Citations

Background and Aims Interleukin‐22 has beneficial effects on inflammation and impaired hepatic regeneration that characterize alcohol‐associated hepatitis (AH). F‐652 is a recombinant fusion protein of human interleukin‐22 and immunoglobulin G2 fragment crystallizable. This study aims to assess the safety and efficacy signals of F‐652 in patients with moderate and severe AH. Approach and Results A phase‐2 dose‐escalating study was carried out. F‐652 (10 μg/kg, 30 μg/kg, or 45 μg/kg) administered on days 1 and 7 was tested in 3 patients each with moderate (Model for End‐Stage Liver Disease [MELD] scores: 11‐20) and severe AH (MELD scores: 21‐28). Safety was defined by absence of serious adverse events and efficacy was assessed by Lille score, changes in MELD score, and serum bilirubin and aminotransferases at days 28 and 42. Three independent propensity‐matched comparator patient cohorts were used. Plasma extracellular vesicles and multiplex serum cytokines were measured to assess inflammation and hepatic regeneration. Eighteen patients (9 moderate and 9 severe AH) were enrolled, 66% were male, and the mean age was 48 years. The half‐life of F‐652 following the first dose was 61‐85 hours. There were no serious adverse events leading to discontinuation. The MELD score and serum aminotransferases decreased significantly at days 28 and 42 from baseline (P < 0.05). Day‐7 Lille score was 0.45 or less in 83% patients as compared with 6%, 12%, and 56% among the comparator cohorts. Extracellular vesicle counts decreased significantly at day 28 (P < 0.013). Cytokine inflammatory markers were down‐regulated, and regeneration markers were up‐regulated at days 28 and 42. Conclusions F‐652 is safe in doses up to 45 μg/kg and associated with a high rate of improvement as determined by Lille and MELD scores, reductions in markers of inflammation and increases in markers of hepatic regeneration. This study supports the need for randomized placebo‐controlled trials to test the efficacy of F‐652 in AH.

Introduction: We have previously reported underrepresentation of female faculty at senior academic ranks in hematology/oncology (H/O). In this analysis we aimed to investigate the influence of sex in attaining leadership positions amongst academic hematologists/oncologists in United States. Methods: Faculty members were identified at 146 H/O fellowship programs listed on fellowship and residency electronic interactive database (FREIDA.) Data was collected on demographics, academic rank and research output using Doximity and Scopus databases. We compared the unadjusted characteristics of men and women by using two-sided t-tests and χ2 tests where appropriate. In primary analysis, logistic regression models were used to evaluate sex differences on probability of having full professorship (versus assistant and associate professorship) and of achieving leadership positions including division chief, Program Director (PD) and Associate Program Director (APD). Adjusted models included the following variables: clinical experience in years, number of publications, h-index, appointment at top 20 hospital, clinical trial investigator status and National Institutes of Health funding. Stratified analysis was performed adjusting for duration of clinical experience (≤15 vs >15 years) Results: Fewer women were full Professors (21.9% vs 78.1%), division chiefs (16.7% vs 83.3%), and PDs (30.5% vs 69.5) but the number was similar for Associate Program Directors (47.1% vs 52.9%). In a univariate unadjusted model, women were less likely to be full professors compared to men (OR 0.39; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.31-0.48; P<.001). However, in the multivariable adjusted model no statistically significant sex difference in full professorship was found (OR 1.05; 95% CI 0.71, 1.57; P=.85; Table). The likelihood of full professorship was positively associated with clinical experience in years, number of first/last author publications, h-index, and being a primary investigator on at least one clinical trial.In a univariate unadjusted model, women were less likely to be division chiefs as compared to males (OR 0.35; 95% CI, 0.16, 0.80; P=.01). However, in the multivariable adjusted model, there was no statistically significant sex difference in achieving the position of division chief (OR 0.57; 95% CI 0.20, 1.58; P=.28; Table). No significant difference was found between females and males for being program directors or associate program directors in both univariate and multivariate analysis. Similarly, a stratified analysis adjusting for duration of clinical experience (≤15 vs >15 years) found no significant sex differences in attaining leadership position (Table) Conclusion: We found that women are underrepresented at higher academic ranks and in leadership positions in hematology/oncology, but that sex is not a significant negative predictor to women obtaining leadership positions after correcting for traditional predictors of academic success. However, "non-traditional" and therefore less measurable and analyzable factors such as networking, mentorship, sponsorship, gender bias, balancing work and home responsibilities and many others may contribute and should be further investigated. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Background: Mutations in isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) occur in ~3% of individuals with myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) and have been associated with increased transformation to acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Ivosidenib (AG-120) is an oral, potent, targeted inhibitor of the mutant isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 enzyme (mIDH1) and is approved in the US for the treatment of newly diagnosed AML with a susceptible IDH1 mutation in patients ≥75 years of age or who have comorbidities that preclude the use of intensive induction chemotherapy, and in adult patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) AML. The first-in-human, phase 1 dose escalation and expansion study of ivosidenib (NCT02074839) enrolled adults with mIDH1 advanced hematologic malignancies, including R/R MDS, and the study is ongoing. In the initial phase of the study (DiNardo et al. N Engl J Med 2018), the 12 patients with R/R MDS received 500 mg ivosidenib once daily and were characterized as follows: 75% were male, median age was 72.5 years (range 52-78), and 42% were ≥75 years of age; median number of prior therapies was 1 (range 1-3). Adverse events (AEs) of any grade, irrespective of causality, occurring in ≥20% of the 12 patients were diarrhea, fatigue, back pain, rash (n=4 each, 33.3%), anemia, urinary tract infection, decreased appetite, hypokalemia, arthralgia, dyspnea, pruritus, and hypotension (n=3 each, 25.0%). No AEs led to permanent discontinuation of treatment. Response was assessed according to International Working Group 2006 criteria for MDS. According to investigators, five of 12 patients achieved complete remission (CR) (41.7%; 95% CI 15.2%, 72.3%); median duration of CR was not estimable for these patients (95% CI 2.8 months, not estimable). Nine of 12 patients were transfusion independent for at least 56 days during study treatment. Mutation clearance was observed in one of the 5 CR patients. Here we report the design of a new sub-study of this trial, which is being undertaken to further assess the safety, tolerability, and clinical activity of treatment with ivosidenib in patients with R/R MDS. Methods: This sub-study is evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and clinical activity of ivosidenib. Adults with R/R MDS with an IDH1 mutation will be enrolled in the MDS sub-study. These individuals must have R/R disease after treatment with standard agents indicated for MDS. Eligible patients must have a platelet count of ≥20,000/μL, and adequate hepatic function (total bilirubin ≤1.5 × upper limit of normal [ULN]; aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, and alkaline phosphatase ≤3.0 × ULN) and renal function (serum creatinine ≤2.0 × ULN or creatinine clearance >40 mL/min). Additional key inclusion criteria are bone marrow blasts >5% and/or transfusion dependence. Ivosidenib is to be administered at a dose of 500 mg once daily orally on Days 1 to 28 of 28-day cycles. The addition of the MDS sub-study to this phase 1 clinical study in patients with hematological malignancies will provide additional insights into the use of ivosidenib for the treatment of mIDH1 R/R MDS. Disclosures Foran: Agios: Honoraria, Research Funding. DiNardo:notable labs: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; medimmune: Honoraria; daiichi sankyo: Honoraria; abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; agios: Consultancy, Honoraria; jazz: Honoraria; celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; syros: Honoraria. Watts:Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Stein:Agios: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas Pharma US, Inc: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Daiichi Sankyo, Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bioline: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; PTC Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Syros: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. De Botton:Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Astellas: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Syros: Consultancy; Forma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Servier: Consultancy; Pierre Fabre: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Agios: Consultancy, Research Funding. Fathi:Amphivena, Kite, Jazz, NewLink Genetics,: Honoraria; Agios, Astellas, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo, Novartis, Takeda, Amphivena, Kite, Forty Seven,Trovagene, NewLink genetics, Jazz, Abbvie, and PTC Therapeutics: Consultancy. Stein:Stemline: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Stone:AbbVie, Actinium, Agios, Argenx, Arog, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Biolinerx, Celgene, Cornerstone Biopharma, Fujifilm, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Amgen, Ono, Orsenix, Otsuka, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Sumitomo, Trovagene: Consultancy; Argenx, Celgene, Takeda Oncology: Other: Data and Safety Monitoring Board/Committee: ; Novartis, Agios, Arog: Research Funding. Patel:France Foundation: Honoraria; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Dava Oncology: Honoraria. Tallman:UpToDate: Patents & Royalties; Daiichi-Sankyo: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BioLineRx: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Rigel: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Cellerant: Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Delta Fly Pharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Nohla: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding; Tetraphase: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Orsenix: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Biosight: Research Funding; Oncolyze: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; KAHR: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Choe:Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership; Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership. Wang:Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership. Zhang:Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership; Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership. Fan:Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership. Yen:Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership. Oluyadi:Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership. Winkler:Agios: Employment. Hickman:Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership. Agresta:Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership. Liu:Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership. Wu:Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership. Attar:Aprea Therapeutics: Employment; Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kantarjian:Astex: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria; Actinium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Immunogen: Research Funding; AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding; Jazz Pharma: Research Funding; Agios: Honoraria, Research Funding; Ariad: Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Cyclacel: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Daiichi-Sankyo: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: Ivosidenib (AG-120) is an IDH1 inhibitor indicated for the treatment of AML with a susceptible IDH1 mutation as detected by an FDA-approved test in: 1) adult patients with newly-diagnosed AML who are more than 75 years old or who have comorbidities that preclude use of intensive induction chemotherapy and 2) adult patients with relapsed or refractory AML. It is being evaluated in clinical trials for mutant IDH1 advanced hematologic malignancies.

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 Despite more robust attempts to deliver chemotherapy in the outpatient setting, certain regimens for hematologic malignancies require inpatient hospitalization for treatment and monitoring clinical status. Increased length of stay (LOS) for planned chemotherapy admissions leads to increased healthcare utilization and decreased patient satisfaction. We sought to identify potentially modifiable risk factors for increased LOS. Methods Planned chemotherapy admissions to the inpatient hematology services at Mayo Clinic (Rochester, MN) from October 2018 through March 2019 were reviewed. We included patients who had treatment plans based on four pre-specified common regimens for acute myeloid leukemia, relapsed non-Hodgkins lymphoma and multiple myeloma. Patients who remained in the hospital for lack of caregiver support were excluded. Patient characteristics, including age, malignancy type, and chemotherapy regimen were recorded. Encounter characteristics included day of week of admission, time of admission, time chemotherapy plan initiated, and whether or not all necessary procedures (labs, vascular access, chemo orders) were completed prior to admission. Primary outcome was LOS. Secondary outcome was time to treatment initiation (TTI) after admission. Results There were 100 planned admissions for patients receiving four regimens: cytarabine consolidation, EPOCH, ICE, VDT-PACE, during the six month review period. Thirty-six admissions did not occur as planned (regimen changed, rescheduled, or disease progression). Of the remaining 66 admissions, 11 outliers were excluded from primary analysis. Baseline characteristics are summarized in Table 1. Univariate analysis with independent t-test found no difference in LOS for patients who had physician chemotherapy orders in place prior to admission. To the contrary, we detected a non-significant trend toward longer mean length of stay for patients that were not seen in clinic on day of admission (Table 2). On ANOVA, there was a statistically significant difference in LOS when comparing Monday admissions 3.93 days (95% CI 3.07 to 4.79) vs Friday 5.25 days (95% CI, 4.86 to 5.64), but not between any other days. There were no statistically significant differences in TTI when comparing by day of week, physician order status, or chemotherapy regimen. Again, a non-significant trend toward increased TTI was observed for patients not seen in clinic on the same day as admission. Conclusions This study serves as a starting point towards identifying modifiable factors that are essential to delivery of safe, satisfying inpatient care to our hematological malignancy patients.Our noteworthy finding regarding patients who were admitted on Friday having a longer LOS than those admitted on Monday requires further exploration. This study is ongoing with mature data to be presented at the meeting. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Background: Carfilzomib (Car), a second-generation proteasome inhibitor (PI), has been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as therapy for relapsed and /or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM), either as a single agent or in combination with other agents. It has proven to be superior in many ways compared to the the first generation PI, bortezomib, both in terms of superior efficacy and neuropathy related adverse effect profile. Carfilzomib has lower rate of peripheral neuropathy. In this review, we gathered data from trials which studied Carfilzomib for newly diagnosed MM (NDMM). Carfilzomib based two and three drug combination as induction regimens for the management of NDMM is an emerging approach. Through this systematic review, we explore efficacy, adverse effect profile of Car based regimens for NDMM. Methods: Per PRISMA guidelines, a thorough database search was conducted on 06/24/2019 using the following search engines; PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane library, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Clinicaltrials.gov. We included all published trials that used carfilzomib as an induction agent in NDMM patients and had at least response rates after induction. Results: The total number of articles identified with initial search were 1131, out of which 19 articles met our selection / eligibility criteria (n=2286). The overall response rates (ORR) after induction therapy with carfilzomib based regimens was very impressive (range: 84.3% - 100%). Two drug combination using carfilzomib and dexamethasone (n=72) had an ORR of 90% and a greater than very good partial response rate (>VGPR) of 84%. Three drug combinations used for induction therapy included carfilzomib/dexamethasone with immunomodulators (n=391) and alkylating agents (n=308). The combination of carfilzomib/dexamethasone with lenalidomide (n=189, ORR: 97% - 98%, >VGPR: 69% - 98%) and thalidomide (n=202, ORR: 90% - 94%, >VGPR: 66% - 68%) showed the best response. Alkylating agents used in combination with carfilzomib were melphalan (n=98, ORR: 90% - 93%, >VGPR: 58% - 70%), cyclophosphamide (n=192, ORR: 87% - 95%, >VGPR: 39% - 71%) and bendamustine (n=18, ORR; 100%, >VGPR: 89%). Four drug combinations with carfilzomib used were daratumumab/lenalidomide/dexamethasone (n=22, ORR: 100%, >VGPR: 90%, 12m PFS: 95%) and cyclophosphamide / thalidomide / dexamethasone (n=64, ORR; 91%, >VGPR: 69%, 24m PFS: 76%). One trial directly compared carfilzomib/melphalan/dexamethasone (n=478, ORR: 84%, >VGPR: 61%, PFS: 22.3m) with bortezomib/melphalan/dexamethasone (n=477, ORR: 79%, >VGPR: 49%, PFS: 22.1m). Another trial compared the combination of carfilzomib / dexamethasone with lenalidomide (n=315) or cyclophosphamide (n=159) that showed similar ORR (97% vs 91%) though >VGPR rate was better with lenalidomide (75% vs 60%). Efficacy data including progression free survival (PFS) for carfilzomib based regimens is reported in table 1. Most common >grade 3 hematological adverse effects reported were anemia (2% - 35%), lymphopenia (5% - 76%), thrombocytopenia (4% - 28%) and neutropenia (1% - 38%). Most Common >grade 3 non-hematological adverse events included cardiac events (5% - 10%), respiratory disorders (8% - 16%), infections (2% - 9%), hypertension (6% - 17%), renal events (9% - 10%) and hyperglycemia (6% - 23%). (Table 1) Conclusion: The overall efficacy and favorable adverse effect profile of Carfilzomib-based induction regimens seem very promising for the treatment of NDMM. Car is now approved for weekly dosing which is convenient. Due to cardiovascular toxicity seen in upto 10% cases, Car should be used very judiciously in patients with cardiovascular risk factors and heart failure. Several ongoing phase 3 clinical trials are studying Carfilzomib in various combinations will help to establish foundation for future standard therapy as well as next phase of drug development through clinical trials. Disclosures Anwer: In-Cyte: Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

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.

AbstractBackgroundPatients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) are surviving longer. There are no data on changes in myocardial mechanics from standard of care low‐dose anthracycline‐based induction chemotherapy in older patients with AML. The aim of this study was to demonstrate the potential utility of strain imaging in detecting early changes in left ventricular function in this patient population after induction chemotherapy.MethodsThirty two patients enrolled in the ECOG‐ACRIN E2906 study (cytarabine and daunorubicin vs clofarabine [Genzyme/Sanofi]) from 2011 to 2014 were evaluated retrospectively. Two‐dimensional transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) imaging with Doppler and two‐dimensional speckle‐tracking echocardiography (2DSTE) using EchoInsight software (Epsilon imaging) were performed before and after induction chemotherapy.ResultsEighteen patients received cytarabine and daunorubicin (7 + 3) and 14 received clofarabine. The clofarabine group was older than the 7 + 3 cohort (67.8 ± 4.0 vs 63.7 ± 3.8, P = .007). There were no other significant differences in cardiac risk factors between groups. The 7 + 3 group had a decrease in average peak systolic global longitudinal (−19.1 ± 2.8 to −17.2 ± 3.0, P = .01) and circumferential strain (−29.4 ± 6.3 to −23.9 ± 4.3, P = .011). These changes were not demonstrated in the clofarabine group and were not associated with a decline in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF).ConclusionsIn older AML patients, standard cytarabine and daunorubicin chemotherapy causes early changes in global longitudinal and circumferential strain not seen with clofarabine therapy. These findings demonstrate subclinical left ventricular dysfunction after exposure to low cumulative doses of anthracycline‐based induction chemotherapy and may help us better identify those patients at risk for adverse long‐term cardiovascular outcomes.

241 Background: In a rapidly moving field, such as cancer immunotherapy, where immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are used across 14 different tumor types, patients may receive suboptimal treatment or even be harmed if information on toxicity is not readily translated for use in clinical practice. Every single systematic review and meta-analysis which attempted to summarize toxicity of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) quickly became outdated. A living systematic review, which is defined as a systematic review that is continually updated to incorporate relevant new evidence as it becomes available, is necessary in this situation. Methods: The process of creating a living systematic review started with the creation of a comprehensive search designed by a librarian experienced in systematic reviews in collaboration with the study’s principle investigator. Search was constantly updated every 3 months and evidence is synthesized in a series of steps (microtasks) using a combination of human and augmented intelligence. A complete infrastructure is being developed and it includes automated cumulative meta-analysis and an online reporting platform which will constantly update information for clinicians and patients in a live manner. Results: We screened 6746 studies during Sep 2018-March 2019 and identified 6746 studies and we were able to successfully maintain up-to-date toxicity estimates for immune mediated adverse events over this period while maintaining the rigor of a conventional systematic review. Eventually, we will integrate the steps of LSR into one, user-friendly, semi-automated format which can independently provide accurate estimates and feed into and support a living guidelines platform through shared Application Programing Interface (APIs). Conclusions: LSRs are feasible, efficient, and when fully developed can reduce redundancy and waste in medical research, improve the quality of evidence, reduce human effort and support living and dynamic guidelines to facilitate truly informed shared decision making.