstract 2682 Background: The PI3K-Akt pathway is critical to tumor growth in lymphoid malignancies and mTOR inhibitors have shown promising activity in lymphoid malignancies. However, alternate signaling pathways allow cells to escape the effect of mTOR inhibition. Pre-clinical studies have shown that the combination of LBH589, an HDAC inhibitor, with the mTOR inhibitor RAD001 results in potent synergy. We then explored this combination in a phase I/II clinical trial. Patients and Methods: Patients with relapsed multiple myeloma (MM), non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) or Hodgkin Lymphoma (HL) were enrolled into a phase I trial of escalating doses of LBH589 and RAD001. The doses are shown in the table. The study utilized a 3+ 3 design with MTD defined as the maximum dose resulting in less than 2 dose limiting toxicities (DLT) during the first cycle among 6 patients treated at that dose. DLT was defined as a grade 4 neutropenia or thrombocytopenia lasting >= 7 days, febrile neutropenia or any other grade >=3 non-hematologic toxicity considered possibly related to the drugs. Once MTD was determined, patients were enrolled into two separate phase 2 studies, one for relapsed MM and another for relapsed NHL or HL. Results: Twenty-six patients were enrolled to the phase 1 study; 23 were eligible for MTD analysis. There were 16 patients with NHL, 4 with HL and 3 with MM. Median age was 61 (range, 24–73) and 17 were male. The median number of prior therapies was 4 (range 2–11), including a prior stem cell transplant in 11 (48%). No DLT was observed at any of the doses tested in the trial (See below). Hematological toxicities were the most common AEs observed, with a grade 3 or 4 hematologic AE in 15 patients and grade 3 or 4 non-hematologic AEs in 6 patients across all cycles administered. Grade 3 and 4 hematologic AEs included 10 patients with neutropenia and 8 patients with thrombocytopenia. Grade 3 and 4 non-hematologic AEs included hyperglycemia, hypertriglyceridemia, hypophosphatemia, diarrhea, pneumonia and mucositis in one patient each. Overall, 10 responses (43%) were seen (Table). Conclusions: The combination of LBH589 and RAD0001 is tolerated at the doses tested, with hematological toxicities being the most common adverse events. The recommended phase II dose is LBH 40 mg MWF every other week along with 5 mg RAD001 every day in 4-week cycles. Clinical efficacy was seen in all diseases tested with partial responses seen in NHL and HL as well as a minor response in a patient with refractory myeloma, who had previously failed single agent RAD001. Phase 2 trials are ongoing in both disease groups. Disclosures: Kumar: Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding; Genzyme: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Off Label Use: Use of the investigational agent MLN9708 for the treatment of previously untreated multiple myeloma. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding. Reeder:Celgene: Research Funding; Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 863 Background: Patients with MM who have progressed after multiple novel agents have limited treatment options. Pomalidomide (CC4047) is the newest immunomodulatory (IMiD) agent. Pom/dex using a dose of 2 mg/day has demonstrated response rates (≥PR) of 63% in relapsed MM (Lacy, JCO 2009, 27:5008-5014) and 32% in a lenalidomide-refractory cohort (Lacy, Leukemia, in press). The maximum tolerated dose has been determined to be 4 mg/day for 21 of 28 days (Richardson, ASH, 2009), We opened two sequential phase II trials using the Pom/dex regimen at differing doses to study the efficacy of this regimen in patients who have failed both lenalidomide and bortezomib. Methods: Patients refractory to both lenalidomide and bortezomib therapy; defined as relapsing on or within 60 days of stopping each regimen, were enrolled. Pomalidomide was given orally 2 mg daily (Cohort A) or 4mg daily (Cohort B) on days 1–28 of a 28-day cycle with oral dexamethasone given 40 mg daily on days 1, 8, 15 and 22. Response was assessed by the International Myeloma Working Group Uniform Response criteria. All patients received aspirin 325 mg daily for DVT prophylaxis. Results: 35 patients with relapsed and resistant/refractory to both lenalidomide and bortezomib were enrolled in each cohort. The median age was 62 years (range, 39–77) in Cohort A and 61 (range, 45–77) years in Cohort B. The median time from diagnosis to enrollment was 57 months for Cohort A (range 12–249) and 72 months(range, 13–183) for Cohort B. 15 patients had high risk molecular markers in Cohort A and 16 in Cohort B. The median number of prior regimens was 6 in both groups. The median (range) duration on treatment was 5(1-13) and 2(0-6) cycles in cohorts A and B respectively. Toxicity at least possibly attributed to drug consisted primarily of myelosuppression: grade 3/4 neutropenia (37% Cohort A vs. 55% Cohort B); grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia (11% Cohort A vs. 13% Cohort B); and grade 3/4 anemia (9% Cohort A vs. 16% Cohort B). Grade 3/4 non-hematologic toxicities occurred in 23% Cohort A vs. 13% Cohort B. Grade 1 or 2 fatigue was the most common non-hematologic toxicity seen in 43% Cohort A vs. 52% Cohort B. Grade 1 or 2 neuropathy occurred in 17% Cohort A vs. 16% Cohort B. Other non-hematologic toxicities occurring in <5% included pneumonitis, hyperglycemia, renal failure, thrombosis. One patient in cohort B had grade 4 hepatitis. Confirmed responses in Cohort A consisted of VGPR 14%, PR 11%, and MR 24% (ORR 49%, 95% CI: 31–66), and responses in Cohort B consisted of VGPR 9%, PR 20%, and MR 12% (ORR 40%, 95% CI: 23–58). The median follow-up on alive patients was 7.5 months, and 3 months in Cohorts A and B, respectively. The median PFS in cohorts A and B are respectively 6.4 months (95% CI: 4.7-NR) and 3.3 months (95% CI: 2.3-NR). Conclusions: Pom/dex is remarkably active and well tolerated in this heavily pre-treated population of dual bortezomib/lenalidomide-refractory MM patients. The majority of patients have not progressed and objective responses (MR or better) are seen in 40–49%. This study confirms therapeutic benefit for Pom/dex in patients relapsing after other novel therapies. These studies do not show an advantage for the 4 mg/day on days 1–28 of each 28 day cycle did not show an advantage over the 2 mg/day on days 1–28 of each 28 day cycle. Disclosures: Lacy: Celgene: Research Funding. Gertz:Celgene: Honoraria; Millennium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Dispenzieri:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Binding Site: Honoraria. Kumar:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Genzyme: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cephalon: Research Funding. Fonseca:Genzyme: Consultancy; Medtronic: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; AMGEN: Consultancy; Otsuka: Consultancy; Celegene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Intellikine: Consultancy; Cylene: Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding; FISH probes prognostication in myeloma: Patents & Royalties. Bergsagel:Celgene: Consultancy; Centocor: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy. Stewart:Celgene: Honoraria.

