Lonial, Sagar

LBA3 Background: Bortezomib (btz) combined with lenalidomide (len) and dexamethasone (dex) (VRd) is a standard initial therapy for NDMM. Carfilzomib (cfz), a next-generation proteasome inhibitor, in combination with len-dex (KRd) has shown higher efficacy in phase II trials. This randomized phase III trial was designed to examine if KRd improves progression free survival (PFS) compared to VRd in NDMM (current results), and whether indefinite maintenance with len improves OS compared with two-year maintenance (to be analyzed once data matures). Methods: Patients (Pts) with NDMM, were randomized to receive VRd or KRd in a 1:1 fashion for 36 weeks followed by a second randomization (1:1) to indefinite versus two years of len maintenance. Pts without del17p, t (14;16), t(14;20), plasma cell leukemia or high-risk GEP70 profile, were enrolled. VRd arm included btz 1.3 mg/m2 on days(d) 1, 4, 8, and 11 (d 1, 8 for cycles 9-12), len 25 mg d 1-14, and dex 40 mg d 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, 12 of a 3-week (wk) cycle for 12 cycles, while pts in the KRd arm received cfz 36 mg/m2 d 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16 with len 25 mg daily on d 1-21 and dex 40 mg wkly, in 4 wk cycles for 9 cycles. Maintenance included len 15mg d 1-21 every 4 wks. The study was designed to detect a hazard ratio (HR)=0.75 with 80% power at 1-sided 2.5% alpha and 399 PFS events (progression or death regardless of intervening therapy). Results: The study accrued 1087 pts (VRd=542, KRd=545). The median age was 65y. Treatment, efficacy, and toxicity data are in the table. At the second of 3 planned interim analyses, with PFS HR=1.04 (95% CI, 0.8 to 1.3, p=0.74), futility was met. Median PFS was VRd=34.4m and KRd=34.6m; no differences were seen based on age (<65 or ≥65), presence or absence of t(4;14) or ISS stage. The three-year OS (95% CI) was similar: VRd 84% (80 to 88) and KRd 86% (82 to 89). Conclusions: In this randomized phase 3 trial, KRd did not improve PFS compared with VRd in NDMM. A significantly higher rate of cardio-pulmonary and renal toxicity was observed with KRd, while neuropathy rates were higher with VRd. VRd remains the standard triplet induction regimen in standard and intermediate risk NDMM, and a suitable backbone for 4 drug combinations. Clinical trial information: NCT01863550 . [Table: see text]

Purpose: Multiple myeloma (MM) treatment has changed tremendously, with significant improvement in patient out-comes. One group with a suboptimal benefit is patients with high-risk cytogenetics, as tested by conventional karyotyping or fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). Methodology for these tests has been published, but not necessarily standardized. Methods: We address variability in the testing and reporting methodology for MM cytogenetics in the United States using the ongoing African American Multiple Myeloma Study (AAMMS). We evaluated clinical and cytogenetic data from 1,221 patients (1,161 with conventional karyotyping and 976 with FISH) tested between 1998 and 2016 across 58 laboratories nationwide. Results: Interlab and intralab variability was noted for the number of cells analyzed for karyotyping, with a significantly higher number of cells analyzed in patients in whom cytogenetics were normal (P 5.0025). For FISH testing, CD138-positive cell enrichment was used in 29.7% of patients and no enrichment in 50% of patients, whereas the remainder had unknown status. A significantly smaller number of cells was analyzed for patients in which CD138 cell enrichment was used compared with those without such enrichment (median, 50 v 200; P, .0001). A median of 7 loci probes (range, 1-16) were used for FISH testing across all laboratories, with variability in the loci probed even within a given laboratory. Chromosome 13–related abnormalities were the most frequently tested abnormality (n5956; 97.9%), and t(14;16) was the least frequently tested abnormality (n 5 119; 12.2%). Conclusions: We report significant variability in cytogenetic testing across the United States for MM, potentially leading to variability in risk stratification, with possible clinical implications and personalized treatment approaches.

8503 Background: Outcomes are poor in triple-class exposed RRMM patients (pts) who progress on immunomodulatory agents (IMiDs), proteasome inhibitors (PIs), and CD38 antibodies (mAbs). Ide-cel, a BCMA targeted CAR T cell therapy, showed promising tolerability and efficacy in RRMM pts in the phase I CRB-401 study ( NEJM2019;380:1726). We present primary efficacy and safety data from the pivotal phase II KarMMa trial of ide-cel in RRMM (NCT03361748). Methods: Enrolled pts had ≥3 prior regimens (including IMiD, PI, and CD38 mAb) and were refractory to their last regimen per IMWG criteria. After lymphodepletion (cyclophosphamide 300 mg/m2+ fludarabine 30 mg/m2 x 3), pts received 150─450 × 106 CAR+ T cells (target dose range). Endpoints included overall response rate (ORR; primary), complete response (CR) rate, duration of response (DoR), and PFS. Results: Of 140 pts enrolled, 128 received ide-cel. Median age was 61 y; median no. of prior regimens was 6; 84% were triple- and 26% were penta-refractory. Most pts (88%) had bridging therapy. At data cutoff (16 Oct 2019), median follow up was 11.3 mo. ORR was 73% and median PFS was 8.6 mo; both increased with higher dose (Table). All subgroups had an ORR ≥50%, including older and high-risk pts. Most common any-grade (Gr) toxicities were cytopenias (97%) and cytokine release syndrome (CRS; 84%). CRS was mainly Gr 1/2; 5 pts (5%) had Gr 3, 1 had Gr 4, and 1 had Gr 5 (at 300 × 106). Neurotoxicity developed in 23 pts (18%); 4 (3%) Gr 3 and 0 Gr ≥4. Median peak CAR+ T cell expansion occurred at 11 d. Expansion was higher in responders and parameters (AUC0−28d, Cmax) increased with higher dose, with exposure overlap across doses. Persistence was durable, with CAR+ T cells detected in 29/49 (59%) and 4/11 pts (36%) at 6 and 12 mo. Conclusions: Ide-cel demonstrated deep, durable responses in heavily pretreated RRMM pts. Efficacy and safety reflected prior reports and support a favorable ide-cel clinical benefit-risk profile across the target dose range. Clinical trial information: NCT03361748 . [Table: see text]

Abstract Background: Outcome of patients with Multiple Myeloma (MM) is influenced by a variety of baseline prognostic factors, most importantly presence of chromosomal abnormalities. Nevertheless, these biologically determined risk-factors do not account for a significant subset of patients whose outcome varies greatly from what one expects based on the underlying prognostic characteristics. We have previously demonstrated that outcome in myeloma is dictated not only by baseline risk-factors but also response to therapy (R2, risk and response dependent outcome). We studied response duration following initial therapy as a prognostic factor for long-term overall survival in myeloma in three ECOG clinical trials that enrolled patients with newly diagnosed myeloma. Methods: Data from three studies with long-term, mature follow up were analyzed: E9486, E5A93, and E1A00. The regimens used in these studies included Thalidomide/Dex, Dex, VBMCP, VBMCP + alpha-IFN, and VBMCP + Cyclophosphamide. Among progressed/relapsed patients, the association between time to progression and overall survival since relapse was explored using Cox proportional hazards model, in which time to progression was analyzed as a continuous variable. In addition, the association between response duration and overall survival since relapse was explored similarly among relapsed responders. Treatment effect and calendar time of diagnosis have been adjusted in the model. Also, to determine the best cut off point associated with the best differentiation of patients with short OS after relapse, an outcome-oriented method using log likelihood value was applied. Results: Among the 1136 patients enrolled in the three studies, 625 patients who have documented disease relapse have been included in the current study. Of these, 471 patients had responded to the treatment before relapse. Only 33 patients are alive as of Dec., 2007. For all 625 patients, the time to progression (continuous variable) was significantly associated with overall survival from the time of relapse/progression (P&lt;0.0001), with hazard ratio of 0.77 (95%CI: 0.72~0.81) at time to progression increasing by 1 year (i.e., the later the progression/relapse, the lower the risk). The best cutoff point of the time to progression is 3 yrs (the 75th percentile). The hazard ratio of patients progressing within 3 yrs since randomization vs. after 3 yrs is 2.4 (95% CI: 1.9 ~ 2.9) and P-value&lt;0.0001. The median OS from relapse was 0.96 years for the former vs. 2.43 years in the latter group (Figure). Among the 471 relapsed responders, the response duration (continuous variable) was also significantly associated with overall survival since relapse (P&lt;0.0001), with hazard ratio of 0.76 (95%CI: 0.70~0.81) at response duration increasing by 1 year (i.e., the longer the response duration, the lower the risk). The effects seen with each regimen are detailed in the table. The best cutoff point of the response duration is 2 yrs (median). The hazard ratio of patients with response duration less than or equal to 2 yrs vs. more than 2 yrs is 2.1 (95% CI: 1.7 ~ 2.6) and P-value&lt;0.0001. Conclusions: Among patients treated with alkylator based therapy, the duration of response from the initial therapy is an important predictor of the subsequent outcome among patients with myeloma. Given the heterogeneity of the disease and imprecise predictive ability of the known baseline prognostic factors, the duration of response to initial therapy should be taken into account, to deliver risk and response-adapted therapy. The prognostic value of this feature across different clinical trials, points towards the role of underlying disease biology, both disease aggressiveness and ability to rapidly develop resistance to therapies as two important determinants of outcome. Table 1: Hazard ratio of overall survival since relapse for patients progressed within 3 yrs since randomization vs. after 3 yrs in each treatment arm Treatment arm Treatment arm HR (95% CI) P-value TTP&lt;=3yrs vs. &gt;3 yrs Thal/Dex N/A N/A Dex 0.4 (0.05, 3.9) 0.46 VBMCP(E5A93+ E9486) 1.9 (1.4, 2.7) 0.0001 VBMCP+alpha2IFN (E5A93+ E9486) 3.0 (2.2, 4.1) &lt;0.0001 VBMCP+CYCLOPHOSPHAMIDE 2.3 (1.5, 3.6) 0.0001 Response duration &lt;=2 yrs vs. &gt;2 yrs Thal/Dex 0.2 (0.003, 18.5) 0.51 Dex 0.15 (0.02, 0.98) 0.048 VBMCP(E5A93+ E9486) 1.7 (1.2, 2.3) 0.0009 VBMCP+alpha2IFN (E5A93+ E9486) 3.0(2.1, 4.3) &lt;0.0001 VBMCP+CYCLOPHOSPHAMIDE 2.1 (1.4, 3.3) 0.006 Figure 1: Overall survival since relapse between patients progressed within 3 yrs since randomization vs. after 3 yrs. Figure 1:. Overall survival since relapse between patients progressed within 3 yrs since randomization vs. after 3 yrs.

Abstract p90 Ribosomal S6 Kinase 2 (p90RSK2) is a substrate of ERK and plays an active role in anti-apoptosis signaling and cell cycle regulation. Our proteomics studies revealed that p90RSK2 is not only activated but also tyrosine-phosphorylated in hematopoietic cells expressing constitutively activated leukemogenic FGFR3 mutants. FGFR3 is a receptor-tyrosine kinase that responds to fibroblast growth factor (FGF). Recent studies have suggested that FGFR3 may play a significant role in the pathogenesis and disease progression of some hematopoietic malignancies including t(4;14)(p16.3;q32.3) multiple myeloma, which is associated with dysregulation of FGFR3. We found that the MEK1 inhibitor U0126 effectively inhibited RSK2 activation induced by FGFR3, suggesting that FGFR3 activates RSK2 through the MEK/ERK pathway. Interestingly, FGFR3-dependent tyrosine phosphorylation at Y529 was required for phosphorylation and activation of the Ser/Thr kinase RSK2 by ERK. By using a specific phospho-RSK2 (Y529) antibody, we identified FGFR3 as the direct tyrosine kinase that phosphorylates RSK2 at Y529 in an in vitro kinase assay, which only contains purified recombinant active FGFR3 and RSK2 proteins. Substitution of Y529 in RSK2 attenuates inactive ERK binding to RSK2, which is prior to and required for ERK-dependent phosphorylation and activation of RSK2. In addition, reconstitution of RSK2 phosphorylation at Y529 consequently enhanced inactive ERK binding by a GST pull down, suggesting that phosphorylation at Y529 by FGFR3 facilitates ERK binding to RSK2, which is a sequential event and precedes inactive ERK binding. These observations support a novel two-step model that FGFR3 activates RSK2 by both assisting inactive ERK binding via tyrosine phosphorylation of RSK2 at Y529 and activating the MEK/ERK pathway. Moreover, we observed that RSK2 is specifically phosphorylated at Y529 and activated in FGFR3 expressing various human t(4;14) positive MM cell lines. Targeted down-regulation of RSK2 by siRNA induced significant apoptosis in FGFR3-expressing human myeloma cell lines including OPM1 and KMS11. In addition, a specific RSK inhibitor fmk induced significant apoptosis in t(4;14) positive human myeloma cells including KMS11, OPM1, LP1 and KMS18, but not in control t(4;14) negative myeloma cell lines including ANBL6 and U266. Similar results were obtained by using another RSK specific and potent inhibitor BI-D1870. Furthermore, we observed that fmk induced significant apoptosis in primary CD138-positive, FGFR3-expressing myeloma cells from a t(4;14) positive multiple myeloma patient, but not in the control CD138-negative cells from the same patient, nor primary samples from a t(4;14)-negative patient as a control. Together, these data not only support our model that RSK2 is a critical signaling effector of FGFR3 in hematopoietic transformation, but also provide “proof of principle” for the therapeutic potential of RSK2 inhibitors such as fmk in treatment of t(4;14) positive, FGFR3-expressing multiple myeloma with minimal non-specific cytotoxicity.

TPS8057 Background: Multiple myeloma (MM) is the second most prevalent blood cancer, representing approximately 1% of all cancers. Although overall survival has improved in recent years due to new approved agents, the vast majority of MM patients (pts) ultimately stop responding to treatment. Moreover, about a quarter of MM pts characterized as “high risk” experience limited benefit from existing treatments. Seminal genomic sequencing research efforts, such as the MMRF CoMMpass study, have highlighted that a large number of MM cases harbor potentially actionable oncogenic molecular alterations and published reports on small numbers of cases suggest that Precision Medicine (PM) interventions clinically targeting such actionable drivers may benefit MM pts. These results suggest that PM approaches in MM are possible and should be further studied clinically. To that end, we have launched MyDRUG, a master protocol aimed at developing new myeloma regimens based on individual pt’s genomics. Methods: This study is a Phase I-II, multicenter master protocol in functional high risk MM patients (i.e patients having progressed from baseline treatment within 18 months without maintenance or 3 years on maintenance) with 1-3 prior lines of therapy. Patients are screened for actionable genomic alterations on the CLIA-grade MI-ONCOSEQ platform. Patients with actionable alterations are assigned to the appropriate targeted agent used in combination with a backbone regimen ixazomib, pomalidomide and dexamethasone (IPd), whereas patients without such alterations go on an immune arm (see Table). Inclusion criteria include measurable disease (as measured by M-protein and FLC) and acceptable hematologic and metabolic functions. A maximum of 12 evaluable pts will be accrued onto the phase I portion of each arm and an additional 21 evaluable phase II pts will be accrued onto each arm for a total of 27 evaluable pts at the MTD combination dose. The primary objective of the study is to evaluate ORR per IMWG consensus criteria. Secondary objectives are to assess adverse events (AEs), progression-free survival, and overall survival (OS). Experimental correlative aims include assessing molecular or clonal response, molecular and immune signatures of resistance/response, MRD. Clinical trial information: NCT03732703. [Table: see text]

TPS8052 Background: The most common translocation in multiple myeloma (MM) is t(11;14)(q13;q32), present in approximately 20% of cases. MM cells with t(11;14) usually have a favorable high BCL-2 level and inferior outcomes compared to standard risk MM. Venetoclax (VEN) is a potent, selective, orally available small-molecule BCL-2 inhibitor that induces cell death in MM cell lines and primary samples. VEN has single agent activity in relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM) with an acceptable safety profile, especially in t(11;14) MM; however, non- t(11;14) MM patients may benefit from single agent VEN and VEN incorporated in multi-agent RRMM regimens. Dexamethasone (d) promotes Bcl-2 dependence in MM resulting in sensitivity to VEN and this combination with bortezomib (Vd-VEN) has an acceptable safety profile with high response rates in heavily pre-treated MM. Combination therapy with daratumumab and bortezomib (DVd) has become a standard of care in RRMM. Our hypotheses are that the addition of VEN will improve upon this standard and be most effective in the t(11;14) positive subset. Methods: Eligibility criteria include RRMM with measurable disease, not bortezomib refractory, platelet count > 100K. t(11;14) is an integral biomarker with status (positive or negative) established at registration. After a Ph1 study to determine the recommended phase 2 VEN dose, patients are randomized to DVd +/- VEN [stratified by prior lines of therapy and R-ISS]. The primary Ph2 objectives are to compare 8-cycle minimal residual disease (MRD) negative rate and to inform the role of t(11;14) as a biomarker. The Ph2 design proposed by Freidlin et al. follows a decision algorithm as outlined in the table below. Simulations were run to establish an optimal sample size given various parameters including biomarker prevalence and power to make appropriate decisions for a Ph3 design. Target Ph2 accrual is 240 patients with a 1/3 positive:2/3 negative t(11;14) split. Clinical trial information: NCT03701321. [Table: see text]

8014 Background: TCR-MM is defined as being refractory to immunomodulatory agents, proteasome inhibitors, and anti-CD38 mAbs, representing an urgent unmet medical need with a median OS of 3-5 months( Pick M et al, Eur J Haem 2018; Gandhi U et al, ASH 2018). Sd has shown a 26.2% overall response rate (ORR) in 122 patients (pts) with TCR-MM in the Phase 2b STORM study ( Chari A et al, ASH 2018). Here, we evaluate the OS of pts in the STORM study with Sd and in pts with bortezomib, carfilzomib, lenalidomide, pomalidomide, and daratumumab (“penta”)-exposed, TCR-MM from an observational cohort not receiving Sd. Methods: Data were drawn from STORM and a retrospective cohort from the nationally representative Flatiron Health Analytic Database (FHAD). All pts from both sources had penta-exposed TCR-MM. In order to align study populations, OS was evaluated in pts in STORM whose first therapy after their MM reached TCR status was Sd and in pts in the FHAD who received ≥1 therapy after their MM reached TCR status. The index date for this evaluation was the start date of treatment after their MM reached TCR status. A Cox proportional hazards regression model was performed to assess the survival impact of Sd. In STORM, ORR was assessed by an Independent Review Committee based on IMWG criteria. Results: In the FHAD, 69 pts with TCR-MM were identified. Characteristics of the two groups of pts were similar, except that pts in STORM were more heavily pretreated, had a higher frequency of high-risk MM, a longer time since initial diagnosis of MM, and higher baseline hemoglobin and platelet values. Among the 122 pts in STORM, 64 received Sd as their first therapy after their MM became TCR, and ORR was 32.8%. Among the 69 pts from FHAD, 37 received ≥1 therapy after their MM became TCR. Median OS (N = 64) was 10.4 months for pts receiving Sd in STORM and 5.2 months (N = 37) for pts not receiving Sd in FHAD (HR = 0.49, p = 0.0241). Conclusions: The prognosis of TCR-MM in the real-world population appears very poor. Within the limits of this analysis, median OS of pts receiving Sd as their first therapy after their MM becomes TCR is significantly better than those not receiving Sd, suggesting that Sd may be associated with an OS benefit in pts with TCR-MM. Clinical trial information: NCT02336815.

8006 Background: IBER is a novel cereblon E3 ligase modulator (CELMoD) with enhanced tumoricidal and immunostimulatory activities. Preclinically, IBER overcomes immunomodulatory drug (IMiD) resistance and has synergy with daratumumab (DARA), bortezomib (BORT), and DEX. Methods: A phase 1b/2a multicenter, open-label, dose-escalation study evaluated the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D), safety, and preliminary efficacy of IBER. Eligible pts had RRMM and must have received ≥ 2 prior regimens including lenalidomide (LEN) and/or pomalidomide (POM), and a proteasome inhibitor (PI). All pts had progressed on or within 60 days of last MM therapy. Escalating doses of IBER were given on days 1–21, in combination with DEX 40 mg (20 mg in pts age > 75 years) on days 1, 8, 15, and 22, of each 28-day cycle. Dose escalation was reviewed by a dose escalation committee. Results: As of Jan 2019,58 pts received IBER + DEX. Median age was 64.5 years (range 33–79), and median number of prior regimens was 5 (2–12). Prior therapies included autologous stem cell transplant (79%), LEN (100%), POM (69%), PIs (100%), and DARA (66%). IBER dose ranged from 0.3 to 1.2 mg; MTD/RP2D was not reached. Median duration of therapy was 12+ weeks (range 4–109). Grade 3–4 adverse events (AEs) were reported in 41 (72%) pts and were not related to dose. Grade 3–4 neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, neuropathy, and fatigue occurred in 26%, 11%, 2%, and 0% pts, respectively. Three pts discontinued treatment due to AEs. Clinical activity occurred early and was observed across all dose levels (Table); 20 of 51 pts remain on treatment (2–27+ cycles). Conclusions: IBER + DEX showed favorable efficacy and safety in heavily pretreated pts with RRMM who failed multiple prior therapies. This study is ongoing, including combinations of IBER with DARA or BORT. Clinical trial information: NCT02773030. [Table: see text]