Saleh, Abdullah S. Al

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

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

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

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

AbstractThe role of consolidation post autologous stem cell transplant in light chain amyloidosis is not well defined. We retrospectively identified patients who had light chain amyloidosis and underwent autologous stem cell transplant at the Mayo Clinic. Consolidation was defined as any treatment given after the day 100 evaluation post‐transplant to maintain or deepen the response. We identified 471 patients, of whom 72 (15%) received consolidation. Patients receiving consolidation had more advanced disease (Mayo 2012 stage ≥II in 67% vs 52%, P = .02), and had lower day 100 response rates (very good partial response or better: 35% vs 84%, P < .001). After consolidation, rates of very good partial response improved from 24% to 28%, and rates of complete response improved from 11% to 40%. Patients with less than very good partial response who received consolidation, had better progression‐free survival (median of 22.4 vs 8.8 months, P < .001), and the benefit was greater in those who deepened their response (median of 41 vs 8.8 months, P < .001). In patients with less than very good partial response, there was a trend for better overall survival in patients who responded to consolidation (median of 125.8 vs 74.4 months, P = .07). In patients who achieved very good partial response, or better, at day 100 post autologous stem cell transplant, consolidation did not improve progression‐free or overall survival. Consolidation after autologous stem cell transplant for light chain amyloidosis improves progression‐free survival for patients who achieve less than very good partial response.

Background:Venetoclax is a B cell lymphoma 2 (BCL‐2) inhibitor that has shown activity as a single agent and in combination with other therapies in patients with multiple myeloma, particularly those harboring t(11;14) associated with high BCL‐2 expression. Although early clinical trial data is encouraging (monotherapy response rate of 21% and 40% amongst t(11;14) and a response rate of 97% when used in combination with bortezomib and dexamethasone), data on outcomes in patients treated outside of clinical trial setting are sparse.Aims:We aimed to identify the efficacy of venetoclax in patients with multiple myeloma treated outside clinical trial.Methods:We conducted a retrospective review of all patients with multiple myeloma treated with venetoclax between December 2016 and February of 2019 at the Mayo Clinic outside of a clinical trial setting.Results:A total of 29 patients that were treated with venetoclax for relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma were identified. Characteristics of the cohort are reported in Table 1. Two thirds of the cohort had t(11;14) detected on cytogenetic studies and 48% (n = 14) had presence of high risk abnormalities. Median number of prior therapies was 6 (range 1–15) and 21% (n = 6) of patients had received ≥10 prior lines of therapy. Eighty three percent (n = 24) of patients had received prior autologous transplant and 76% (n = 22) were penta refractory or exposed. Median time from diagnosis of myeloma to initiation of venetoclax therapy was 5.3 years (range 0.8–23.6 years).Venetoclax used as monotherapy or a doublet in combination with dexamethasone in 59% (n = 17) of patients and a triplet or quadruplet in 41% (n = 12) given at 800 mg (55%) or 400 mg (35%) daily. Triplet and quadruplet regimens combined venetoclax with a variety of proteasome inhibitors or daratumumab. One patient had a quadruplet of venetoclax, carfilzomib, pomalidomide and dexamethasone. 93% (n = 27) patients were refractory to at least on proteasome inhibitor and immunomodulatory drug. Dose titration and escalation was used in 31% (n = 9) of patients. None of the patients experienced tumor lysis syndrome. At last follow‐up 55% (n = 16) of patients remain on venetoclax therapy. Overall response rate in the 24 patients evaluable for response was 46% (21% CR, 8% VGPR, 17% PR). Patients with t(11;14) had a numerically higher response rate than those without (50% vs 33%, p = 0.64). Patients with high risk cytogenetic abnormalities were less likely to respond (ORR 69% for standard risk vs 18% for high risk, p = 0.019). Median time to response was 2.6 months (range 1.1–6.9 months). Median duration of response was 5.2 months (range 2.2–12.9 months). After a median follow‐up time of 7.2 months for the cohort, the median PFS and OS are 5.8 and 14.6 months, respectively, Figure 1A/B. High risk cytogenetic abnormalities were associated with a shorter PFS (median PFS 3 months vs 14 months for standard risk, p = 0.002). The outcomes with venetoclax monotherapy and combination therapies are reported separately in the Table.Summary/Conclusion:Venetoclax is an effective oral agent in relapsed and/or refractory myeloma and can produce deep and durable responses in heavily pretreated patients. Further studies are needed to elucidate its role earlier in the disease and its effectiveness in combination with other anti‐myeloma therapies.image