Citations

AbstractThe median survival in primary systemic (AL) amyloidosis is less than 18 months. No published series of patients with AL amyloidosis have reported survival of more than 10 years. The records of all Mayo Clinic patients with a diagnosis of AL amyloidosis between January 1, 1966 and March 1, 1987 were reviewed. Patients with secondary amyloidosis, familial amyloidosis, senile systemic amyloidosis, and localized amyloidosis were excluded. During the 21 years of the study, 841 patients with AL amyloidosis were seen. Of these, 29 were excluded because the diagnosis was made at autopsy, and 2 others were excluded because no follow-up data were available. Actuarial survival for the 810 patients was 51% at 1 year, 16% at 5 years, and 4.7% at 10 years. Thirty patients survived for 10 years or more after the histologic diagnosis of AL amyloidosis; all received alkylating-agent therapy. In 14 patients, the monoclonal protein disappeared from the serum or urine. Of 10 patients with nephrotic syndrome, 4 had an objective response. Congestive heart failure, older age, creatinine value of 2 mg/dL or more, bone marrow plasma cell value of 20% or more, platelet count of 500 × 109/L or less, and the presence of peripheral neuropathy were underrepresented in the 10-year survivors and are unfavorable prognostic features. Five percent of patients with AL amyloidosis survived for 10 years or more.

Abstract Aim: The autonomic nervous system plays an essential role in homeostasis and the response to stress. The peri-transplant period can be a challenging time for homeostatic responses due to the fluid shifts, sepsis and cardiac dysrhythmias that can occur. Patients with AL amyloidosis may have significant autonomic neuropathy (AN) that renders the peri-transplant care problematic. The purpose of this study was to compare a cohort of patients with AL amyloidosis complicated by AN with a matched cohort without AN to determine the outcome of patients with AN during and after stem cell transplantation (PBSCT). Methods: We performed a nested case-control study by searching the Mayo Clinic dysproteinemia transplant database for all patients with AL amyloidosis who underwent autologous PBSCT. Patients with proven AN were identified and compared to a large cohort of matched controls. We have complete follow-up on all the patients. The main outcome variables were overall survival (OS), the duration of hospitalization, incidence of sepsis, peri-transplant atrial fibrillation (AF) and engraftment kinetics. Comparisons between groups were performed with the Mann Whitney U test for continuous variables and the chi squared test for nominal variables. Overall survival was determined by the Kaplan-Meier method. A stepwise Cox proportional hazards model was used to evaluate the impact of various parameters on OS. Results: We identified 13 patients with AN who underwent PBSCT and compared them to a control group of 94 patients. The two cohorts were well matched for many of the relevant clinical and laboratory characteristics prior to PBSCT. Notable differences included (i) patients with AN tended to have more organs involved (2.5 versus 1, p<0.001) and as a result (ii) the conditioning dose of melphalan was often reduced (p=0.0015). There was no difference in the number of apheresis sessions required for CD34+ cell collection (2.5 versus 2.0, p=0.99), or the number of CD34+ cell collected (6.75 versus 8.15 x106/kg, p=0.99) between the two cohorts. The median hospital duration was 10 (1 – 78) and 8 (0 – 78) days (p=0.99) respectively. Engraftment kinetics, as measured by the time to reach a neutrophil count > 500/ml (p=0.85), a platelet count > 20,000/ml (p=0.99) and a platelet count > 50,000/ml (p=0.99) were similar in the two cohorts. Culture positive sepsis was more common in patients with AN (75% versus 47%, p=0.014). Atrial fibrillation occurred in all patients with AN but in only 1 patient from the control group (p<0.0001). The median OS from PBSCT was 45.2 months for all the combined groups. However, the median OS for patients with AN was 29 months but not yet reached for the controls (p<0.0001). On univariate analysis, cardiac involvement (p=0.0132), AN (p=0.0011), GFR (p=0.038), number of organs involved (p=0.0064) and NT-pro-BNP (p=0.039) all had an impact on OS. On multivariate analysis, AN remained an independent adverse determinant of OS. Conclusion: Patients with autonomic neuropathy secondary to AL amyloidosis can undergo PBSCT safely with similar engraftment kinetics. They are at a higher risk of peri-transplant atrial fibrillation and sepsis although their hospitalizations are not longer compared to controls. Patients with AN generally have more organ involvement by AL amyloidosis. However, AN is an independent, adverse determinant of OS in AL amyloidosis.

Introduction With the introduction of novel agents, survival in multiple myeloma has successively increased in the past decade. This improved survival increases the risk for late complications. Patients continue to receive melphalan therapy as a standard induction for those over the age of 65. Lenalidomide is considered a standard component of induction therapy in the United States for patients who are transplant candidates. Stem cell transplantation remains the standard of care for patients eligible to receive it. As a consequence of exposure to lenalidomide, stem cell transplant, and melphalan, the risk of late myelodysplasia and acute leukemia remains significant. We reviewed the Mayo Clinic experience with therapy-induced myelodysplasia beginning with the advent of novel agents. Patients and Methods All patients that carry the diagnosis of multiple myeloma between January 1, 2000, and September 1, 2011, were included. Patients with a synchronous diagnosis of a myeloproliferative or a myelodysplastic disorder or those who developed the myelodysplastic disorder within 15 months of first chemotherapy exposure were excluded. The date of diagnosis for the purpose of this abstract was based on first exposure to chemotherapy and not first detection of a monoclonal protein or smoldering multiple myeloma. All patients had to have morphologic verification in the bone marrow of dysplastic change consistent with therapy-related myelodysplasia. Results Of 3111 patients who had a myeloma diagnosis and first treatment after January 1, 2000, through September 1, 2011, 22 patients were identified to fulfill the criteria of myelodysplasia. There were 13 men and 9 women with a median age of 67 (46 to 82). At the time of this report, 17 have died. Prior to the development of myelodysplasia, exposure to an alkylating agent, lenalidomide, or an auto stem cell transplant was seen in 13, 15, and 10, respectively. Only one patient had been exposed to lenalidomide alone. Eighteen patients were classified as myelodysplasia. Four had acute non-lymphocytic leukemia. Metaphase cytogenetics was available in 19 and only one was normal. Twelve were hypodiploid. Trisomy 8 or abnormalities of chromosome 5 and 7 were present in 13. Seven patients received a hypomethylating agent with no clear evidence of response in any. Four patients had an allotransplant to manage the MDS/AML and only one survives 487 days after a matched-related donor allogeneic transplant. The median time from initial therapy of multiple myeloma to recognition of MDS or AML was 50.9 months (range: 15.2-146.5 months) fig 1. The median overall survival of the 22 patients is 6.5 months. Fig 2 Six of the 22 had active myeloma at the diagnosis of MDS/AML. Conclusion Myelodysplasia during the era of novel agents is a devastating complication of therapy with a very short survival and low response rate. As a time-dependent complication, the overall risk cannot be accurately estimated but has occurred in <1% of our patient population to date. Hypomethylating agents were ineffective in the seven that received it. One of four allotransplant patients remains alive. Ongoing surveillance for MDS/AML in this population is warranted and more effective therapies are needed. Disclosures: Kumar: Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Abstract Background: Autologous stem cell transplantation is an effective therapy for patients with multiple myeloma. We and others have previously reported the influence of lenalidomide based regimens on the ability to harvest adequate number of stem cells for successful transplantation. In order to identify factors predicting for poor mobilization we studied a large group of patients who underwent an attempt at stem cell mobilization after receiving lenalidomide and dexamethasone as primary therapy for myeloma. Methods: We identified sequential patients who received lenalidomide and dexamethasone as initial therapy for their myeloma and then underwent stem cell mobilization for immediate or future stem cell transplantation. Patients who received any other regimen prior to the stem cell mobilization were excluded. Between July 2004 and May 2008, 106 patients, satisfying the above criteria were identified from the Mayo Clinic transplant database. Medical records and collection sheets were examined for the data. Results: The median (range) age at mobilization was 60 yrs (29–75); 34 (32%) were over 65 yrs and 59 (55%) were males. The median duration of lenalidomide therapy was 4 months (range; 1–13). The strategy for stem cell mobilization was GCSF alone in 92 patients (87%), cyclophosphamide (CTX) and GCSF in 11 pts and 3 pts received AMD3100 and GCSF. Among the GCSF mobilized patients, 10 pts (11%) failed to collect at least 2.5 million cells required for one transplant, including 8 patients who never achieved the minimum peripheral count threshold to initiate the collection. Two of the 11 pts undergoing primary mobilization with CTX/GCSF failed to collect any cells, while all of the 3 pts mobilized with AMD3100 were successful. Five of these pts subsequently underwent successful salvage mobilization with CTX/GCSF, 1 with AMD3100, one failed to mobilize with CTX and the rest did not repeat mobilization. Given that the total CD34 collection and the number of days of collection are influenced by the CD34 goal, we examined patient characteristics that correlated with the CD34 collections over the first 2 days. Increasing patient age and the duration of lenalidomide therapy, both correlated with decreasing 2-day CD34 collection, while the time between last dose of lenalidomide and the start of GCSF had no effect. We then performed ROC analysis to find best cut-off points that predicted the inability to collect adequate (2.5 million) CD34 cells in 3 days. Lenalidomide therapy of more than 4 months (P =0.03) and age > 63 yrs (P = 0.04) best predicted inability to achieve this endpoint. In addition, a peripheral blood CD34 count < 5/uL on day 5 after start of GCSF was highly predictive of failure to reach this endpoint. Conclusions: Inability to collect adequate stem cells with lenalidomide appears to be related to patient age and the duration of lenalidomide therapy. We recommend early stem cell collection and storage, if a delayed transplantation approach is taken. Patients receiving more than 4 cycles of therapy and those over 65 years should undergo mobilization with CTX+G-CSF, rather than G-CSF alone. Majority of the patients who fail G-CSF based collection can be mobilized using CTX and G-CSF. Early identification of failures after G-CSF administration using the peripheral CD34 counts can potentially allow salvage using strategies such as AMD3100.

Abstract Abstract 636 Cellular vaccine may offer additional benefit as consolidative therapy after autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) for multiple myeloma (MM). We have reported previously from two phase II studies the survival of MM patients who received APC8020 (autologous antigen presenting cell vaccine) after ASCT (Lacy, AJH '09, (84): 799; Lin, ASH annual meeting 2010, abstract 1958). To determine if there was an outcome advantage for additional consolidative vaccine therapy after ASCT, we performed this matched case control analysis comparing the survival of patients who received ASCT only (control) at Mayo Clinic to those who received APC8020 after ASCT in the same time period. Forty-three study patients accrued between July 1998 and March 2002 were eligible for matching. To reduce bias from disease risks and transplant-related mortality, control patients were required to be alive and progression free six months after transplant and have a M-spike value of < 2g/dL at 4 mos (1st study) or 9 mos (2nd study) after transplant, similar to post-ASCT patients who were enrolled in the two APC8020 studies. A total of 111 control patients were eligible for matching. Control patients were matched to study patients by age (+/− 5 yrs), ISS (International Staging System) stage, and plasma cell labeling index (PLCI, either >= 3 or < 3). A matched control was not identified for one study patient. Of the remaining 42 study patients, all had at least one matched control patient. Thirty-two patients had 2 matched controls. Cox proportional hazards analysis showed that there was no statistically significant difference in time to progression between the study and control patients (HR 1.54, 95% CI 0.92 – 2.58, p = 0.1). However the overall survival is significantly improved among the study patients (HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.30 – 0.99, p = 0.05). This analysis is the only known report of long-term follow-up of the largest group of MM patients treated with APC8020 vaccine. While many current prognostic tests were not available at the time of the initial vaccine studies, the control patients in this analysis were matched by known disease risks that are still in use today. The survival advantage in study patients remained statistically significant compared to matched controls. Interestingly, the time to progression is unchanged between study and control patients. This is similar to other reports of vaccine therapy such as in sipuleucel-T (Provenge™) in prostate cancer where an overall survival benefit is seen without change in progression-free survival. A larger, randomized phase III study is needed to confirm the encouraging survival benefit of this treatment modality in MM. Further insight into the mechanisms of action of APC8020 is needed to improve our understanding of the role of this therapy in the context of current practice of MM maintenance therapies. Disclosures: Sims: Dendreon Corporation: Employment.

Background: Therapy-related MDS/AML (t-MDS/AML) is a common and devastating complication of treatment with alkylating agents and topoisomerase II inhibitors, often employed with curative intent, in standard or high-doses, in the treatment of hematological malignancies and solid tumors. Allogeneic HSC transplant is considered the standard treatment for t-MDS/AML but its applicability is limited by the unavailability of donors, comorbidities in the recipient and risk of acute and chronic graft-versus-host disease. Patients carrying diseases commonly treated with high-dose chemotherapy and autologous HSC transplant (such as multiple myeloma and non-Hodgkin lymphoma) who latter develop t-MDS/AML occasionally have stored HSC harvested prior to the diagnosis of the secondary malignancy (hereafter called early-stored HSC). The benefit of using early-stored HSC to support myeloablative therapy for the treatment t-MDS/AML is unknown. Methods: Retrospective, single center analysis of patients with t-MDS/AML receiving myeloablative chemotherapy with or without irradiation supported with early-stored HSC. Results: Six patients received early-stored HSC transplant for treatment of t-MDS/AML between 2000 and 2007. Median age at the time of the transplant was 57 years (range 15–71). Three patients had been primarily diagnosed with follicular lymphoma, 2 with multiple myeloma and 1 with Ewing’s sarcoma. One patient had received prior autologous HSC transplantation. Two patients developed AML, 1 patient CMML, 1 patient RCMD, 1 patient RAEB1 and 1 patient RAEB2. Median time from diagnosis of primary malignancy to HSC harvesting was 26 (2–122) months and from harvesting to development of t-MDS/AML 44 (7–79) months. Conditioning regimen was Cy/TBI in three patients, BuCy in 2 patients and Samarium + Melphalan in one patient. Five patients engrafted neutrophils and 4 patients engrafted platelets 10–34 and 13–126 days after transplant respectively. In 3/6 patients there was disappearance of the pre-transplant chromosomic abnormality (2 patients -7 and 1 patient -7 and t(1;7)). Two patients obtained hematologic CR and two patients obtained CR without full recovery of platelets. One patient died of sepsis 230 days after transplant, one died with refractory disease on day 103 after transplant and one patient is alive with recurrence of t-MDS. Three patients are alive and free of disease 7, 73 and 87 months after transplant. Conclusion: Myeloablative conditioning followed by autologous, early-stored HSC transplant can provide prolonged survival to patients with tMDS/AML not suitable to allogeneic SCT.

Abstract We investigated whether interleukin-1β (IL-1β) is differentially expressed in plasma cells from monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) and multiple myeloma (MM) patients because IL-1β appears to play a major role in the development of lytic bone lesions, the major clinical feature distinguishing MGUS from myeloma. In situ hybridization (ISH) for IL-1β was performed using bone marrow aspirates from 51 MM, 7 smoldering MM, 21 MGUS, and 5 normal control samples. Using the ISH technique IL-1β mRNA was detectable in the plasma cells from 49 of 51 patients with active myeloma and 7 of 7 patients with smoldering myeloma. In contrast, 5 of 21 patients with MGUS and 0 of 5 normal controls had detectable IL-1β message. Bone lesions were present in 40 of the 51 MM patients analyzed, and all 40 patients had IL-1β mRNA by ISH. These results show that greater than 95% of MM patients but less than 25% of MGUS patients are positive for IL-1β production. In the future, continued follow-up of IL-1β positive and negative MGUS patients should determine whether aberrant expression of plasma cell IL-1β is predictive of those MGUS patients that will eventually progress to active myeloma.

Abstract Abstract 2887 Introduction: Cardiac involvement is the major cause of death in patients with immunoglobulin light chain amyloidosis (AL). Detection of cardiac involvement and risk stratification has been facilitated by cardiac biomarkers like troponin T (cTnT) and N-terminal brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP). A novel high sensitivity cTnT (hs-cTnT) assay has been developed, and we evaluated its diagnostic use with three questions in mind: 1) How do the cTnT and hs-cTnT perform in the AL amyloid staging system? 2) Does higher sensitivity add significant additional value in terms of prognosticating outcomes for patients with AL amyloidosis? 3) Can the current AL amyloidosis staging system be further improved upon? Methods: Stored serum samples (-20°C) from 224 pts with AL were analyzed for concentrations of hsTnT, TnT, and NT-proBNP on the E170 Modular analyzer (Roche Diagnostics, Penzberg, Germany). 99th percentile reference limits were <0.014 and <0.010 mcg/L for hsTnT and TnT, respectively. Results: Median values for hsTnT, TnT, and NT-proBNP were 38 ng/L (range 0–075.4), 0.017 mcg/L (<0.0–0.904), and 1230 ng/L (0–32, 226), respectively. The correlation coefficient between hsTnT and TnT was 0.972. Those classified by echocardiographic parameters as having (n=143) or not having (n=81) cardiac involvement had TnT concentrations of 0.04 and 0.01 mcg/L and hsTnT levels of 52.2 and 15.6 ng/L, respectively. The direct numeric result from the hs-cTnT result CANNOT merely be substituted for a cTnT result in the Mayo AL staging system since 14% of patients would be misclassified. The performance of the receiver operation curve derived hs-cTnT cut-point of 54 ng/L is a slight improvement over the direct substitution of 35 ng/L if replacement of one assay for another is required. An alternate staging option using hs-cTnT alone—using the two thresholds14 ng/L and 54 ng/L (figure)—performs as well as either the original Mayo AL staging system or a derivative system incorporating hs-cTnT with respective relative risks of death (95%CI) of 3.6 (2.3, 5.7), 3.8 (2.5, 5.9), and 3.3 (2.2, .50). On multivariate analysis, our newly described alternate 3 level, hs-cTnT alone staging system is independent of other factors including period of diagnosis, type of therapy, and NT-proBNP value, the last of which dropped out of the model. Alternate models using NT-proBNP and cTnT were explored, but none performed better than the original staging system or the new hs-cTnT system. Conclusion: The direct numeric result from the hs-cTnT result cannot merely be substituted for a cTnT result in the Mayo amyloid staging system. Consideration could be made for AL staging systems using hs-cTnT alone and relegating the NT-proBNP for measuring cardiac response. Disclosures: Jaffe: Roche: Consultancy.

Abstract 5079 Introduction: IgD monoclonal proteins are rare. They are not seen as a MGUS and are present in 1% to 2% of patients with myeloma. In light chain amyloidosis (AL), IgD monoclonal proteins are rare. When an IgD protein is found, amyloidosis is often omitted from the differential diagnosis. An IgD protein in amyloidosis has been reported in single cases but never as a patient series. We report IgD AL in 53. Patients & Methods: Clinical and demographic data for patients were retrieved from the patient records. Factors of interest were compared between patients who did and did not have an IgD protein. Results: Among 3,955 patients with AL amyloidosis seen, 53 patients (1.3%) had a serum IgD monoclonal protein. (Table 1) A serum monoclonal protein peak was visible on SPE in only 14, and only 5 had an M spike greater than 1 g/dL. On immunofixation of the serum, the IgD light chain was k in 11, λ in 35, and uncertain in 6; 1 patient had a biclonal D λ and G k protein. A urine monoclonal protein was detected in 43 of 51 patients; urinary immunofixation detected a λ light chain in 33 and a k light chain in 10. Biopsy of tissues showed amyloid deposits in the bone marrow in 47% and in the fat aspirate in 73%. Six patients (age 47–63 years) underwent autologous SCT. Four had renal & two had cardiac AL. All 6 had hematologic PR, 4 CR, and 4 had organ response. One patient had relapse of disease and is now on dialysis, and another had relapse and is alive with salvage chemotherapy. One patient had disease relapse and died of progressive GI amyloidosis at 22 months. The other 5 are alive at a median of 68 months (range, 7.5–83.5 months). We compared the 53 patients with IgD amyloidosis with 144 patients with non-IgD amyloidosis. (Table 2) Findings that were significantly different between groups included a lower frequency of renal amyloidosis (P=.005) and a lower prevalence of cardiac amyloidosis (P=.047). There was a higher serum albumin level (P=.04) related to the lower level of proteinuria. No difference in survival was seen between the groups. (Figure). Variables that might affect survival—liver size, performance status, septal thickness, serum creatinine level, and β2-microglobulin level—were not different between groups. Conclusions: IgD AL patients have a lower frequency of renal involvement and possibly also of cardiac involvement. The overall survival of these patients does not appear to be different from that of patients who have AL associated with another monoclonal protein. IgD monoclonal proteins are so closely linked to the diagnosis of multiple myeloma in the mind of a clinician that the possibility of amyloidosis may be overlooked. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Introduction Few treatments options are available for patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) who have previously been treated with lenalidomide (LEN) and bortezomib (BORT), and their prognosis is poor. Pomalidomide (POM) is a distinct IMiD® immunomodulatory agent with a mechanism of action consisting of direct anti-myeloma, stromal-support inhibitory, and immunomodulatory effects. In randomized phase 2 and 3 trials (MM-002 and MM-003), POM plus low-dose dexamethasone (POM+LoDEX) demonstrated marked efficacy in RRMM pts who had received multiple prior therapies, including LEN and BORT. This side-by-side analysis presents the most recent survival and safety data from these trials. Methods The MM-002 and MM-003 trials enrolled pts with ≥ 2 prior therapies, including LEN and BORT. In MM-002, pts received POM (4 mg/day on days 1–21 of each 28-day cycle) alone or in combination with LoDEX (40 mg/week). In MM-003, pts were randomized 2:1 to receive POM+LoDEX or high-dose DEX alone (HiDEX) (40 mg/days 1–4, 9–12, 17–20 in a 28-day cycle); HiDEX was chosen as the comparator to isolate the effects of POM, as at the time of trial design it was the standard salvage therapy for heavily pretreated pts. Thromboprophylaxis was required for all pts treated with POM and pts at high risk of developing venous thromboembolism. Data cutoff was February 1, 2013 for MM-002 and March 1, 2013 for MM-003. The primary endpoint in both trials was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), response rates, duration of response, and safety. Results In each study, pts had received a median of 5 prior therapies (range 1-17), and all pts had received prior LEN and BORT. In MM-002, 113 pts were treated with POM+LoDEX and 108 were treated with POM alone (60% of POM alone pts subsequently received DEX). A total of 79% of pts were LEN refractory; 62% were refractory to both LEN and BORT; and 35% had received LEN as their last prior therapy. With a median follow-up of 14.2 months (mos), median PFS was 4.2 mos, OS was 16.5 mos, and overall response rate (ORR, defined as at least a partial response) was 33% with POM+LoDEX (Table 1). In MM-003, 302 pts were treated with POM+LoDEX and 153 pts were treated with HiDEX (50% of HiDEX pts subsequently received POM). A total of 94% of pts were LEN refractory; 74% were both LEN and BORT refractory; and 29% had received LEN as their last prior therapy. Survival outcomes were similar in MM-003; with a median follow-up of 10 mos, median PFS was 4.0 mos, OS was 12.7 mos, and ORR was 31% with POM+LoDEX. In both trials, LEN as last prior therapy did not impact response, PFS, or OS vs the overall population. Commonly observed adverse events (AEs) are presented in Table 2 for pts treated with POM+LoDEX. Grade 3 and 4 neutropenia was 28% and 13% in MM-002, and 26% and 22% in MM-003 for the POM+LoDEX arms, respectively. AEs were generally manageable for POM+LoDEX in MM-002 and MM-003 with dose interruptions (67% for both) and reductions (29% and 26%, respectively), and standard supportive care, including growth factor support (46% and 43%), red blood cell transfusions (45% and 49%), platelet transfusions (14% and 20%), and anti-infective agents (89% in both trials). Rates of POM discontinuation due to treatment-related AEs were low (2–4% with POM+LoDEX). In MM-002 and MM-003, 49% and 51% of pts in the POM+LoDEX arms experienced neutropenia of any grade. With appropriate AE management, 9% and 23% had dose interruptions, 4% and 8% had dose reductions, and 1 pt in both MM-002 and MM-003 discontinued due to neutropenia. Febrile neutropenia developed in 3% and 10% of pts; 1% and 4% had dose interruptions, 0% and 2% had dose reductions, and no pts discontinued due to febrile neutropenia in the MM-002 and MM-003 studies, respectively. The majority of infections occurred in the absence of neutropenia of any grade (54% in MM-002 and 66% in MM-003). The rate of POM discontinuation due to infection was low (1% in MM-002 and 2% in MM-003). Conclusion In both the MM-002 and MM-003 trials, POM+LoDEX consistently extended PFS in advanced RRMM pts. PFS, OS, and ORR were not negatively impacted in patients who were refractory to LEN or BORT, even as last prior therapy. Both trials demonstrated that with dose modifications and supportive care POM was well tolerated, leading to few discontinuations. POM+LoDEX should be considered a standard of care for pts with advanced RRMM who have exhausted LEN and BORT. Disclosures: Siegel: Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Richardson:Millennium: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Johnson & Johnson: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Dimopoulos:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Chen:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Song:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Vij:Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millenium: Speakers Bureau; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Bahlis:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Baz:Millenium: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Research Funding. Hofmeister:Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Weisel:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Jagannath:Millennium: Honoraria; Celgene Corporation: Honoraria. Lonial:Millennium: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy. Delforge:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria. Talpaz:Ariad, Sanofi, Novartis: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Ariad, Novartis, BMS, Pfizer: Speakers Bureau; Ariad, BMS, Sanofi, INCYTE: Research Funding. Moreau:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. San Miguel:Jansen, Celgene Corporation, Onyx, Novartis, Millenium: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Karlin:Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Expert board committee Other, Honoraria. Goldschmidt:Celgene Corporation, Janssen, Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Oriol:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy. Alegre:Janssen: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Cavo:Millennium: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Martinez-Lopez:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding. Lacy:Celgene Corporation: Research Funding. Chen:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Casey:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Sternas:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Zaki:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Jacques:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Anderson:Onyx: Consultancy, Equity Ownership; Gilead: Consultancy, Equity Ownership; sanofi aventis: Consultancy, Equity Ownership; Oncopep: Consultancy, Equity Ownership; Acetylon: Consultancy, Equity Ownership; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Equity Ownership.