Abstract Abstract 3963 Background: Pomalidomide at doses of 2 or 4 mg/d has demonstrated excellent activity in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma (MM). Between November 2007 and November 2010, we opened 5 sequential phase 2 trials using the pomalidomide at differing doses with weekly dexamethasone (Pom/dex) regimen to study the efficacy of this regimen. Methods: The five cohorts consisted of: Cohort 1 (N=60): relapsed MM with 1–3 prior regimens, 2 mg dose; Cohort 2 (N=34): lenalidomide refractory, 2 mg dose; Cohort 3 (N=35): bortezomib/lenalidomide refractory, 2 mg dose; Cohort 4 (N=35): bortezomib/lenalidomide refractory, 4 mg dose; and Cohort 5 (N=60) lenalidomide refractory, 1–3 prior regimens, 4 mg dose. Pomalidomide was given orally 2 mg daily or 4mg daily on days 1–28 of a 28-day cycle with oral dexamethasone given 40 mg daily on days 1, 8, 15 and 22. Response was assessed by the International Myeloma Working Group Uniform Response criteria. All patients received aspirin 325 mg daily for DVT prophylaxis or full dose anticoagulation. Results: A total of 225 patients were enrolled across all 5 cohorts. One patient was ineligible and excluded from analysis. The median age was 63 years (32.0–88.0). The median time since diagnosis was 53 months. Forty percent had high-risk molecular markers. Eighty-nine percent had received previous IMIDs including thalidomide (53%) and lenalidomide (81%). Sixty-two percent had previous bortezomib and 73% had prior transplant. The median follow-up is 12.6 months, but varies from 9.4 months for the most recent cohort to 30 months for the first cohort. Sixty-nine percent are alive and 30% remain progression free. Toxicities ≥ grade 3 are shown in table 1 and patient outcomes are shown in Table 2. Conclusions: Pom/dex is remarkably active and well tolerated even in heavily pretreated patients. Responses are durable. Response rates and toxicity are similar between the 2 mg and 4 mg doses. Disclosures: Lacy: Celgene: Research Funding. Fonseca:Consulting:Genzyme, Medtronic, BMS, Amgen, Otsuka, Celgene, Intellikine, Lilly Research Support: Cylene, Onyz, Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 987 Background: IMiD® compounds are effective in immunoglobulin light-chain amyloidosis (AL), a systemic plasma cell disorder related to multiple myeloma (MM). Pomalidomide is a new IMiD® compound. Methods: Persons with symptomatic, biopsy-proved, previously-treated AL were eligible for treatment with pomalidomide if they had measurable hematologic disease, ECOG PS≥2, adequate hematologic reserve and creatinine ≤2.5 mg/dL. Pomalidomide, 2 mg/d, and dexamethasone, 40 mg/w, were given orally along with low-dose aspirin. Dose-escalation to 4 mg/d was allowed for non-responders. Exclusion-criteria were uncontrolled infection, cancer, NYHA classification >II, serum troponin-T >0.1 ng/mL, ≥grade-3 neuropathy, thrombosis or other AL therapy within 2 weeks of enrollment. 31 subjects enrolled, but only 29 are evaluble for toxicity and response due to recent enrollment. Results: Median age was 66 y (range, 52 82 y); 19 were male. Median time from diagnosis to study-entry was 36 mo (range, 0.9–104.1 mo). 24 had cardiac involvement, 10, renal involvement and 8, nerve involvement. Cardiac biomarker staging was: I, N=3, II, 21, and III, N=7. Subjects were extensively pretreated: 28 received an alkylator (including an autotransplant in 13), 15, prior lenalidomide or thalidomide and 12, prior bortezomib. 193 cycles of pomalidomide were given to 29 subjects. 11 subjects had protocol-specified dose-increases (no response) and 16, dose-reductions (AEs). 20 subjects had dexamethasone dose-reductions. ≥Grade-3 AE's ≥possibly attributed to therapy occurred in 21 subjects. 7 of these subjects had only hematologic AE's. Neutropenia was the most common severe AE (N=10); severe thrombocytopenia occurred in 2 subjects. Other grade-3/-4 AEs included infection/fever (N=3); fatigue (N=4), and pleural effusion, ascites/edema, and edema each in one patient. 1 subject each had dyspnea, increased creatinine, thrombosis, muscle weakness, atrial tachycardia, and diarrhea. There were 2 episodes of syncope attributed to AL rather than therapy. A subject died 5 d after beginning therapy presumably from cardiac AL. As of 7/27/010, median time on-study is 8.4 mo (range, 0.2–16.2 mo). 18 subjects discontinued therapy for: progression/death (N=9); consent withdrawal (N=4), AE (N=3) and physician choice (N=2). Overall hematologic response rate (N=29) is 38% (95% CI, 20–58%) There were 8 PRs and 3 VGPRs including 4 PRs and 2 VGPRs among 14 subjects failing prior lenalidomide and/or thalidomide. 3 subjects had confirmed organ responses (2 heart and 1 kidney) and 4 unconfirmed organ responses. 1 y survival and PFS are 77% (95% CI, 60–98) and 56% (95% CI, 36–85). Conclusion: These data suggest that pomalidomide could provide a safe and effective therapy in previously-treated persons with AL including those failing lenalidomide and/or thalidomide. Disclosures: Dispenzieri: Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Binding Site: Honoraria. Off Label Use: Non-FDA approved indication. Gertz:Celgene: Honoraria. Kumar:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Genzyme: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cephalon: Research Funding. Fonseca:Amgen: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genzyme: Consultancy; Onyx: Research Funding; Otsuka: Consultancy; Medtronic: Consultancy. Bergsagel:Celgene: Consultancy; Centocor: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy. Stewart:Millennium: Consultancy; Celgene: Honoraria. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding.

Abstract Background: Ixazomib is an experimental, orally bioavailable, proteasome inhibitor that has demonstrated anti-tumor activity in relapsed multiple myeloma (MM). In the dose escalation studies, ixazomib was tolerated up to a dose of 5.5 mg given every week as a single agent, while a dose of 4 mg was utilized in the combination studies with lenalidomide. We undertook this study to examine the efficacy and tolerability of the two doses of ixazomib in combination with dexamethasone in patients with relapsed MM. Patients and methods: This was a randomized phase 2 study of two doses of ixazomib (4mg; Arm A or 5.5 mg; Arm B) given weekly for three weeks with a week off along with weekly dexamethasone (40 mg) in patients with relapsed MM, who are proteasome inhibitor na•ve (including bortezomib) or have received less than 6 cycles of therapy with bortezomib and had a PR or better with no progression at the time of discontinuation. The primary objective was to determine the confirmed overall response rate (>=PR); secondary objectives included progression free and overall survival. A total of 71 patients were accrued from February 2013 to April 2015; one patient was ineligible. Results: Baseline characteristics were similar in the two arms; median age across the study was 70 years (46-84); 53% were male. Median number of prior therapies was 4 (range 2-6); 90% of the patients had prior IMiDs, 70% had prior transplant and 29% had prior bortezomib. At a median follow up of 10 months, 17 (49%) and 19 (54%) of patients had disease progression in arms A and B respectively with 12 (34%) patients in each arm still continuing on treatment. All patients in each arm were evaluable for response; the overall response rates were 31% in arm A (95%CI: 17-49) and 51% (95%CI: 34-69) in Arm B. The depth of response, event free survival and overall survival are outlined in Table 1. Among the patients with no prior bortezomib exposure the response rates were 38% for Arm A and 52% for Arm B. The treatment was well tolerated with 2 patients in each arm discontinuing treatment for adverse events; there were no on study deaths. A grade 3 or higher AE that was at least possibly related to treatment was seen in 21% and 54% in Arms A and B respectively; with 15% and 37% hematologic and 6% and 29% non-hematologic AEs. The most common attributable toxicities encountered included fatigue, thrombocytopenia, diarrhea and nausea with more grade 3 toxicities among Arm B. Peripheral neuropathy, possibly related to ixazomib, was seen in 55% (only grade 1 or 2) in arm A and 43% (2 patients with grade 3) in Arm B. Toxicities led to dose reduction of ixazomib in 17% and 43% of patients in Arm A and B respectively; the median number of cycles administered were 5 (1-24) and 5 (1-22) respectively. Conclusions: Ixazomib in combination with dexamethasone was well tolerated with significant anti-myeloma activity in this group of patients with relapsed MM. Deep responses including stringent CR were observed. The higher dose of ixazomib appears to be associated with a higher response rate but with higher rate of adverse events requiring dose reductions. Table 1. Treatment outcome in all patients Arm B (4 mg) (N=35) Arm C (5.5 mg) (N=35) Response Rate 31% (95%CI: 17-49) 51% (95%CI: 34-69) No. of Responders 11 18 sCR 0 1 CR 1 0 VGPR 7 8 PR 3 9 MR 5 1 Median Overall Survival1 NA NA 6 Months 100% 100% Median Event Free Survival1,2 8.4 mos (95%CI: 4.3-13.2) 8.2 mos (95%CI: 3.8-16.3) %Event Free at 6 Months 60% (95%CI: 45-81) 60% (95%CI: 45-81) Median Duration of Response1 16.7 mos (95%CI: 9.3-22.0) 16.3 mos (95%CI: 7.0-20.1) Median Time to Response 1.1 mos (range: 0.8-3.6) 1.0 mos (range: 0.8-7.5) CI: confidence interval; mo: month; NA: not attained 1Kaplan Meier 2Event-free survival time is defined as the time from registration to the first of disease progression, death due to any cause, or subsequent treatment for multiple myeloma. Disclosures Kumar: Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Skyline: Consultancy, Honoraria; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy.

Abstract Abstract 1958 Vaccines may offer additional benefit as consolidation therapy after plateau phase or autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) for multiple myeloma (MM). We have reported previously the results of another phase II trial showing that using APC8020 (Mylovenge™) after ASCT improved the overall survival (OS 5.3 yrs, 95% CI 4.0 yrs – NA) compared to ASCT alone (3.4 yrs, 95% CI 2.7 – 4.6 yrs; p = 0.02; Lacy, AJH (84): 799). We now report the results from a randomized, phase II trial using the same vaccine plus adjuvant cytokines in MM patients in plateau phase after either chemotherapy or ASCT. Twenty patients were enrolled between 2001 and 2003 and were randomized to receive APC8020 and adjuvant cytokine of either interferon-g (IFNg, arm A, n = 10) or interleukin-2 (IL2, arm B, n = 10). Each cycle of treatment included five days of daily subcutaneous injections of either IFNg (106 IU, arm A) or IL2 (200 mg, arm B) followed by APC8020 injection. Each patient received a cycle of treatment every 2 weeks for 4 cycles. One patient in each arm was in plateau phase post-chemotherapy. Time from diagnosis to treatment was 11.9 mos for the patient in arm A and 16.2 mos for arm B. Time to progression (TTP) was 3.7 and 68 months respectively the patient in arm A and B. Both patients were alive at five years. For the 9 post-ASCT patients in each arm, no statistically significant differences were seen in the baseline characteristics between the 2 arms. The median time from diagnosis to treatment was 15.4 months. No grade 4 or 5 adverse events (AEs) were reported. Two patients in each arm had grade 3 AE, including lymphopenia, thrombocytopenia, hemorrhage, infection, and fatigue. One patient in arm B had grade 3 autoimmune disorder that was deemed possibly related to study treatment. The most common AEs were grade 1 fatigue (n = 7) and anemia (n = 5) in arm A and grade 1 anemia (n = 7) and injection site reaction (n = 5) in arm B. The median TTP was 9.3 months (95% CI: 3.9 – 19.3 months) for arm A and 6.6 months for arm B (95% CI: 6.3 – 29.6 months) with no statistically significant difference between the two arms (p = 0.89). The median OS had not been reached for either arm; the 5-year OS rate was 67% and 56% for arms A and B respectively (p = 1.0). Interestingly, similar to our previous study where TTP was not different while OS was improved with vaccine, when we compared the clinical outcome for all patients in this vaccine trial to that of 78 matched control patients who only received ASCT during the same time frame, we did not see significant improvement in TTP (Figure 1). However, the 5-year overall survival for all patients in this trial is significantly improved at 71% (95%CI: 51–96%) compared to ASCT control patients (41%, 95% CI: 31 – 54%; p = 0.03; Figure 1). This trial suggests improved OS with vaccine plus cytokine. It is possible that modulation of patients’ immunity may help them live longer with multiple myeloma. Further investigation is needed to compare the approach in this trial with dendritic cell vaccine alone to better understand optimal strategy for vaccine therapy in MM. Figure 1. Kaplan-Meier curves for time to progression and overall survival Figure 1. Kaplan-Meier curves for time to progression and overall survival Disclosures: Dispenzieri: Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Binding Site: Honoraria. Kumar:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Genzyme: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cephalon: Research Funding. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding.