Go, Ronald S.

7050 Background: Langerhans cell histiocytosis (LCH) is an inflammatory myeloid neoplasm manifesting as unifocal, multifocal, multisystem (MS) or pulmonary LCH (smoking-related). In pediatric LCH, somatic BRAFV600E prevalence is reported at 55-70%, and associated with increased risk of multisystem disease and early treatment failure. Our aim was to describe the prevalence of BRAFV600E mutation and evaluate its association with clinical manifestations and outcomes in adults with LCH. Methods: A retrospective review of adult patients diagnosed with LCH consecutively seen at Mayo Clinic from 2011 to 2020 was performed.Evaluation of association of BRAFV600E mutational status and clinical factors was conducted by the Chi-square test for independence. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed via the Kaplan Meier method and compared with the log-rank test to assess the effect of BRAFV600E. Results: Of the total LCH cohort ( n= 128), 88 patients with available BRAFV600E results were included in the study. Median age at diagnosis was 41y (range 19 - 88); 52.3% were male. 40 (45.5%) patients had a BRAFV600E mutation. Increasing age was associated with BRAFV600E (10-year increase OR 1.42, 95%CI 1.07-1.89; p= 0.017). No correlation was observed between BRAFV600E status and site of disease, risk organ (RO: liver, spleen, marrow) involvement, or MS disease. Patients with BRAFV600E were 4 times more likely to receive targeted therapy ( BRAF inhibitor) than non- BRAFV600E patients ( p= 0.018). After a median follow up of 46 mo (95% CI 30.8-61.2), PFS was similar between BRAFV600E and non- BRAFV600E patients ( p= 0.167). However, patients with BRAFV600E had a worse 3-year OS compared with non- BRAFV600E patients (84% vs. 97.1%, p= 0.027). Patients who died had a significantly higher age at LCH diagnosis (median 62 vs. 38 years; p= 0.0002). Conclusions: In our cohort of adults with LCH, BRAFV600E was less frequent than reported in pediatric literature and was associated with worse OS. The frequency of BRAFV600E was positively correlated with increasing age. Contrary to reports in pediatric LCH, there were no significant associations between BRAFV600E and high-risk or multisystem disease.[Table: see text]

e13573 Background: UpToDate is an evidence based clinical resource designed to provide current clinical information. It is a widely used clinical practice tool providing evidenced based recommendations for diagnosis, management, and therapy. The extent of COI among the UpToDate authors has not been well studied. Our study evaluated the extent of COI of UpToDate authors involved in medical management recommendations for the 10 most common cancers in United States. Methods: We examined the latest November 2020 version of the UpToDate clinical management recommendations for 10 most common cancers. Using disclosure lists, we catalogued COIs for participants in each work group. The categories included: Category I- Grant/Research/Clinical Trial Support; Category II- Consultant/Scientific Advisory Boards/Expert witness; Category III- Speakers Bureau; Category IV- Equity Ownership/Stock Options/Patent holder/Employment/Other Financial Interest; and Category V- Spouse/Domestic Partner/Dependent Potential Conflict. We cataloged the companies/institutions involved in each disclosure. An “episode” describes 1 instance of participation of an individual in 1 company in 1 category for each cancer section. Results: There was a total of 207 authors including section and deputy editors of oncology management section. All authors completed their COI disclosures (100%). 128 (62%) of a total of 207 individuals reported COIs. A total of 1343 episodes were disclosed. We found that each author had an average of 10.49 episodes overall. Authors involved in Category I, II, III, IV & V were 6.3%, 13.5%, 3.2%, 4.7% and 1.6% respectively. 29.36% authors were involved both in Category I and II. A total of 672 company affiliations were associated with COI disclosure. AstraZeneca (6.10%), Merck (4.31%) and Novartis (2.68%) were the companies most frequently reported. The guideline with the maximum episodes (223) was prostate cancer. Conclusions: COIs are prevalent among authors of UpToDate clinical management recommendations. More than ½ of the participants disclosed at least 1 COI, but there appears to be a substantial number of experienced experts without COIs. Further research studies are necessary to determine the impact of these COIs on clinical practice patterns and resource utilization. Distribution of COI and total episodes.[Table: see text]

7049 Background: Langerhans cell histiocytosis (LCH) can manifest as single system (SS) disease, multisystem (MS) disease, or pulmonary LCH (smoking-related). There is a paucity of data on prognostic factors including risk organ (RO) involvement (liver, spleen, and bone marrow) in adult LCH, which we sought to address in this study. Methods: Single-center retrospective study of patients ≥18y diagnosed with LCH from 1998 to 2020. Univariate and multivariate analyses for progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were conducted using age, sex, organ involvement, LCH subtype, year of diagnosis, BRAF V600E status, and treatments. Results: We included 219 patients with LCH; median age 43y (range 19-88), females 51%, SS unifocal (23%), SS multifocal (6%), pulmonary (31%) and MS (40%). Commonly involved organs included lung (53%), bone (42%), skin (24%), pituitary (16%), and CNS (12%). BRAF V600E was positive in 40/88 (46%). Median follow-up duration was 6.1y (95% CI, 5.1- 7.1). On univariate analysis, factors associated with worse PFS were bone LCH, RO involvement, multifocal/MS LCH, and radiation therapy alone; those with worse OS included RO involvement, MS disease, BRAF V600E+, and age ≥45y at diagnosis. In multivariate analysis, BRAF V600E and age ≥45y at diagnosis were associated with worse mortality (Table). Median PFS was not reached (NR-NR) for SS unifocal LCH, 5mo (0-12.7) for SS multifocal LCH, 110mo (84.7-135.3) for pulmonary LCH, and 27mo (17.2-36.8) for MS LCH. 5-year OS was 97.4% for SS unifocal LCH, 100% for SS multifocal LCH, 96.1% for pulmonary LCH, and 79.9% for MS LCH. 41 (18.7%) developed a second primary malignancy (SPM), of which 11 were hematologic neoplasms. There was a trend towards a higher prevalence of SPMs in patients with BRAF V600E (28% vs. 17%; p = 0.22). Conclusions: In our large single-center study, PFS for multifocal and MS LCH was worse than SS unifocal or pulmonary LCH. RO involvement was not associated with outcomes in multivariate analysis. Overall prognosis was excellent for all subtypes except MS LCH. BRAF V600E and older age were associated with worse OS. The prevalence of SPMs was very high and needs to be explored further.[Table: see text]

Abstract Comparative data guiding initial therapy for Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM), an infrequently encountered non‐Hodgkin lymphoma, are sparse. We evaluated three commonly used rituximab‐based frontline regimens: rituximab‐bendamustine (R‐Benda); dexamethasone, rituximab, cyclophosphamide (DRC); and bortezomib, dexamethasone, rituximab (BDR) in 220 treatment‐naïve patients with WM, seen at Mayo Clinic between November 1, 2000 and October 31, 2019. The median follow‐up was 4.5 (95%CI: 4–5) years. The R‐Benda cohort (n = 83) demonstrated superior overall response rate (ORR: 98%), in comparison to DRC (n = 92, ORR: 78%) or BDR (n = 45, ORR: 84%) cohorts, p = 0.003. Similarly, longer progression‐free survival (PFS) was evident with R‐Benda use [median 5.2 vs. 4.3 (DRC) and 1.8 years (BDR), p < 0.001]. The time‐to‐next therapy (TTNT) favored R‐Benda [median, not‐reached, 4.4 (DRC) and 2.6 years (BDR), p < 0.001). These endpoints were comparable between the DRC and BDR cohorts. Overall survival (OS) was similar across the three cohorts, p = 0.77. In a subset analysis of 142 patients genotyped for MYD88 L265P mutation, the ORR, PFS and TTNT were unaffected by the patients' MYD88 signature within each cohort. In conclusion, ORR, PFS and TTNT with R‐Benda are superior compared to DRC or BDR in treatment‐naïve patients with active WM. The patient outcomes with any one of these three regimens are unaffected by the MYD88 L265P mutation status.

Abstract Background The two major types of cold autoimmune hemolytic anemias are cold agglutinin disease (CAD) and paroxysmal cold hemoglobinuria (PCH). In CAD, the cold agglutinin is usually IgM with anti-I specificity. In PCH, the Donath-Landsteiner (DL) antibody is a cold reacting IgG with anti-P specificity. In this study, we describe the clinical and serological characteristics of patients with autoimmune hemolytic anemia positive for both cold agglutinin and DL antibodies. Methods On review of our immunohematology reference laboratory database, we identified patients over a 16-year period (January 2000- March 2016) with the following: i) age ≥18 years, ii) hemoglobin (Hb) &lt;12g/dL, iii) positive direct antiglobulin test (DAT) with hemolysis (increased lactate dehydrogenase/low serum haptoglobin/ elevated indirect bilirubin), and iv) tested for both CAD and DL antibodies. We classified the patients into 3 cohorts. Cohort 1 included patients positive for both cold agglutinin (titer ≥1:64) and DL antibodies. Cohort 2 consisted of patients with DL antibody but no cold agglutinin (titer &lt;1:64), while Cohort 3 was comprised of patients with cold agglutinin but no DL antibody. We evaluated the clinical response based on the GIMEMA (Gruppo Italiano Malattie EMatologiche dell'Adulto) criteria (Barcellini W, et al . Blood 2014) defined as i) complete (CR): hemoglobin ≥12 g/dL with normalization of at least one previously abnormal hemolytic marker; ii) partial (PR): hemoglobin 10-12 g/dL with hemolysis; or iii) none (NR): if any of the above criteria were not met. Results Seven patients had cold autoimmune hemolytic anemia with concomitant cold agglutinin and DL antibodies (Cohort 1). The clinical and serological characteristics are described in table 1. The median age at diagnosis was 68 years (range: 59-78) and the median hemoglobin at onset was 10.3 g/dL (range: 8.2-10.6). Six had red cell agglutination in the blood smear. Two patients had a recent history of infection (1 with Mycoplasma pneumoniae and 1 with upper respiratory tract infection). The median follow-up was 4.8 months (range: 1.0-166.4). Five patients received steroid/other immunosuppressants and two were managed conservatively. The clinical response to treatment was CR in 28.6% patients, PR in 42.9%, and NR in 14.3%. In comparison, Cohort 2 had a 20% CR, 20% PR and 40% NR, while Cohort 3 had a 50% CR, 25% PR and 25% NR, respectively. Conclusion Our study is the first series describing patients with cold autoimmune hemolytic anemia with concomitant cold agglutinin and DL antibodies. In terms of clinical response, patients with negative DL antibodies and cold agglutinin titers &gt;1:64 had better response (50% CR, Cohort 3) to immunosuppressants compared to patients with positive DL antibody (20-30% CR, Cohorts 1 and 2). Large scale studies may be warranted to determine the treatment strategies among patients with concomitant DL and high cold agglutinin titers. Disclosures Kay: Agios: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Tolero Corporation: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding. Winters: Fresenius Kabi USA: Consultancy; Eliaz Therapeutics Inc: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi Inc: Other: Moderated opinion leader's forum; Wiley Blackwell: Employment; Regional Health Inc: Consultancy; Mayo Clinic: Employment; Grifols International SA: Consultancy.

Abstract The utility of systemic light chain (AL) amyloidosis staging systems has been validated for newly diagnosed patients, but their role in restaging after treatment has not been explored. We designed this study to evaluate whether the currently used systems are of prognostic value at 3 and 6 months of starting first-line treatment, and whether stage migration from diagnosis impacts survival. This is a retrospective study including Mayo Clinic patients with AL amyloidosis diagnosed between 1 January 2006 and 30 June 2019; 536 and 204 patients had restaging data for at least 1 system at 3 and 6 months, respectively. Using modified Mayo 2004 staging at 3 months, median overall survival (OSs) were 11.8, 10.8, 4.6, and 1.1 years for stage I, II, IIIa, and IIIb, respectively. Using Mayo 2012, median OSs were 11.8, 9.0, 5.2, and 0.8 years for stage I, II, III, and IV, respectively. Using modified Mayo 2004 staging at 6 months, median OSs were not reached (NR), NR, 5.4, and 0.9 years for stage I, II, IIIa, and IIIb, respectively. Using Mayo 2012, OSs were NR, NR, 4.6, and 0.9 years for stage I, II, III, and IV, respectively. Worsening stage at 3 or 6 months was associated with worse survival than retaining baseline stage. In conclusion, the current staging systems can be used for restaging at 3 and 6 months from treatment initiation. Migration to higher stage predicts poor prognosis.

Background: National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines are the most comprehensive and widely used standard for clinical care in malignant hematology by clinicians and payers in the US. The level of scientific evidence in NCCN guidelines for malignant hematological conditions has not been recently investigated. We describe the distribution of categories of evidence and consensus (EC) among the 10 most common hematologic malignancies with regard to recommendations for staging, initial and salvage therapy, and surveillance. Methods: NCCN uses a system of guideline development distinct from other major professional organizations. The NCCN definitions for EC are: category I, high level of evidence such as randomized controlled trials with uniform consensus; category IIA, lower level of evidence with uniform consensus; category IIB, lower level of evidence without a uniform consensus but with no major disagreement; and category III, any level of evidence but with major disagreement. We compared our results with previously published results from 2011 guidelines. Results: Total recommendations increased by 16.6% from 1160 (2011) to 1353 (2020). Of the 1353 recommendations, Category 1, 2A, 2B and 3 EC were 5%, 91%, 4%, 1% while in 2011 they were 3%, 93%, 4% and 0% respectively. Recommendations with category 1 EC were found in all guidelines, except for Burkitt's Lymphoma. 6.3% of therapeutic recommendations were category 1 EC with the majority (56.4%) pertaining to initial therapy. Guidelines with highest proportions of therapeutic recommendations with category 1 EC were Multiple Myeloma (12.4%), CLL/SLL (6.9%) and AML (5.6%). Between 2011 and 2020, the proportion of category I recommendations increased significantly only in Follicular lymphoma and CLL/SLL. No category 1 EC recommendations existed in staging or surveillance. Conclusion: Recommendations issued in the 2020 NCCN guidelines are largely developed from lower levels of evidence but with uniform expert opinion. Despite the major advances in hematology in the past decade, this is largely unchanged. Our study underscores the urgent need and available opportunities to expand the current evidence base in malignant hematological disorders which forms the platform for clinical practice guidelines. Figure Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Background: Bortezomib, a proteasome inhibitor, has shown efficacy in the treatment of newly diagnosed and relapsed light chain (AL) amyloidosis, and the combination of bortezomib, cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone is a commonly used regimen in AL. Ixazomib is the first oral proteasome inhibitor to be approved, and the combination of ixazomib with cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone is an all oral effective regimen for the treatment of multiple myeloma. This phase 2 trial was designed to evaluate the efficacy of this regimen in patients with AL, who have not received any therapy. Patients and methods: Newly diagnosed patients with biopsy proven AL amyloidosis, with organ involvement requiring therapy, were enrolled if they had measurable disease (Serum immunoglobulin free light chain ≥5 mg/dL AND abnormal serum free light chain ratio) and adequate organ function. Patients with severe organ involvement were excluded (Alkaline phosphatase &gt;750 U/L, creatinine clearance &lt;30 mL/min or NT-ProBNP ≥ 7500 ng/dL). Treatment consisted of ixazomib 4 mg days 1, 8, 15; cyclophosphamide 500 mg PO weekly and dexamethasone 40 mg, weekly for twelve 28-day cycles, followed by ixazomib maintenance (days 1, 8, 15) at the last tolerated dose till progression. The primary objective was to determine the hematologic response rate of ixazomib, used in combination with cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone in patients with previously untreated AL. A one-stage binomial design was utilized to test the null hypothesis that the hematologic response rate is at most 30% against the alternative hypothesis that it is at least 50%, with 85% power and 9% type I error. Results: Thirty-five patients were enrolled, median age was 67 (range 38-78) years; 69% were male. Organ involvement included cardiac in 23 (65.7%), renal in 19 (54.3%), and nervous system involvement in 5 (14.3%). At data cutoff 8 patients still remain on study with a median follow up of 4.4 months for those who are alive. Across the trial a median of 4 cycles (range 0-23) of treatment have been completed; the most common reason for going off study was institution of alternate therapy in 17 patients (63%). The overall hematologic response was 57% (20/35) and included amyloid CR in 5 (14%), VGPR in 9 (26%) and a PR in 6 (17%) patients. Confirmed organ responses have been observed in 5 patients so far, 2 each for cardiac and renal and 1 hepatic. The median PFS and OS have not been reached; 4 patients had hematological progression; 6 patients (17%) have died. Across 193 cycles of treatment administered, dose modification was required in 5, 3, and 10 patients, respectively, for ixazomib, cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone. A grade 3 or higher adverse event (AE), at least possibly attributed to the study drugs, was observed in 41% of patients. The figure shows the maximum grade of adverse events for individual patients seen in more than one patient across the study. Conclusions: The all-oral regimen of ixazomib, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone is active in patients with previously untreated AL amyloidosis with hematologic responses observed in 57% of patients, including complete responses. Organ response has been observed but will likely need longer follow up for accurate assessment, given the delay in organ responses in this disease. Further evaluation of this combination is warranted. Disclosures Gertz: Alnylam: Consultancy; Ionis/Akcea: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Medscape: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; Data Safety Monitoring board from Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy; Johnson and Johnson: Speakers Bureau; DAVA oncology: Speakers Bureau; Advisory Board for Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Advisory Board for Proclara: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; i3Health: Consultancy; Springer Publishing: Patents & Royalties; Amyloidosis Foundation: Research Funding; International Waldenstrom Foundation: Research Funding; NCI SPORE MM: Research Funding; Prothena: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Spectrum: Consultancy, Research Funding; Annexon: Consultancy; Appellis: Consultancy. Kapoor:Celgene: Honoraria; GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Cellectar: Consultancy. Larsen:Janssen Oncology: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Dingli:Apellis: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Sanofi-Genzyme: Consultancy; Rigel: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Research Funding; Alexion: Consultancy; Millenium: Consultancy. Dispenzieri:Janssen: Research Funding; Intellia: Research Funding; Alnylam: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Kumar:Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy; Carsgen: Other, Research Funding; AbbVie: Other: Research funding for clinical trials to the institution, Consulting/Advisory Board participation with no personal payments; Janssen Oncology: Other: Research funding for clinical trials to the institution, Consulting/Advisory Board participation with no personal payments; Genecentrix: Consultancy; Dr. Reddy's Laboratories: Honoraria; Tenebio: Other, Research Funding; Takeda: Other: Research funding for clinical trials to the institution, Consulting/Advisory Board participation with no personal payments; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Oncopeptides: Consultancy, Other: Independent Review Committee; IRC member; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Other: Research funding for clinical trials to the institution, Consulting/Advisory Board participation with no personal payments, Research Funding; Genentech/Roche: Other: Research funding for clinical trials to the institution, Consulting/Advisory Board participation with no personal payments; Celgene/BMS: Other: Research funding for clinical trials to the institution, Consulting/Advisory Board participation with no personal payments; Cellectar: Other; MedImmune: Research Funding.

Background: Multiple myeloma (MM) is a heterogeneous disease that may be evaluated by a broad array of imaging and laboratory techniques to measure disease activity and predict prognosis. FDG PET/CT has been shown to be predictive of patient outcomes throughout the disease course, with several studies demonstrating that PET/CT is an independent prognostic factor for progression free survival and overall survival (OS). We sought to corroborate these findings by specifically examining the prognostic impact of PET/CT in the post-transplant setting. We retrospectively analyzed PET/CT in MM patients after consolidation therapy with autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) and correlated these findings with time to progression (TTP) and OS to assess the impact of day 100 PET/CT findings as an independent prognostic factor. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted on 231 myeloma patients who underwent ASCT between 2003-2016 and had a FDG PET/CT exam available for analysis at an average of day 104 post-transplant. We recorded the findings on PET/CT prior to transplant, where available. PET/CT without evidence of active/residual disease (PET-) was defined per IMWG guidelines (disappearance of every area of increased tracer uptake found on preceding PET/CT, or uptake &lt; mediastinal blood pool, or decrease &lt; surrounding normal tissue). PET/CT indicating active disease (PET+) was defined as any abnormal uptake or incompletely resolved uptake from previous exam. A Kaplan-Meier model was used to estimate median TTP and OS and the 2-sided log-rank test to compare groups. TTP and OS were calculated from the date of ASCT to the date of confirmed disease progression or death, respectively. Outcomes were then compared among patients with a PET/CT versus those without a PET/CT post-ASCT to assess for the presence of selection bias. A proportional hazards fit model was used for multivariate analysis. Results: The median length of follow-up for the entire cohort was 49 months (range: 43-58 mo), median TTP was 18.5 months (95% CI; 15.4-21.8), and median OS was 61.5 months (95% CI; 49-75). Among the entire cohort (n=231), 150 (65%) patients had a positive PET/CT exam at day 100 post-ASCT while 81 (35%) had a negative PET exam. There were 195 (84%) patients with a PET/CT exam prior to ASCT available for comparison, of which 161 (85%) were PET+ and 29 (15%) were PET-. Median time between PET/CT exams was 4.1 months (range 1.4-55). Median TTP among PET+ patients near day 100 was 12.4 months vs. 24 months PET- patients (p&lt;.0001, Fig 1, panel A). Median OS in the PET+ group was 46 months compared to 99 months in the PET- group (p&lt;.0001, Fig 1, panel B). Among patients with a prior PET/CT (195, 84%), median TTP was longer in patients with both exams negative compared to those who were day 100 PET- and previously PET+ (42.6 mo vs. 21.1 mo respectively; p&lt;.0001). TTP was shorter in those who were day 100 PET+ and previously PET- compared to those with persistently PET+ on both exams (4.5 vs. 12.3 mo; p&lt;.0001, Figure 2). Since PET/CT was not routinely ordered post ASCT, we also compared the outcomes between patients getting a PET/CT (n=231) and remaining patients undergoing ASCT (n=1764). Among patients with a day 100 PET/CT vs. those without a PET/CT exam, there was a slightly longer median TTP and OS in the group who did not have a post-ASCT PET/CT. Hazard ratios (HR) after adjusting for disease response (CR at day 100 vs. non-CR) were as follows: TTP PET+ HR 1.76 (1.2-2.4; p=0.003), OS PET+ HR 1.8 (1.2-2.6; p=.0016). Conclusions: MM is a heterogeneous disease that relies on different assessments for determining response, activity, and prognosis. Among these, PET/CT has shown promise in predicting prognosis, independent of disease state and conventional prognostic factors. Our study confirms these findings, demonstrating that an abnormal PET/CT near day 100 post-transplant is predictive of shorter TTP and OS. This prognostic significance remained even after adjusting for disease response (CR vs. non-CR), which could be explained by the sometimes patchy distribution of myeloma in the bone marrow, and identification of extramedullary disease by PET/CT. Taken together, these results demonstrate a possible role for incorporating PET/CT in the post-transplant setting as an independent prognostic variable in stratifying disease risk. Disclosures Dingli: Apellis: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Rigel: Consultancy; Millenium: Consultancy; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Research Funding; Sanofi-Genzyme: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Alexion: Consultancy. Gertz:NCI SPORE MM: Research Funding; International Waldenstrom Foundation: Research Funding; Amyloidosis Foundation: Research Funding; Springer Publishing: Patents & Royalties; i3Health: Consultancy; Advisory Board for Proclara: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Advisory Board for Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; DAVA oncology: Speakers Bureau; Johnson and Johnson: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy; Data Safety Monitoring board from Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; Medscape: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy; Appellis: Consultancy; Annexon: Consultancy; Spectrum: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Prothena: Consultancy; Alnylam: Consultancy; Ionis/Akcea: Consultancy. Dispenzieri:Janssen: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Alnylam: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Intellia: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Kapoor:Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria; Cellectar: Consultancy; GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding. Lin:Sorrento: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Vineti: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy, Research Funding; Juno: Consultancy; Legend BioTech: Consultancy; Merck: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Gamida Cells: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Research Funding. Kumar:Amgen: Consultancy, Other: Research funding for clinical trials to the institution, Consulting/Advisory Board participation with no personal payments, Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy; Janssen Oncology: Other: Research funding for clinical trials to the institution, Consulting/Advisory Board participation with no personal payments; Genentech/Roche: Other: Research funding for clinical trials to the institution, Consulting/Advisory Board participation with no personal payments; Dr. Reddy's Laboratories: Honoraria; Novartis: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Oncopeptides: Consultancy, Other: Independent Review Committee; IRC member; AbbVie: Other: Research funding for clinical trials to the institution, Consulting/Advisory Board participation with no personal payments; Takeda: Other: Research funding for clinical trials to the institution, Consulting/Advisory Board participation with no personal payments; Cellectar: Other; Tenebio: Other, Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Celgene/BMS: Other: Research funding for clinical trials to the institution, Consulting/Advisory Board participation with no personal payments; Carsgen: Other, Research Funding; Genecentrix: Consultancy; MedImmune: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding.