Merlini, Giampaolo

Background: The extent of cardiac involvement has a major impact on clinical outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed light chain (AL) amyloidosis. Here, we present the hematologic responses, major organ deterioration progression-free survival (MOD-PFS) and event-free survival (MOD-EFS), and organ responses by cardiac stage in patients with newly diagnosed AL amyloidosis treated with cyclophosphamide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (VCd) with or without daratumumab subcutaneous (DARA SC) in the ANDROMEDA trial (NCT03201965). Methods: Key eligibility criteria included newly diagnosed AL amyloidosis with measurable hematologic disease, ≥1 involved organ, cardiac stage I-IIIA (based on the European Modification of the Mayo staging system), eGFR ≥20 mL/min, and absence of symptomatic multiple myeloma. Patients were randomized (1:1) to receive DARA-VCd or VCd alone. All patients received bortezomib (1.3 mg/m2 SC weekly), cyclophosphamide (300 mg/m2 oral [PO] or intravenous [IV] weekly [500 mg maximum]), and dexamethasone (20-40 mg PO or IV weekly) for six 28-day cycles. DARA SC (1800 mg, co-formulated with recombinant human hyaluronidase PH20 in 15 mL) was administered by injection weekly in Cycles 1-2, every 2 weeks in Cycles 3-6, and every 4 weeks thereafter for up to 24 cycles. Disease evaluations occurred every 4 weeks (Cycles 1-6) and every 8 weeks (after Cycle 7) until major organ deterioration, hematologic progression, death, end of study, or withdrawal. The primary endpoint was overall (ie, at any time) hematologic complete response (CR) rate. Secondary endpoints included MOD-PFS, MOD-EFS, organ response rate, time to hematologic response, survival, and safety. Analyses of hematologic CR and MOD-PFS were performed on the intent-to-treat analysis set; cardiac response analyses were based on patients who were evaluable for cardiac response, defined as patients with baseline NT-ProNBP value ≥650 ng/L or baseline NYHA class 3 or 4 and received at least 1 administration of study treatment. Patients without a baseline assessment or post-baseline assessment were censored at randomization for the MOD-PFS analysis. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize overall CR rate and organ response rate. Hazard ratios and corresponding 95% confidence intervals were estimated based on Cox proportional hazard model. Results: A total of 388 patients were randomized to receive DARA-VCd (n=195) or VCd alone (n=193). Baseline characteristics were well balanced between treatment groups. The median age was 64 years and the proportions of patients with cardiac stage I, II, and III were 23%, 40%, and 37%, respectively. The median duration of treatment was 9.6 months for DARA-VCd and 5.3 months for VCd. Median follow-up was 11.4 months (range, 0.03-21.3+). Baseline characteristics were generally balanced across cardiac stages, except increasing cardiac stage was associated with older age (≥65 years), worse Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, more advanced renal failure (CrCl ≤30), and functionally worse heart failure (NYHA IIIA). Hematologic CR rates were higher in the DARA-VCd group than in the VCd group in patients with cardiac stages I, II, and III at baseline (Table). Cardiac and renal response rates at 6 months were also higher in the DARA-VCd group regardless of cardiac stage at baseline (Table). The hazard ratios (HRs) for MOD-PFS were 0.33, 0.55 and 0.66 for cardiac stages I, II and III, respectively, favoring DARA-VCd. Corresponding HRs for MOD-EFS were 0.24, 0.39, and 0.48, respectively. Rates of any grade adverse events (AEs) were similar in patients with and without cardiac involvement at baseline. Across both treatment arms, rates of serious treatment-emergent AEs were higher in patients with cardiac involvement at baseline than in those without. Conclusions: The benefit of DARA-VCd was retained over VCd alone across cardiac stages for hematologic CR, MOD-PFS, MOD-EFS, and organ responses. Disclosures Minnema: Kite, a Gilead Company: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Other: travel support, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy; Servier: Consultancy. Dispenzieri:Alnylam: Research Funding; Intellia: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Comenzo:Unum: Consultancy; Prothena: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Caleum: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding. Kastritis:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Genesis Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Wechalekar:Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel; Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Advisory; Caelum: Other: Advisory. Witteles:Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Alnylam Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Maurer:Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Alnylam: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Ionis: Research Funding; Eidos: Research Funding; Akcea: Research Funding. Tran:Janssen: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Qin:Janssen: Current Employment. Vasey:Janssen Research & Development: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Tromp:Janssen: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Weiss:Janssen: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Vermeulen:Janssen: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Jaccard:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: A.J. has served in a consulting or advisory role for Janssen and has received honoraria from, received research funding from, and had travel, accommodations, or other expenses paid for or reimbursed by Janssen., Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: A.J. has served in a consulting or advisory role for Janssen and has received honoraria from, received research funding from, and had travel, accommodations, or other expenses paid for or reimbursed by Celgene., Research Funding.

SummaryThe severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2)‐associated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) is primarily manifested as a respiratory tract infection, but may affect and cause complications in multiple organ systems (cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, kidneys, haematopoietic and immune systems), while no proven specific therapy exists. The challenges associated with COVID‐19 are even greater for patients with light chain (AL) amyloidosis, a rare multisystemic disease affecting the heart, kidneys, liver, gastrointestinal and nervous system. Patients with AL amyloidosis may need to receive chemotherapy, which probably increases infection risk. Management of COVID‐19 may be particularly challenging in patients with AL amyloidosis, who often present with cardiac dysfunction, nephrotic syndrome, neuropathy, low blood pressure and gastrointestinal symptoms. In addition, patients with AL amyloidosis may be more susceptible to toxicities of drugs used to manage COVID‐19. Access to health care may be difficult or limited, diagnosis of AL amyloidosis may be delayed with detrimental consequences and treatment administration may need modification. Both patients and treating physicians need to adapt in a new reality.

8546 Background: The PI bortezomib is commonly used in first-line therapy of AL, but new therapies are needed that are tolerable in the context of multi-organ dysfunction and that, in RRAL, offer improved outcomes following prior bortezomib. Ixazomib is an oral PI, and in TOURMALINE-AL1, the first phase 3 trial conducted in RRAL, while the first primary endpoint of hematologic overall response rate (ORR) was not met, all clinically relevant time-to-event endpoint data favored Ixa-Dex vs PC (Dispenzieri et al, ASH 2019). Methods: RRAL pts with 1–2 prior therapies were randomized (1:1) to Ixa-Dex (n = 85) or PC (n = 83; Dex plus lenalidomide [n = 47], melphalan [n = 24], cyclophosphamide [n = 10], or thalidomide [n = 2]), stratified by cardiac stage, relapsed vs refractory disease, and prior PI exposure. The primary endpoints were hematologic ORR and 2-yr rate of vital organ deterioration or death. We report subgroup analyses of ORR and outcomes by prior PI exposure. Results: Of the 168 pts enrolled, 90 were PI-naïve and 78 PI-exposed (46 and 39 in the Ixa-Dex arm; 44 and 39 in the PC arm) per stratification; 28 and 27 pts in the Ixa-Dex and PC arms had received bortezomib in their last prior line. Hematologic ORR was 63% vs 50% for Ixa-Dex vs PC (odds ratio [OR] 1.71; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.74–3.96) in PI-naïve pts, and 41% vs 51% (OR 0.66; 95% CI 0.27–1.62) in PI-exposed pts. For time-to-event outcomes (Table), hazard ratios (HRs) were 0.46–0.85 in favor of Ixa-Dex vs PC in both PI-naïve and PI-exposed pts. Conclusions: Hematologic ORR was higher with Ixa-Dex vs PC in PI-naïve pts but lower in PI-exposed pts (although not statistically significant), and long-term clinically relevant outcomes favored Ixa-Dex in both groups. Based on HRs, the magnitude of benefit appeared similar or greater in PI-naïve vs PI-exposed pts. Clinical trial information: NCT01659658 . [Table: see text]

Background and purposeHereditary transthyretin (hATTR) amyloidosis causes progressive polyneuropathy resulting from transthyretin (TTR) amyloid deposition throughout the body, including the peripheral nerves. The efficacy and safety of inotersen, an antisense oligonucleotide inhibitor of TTR protein production, were demonstrated in the pivotal NEURO‐TTR study in patients with hATTR polyneuropathy. Here, the long‐term efficacy and safety of inotersen are assessed in an ongoing open‐label extension (OLE) study.MethodsPatients who completed NEURO‐TTR were eligible to enroll in the OLE (NCT02175004). Efficacy assessments included the modified Neuropathy Impairment Score plus seven neurophysiological tests composite score (mNIS + 7), the Norfolk Quality of Life – Diabetic Neuropathy (Norfolk QOL‐DN) questionnaire total score and the Short‐Form 36 Health Survey (SF‐36) Physical Component Summary (PCS) score. Safety and tolerability were also assessed.ResultsOverall, 97% (135/139) of patients who completed NEURO‐TTR enrolled in the OLE. Patients who received inotersen for 39 cumulative months in NEURO‐TTR and the OLE continued to show benefit; patients who switched from placebo to inotersen in the OLE demonstrated improvement or stabilization of neurological disease progression by mNIS + 7, Norfolk QOL‐DN and SF‐36 PCS. No new safety concerns were identified. There was no evidence of increased risk for grade 4 thrombocytopenia or severe renal events with increased duration of inotersen exposure.ConclusionInotersen slowed disease progression and reduced deterioration of quality of life in patients with hATTR polyneuropathy. Early treatment with inotersen resulted in greater long‐term disease stabilization than delayed initiation. Routine platelet and renal safety monitoring were effective; no new safety signals were observed.

Abstract The outcome of patients (pts) with WM, a rare B-cell malignancy, varies widely. The international community has convened a panel to develop a prognostically meaningful staging system for survival after treatment initiation. Toward establishing IPSS, we performed multivariate analyses with bootstrap validation in a series of 587 pts (median age 67, range: 28 to 95, M/F ratio: 1.7) diagnosed between September 1979 and December 2001. Diagnostic and treatment criteria fulfilled recommendations of the 2nd international WM workshop. Front-line treatment was initiated at diagnosis in 69% and 4 mo to 164 mo later in the remaining pts. Criteria for initiation of therapy included cytopenia, constitutional symptoms, organomegaly, hyperviscosity, IgM-related disorders, which pertained to 51%, 44%, 35%, 31% and 13%, respectively. Treatment regimens comprised alkylating agents, fludarabine and rituximab in 369, 195 and 23 subjects, respectively. Baseline parameters included age>65 yr in 57%, Hb≤11.5 g/dL in 65%, platelet count ≤100 x109/L in 9%, granulocyte count ≤1.5 x109/L in 9%, B2M >3 mg/L in 56%, albumin ≤3.5 g/dL in 36% and monoclonal protein >7.0 g/dL in 7%. With a median follow-up of 64 mo (range, 6 mo–182 mo), the median survival after treatment initiation was 87 mo (95%CI 79–103) regardless of the type of therapy applied (p=0.3). Using results of univariate survival analyses, recursive partitioning and martingale residuals analyses, 7 adverse characteristics for inclusion in multivariate analyses were identified during an expert meeting: age >65 yr, platelet count ≤ 100x109/L, B2M >3 mg/L, M-protein >7.0 g/dL, granulocytes ≤1.5 x109/L, Hb ≤11.5 g/dL and albumin ≤3.5 g/dL. The Cox proportional hazard model with stepwise selection selected the first 6 covariates. Bootstrap resampling (500 replicates) validated the selection of the first 4 covariates in at least 80% of the replicates. Selection of at least one of the last 2 covariates in more than 80% of the replicates indicated a correlation between these 2 covariates, and validated the inclusion of Hb only. Using the combination of age, Hb, platelet count, B2M and M-protein, low risk was defined by the presence of ≤1 adverse characteristic except age, high risk by the presence of >2 adverse characteristics; the remaining patients with 2 adverse characteristics or age >65yr had intermediate risk, comprising 27%, 38% and 35% of patients with 5-yr survival rates of 87%, 68% and 36% (p<0.0001), independent of treatment and age. IPSS split each subgroup identified by previous scoring systems (Morel, Merlini, Dhodapkar). Conversely, log-rank test was significant only when the latter prognostic system was assessed in low IPSS-risk pts. Thus the combination of age, B2M, M-protein and blood counts provides simple prognostic model for survival in WM, hopefully serving as an objective basis for initiation of therapy and comparison of treatment results.

8015 Background: Multiple myeloma (MM) is a heterogeneous disease with varying survival outcomes depending on the presence of certain genetic abnormalities. Common abnormalities include trisomies, translocations involving chromosome 14, and amplifications or deletions of chromosomes 1, 13, and 17. t(11;14), occurring in approx. 15% of patients (pts) with MM, is considered a standard risk abnormality, but recent data suggest that the prognosis may be inferior to what had been expected. This is of particular relevance as new therapeutic options such as the BCL-2 inhibitor venetoclax has been shown to be effective in t(11;14) pts. Methods: This was a multicenter study designed and conducted by the IMWG, to identify the outcomes of pts with t(11;14) using a retrospective cohort of pts. Pts with MM diagnosed between 2005 and 2015 with t(11;14) identified on FISH performed within six months (mos) of diagnosis, and with treatment details available and if alive, a minimum of 12 mos of follow up, were enrolled. Results: The current analysis includes 848 pts with a median age of 64.4 years; 60.0% are male. The median follow-up from diagnosis for the entire cohort was 45.7 mos; 84.7% of the pts were alive at the last follow up. ISS stage distribution included: Stage 1 (35.3%), Stage II (38.9%) and stage III (25.8%). The distribution of FISH abnormalities included: del 13q (14.5%), 1q amp (12.1%), del 17p or monosomy 17 (6.1%). Pts received initial therapy with different regimens: IMiD-24.3%, PI-41.0%, both-20.8% and 13.8% had no novel agent. The drug classes by line of therapy are shown in table. An early stem cell transplant (SCT) was used in 40.8% of pts. The median time to next treatment (TTNT) after initial treatment was 15.0 (95% CI: 12.2 to 17.7) mos. The median overall survival from diagnosis for the entire cohort was 82.5 (95% CI: 73.5 to 95.8) mos. Conclusions: This is the first study to examine the outcomes of a large group of myeloma pts with t(11;14) abnormality. Pts receiving a combination if a PI and an IMiD appear to have the best survival outcomes and thse receiving an early SCT appear to have excellent survival with median OS approaching 10 years. Additional pts are being accrued to this study and additional analysis examining the variables affecting response duration and survival will be presented. [Table: see text]

8000 Background: The diagnostic criteria for MM were revised in 2014, recategorizing ultra-high risk (i.e., 80% at two years) as active myeloma requiring therapy. The removal of patients at the highest risk of progression from the smoldering group requires reassessment of current risk stratification models. Methods: We designed a multicenter, retrospective study of SMM patients to develop a risk stratification model. Patients diagnosed with SMM on/after January 1, 2004 were included if they had no disease progression within 6 months, had baseline data from diagnosis (+/- 3 months), had a follow up of ≥1 year, and did not participate in a therapeutic trial of SMM. Various clinical and laboratory factors were explored to identify factors that predicted progression at 2 years. Univariate Cox regressions were run for each factor. For factors with p-values ≤ 0.25, optimal cut points were identified using Youden’s index. Binary factors were used in stepwise regression to fit multivariable Cox model and significant risk factors were determined (F-test). Results: Overall, 2004 patients were included (ages 26-93, 51% female). Factors independently associated with progression (optimal cutoffs) included: Serum M protein (2 g/dL), involved to uninvolved serum-free light chain ratio (20), and marrow plasma cell % (20%). Patients were stratified using the risk factors: Low- (0 factors), Intermediate- (1), and High-Risk (≥2). Previously used high risk markers such as Bence Jones proteinuria (≥500 mg/24 hours) and severe immunoparesis (50% decrease in uninvolved immunoglobulin levels) were both significant in univariate analysis, but were eliminated on step wise selection. Compared to the low risk group, intermediate- and high-risk groups had significantly higher rate of progression (Table). Within the high-risk group, having all 3 risk factors (n=61) versus 2 did not add to the model, with insufficient separation between 2 and 3 factors. Conclusions: We have developed a risk stratification model for SMM that incorporates revised cutoffs for previously used parameters (20/2/20) that can be universally applied. Additonal analysis are being conducted to develop models that utilize common cytogenetic abnormalities, as well as those without FLC given lack of availability of all tests across the world. [Table: see text]

Background Systemic AL amyloidosis is a clonal plasma cell disorder in which amyloid fibrils are deposited in tissues and organs, leading to multi-system organ dysfunction. The most frequently involved organs are the heart and kidney (individually or together), with advanced cardiac involvement conferring particularly poor outcomes. Achievement of hematologic response and improved organ function result in better outcomes. There are currently no approved treatments for AL amyloidosis; multiple myeloma (MM) treatment strategies are used for these pts. Active, tolerable treatment options specific for AL amyloidosis are needed. The oral proteasome inhibitor (PI) ixazomib (ixa) is active and approved in combination with lenalidomide (L)-dexamethasone (Dex) for the treatment of MM pts who have received ≥1 prior therapy. Methods RRAL pts with measurable disease and major organ involvement (cardiac/renal) who required treatment after 1-2 prior therapies (and were not refractory to prior PI therapy) were randomized to ixa (4.0 mg, d 1, 8, 15) plus Dex (20 mg, d 1, 8, 15, 22) or physician's choice (Dex alone or plus melphalan [M], cyclophosphamide [C], thalidomide [T], or lenalidomide [L]) in 28-d cycles until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity (or best response plus 2 cycles or maximum 18 mos therapy/600 mg total dose for MDex). Randomization was stratified by cardiac risk stage, relapsed vs refractory disease, and prior PI exposure. Primary endpoints were 1) overall hematologic response rate (ORR) centrally adjudicated, and 2) death or vital organ deterioration at 2 yrs. Key secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and hematologic complete response (CR) rate; other secondary endpoints included hematologic/vital organ progression-free survival (PFS), time to vital organ deterioration or mortality, duration of hematologic response (DOR), and safety. Results 168 pts were randomized to ixa-Dex (n=85) or physician's choice (n=83; 47 LDex, 24 MDex, 10 CDex, 2 TDex); median age was 65 (range 38-84) vs 66 (33-82) yrs, 60% vs 55% were male, 56% vs 63% had cardiac and 66% vs 58% had renal involvement (33% vs 23% had both) at initial diagnosis (plus 9% vs 12% liver, 12% vs 18% gastrointestinal tract, and 11% vs 10% peripheral nerve involvement), 47% vs 47% had prior bortezomib, and 47% vs 37% had prior transplant. Median time since diagnosis was 14.7 vs 15.9 mos. Hematologic responses were seen in 45 (53%) vs 42 (51%) pts receiving ixa-Dex vs physician's choice (odds ratio 1.10 [95% CI 0.60-2.01], p=0.762). Higher CR rates were seen with ixa-Dex vs physician's choice (26% vs 18%). Overall survival, overall/hematologic/vital organ PFS, time to vital organ deterioration/death, DOR, time to treatment failure, and time to subsequent therapy data all favored pts treated with ixa-Dex vs physician's choice (Figure). Vital organ response rates were 36% in the ixa-Dex arm vs 11% with physician's choice (cardiac response rate: 18% vs 5%; renal response rate: 28% vs 7%). At data cut-off, pts had received a median treatment duration of 11.7 vs 4.9 mos with ixa-Dex vs physician's choice, and 21% vs 6% of pts remained on treatment. Grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) were seen in 59% vs 56% of pts, including 33% vs 41% with drug-related grade ≥3 AEs, 45% vs 33% had serious AEs, 25% vs 20% had AEs resulting in discontinuation, and there were 6% vs 5% on-study deaths. AEs of clinical importance included diarrhea (34% vs 30%), rash (33% vs 20%), cardiac arrhythmias (25% vs 15%), nausea (24% vs 14%), pneumonia (22% vs 16%), and peripheral neuropathy (20% vs 15%). Common (≥5% overall) grade ≥3 AEs were fatigue (9% vs 9%), anemia (2% vs 10%), cardiac failure, dyspnea (each 6% vs 4%), peripheral edema, and pneumonia (each 5% vs 5%). Conclusions Treatment with ixa-Dex significantly prolonged duration of composite survival and vital organ function, PFS, and time to subsequent therapy vs physician's choice. Moreover, ixa-Dex resulted in an improved CR rate and DOR and, although the primary endpoint of hematologic response was not met, all clinically relevant time-to-event endpoint data favored ixa-Dex vs physician's choice. Ixa-Dex was generally well tolerated and associated with a doubling of treatment duration vs physician's choice; no new safety signals were seen. TOURMALINE-AL1 is the first phase 3 trial in RRAL to show significant outcome improvements, suggesting ixa-Dex represents a new option for RRAL pts, who have limited access to therapies. Disclosures Dispenzieri: Akcea: Consultancy; Intellia: Consultancy; Alnylam: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy. Kastritis:Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Prothena: Honoraria; Genesis: Honoraria. Wechalekar:Takeda: Honoraria; GSK: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Amgen: Research Funding; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria. Schönland:Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Medac: Other: Travel Grant. Sanchorawala:Proclara: Consultancy, Honoraria; Caelum: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Research Funding; Prothena: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Landau:Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Caelum: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Suzuki:Takeda: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding; Ono: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria. Comenzo:Takeda: Research Funding; Caelum: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Prothena Biosciences: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sanofi-Aventis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Unum: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Myself: Patents & Royalties: Patent 9593332, Pending 20170008966. Berg:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Ltd: Employment, Patents & Royalties. Liu:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited: Employment. Faller:Phoenicia Biosciences: Equity Ownership; Briacell Pharmaceuticals: Equity Ownership; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited: Employment; Viracta Pharmaceuticals: Equity Ownership; Boston University: Employment. Off Label Disclosure: Investigation of the oral proteasome inhibitor ixazomib in combination with dexamethasone versus physician's choice (of which there are no approved treatment options) for the treatment of relapsed/refractory primary systemic amyloidosis.

Abstract Background: Amyloid light chain (AL) amyloidosis is caused by the deposition of misfolded light chain (LC) proteins, which may cause organ failure and death. Current treatments, which target the plasma cells that produce LC, induce organ responses in only 30% to 40% of patients. There is a substantial need for a safe and effective amyloid-directed therapy to improve recovery of organ function. NEOD001, a monoclonal antibody that targets misfolded LC, is hypothesized to neutralize circulating LC aggregates and to clear insoluble organ deposits. In an ongoing phase 1/2 study (NCT02613182; Gertz M et al. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(10):1097-1103) in 27 patients with AL amyloidosis and persistent organ dysfunction, monthly NEOD001 infusions were well tolerated and produced no infusion-related hypersensitivity reactions. In a best response analysis of subjects who fulfilled eligibility criteria at baseline, 57% met cardiac and 60% met renal response criteria. Supported by these positive results, the current study (VITAL; NCT02312206) is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial of NEOD001 in patients with cardiac AL amyloidosis. Here we present the study design for this trial in progress. Patients and Methods: Eligible patients (estimated enrollment, 236) with a diagnosis of AL amyloidosis (newly diagnosed, treatment naive) and cardiac dysfunction (N-terminal probrain natriuretic peptide [NT-proBNP] ≥650 and <8500 pg/mL, clinical signs of heart failure, left ventricular wall thickness >12 mm, or cardiac biopsy-detected amyloidosis) and with estimated glomerular filtration rate ≥30 mL/min/1.73 m2 will be randomly assigned (1:1) to receive NEOD001 (24 mg/kg q28d) plus standard of care (SOC) chemotherapy or placebo plus SOC therapy. Subjects will be stratified according to Mayo Clinic stage, renal stage, and 6-minute walk test (6MWT) distance. The primary end point is a composite, evidence-based measure consisting of all-cause mortality or cardiac hospitalization. Key secondary end points include cardiac response measured by NT-proBNP (as defined by Comenzo RL et al. Leukemia. 2012;26(11):2317-2325) and change in 6MWT distance, Short Form-36 Health Survey response, Neuropathy Impairment Score-Lower Limb and renal response (as defined by Palladini G et al. Blood. 2014;124(15):2325-2332). Disclosures Liedtke: Gilead: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Prothena: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Merlini:Takeda and Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria. Landau:Janssen: Consultancy; Spectrum Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Onyx/Amgen: Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Prothena: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Comenzo:Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Prothena: Consultancy, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding. Sanchorawala:Prothena: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Weiss:Janssen: Consultancy, Other: Travel, accommodations, Research Funding; Millennium: Consultancy, Other: Travel, accommodations; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy; Prothena: Other: Travel, accommodations, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy. Zonder:Array Biopharma: Consultancy; Prothena: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy. Walling:Stealth: Consultancy; KaloBios: Consultancy; Exelixis: Consultancy; Newgen: Consultancy; Mateon (was Oxigene): Consultancy; Apex: Consultancy; Corcept: Consultancy; Aduro: Consultancy; Prothena: Consultancy; BioMarin: Equity Ownership; Amgen: Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties; NuMedii: Consultancy; Pharm-Olam: Consultancy; Crown Bioscience: Consultancy; Codexis: Consultancy; Upsher Smith: Consultancy, Patents & Royalties. Kinney:Prothena: Employment, Equity Ownership, Other: Leadership. Koller:Prothena: Employment, Equity Ownership, Other: Travel, accommodations. Gertz:Ionis: Research Funding; Prothena Therapeutics: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Alnylam Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Annexon Biosciences: Research Funding; Research to Practice: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Med Learning Group: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria; NCI Frederick: Honoraria; Sandoz Inc: Honoraria; GSK: Honoraria.