Citations

Abstract Introduction: For decades conventional skeletal survey (CSS) has been the standard imaging technique for the detection of bone impairment caused by Multiple Myeloma (MM). The development of cross-sectional imaging techniques like Whole Body Computed Tomography (WBCT) with or without Positron Emission Tomography (PET/PET-CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) led to the use of these techniques in several centers worldwide and to the implementation of their findings into the revised diagnostic criteria of MM. The aim of the current multicenter study was to compare sensitivity and prognostic significance of WBCT and CSS in patients with monoclonal plasma disorders. Methods: For the current retrospective analysis 308 patients with different stages of monoclonal plasma cell disorders from 8 centers were included. Compact discs with pseudonymized imaging data of WBCT and CSS were sent to the organizing center and uploaded to the picture archiving and communication system. In addition, questionnaires were completed by each center to collect clinical data of the patients. Image analysis was performed in consensus reading by three experienced radiologists (LAM, SD, VK) blinded to the clinical data of the patients. Osteolytic lesions in 19 pre-specified anatomic regions were characterized as "definitely present", "probably present", "probably absent" and "definitely absent". For the analysis only "definitely present" and "probably present" entries were counted as myeloma lesions. To define symptomatic or active versus smoldering myeloma based on the presence of bone lesions, findings of CSS were used to simulate the situation before the introduction of WBCT. For comparison of WBCT and CSS only those anatomic regions having valid measurements from both methods performed within 30 days without treatment in the meantime were considered. WBCT and CSS were tested for differences in detection sensitivity with the exact McNemar test. Results: Of 308 submitted datasets; 160 patients were without prior treatment and 56 of them had smoldering myeloma. Of 160 patients 80 (50%) had no osteolytic lesions on either CSS or WBCT and 33 (20.6%) showed osteolyses on both techniques. In 9 patients (5.6%) osteolyses were found on CSS but not in WBCT while 38 patients (23.8%) were positive on CT alone. Of note is that for some CT-scans, the upper extremities were not evaluable due to positioning during the examination. Odds ratio for osteolyses on WBCT compared to CSS was 4.22 (P < 0.0001). The regions where WBCT was most significantly superior in detecting osteolyses were the iliac bone, thoracic and lumbar spine as well as the ribs. CSS compared to WBCT revealed osteolyses in more patients only in the proximal extremities: for left humerus 10 (6.5%) versus 3 (1.9%), right humerus 12 (7.7%) versus 4 (2.6%), left femur 11 (7.1%) versus 7 (4.5%) and right femur 10 (6.5%) versus 8 (5.2%) respectively. Of 157 evaluable patients 63 (40.1%) showed osteoporosis (defined by radiological criteria) on both techniques while 29 (18.5%) had osteoporosis on WBCT only and 10 (6.4%) on CSS only (OR 2.90, P = 0.003). In the 56 patients with smoldering myeloma, with bone disease being defined according to the findings of CSS 12 (21.4%), were positive for osteolyses on WBCT (P = 0.0005). Conclusion: WBCT shows significantly more sites of bone destruction compared to conventional X-ray imaging particularly in skeletal regions composed primarily of trabecular bone while CSS shows more osteolyses in the appendicular skeleton - in part due to a limited field of view. More than 20% of patients with smoldering myeloma based on CSS have active disease that needs treatment based on WBCT. Therefore, WBCT is the current standard for the detection of osteolytic lesions in myeloma. The prognostic significance of WBCT and CSS findings for survival and correlation with clinical parameters will be reported at the meeting. Disclosures Hillengass: Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Honoraria; Novartis: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Research Funding. Plesner:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Dimopoulos:Amgen: 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; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genesis: Consultancy, Honoraria. Goldschmidt:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Chugai: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Millennium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Onyx: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Lentzsch:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy. Terpos:Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Genesis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria.

Abstract Total body irradiation (TBI)-based conditioning regimens are considered the standard of care for patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). However, due to concerns regarding acute and long-term toxicities, non-TBI regimens, commonly including busulfan (BU), have been increasingly explored. We performed a retrospective cohort analysis with the hypothesis that there would be equivalence of these two myeloablative approaches by reviewing outcomes for adult patients (pts), aged 18-60 years, undergoing a first, well-matched sibling, related or unrelated donor HCT in CR1 or CR2 reported to the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) from 2005-2014. Eight hundred nineteen pts received TBI (63% 9-12 Gy, 37% ≥13 Gy) combined with etoposide (25%) or cyclophosphamide (Cy) (75%) and 299 pts received intravenous BU combined with a second alkylator Cy (15%) or melphalan (Mel) (13%), or a nucleoside analogue fludarabine (Flu) (41%) or clofarabine (Clo)(30%). The majority of the BU-based pts were treated at the Moffitt or MD Anderson Cancer Center. The BU-based regimens were grouped together for analyses since no significant differences in basic outcomes among the different chemotherapy-only regimens were noted. Patients in the BU-containing group were older but had better performance status, took longer to achieve CR1 and longer to receive HCT; more received peripheral blood than marrow grafts, peri-HCT ATG, pre- and post HCT tyrosine kinase inhibitors ( TKI), and were treated more recently than pts in the TBI-based group (Table 1). With median follow-up of 3.6 years for the BU-based group and 5.3 years for the TBI-based group, adjusted 3 year outcomes showed treatment-related mortality (TRM) BU 19% vs. TBI 25% (p=.04); relapse BU 37% vs. TBI 28% (p=.007); disease-free survival (DFS) Bu 45% vs. TBI 48% (p=.35); and overall survival (OS) BU 57% vs. TBI 53% (p=.35) (Figures A-B). Patients in the BU group had significantly more grade II-IV acute GVHD (47% vs. 40%, p=.025), but marginally less chronic GVHD (49% vs. 55% at 3 years, p=.073). In multivariate analysis, the BU group had a significantly higher rate of acute GVHD after day 50 (RR 1.75, 95% CI 1.19-2.58, p=.004), but marginally less chronic GVHD (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.68-1.01 p=.059) and higher risk of relapse (RR 1.46, 95% CI 1.15-1.85 p=.002) compared with TBI-based regimens. Despite the observed higher risks of acute GVHD and relapse, BU-based conditioning led to similar TRM, OS, and DFS following HCT for ALL. Table 1 Table 1. Figure Figure. Disclosures Ciurea: Spectrum Pharmaceuticals: Other: Advisory Board; Cyto-Sen Therapeutics: Equity Ownership. Seftel:Otsuka: Research Funding. Pulsipher:Medac: Other: Housing support for conference; Chimerix: Consultancy; Jazz Pharmaceutical: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Other: Study Steering Committee. Champlin:Ziopharm Oncology: Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties; Intrexon: Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties.

Abstract Background: Peripheral T-cell lymphomas (PTCL) are a heterogeneous group of mature T-cell and natural-killer-cell aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphomas associated with poor prognosis with current therapies. Numerous studies have reported poor survival for PTCL patients with a median Overall Survival (OS) shorter than 2 years and 5-year survival rates of <30%. Traditionally, patients with PTCL have been treated with a cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP)-like first-line chemotherapeutic regimen. Unfortunately, the prognosis remains poor with most patients relapsing within 2 years. Thus, improved front line treatment strategies are needed. Pralatrexate (Folotyn) is a folate analogue metabolic inhibitor that was the first drug approved in the US for the treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory PTCL (R/R PTCL). Approval was based on results from the pivotal Phase 2 PROPEL study (O'Connor et al, JCO, 2011) of pralatrexate in R/R PTCL, in which pralatrexate monotherapy demonstrated a durable clinical benefit (objective response rate of 29%). Pralatrexate is administered intravenously (IV) at a dose of 30 mg/m2 weekly for 6 weeks of a 7-week treatment cycle. Since pralatrexate and each of the components of the CHOP regimen target different aspects of tumor cell growth and proliferation, there is a potential for synergistic anti-tumor effect, and limited additive toxicities. Objectives: The primary endpoint of the study is the determination of the MTD of pralatrexate in combination with CHOP (Fol-CHOP) in previously untreated PTCL patients. Secondary endpoints included safety, tolerability and ORR (complete response [CR] + partial response [PR]) and pharmacokinetics. Methods: In this study, patients with PTCL received CHOP in combination with pralatrexate, repeated every 3-weeks for up to 6 cycles. Part 1 of the study was to determine the Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD) of the Fol-CHOP combination. Once the MTD was determined, an additional 10 patients were treated in the Expansion Phase (Part 2). The cohort schema followed a traditional "3+3" design. Pralatrexate was to be administered as 10, 15, 20, 25, or 30 mg/m2 IV push over 3 to 5 minutes on Days 1 and 8 of each cycle. The starting cohort was CHOP + 10 mg/m2 of pralatrexate. Patients received prophylaxis with acyclovir and sulfamethoxazole/trimethoprim during the study and primary prophylaxis with growth factor (filgrastim or pegfilgrastim) support. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) were considered during the 1st cycle and included: Severe infections, study treatment-related non-hematological toxicity Grade 3-4, platelet count < 25 X 109/L at any time or ANC < 0.5 X 109/L lasting more than 7 days despite G-CSF administration. Results: A total of 12 patients have been enrolled in Part 1 of the study at the time of abstract submission. Nine patients have completed Cycle 1 and no DLT was reported. Among these nine patients, three patients each were treated at CHOP + 10 mg/m2, 15 mg/m2 and 20 mg/m2 of pralatrexate. One patient (11%) treated with CHOP + 10 mg/m2 had one serious adverse event (SAE) of febrile neutropenia that was deemed unrelated to any study drug. Only four Grade 3 AEs (anemia, constipation, mucosal inflammation, and nausea) were reported, in one patient (11%). The enrollment into the study continues. Conclusions: These interim results demonstrate that the combination of pralatrexate with CHOP (Fol-CHOP) is well tolerated, with all components of CHOP as well as pralatrexate being given at close to or at standard doses. The rates of AEs are comparable to those typically reported with CHOP alone. The study is ongoing to confirm the MTD and to assess preliminary efficacy of the Fol-CHOP combination. Updated results will be presented at the meeting. Disclosures Oki: Novartis: Research Funding. Barta:Celgene, Merck, Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Sharma:Spectrum Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Song:Spectrum Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Mourya:Spectrum Pharmaceuticals: Employment.

Abstract Introduction: Immune suppression is a major component of lymphoma pathogenesis. Recent advances in lymphoma treatment have been immunotherapy. We present the preliminary results of our clinical trial testing 2 vaccine strategies in patients with indolent B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). The primary objective is to determine the safety and feasibility of the vaccine approaches and secondary objectives are to describe clinical responses and identify corresponding immune changes. Methods: Autologous mature dendritic cells (mDC) were manufactured from leukapheresed cells of NHL pts. For patients with tumor lymph nodes deemed amenable to cryoablation by interventional radiologist (arm A), they received cryoablation of a node and injection of mDC into the cryoablated node followed by another 1 to 7 intratumoral mDC injections. Remaining patients had a tumor excised to generate tumor lysate ex vivo. mDC were pulsed with tumor lysate during DC maturation (arm B; DC-TL). The DC-TL vaccines were injected intradermally for 4 to 8 doses. Patients are monitored for one year after vaccines for adverse events and systemic tumor response. Correlative studies include cellular immune phenotype of peripheral blood and T cell intracellular cytokine productions. Planned accrual is 10 patients per arm (total = 20). Results: To date, 10 patients have accrued to arm A and 5 patients to arm B (Table 1). All pts tolerated vaccine treatments without major adverse events. Of the 10 evaluable patients, there were 1 CR (arm B: 1 / 4; total: 1/6) and 4 PR (arm A: 3/6; arm B: 1 / 4; total: 4/10) for an ORR of 50% for both arms (Figure 1). Time to next treatment ranged from 6.5 to 25 months (Figure 2). Correlative studies suggest that immune changes can be used as prognostic biomarkers to predict response. These include changes in vaccine induced cytokine secretion, and in the number and composition of the immune system. In addition, preliminary analysis of >40 immune phenotypes using flow cytometry and hierarchical clustering suggest there are characteristic immune system responses in patients responding to vaccine. Conclusions: Both cryoablation and intratumoral mDC vaccination are feasible and safe in NHL. Treatment responses may correlate with immune system changes. Biosystems analysis method can be used to develop novel assays as predictive biomarkers of treatment response and used to develop novel protocols that allow treating to response. Table 1. Patient Demographics Arm A (n = 10) Arm B (n = 5) Total (n = 15) Age (median, rage) 64 (55 – 80) 60 (31 – 86) 63 (31 – 86) Gender (M/F) 6/4 2/3 8/7 Histology (n, %) Follicular Marginal zone DLBCL 10 (100%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (60%) 1 (20%) 1(20%) 13 (86.6%) 1 (6.7%) 1 (6.7%) Stage (N, %) II III IV 1 (10%) 1 (10%) 8 (80%) 2 (40%) 1 (20%) 2 (40%) 3 (20%) 2 (13.3%) 10 (66.7%) No of prior Tx (mean, range) 2.4 (0-8) 3.2 (0-7) 2.7 (0-8) FLIPI (n, %) 0-1 2 ≥ 3 1 (10%) 2 (20%) 7 (70%) 1 (20%) 2 (40%) 2 (45%) 2 (13.3%) 4 (26.7%) 9 (60%) Positive GELF criteria (n, %) 4 (40%) 1 (20%) 5 (30%) Figure 1. Waterfall plot. Figure 1. Waterfall plot. Figure 2. Time to next treatment. Figure 2. Time to next treatment. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Background Systemic AL amyloidosis is a life-threatening disease with limited treatment options. Response criteria have been recently updated and retrospectively validated (Palladini et al, J Clin Oncol 2012). Hematologic response (suppression of FLCs) has been shown to predict for both organ response and survival (ibid). Preliminary results from the present phase 1 study (NCT01318902) regarding the safety, tolerability, and maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of ixazomib (the first oral PI to be investigated in the clinic) in RRAL were reported previously (Merlini et al, ASH 2012). At that time, 11 pts had received the MTD/RP3D of ixazomib - 4.0 mg. Here we update the safety data (primary objective) and report hematologic and organ responses, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) (secondary objectives) for the extended population of 22 pts receiving the RP3D. Methods Pts with RRAL after ≥1 prior therapy and with measureable heart/kidney involvement and cardiac biomarker stage I/II disease were eligible. Two expansion cohorts (PI-naïve and PI-exposed) were enrolled at the RP3D. Pts received oral ixazomib on days 1, 8, and 15 for up to 12 x 28-day cycles; continuation until disease progression was allowed. Pts with less than partial response (PR) after 3 cycles received added dexamethasone (Dex) 40 mg, days 1–4 from cycle 4 onwards. Adverse events (AEs) were graded by NCI-CTCAE v4.03. Responses were assessed per standard criteria (Palladini et al, J Clin Oncol 2012). Results At data cut-off (Dec 6, 2013), 27 pts had been enrolled, 22 at the RP3D of ixazomib 4.0 mg; the other 5 pts were enrolled at 5.5 mg and are not included in these analyses. In pts who received ixazomib 4.0 mg, median age was 64.5 yrs (range 54–78); 13 were male. Mayo cardiac biomarker risk stage was I/II/III in 11/10/1 pts, respectively. Median baseline FLC differential (dFLC) and NT-proBNP were 146 mg/L (range 40–734) and 849 pg/mL (range 51–5691). Major organ involvement included heart, kidney, or both in 9, 8, and 5 pts, with a median of 2 (range 1–6) organ systems involved. Pts had received a median of 3 prior therapies, including transplantation in 16 pts; 16 pts had received prior bortezomib (PI exposed) and 6 were PI naïve. Other prior therapies included melphalan (n=21), Dex (n=16), IMiDs (n=11), and cyclophosphamide (n=10). Best hematologic response to prior therapy was complete response (CR) in 3 pts, very good PR (VGPR) in 4, PR in 14, and stable disease (SD) in 1 pt; organ response was achieved by 5 pts, with 12 pts having no response. Exposure and outcome data by prior PI exposure are shown in the table. Pts discontinued due to disease progression (n=6), pt withdrawal, symptomatic deterioration (each n=3), or unsatisfactory response (n=2); 5 pts completed 12 cycles; 3 pts are ongoing. Overall hematologic response rate (ORR) was 52%. After a median follow-up of 16.9 mos, the 9 pts who achieved ≥VGPR, had a median PFS of 17.0 mos compared with 10.7 mos in pts who achieved a lesser response (p=0.03). Cardiac/renal response was observed in 50%/18% of pts (all ≥VGPR). The most common drug-related AEs included diarrhea, nausea (each n=7), fatigue, thrombocytopenia (each n=6), peripheral neuropathy, and pyrexia (each n=4). Drug-related grade 3 AEs (>1 pt) were thrombocytopenia (n=3), diarrhea, and maculo-papular rash (each n=2). Table.PI naïven=6PI exposed n=16TotalN=22Cycles received, median (range)12 (1–22)3.5 (1–16)5.5 (1–22)Dex added, n358Hematologic response-evaluable ptsn=5n=16N=21Response, n (%)ORR5 (100)6 (38)11 (52)CR2 (40)02 (10)VGPR3 (60)4 (25)7 (33)PR02 (13)2 (10)SD09 (56)9 (43)Cardiac response/heart evaluable, n/N (%)3/4 (75)3/8 (38)6/12 (50)Renal response/kidney evaluable, n/N (%)1/3 (33)1/8 (13)2/11 (18)1 yr hematologic PFS rate, %8341602 yr OS rate, %835157 Conclusions This is one of the first studies prospectively assessing hematologic and organ response according to the updated consensus criteria. These data suggest weekly oral ixazomib 4.0 mg is feasible and generally well tolerated in RRAL pts with vital organ dysfunction. High quality hematologic responses (≥VGPR) were observed in 43% of pts; these responses were sustained at 1 yr in 60% of this heavily-pretreated population. Achieving ≥VGPR was associated with cardiac response and extended PFS. These results warrant a phase 3 study of ixazomib plus Dex vs physician's choice of treatment, which is ongoing (NCT01659658). Disclosures Merlini: Pfizer: Honoraria; Millennium: the Takeda Oncology Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Off Label Use: Use of the investigational agent ixazomib, an oral proteasome inhibitor, in the treatment of relapsed or refractory light-chain amyloidosis. Sanchorawala:Celgene: Research Funding; Millennium: the Takeda Oncology Company: Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding. Jeffrey:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kukreti:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Schoenland:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Jaccard:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria. Dispenzieri:Millennium: the Takeda Oncology Company: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding. Cohen:Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Advisory Board, Advisory Board Other; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Advisory Board, Advisory Board Other, Research Funding; Janssen: Advisory Board, Advisory Board Other; Celgene: Member, Independent Response Adjudication Committee Other. Berg:Takeda Pharmaceutical International Co.: Employment. Yuan:Takeda Pharmaceutical International Co.: Employment. Hui:Takeda Pharmaceutical International Co.: Employment. Comenzo:Millennium:the Takeda Oncology Company: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Teva: Research Funding; Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

Abstract Abstract 731 Background: Treatment with bortezomib achieves high hematologic response rates and rapid and durable responses in AL patients (pts), providing the rationale for proteasome inhibition in this population. MLN9708 is an investigational, oral, potent, reversible, and specific 20S proteasome inhibitor (PI). In preclinical studies, MLN9708 has shown improved antitumor activity compared to bortezomib in a range of xenograft models. This phase 1 study (NCT01318902) assessed weekly doses of oral MLN9708 in pts with relapsed or refractory AL. Methods: Pts aged ≥18 years with relapsed or refractory AL after ≥1 prior therapy, cardiac biomarker stage I/II disease, and measurable major organ (heart/kidney) involvement, received increasing doses of oral MLN9708 (standard 3+3 dose escalation fixed doses of 4.0 and 5.5 mg), on days 1, 8, and 15 of 28-day cycles for up to 12 cycles. Pts with no major hematologic response (<PR) after 3 cycles received dexamethasone (dex; 40 mg, days 1–4). Two expansion cohorts of PI-naïve and PI-exposed pts were enrolled at the MTD. The primary objectives were to determine the safety, tolerability, and MTD. Secondary objectives included analysis of plasma pharmacokinetic (PK) and whole blood pharmacodynamic effects of MLN9708, and assessment of overall hematologic response rate, time to and duration of hematologic and organ response. Adverse events (AEs) were graded using NCI-CTCAE version 4.03. Blood samples were collected at multiple timepoints pre- and post-MLN9708 dosing for PK analysis during cycle 1. Hematologic response and amyloid-related organ assessments were performed according to standardized criteria. Results: At data cut-off (June 29, 2012) 16 pts had been enrolled and received ≥1 MLN9708 dose (safety population). The median age was 66.5 years (range 54–78) and 7 were male. Median number of prior therapies was 3 (range 1–7); 10 received prior transplant, 7 received prior bortezomib. Major organ involvement, defined by standard criteria, included heart, kidney, or both in 7/5/4 pts, respectively, with a median of 2 (range 1–5) involved organ systems, and Mayo cardiac biomarker risk stage was I, II, III in 6, 9, 1 pts. Five pts were treated in the 5.5 mg cohort and 11 pts were treated in the 4.0 mg (n=6 dose escalation; n=5 dose expansion) cohorts. Of the 11 pts treated at 4.0 mg, 4 were PI-naïve, 7 were PI-exposed. Pts received a median of 3 cycles (range 1–12); 5 pts received ≥5 cycles, and 8 pts remain on treatment. Dex was added in 4 pts (2 in each MLN9708 dose level). There were no on-study deaths. Pts discontinued due to disease progression (n=5), AE, withdrawal by pt, or unsatisfactory response (each n=1); 2 pts completed planned 1 year of therapy. One pt in the 4.0 mg cohort experienced a DLT of grade 3 thrombocytopenia. Two pts in the 5.5 mg dose cohort experienced DLTs: grade 3 diarrhea in 1 pt, and renal failure, respiratory failure (both grade 2), and cardiac arrest (grade 4) in another pt. The MTD was determined as 4.0 mg. AEs were reported in 14 pts. The most common drug-related AEs included nausea (n=5), diarrhea and thrombocytopenia (each n=4), abdominal pain and fatigue (each n=3). Grade ≥3 AEs (any cause) reported in >1 pt were thrombocytopenia (n=4), dyspnea (n=3), maculo-papular rash, dehydration, and abdominal pain (each n=2); all were grade 3. Preliminary response data are shown in the table. At data cut-off, one responder had progressed, and the median duration of hematologic response was 7.4 months (range 1.3–11.5+); 2 pts had cardiac organ response. Preliminary PK data showed that MLN9708 was rapidly absorbed, with a median Tmax of 1 hr (range 0.5–6). MLN9708 day 15 plasma Cmax was 73.6 ± 40.2 ng/mL (mean ± SD) and AUC0–168was 1250 ±530 ng*hr/mL (n=8 at 4.0 mg dose cohort). MLN9708 PK parameter values in this study appear similar to other MLN9708 studies in myeloma pts. Conclusions: These data suggest weekly oral administration of MLN9708 is feasible in pts with relapsed or refractory AL. The MLN9708 MTD was determined as 4.0 mg. Assessment is ongoing, with preliminary evidence of hematologic responses noted. A phase 3 study of MLN9708 plus dex versus physician's choice of treatment is planned (NCT01659658). Disclosures: Merlini: Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy. Off Label Use: Use of the investigational agent MLN9708, an oral proteasome inhibitor, in the treatment of relapsed or refractory light-chain amyloidosis. Sanchorawala:Celgene: Research Funding; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding. Zonder:Celgene: Research Funding; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Consultancy, Research Funding. Kukreti:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria. Schonland:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria. Dispenzieri:Janssen Research & Development: Research Funding; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Cohen:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Meyers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Onyx: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Berg:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Liu:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Di Bacco:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Gupta:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Hui:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Comenzo:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 3655 Background Primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) is an aggressive lymphoma with devastating prognosis. High-dose methotrexate (HD-MTX) in combination with HD-cytarabine builds the backbone of current treatments. Elderly patients constitute 45% of cases, exhibit poor outcome and frequent iatrogenic toxicity. However, research efforts to optimize therapy in this subgroup have been neglected. On this background, we conducted a systematic review (SR) and individual patient data meta-analysis (IPDMA) to provide comprehensive evidence-based management strategy for elderly patients with PCNSL. Patients and Methods SR: We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE without language restriction. Eligibility criteria were prospective/retrospective observational studies or randomized trials (RCT) (all N>=10) that exclusively focused on first-line therapy/outcomes in immunocompetent PCNSL patients ≥60 years. Eligible studies were evaluated for methodological quality and reporting of the following baseline characteristics: Age, performance status (PS), involvement of deep brain structures (IDB), serum LDH at baseline, cerebro-spinal fluid (CSF) protein concentration elevation, neurotoxicity (as reported), specific co-morbidity indices, and functional status. For the IPDMA, investigators of eligible studies were asked to provide individual patient data. Minimal eligibility criteria: Age at baseline, details about first-line therapy, and follow-up information. If no data were available, studies were included in the SR, but not in the IPDMA. To maximize statistical power and generalizability, published/unpublished data from other international collaborators were included. Impact of different first-line treatments on overall survival (OS) was investigated using time dependent mixed effects multivariable Cox regression models (age and PS as fixed effects, study/database as random effect). Results SR: We identified 13 eligible studies including 583 patients in total, median age 68–76, published from 1996–2011. Design of studies: prospective (3 multicenter [1 RCT]; 2 single center), retrospective (4 multicenter and single-center, respectively). Accrual of the RCT was recently finished, but publication is pending. From published studies, information about age and therapy was given throughout, for clinical performance in 77%, for LDH and CSF protein in 15%, and IDB in 38%. Functional status was reported in only one study. From the identified 13 studies, 261 individual patient data were available for our IPDMA and pooled with 408 patients from other databases; altogether 669 patients diagnosed from 1977–2011. Preliminary results IPDMA: 50% were male, median age 68 (60–70 [N=431], 70–80 [N=211], >80 [N=22]); median KPS was 60% (10–100%). Therapy regimens widely varied. Overall response to first-line treatment was 65% (45% CR, 19% PR). After a median follow-up of 23 months (1–171), 44% were still alive, with a 3-year OS of 32% [95%CI, 29–37%]. Grouping by time of diagnosis revealed improvement for patients diagnosed after 1997 (N=462) (P<0.001). In multivariate analysis, MTX-based poly-chemotherapy (CT) (N=474) was associated with improved OS (Hazard ratio [HR] 0.69, 95% CI 0.52–0.91) compared to non-MTX regimens (N=195); this was consistent among patients who received consolidating WBRT (HR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01–0.66) and those who did not (HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.23–0.89). In patients who received any MTX-based poly-CT, addition of CHOP-like components (N=90) was not associated with improved OS (HR 0.98, 95% 0.65–1.48). Although any WBRT showed an overall trend for superior OS, it was associated with a 4-fold risk increase for neurotoxicity (Odds Ratio 4.21, 95% CI 2.23–8.21). Further results of treatment patterns and explorative comparisons will be presented at the meeting. Conclusion This international meta-analysis revealed widely varying treatment approaches and demonstrates that prognosis for elderly PCNSL patients is still poor. However, improvement over the last decades was observed. MTX-based poly-CT was associated with better outcome compared to non-MTX containing approaches. The addition of CHOP-like regimens to HD-MTX did not improve outcome. WBRT was associated with better outcome, but also clearly increased risk of neurotoxicity. Prospective trials designed ad hoc for elderly PCNSL patients are promptly needed. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Abstract 1364 In light chain (AL) amyloidosis, as well as in multiple myeloma, response to treatment is increasingly being used as a surrogate endpoint in clinical trials. In 2005 a consensus statement of the International Society of Amyloidosis (ISA) established the criteria for hematologic and organ response. Since then, several studies emphasized the prognostic relevance of the measurement of the amyloidogenic precursor, the circulating free light chain (FLC). Moreover, it was reported that patients who with treatment achieved decreases in the cardiac biomarker N terminal natriuretic peptide type B (NT-proBNP) had longer survival, although echocardiographic criteria of response were not attained. The ISA Consensus Panel reconvened in 2010 to update hematologic and organ response criteria. The panel felt that any new criteria should be validated in a large patient population. Thus, we systematically gathered from 7 referral centers in Europe and in the United States a cohort of 649 patients with systemic AL amyloidosis who had been evaluated for hematologic and organ responses at diagnosis and 6 months after treatment initiation, excluding patients who died earlier. At diagnosis, 430 patients (66%) had heart involvement, 377 (58%) had NT-proBNP ≥650 ng/L, 455 (70%) had renal involvement (95, 15%, with glomerular filtration rate <30 mL/min) and 100 (15%) had liver involvement. Two-hundred eighty-nine patients (44%) were treated with melphalan and dexamethasone, 118 (18%) received thalidomide based therapy, 73 (11%) underwent autologous stem cell transplant, 35 (5%) were treated with regimens including lenalidomide, 20 (3%) received bortezomib-based therapy, and the rest received other alkylating agents, nucleoside analogues or dexamethasone. The median follow-up of living patients was 24 months, and 233 patients (34%) died. The ability of response criteria to identify patients who died was compared by evaluating the areas under Receiver Operator Characteristic curves based on death at 1 year, and by calculating the Harrell C statistic and the Royston explained variation. Survival was calculated from the time of evaluation of response. We maintained the category of complete response (CR: negative serum and urine immunofixation, normal FLC kappa/lambda ratio and normal marrow studies) and examined candidate criteria for partial (PR) and very good partial responses (VGPR), based on percentage changes or absolute values achieved after treatment of involved (amyloidogenic) FLC (iFLC), and alternatively on the difference between iFLC and uninvolved FLC (dFLC). With respect to cardiac response and progression, NT-proBNP-based criteria were defined as a decrease or an increase of both >30% and >300 ng/L, and a threshold of evaluability based on NT-proBNP baseline level >650 ng/L was chosen. The most powerful criteria for PR were those based on dFLC percent decrease, and a 50% cutoff was preferred because of easier clinical use. Among candidate criteria for VGPR, the best were based on iFLC absolute value achieved after therapy, but the performance of those based on dFLC absolute value was only slightly lower. Therefore, a definition of VGPR based on dFLC (<40 mg/L) was adopted for the sake of harmonization with the dFLC-based definition of PR. The adopted hematologic response criteria and their prognostic significance are reported in Table 1. These criteria identified 4 groups with significantly different survivals (Figure 1). Also the proposed criteria of NT-proBNP response and progression were significantly associated with survival (Figure 2). Our 2010 revised consensus criteria for hematologic response include maintenance of the definition of CR, and with use of dFLC re-casting the definition of PR and introducing a VGPR category, and for cardiac response and progression introducing the use of changes in NT-proBNP levels. In a further analysis we will address the definition of measurable dFLC at baseline and evaluate the applicability of the response criteria to earlier evaluation of response. The revised criteria improve the framework for clinical research in AL. Disclosures: Off Label Use: Thalidomide, lenalidomide, bortezomib for systemic AL amyloidosis. Dispenzieri:The Binding Site: Honoraria. Gertz:Celgene: Honoraria; Millennium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Dimopoulos:Ortho-Biotech: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Millennium: Honoraria. Merlini:Millennium: Honoraria; Ortho-Biotech: Honoraria.

INTRODUCTION: Histologic remission is associated with superior long-term clinical outcomes in ulcerative colitis (UC). VARSITY, the first head-to-head comparison of biologic agents in UC (NCT02497469; EudraCT 2015-000939-33), showed superior clinical remission and endoscopic improvement at Week 52 with vedolizumab (VDZ), a gut-selective, humanized, α 4 β 7 integrin monoclonal antibody, vs adalimumab (ADA), a systemic, human, anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) monoclonal antibody. 1 Both VDZ and ADA were generally safe and well-tolerated. 1 This analysis compared histologic improvements with VDZ vs ADA in VARSITY. METHODS: Patients with moderately to severely active UC were randomized 1:1 to active VDZ intravenous (IV) infusions (300 mg)/placebo subcutaneous (SC) injections or placebo IV/active ADA SC (160/80/40 mg). Prespecified histologic exploratory endpoints included histologic remission (Geboes score < 2 or Robarts Histopathology Index [RHI] score < 3) and minimal histologic disease activity (Geboes score < 3.2 or RHI score < 5) at Week 14 and Week 52. Histologic remission was also assessed based on previous anti-TNF use. RESULTS: A total of 769 patients received ≥1 dose of VDZ (n = 383) or ADA (n = 386). Median (range) duration of exposure was 477 (127, 630) days for VDZ and 420 (71, 454) days for ADA. Mean (standard deviation) baseline histologic disease activity was similar between groups (Geboes: VDZ, 15.0 [4.92]; ADA, 15.1 [5.03]; RHI: VDZ, 19.5 [8.74]; ADA, 19.6 [8.89]). Histologic remission induced by VDZ at Week 52 was greater than with ADA in the overall (Geboes or RHI), anti-TNF naïve (Geboes or RHI), and anti-TNF failure (RHI only) groups (Table 1). Histologic remission at Week 14 favored VDZ over ADA, with larger differentiation when using RHI (Table 1). VDZ also outperformed ADA in achieving minimal histologic disease activity at Weeks 14 and 52 (Table 1). CONCLUSION: VARSITY showed that use of VDZ, compared with ADA, achieved higher rates of histologic remission and minimal histologic disease activity at Weeks 14 and 52 in patients with moderately to severely active UC. These data support the use of VDZ over ADA in UC.

INTRODUCTION: VARSITY is the first head-to-head trial comparing the efficacy and safety of 2 biologic therapies, vedolizumab (VDZ) and adalimumab (ADA), in patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC). We previously reported significantly higher rates of clinical remission (31.3% vs 22.5%; P = 0.0061) and endoscopic improvement (39.7% vs 27.7%; P = 0.0005) at Week (Wk) 52 with VDZ vs ADA. 1 METHODS: VARSITY was a phase 3b, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, active-controlled study (NCT02497469; EudraCT 2015-000939-33). Here we report the predefined, exploratory endpoints of early clinical response and clinical remission (defined in the Table 1) within the first 14 wks, as well as durable clinical remission (patients in clinical remission at Wk 14 and Wk 52). RESULTS: A total of 769 patients received ≥1 dose of VDZ (n = 383) or ADA (n = 386). Baseline characteristics were comparable between the 2 groups. A trend for separation in clinical response started to emerge at Wk 6 favoring VDZ vs ADA. Clinical response at Wk 14 favored VDZ vs ADA (257 [67.1%] vs 177 [45.9%]; treatment difference 21.2%). More patients achieved clinical remission at Wk 14 on VDZ vs ADA (102 [26.6%] vs 82 [21.2%]; treatment difference 5.3%). Patients on VDZ achieved higher rates of durable clinical remission (70 [18.3%] vs 46 [11.9%]); laboratory results correlated with these findings. Post hoc analyses showed a larger mean (standard deviation) change of C-reactive protein (CRP) from baseline to Wk 14 (−32.88 [155.77] nmol/L VDZ vs −3.35 [260.81] nmol/L ADA) and to Wk 52 (−50.87 [174.76] nmol/L VDZ vs −37.21 [169.17] nmol/L ADA) in favor of VDZ. Greater mean declines in fecal calprotectin (FCP) levels were seen in patients on VDZ compared with ADA (Wk 14: −1,551.3 [6,236.70] mg/kg VDZ vs −1,167.6 [4,647.67] mg/kg ADA; Wk 52: −2,187.3 [7,440.42] mg/kg VDZ vs −1,846.6 [4,560.55] mg/kg ADA). CONCLUSION: Patients on VDZ had numerically higher rates of both clinical response and clinical remission by Wk 14 compared with ADA. Patients on VDZ also achieved higher rates of durable clinical remission compared with ADA. CRP and FCP results correlated with these findings. These data on early clinical response and clinical remission, as well as durable remission, further support the use of VDZ over ADA in patients with moderately to severely active UC.