Kumar, Shaji

Abstract Abstract 4995 Background: Multiple myeloma results from an accumulation of monoclonal nonproliferating plasma cells arising from a small subpopulation of proliferating myeloma cells. In an effort to optimize detection of the human myeloma cell growth fraction and obviate the need for slide review, a novel FC strategy was developed combining elements of light chain restriction, surface antigen expression, and ploidy analysis. Methods: Bone marrow cells from 41 patients with plasma cell proliferative disorders were lysed with ACK and resuspended in 3% BSA. Cells were stained using a 6-color assay with anti-CD45, anti-CD38, anti-CD138, and anti-CD19. Cells were washed and 100 ul Caltag solution A was added for 15 min. Cells were washed and 100 ul of Caltag solution B, anti-kappa and anti-lambda were added for 10 min. Cells were washed and 100 ul PBS and 3 ul RNAse are added for 15 min. Cells were washed and 400 ul of a 1:1000 solution of 3uM DAPI in Tris 0.1% NP-40 was added. Cells were incubated at 4°C for 45 minutes before running on a FACSCanto instrument for ploidy determination. All patients were analyzed both by flow cytometry and the slide based plasma cell labeling index. Results: Forty-one patients were studied; 34 demonstrated a proliferative fraction and 7 had too few plasma cells for analysis after therapy. Of the 34 patients, 6 had MGUS/SMM, 5 newly diagnosed MM, 7 amyloid, and 16 were treated MM. The mean percent proliferating cells were 1.1% (range 0 – 8.6%) with PCLI and 1.4% (range 0.1 – 12.7%) by flow. The correlation between PCLI and flow gave a RSquare value of 0.54. Twelve patients with a PCLI of 0% had a flow proliferation between 0.1 – 1.4% (mean 0.49%). Treated patients received lenalidomide, dexamethasone, bortezomib, and/or autologous transplantation. All 16 treated myeloma patients with adequate plasma cells had a flow proliferation between 0.2 – 12.7% (mean 2.2%). Conclusion: Flow cytometry offers a useful way to detect the proliferative myeloma component at diagnosis and after treatment. The continued presence of proliferating myeloma cells after treatment may explain why most patients relapse and offers another important marker to monitor and cell population to target in patients with active disease. Disclosures: Kumar: Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Genzyme: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cephalon: Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 1958 Vaccines may offer additional benefit as consolidation therapy after plateau phase or autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) for multiple myeloma (MM). We have reported previously the results of another phase II trial showing that using APC8020 (Mylovenge™) after ASCT improved the overall survival (OS 5.3 yrs, 95% CI 4.0 yrs – NA) compared to ASCT alone (3.4 yrs, 95% CI 2.7 – 4.6 yrs; p = 0.02; Lacy, AJH (84): 799). We now report the results from a randomized, phase II trial using the same vaccine plus adjuvant cytokines in MM patients in plateau phase after either chemotherapy or ASCT. Twenty patients were enrolled between 2001 and 2003 and were randomized to receive APC8020 and adjuvant cytokine of either interferon-g (IFNg, arm A, n = 10) or interleukin-2 (IL2, arm B, n = 10). Each cycle of treatment included five days of daily subcutaneous injections of either IFNg (106 IU, arm A) or IL2 (200 mg, arm B) followed by APC8020 injection. Each patient received a cycle of treatment every 2 weeks for 4 cycles. One patient in each arm was in plateau phase post-chemotherapy. Time from diagnosis to treatment was 11.9 mos for the patient in arm A and 16.2 mos for arm B. Time to progression (TTP) was 3.7 and 68 months respectively the patient in arm A and B. Both patients were alive at five years. For the 9 post-ASCT patients in each arm, no statistically significant differences were seen in the baseline characteristics between the 2 arms. The median time from diagnosis to treatment was 15.4 months. No grade 4 or 5 adverse events (AEs) were reported. Two patients in each arm had grade 3 AE, including lymphopenia, thrombocytopenia, hemorrhage, infection, and fatigue. One patient in arm B had grade 3 autoimmune disorder that was deemed possibly related to study treatment. The most common AEs were grade 1 fatigue (n = 7) and anemia (n = 5) in arm A and grade 1 anemia (n = 7) and injection site reaction (n = 5) in arm B. The median TTP was 9.3 months (95% CI: 3.9 – 19.3 months) for arm A and 6.6 months for arm B (95% CI: 6.3 – 29.6 months) with no statistically significant difference between the two arms (p = 0.89). The median OS had not been reached for either arm; the 5-year OS rate was 67% and 56% for arms A and B respectively (p = 1.0). Interestingly, similar to our previous study where TTP was not different while OS was improved with vaccine, when we compared the clinical outcome for all patients in this vaccine trial to that of 78 matched control patients who only received ASCT during the same time frame, we did not see significant improvement in TTP (Figure 1). However, the 5-year overall survival for all patients in this trial is significantly improved at 71% (95%CI: 51–96%) compared to ASCT control patients (41%, 95% CI: 31 – 54%; p = 0.03; Figure 1). This trial suggests improved OS with vaccine plus cytokine. It is possible that modulation of patients’ immunity may help them live longer with multiple myeloma. Further investigation is needed to compare the approach in this trial with dendritic cell vaccine alone to better understand optimal strategy for vaccine therapy in MM. Figure 1. Kaplan-Meier curves for time to progression and overall survival Figure 1. Kaplan-Meier curves for time to progression and overall survival Disclosures: Dispenzieri: Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Binding Site: Honoraria. Kumar:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Genzyme: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cephalon: Research Funding. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 2802 Background: Redundancy of pro-survival signaling pathways promotes survival and drug resistance in lymphoid and plasma cell malignancies. In particular, the PI3K-Akt and the MEK-ERK pathways have been shown to play an important role in the proliferation and survival of these malignant cells induced by various cytokines in the tumor microenvironment. Sorafenib, a Raf kinase and VEGF receptor inhibitor, and everolimus, an mTOR inhibitor, have synergistic cytotoxicity in myeloma and lymphoma cells due to inhibition of multiple signaling pathways. Methods: We designed a Phase 1/2 clinical trial to identify the maximum tolerated doses of the two drugs used in combination and the efficacy of the combination. Patients (Pts) with relapsed myeloma or lymphoma were eligible for enrollment. Pts were required to have an absolute neutrophil count ≥1500 × 10(6)/L, a platelet count ≥75,000, and a serum creatinine 21.5 mg/dL. The study utilized the classic 3+3 design. Extensive pharmacokinetic studies were performed to better delineate potential drug interactions. Results: Twenty-six pts were accrued from August 2007 to February 2009. Four pts discontinued sorafenib during cycle 1 for various reasons (2 patient refusal, 1 unrelated medical condition and 1 physician discretion) and were excluded from MTD determination. An additional pt did not have measurable disease and was ineligible, leaving 19 pts with lymphoma (including 6 with Hodgkin lymphoma) and 2 with myeloma for phase I analysis. The pts had a median age of 56 years (range, 22, 69) and were heavily pretreated with a median of 4 prior therapies (range, 1–10). Eighteen (86%) had received a prior stem cell transplant. Four dose limiting toxicities were seen across all dose levels (Table). These included grade 3 vomiting (level 1), grade 4 thrombocytopenia (level 2 and 3, one each) and grade 2 hand and foot rash leading to treatment delay (level 3). Overall, 13 pts experienced a grade 3 or 4 hematologic toxicity. Grade 3 or 4 anemia, neutropenia, and thrombocytopenia occurred in 19%, 43%, and 38% of pts, respectively. Four pts have experienced a grade 3 non-hematologic toxicity; no grade 4 non-hematologic toxicities were seen. Grade 3 non-hematologic toxicities included hypokalemia, weight loss, vomiting, hand-foot skin reaction, fatigue, and elevated alkaline phosphatase. Dose level 1 (sorafenib 200 mg and everolimus 5 mg daily) was best tolerated and was selected for phase 2 evaluation. The ORR was 33% (7/21;95% CI: 15–57%, Table) with 3 pts at dose level 0 (2 PR, 1 CR), one at level 2 (1 PR) and three at level 3 (2 PR, 1 CR) responding. The responders included 5 pts with Hodgkin's disease and one each with an NK cell and T-cell lymphoma. Pts have received a median of 6 cycles (range: 1–19) of treatment. 16 pts have discontinued treatment due to disease progression (13 pts), non-resolution of cytopenias (1 pt), physician discretion (1 pt), and death on study due to lymphoma (1 pt). Disease progression has been seen in 16 pts; 9 pts have died. Median follow-up for pts still alive is 18.7 months (range: 11.5–29.4). 6 pts died from disease progression, one each due to sepsis unlikely related to treatment, cholecystitis, and unknown causes. Sorafenib is metabolized by the cytochrome P450 CYP3A enzyme and RAD-001 mainly by the CYP3A4 system in the liver, hence there is a potential for interactions. The detailed PK analyses performed as part of this trial showed a decrease in the RAD001 levels following initiation of sorafenib on day 8 of cycle 1 (Figure). Conclusion: The combination of sorafenib and everolimus is safe at a recommended phase 2 dose of sorafenib 200 mg and everolimus 5 mg daily. There is no significant drug interaction seen. Activity has been observed, especially in the setting of Hodgkins Disease. Disclosures: Kumar: Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Genzyme: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cephalon: Research Funding. Off Label Use: Lenalidomide for treatment of newly diagnosed myeloma. Witzig:Novartis and Celgene: Patents & Royalties, Research Funding, Served on advisory boards with Novartis and Celgene – both uncompensated with compensation to Mayo Clinic.

Abstract Background: Dexamethasone (dex) is an integral part of various anti-myeloma regimens both in the frontline and relapsed/refractory (RR) setting. Several clinical trials have shown that dex adds to the efficacy of novel therapeutic agents for multiple myeloma (MM). Yet, a substantial number of patients are intolerant to even the standard of care low-dose dex (40 mg weekly), especially in heavily pre-treated RRMM, possibly due to cumulative steroid toxicities and thus, require dex dose adjustments. There is a concern of compromising the efficacy of anti-MM regimens by adjusting the dex dose lower. We describe the frequency of dex dose adjustment, characteristics of patients who required it and its effect on patient outcomes in a large prospective clinical trial of pomalidomide (pom) and dex in RRMM (MC0789). Methods: We utilized data from the Pom-dex trial (MC0789), which treated RRMM patients in different cohorts of pom (2 vs. 4 mg; 21 vs 28 days cycle) with fixed dose dex (40 mg orally weekly). Patients were divided into 2 subgroups, with any dose adjustment/elimination of dex vs. not. Continuous and categorical variables were compared between the two groups using two-sample t-test/Wilcoxon rank sum test or Chi-squared test, respectively. Logistic regression and Cox regression models were used to find the univariate and stepwise multivariate predictors of response to treatment and overall mortality, respectively. Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate overall survival (OS) at 1, 3, and 5 years. All statistical tests were two-sided with the alpha level set at 0.05 for statistical significance. Results: Results from the MC0789 clinical trial have been reported previously. Almost half of all treated patients in this trial had dex dose adjusted (n=175/343; 51%). The median number of cycles for the first dose adjustment in this group was 3 (range 1-62), with 46.5% of patients (n=82) having multiple dose adjustments and majority (58.3%, n=102) within the first 3 cycles of treatment. Patients in the dose adjustment group were significantly older (mean 65 vs 60 years; p=0.0001). Males, Whites and patients diagnosed before 2006 or with normal cytogenetics also had a higher incidence of dex dose adjustment, though this was not statistically significant. Patients with dex dose adjustment had a longer duration of treatment (mean 339 days) as compared to the non-adjusted cohort (mean 123.65 days) (95% CI 160.13, 270.58; p <0.0001). Dex dose adjustment was associated with a higher probability of responding in the clinical trial after a univariate (p<0.001) as well as multivariate (p<0.001) analysis. Patients with dex dose adjustment also had a significantly better OS at 1, 3 and 5 years by univariate (p<0.001) and multivariate (p<0.001) analysis. (Figure 1) The only other significant factor was lesser number of prior regimens (3 or less), associated with a higher probability of response (p=0.002) and survival (p<0.001). Conclusion: Our analysis established that in these heavily pre-treated RRMM patients, appropriate dose adjustment of dex did not compromise their response rates; patients remained on treatment significantly longer and had an improved survival. Majority of patients (58.3%) requiring dex dose adjustment had it instituted early during treatment (<3 cycles), suggesting that early disease progression was less likely to determine dex dose continuation or adjustment. Appropriate dex adjustments should be judiciously employed as they may ensure longer treatment duration with novel anti-MM therapeutic agents, conferring superior response and survival in this difficult to treat MM subgroup. This also paves the path to further optimize dex dose in various anti-MM regimens, especially in these patients who are more likely to be intolerant to it. Disclosures Kumar: Skyline, Noxxon: Honoraria; Celgene, Millennium, Onyx, Janssen, Noxxon, Sanofi, BMS, Skyline: Consultancy; Celgene, Millennium, Onyx, Novartis, Janssen, Sanofi: Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 3557 Introduction: Autologous stem cell transplantation for patients with amyloidosis results in high reported hematologic and organ response rates compared with conventional chemotherapy. Patients: Four-hundred and thirty-four patients have undergone transplantation between March 8, 1996, and April 13, 2010 Table 1. Clinical parameters seen in patients with amyloid are given in Table 2. The overall day-100 mortality seen in this group of patients is 44 of 434 patients (10%). Results: The most important determinant of outcome is stage defined by BNP and troponin levels. Figure 1 demonstrates the survival for patients for all 3 cardiac stages. Troponin <.035; NT-proBNP <332. Stage 1 both low, Stage 3 both elevated. The survival of all patients based on whether they achieved a complete response, a partial response (>50%), or no response was analyzed. Median survival has not been reached for the complete response group, is 107 months for the partial response group, and is 32 months for the no response group (p<0.0001). Figure 2, divides the patients at the median dFLC level of 13.5 mg/dL demonstrating that for patients with a higher level of free light chain, the median survival is 87.6 months and has not been reached for those with a lower level of free light chain. A proportional hazards model for variables that impact on survival was done in all patients, and the only relevant predictor of outcome was stage (p<0.0001). When the same analysis was performed using a landmark of 6 months, the only predictor of outcome was stage (p=0.0005). When best response was incorporated into the landmark model, it was the strongest predictor of survival. The amyloid stage predicted survival (p= 0.0005), and the best response to therapy (p <0.0001). When the same analysis was performed in the entire group of 434, stage and best response each remained significant (p<0.0001). Discussion: There is a high response rate associated with high-dose therapy that was not observed in the melphalan and prednisone era. For eligible patients who can be transplanted safely, high-dose melphalan is an effective therapy for many patients with amyloidosis. Best response and stage at diagnosis are the best predictors of overall survival. Disclosures: Lacy: Celgene: Research Funding. Dispenzieri:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Binding Site: Honoraria. Kumar:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Genzyme: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cephalon: Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 1893 Background: Recent data has shown that the level of immunoglobulin free light chain (FLC) is a prognostic factor for patients with AL amyloidosis. Approximately 25% of patients with AL amyloidosis have coexistent multiple myeloma (MM) with myeloma-related end-organ damage and patients may also present with 310% plasma cells (PC) in the bone marrow (BM) in the absence of any MM features. The goal of this study was to determine the effect of increased BM plasmacytosis in the absence of MM end-organ damage on early mortality. Methods: We performed a retrospective study of 263 consecutive patients with AL amyloidosis seen at Mayo Clinic within 30 days of diagnosis from July 2002 – April 2009, to compare the effect of PC burden among those who died within 90 days of diagnosis (n=88) and those who survived more than 90 days after diagnosis (n=175). Only those patients with documented BM PC were included in this study. MM end-organ damage was defined according to the CRAB criteria. Results: In those who died <90 days after diagnosis and patients who lived beyond 90 days, the proportion of patients with 310% BM PC were 57% and 55%, respectively. Overall survival (OS) was significantly shorter in the early mortality group when there was 310% BM PC present at diagnosis (25 vs. 54 days, p=0.006), but this was not observed in the group who survived beyond 90 days (Figure 1). In patients with 310% BM PC, troponin-T, ejection fraction (EF), and hemoglobin (Hgb) were significantly worse in the early mortality cohort but patients who survived beyond 90 days had significant increase in intraventricular septal (IVS) thickness and beta-2 microglobulin (Table 1). As expected, patients with 310% BM PC in both cohorts had significantly higher serum M-spike and involved FLC (Table). The same cohort of patients were analyzed substituting MM-related end-organ damage for 310% BM PC and similar results were observed with the exception of uric acid and calcium being significantly higher in the early mortality cohort with MM (results not shown). Conclusion: This study demonstrated that an excess of early—but not late—deaths occur in AL amyloidosis patients with 310% BM PC at diagnosis. In our cohort, this finding can be attributed to higher troponin-T levels, indicating more severe cardiac involvement as observed by worse cardiac function. These findings warrant additional investigation. Disclosures: Lacy: Celgene: Research Funding. Kumar:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Genzyme: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cephalon: Research Funding. Dispenzieri:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Binding Site: Honoraria.

Abstract Background: Light chain Amyloidosis (AL) is characterized by deposition of light chain derived amyloid fibrils in major organs and/or soft tissue. An observational study on natural history and outcome of localized immunoglobulin light-chain amyloidosis without vital organ (liver, heart, kidney, peripheral and autonomic nervous system) involvement has shown extremely low rate of progression (1%) to systemic amyloidosis at a median follow-up of 74.4 months (Mahmood S et al. The Lancet Haematology; 2015; 6:e241-e250). There is, however, limited evidence in published literature on natural history of AL amyloidosis confined to fat and/or bone marrow biopsy, without involvement of vital organs or other soft tissues. Methods: We retrospectively identified patients with AL amyloidosis limited to fat and/or bone marrow aspirate in a single-institution database. Patients were evaluated for progression to systemic amyloidosis. Statistical analysis was done using JMP 10.0.0 (SAS Institute Inc.). Results: We identified 117 patients, with a median age of 70 years, who had light chain amyloidosis detected in abdominal fat aspirate and/or bone marrow biopsy, without systemic involvement. Amyloid was seen in fat only in 39%, marrow only in 54% and in both sites in 7%. The median follow up was 45.6 months (95% CI-38.1-57.7) from detection of amyloid. Of these, 64% were alive at the time of analysis. Among 117 patients, 65 were treated for a diagnosis of another plasma cell disorder made prior to or concurrent with detection of amyloid. The remaining 52 patients only had isolated fat or marrow amyloid. Among 65 patients with another diagnosis of plasma cell disorder requiring treatment, 3 progressed to systemic amyloidosis, one each with cardiac, renal and lymph node (LN) involvement detected at 32, 42 and 65 months respectively from the detection of amyloid. The first 2 patients had underlying multiple myeloma, and the third patient with LN involvement had underlying Waldenström macroglobulinemia. Among 52 patients without another diagnosis of a plasma cell disorder requiring treatment, at a median follow up of 32 months, no progression to systemic amyloidosis was observed. Median overall survival (OS) in 117 patients from detection of amyloid, using Kaplan-Meier survival estimates, was 60.2 months (95% CI-48.9-146.1). Conclusion: Our study highlights the fact that isolated amyloidosis detected in fat and/or bone marrow aspirate, in the absence of another plasma cell dyscrasias that require therapy, is unlikely to progress to systemic amyloidosis. Watchful waiting might be considered in such patients after a thorough evaluation to rule out systemic involvement. Disclosures Gertz: Smith Kline: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Onyx: Honoraria; millenium: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Kumar:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Millenium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction Gene Expression Profiling studies have resulted in signatures capable of providing robust prognosis for Multiple Myeloma (MM) patients, such as the EMC92 [SKY92, Kuiper et al. Leukemia 2012]. Recently, data from 4720 MM patients from the HOVON-65/GMMG-HD4, UAMS-TT2, UAMS-TT3, MRC-IX, APEX and IFM trials were employed to assessed the majority of currently identified prognostic markers and their combinations (GEP, FISH, and biochemistry data, [Kuiper et al ASH 2014]). The "SKY92 + ISS" was identified and validated as the statistically most optimal (i.e. most significant and robust) prognostic marker combination for MM patients. The combination of the EMC92 (=SKY92) and ISS prognostic features proves to be a very powerful, unprecedented and straightforward prognostic system. It identifies four prognostic risk classes: low risk (ISS I-SKY92 standard risk (SR)), intermediate-low (ISS II-SKY92 SR), intermediate-high (ISS III-SKY92 SR) and high risk (ISS I-III, SKY92 high risk). Previously, the SKY92 has been validated on the 91 MM cases in the MMGI cohort [Van Beers et al. ASH 2013]. Here we present an extension of that validation with the SKY92 + ISS combination on the 78 MM cases for whom both GEP and ISS is available, by both assessing as the "4 risk group" model defined above, but also a "3 risk group" model (the two intermediate groups combined) as this may be more relevant and useful for clinical application. Materials and Methods A public untreated MM dataset (Multiple Myeloma Genomics Initiative, MMGI) had n=78 cases for which OS, GEP, and ISS were available for analysis. The prognostic markers SKY92 and ISS were applied as proposed [Kuiper et al ASH 2014] to classify cases into the risk categories. Results The risks for the 4 group classification model are shown in Table 1 and Figure 1, and the 3 risk group model is shown in Table 2 and Figure 1. In the 4 group model, the intermediate-low group (SKY92 standard + ISS II) was a small and not significantly different (p=0.79) from the low risk. The intermediate-high group (SKY92 standard + ISS III) was also a small group, with significantly worse outcome compared with the low risk group (p=0.012). Although stratification into four groups was statistically superior in the training and validation data [Kuiper et al ASH 2014] the interpretability benefits from aggregation of the middle two groups [Fig 1 right]. Table 1. Classification results for the four risk groups (Fig 1 left) Risk group n % Median OS HR vs low risk SKY92 High Risk regardless of ISS 19 24 28.4 m 10.8 SKY92 standard risk + ISS-III 10 13 63.0 m 4.1 SKY92 standard risk + ISS-II 16 21 NR (0.8) SKY92 standard risk + ISS-I (low risk) 33 42 NR NA NR= Not Reached at 96 months, HR= hazard ratio Table 2. Classification results for the three risk groups (Fig 1 right) Risk group n % Median OS HR vs low risk SKY92 High Risk regardless of ISS 19 24 28.4 m 10.1 SKY92 standard risk + ISS-II/III 26 34 78.5 m (1.8) SKY92 standard risk + ISS-I 33 42 NR NA NR= Not Reached at 96 months, HR= hazard ratio, () not significant Conclusions By applying the SKY92 + ISS risk stratification model in an independent validation cohort of newly diagnosed Multiple Myeloma patients, besides a high risk group of 19 patients (24%), a group of 33 patients (42%) with superior prognosis could be predicted (SKY92 standard risk and ISS I) that translated into 62% OS at 96 months. The 19 high risk (SKY92 high risk) cases had very poor prognosis (median survival of 28 months). The combination of SKY92 Standard Risk and ISS II and III seems useful for definition of "intermediate risk" although sample size currently is insufficient for significance compared to low risk. The intention is to also perform this validation on the relapsed samples from the MMGI cohort, once OS data has been collected. This validated risk model could play a role in the design of future treatment strategies for high and low risk MM patients. Figure 1. Kaplan Meier curves on the 78 MMGI cases, split into four (left) or three (right) risk groups based on the combination of SKY92 + ISS. Hazard Ratios (HR) are from a Cox proportional Hazards model comparing a particular group to the low risk group. Figure 1. Kaplan Meier curves on the 78 MMGI cases, split into four (left) or three (right) risk groups based on the combination of SKY92 + ISS. Hazard Ratios (HR) are from a Cox proportional Hazards model comparing a particular group to the low risk group. Disclosures van Beers: SkylineDx: Employment. van Vliet:SkylineDx: Employment. de Best:SkylineDx: Employment. Chari:Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium/Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Biotest: Other: Institutional Research Funding; Array Biopharma: Consultancy, Other: Institutional Research Funding, Research Funding; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding. Jagganath:Millennium: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Jakubowiak:Sanofi-Aventis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: institutional funding for support of clinical trial conduct, Speakers Bureau; SkylineDx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; SkylineDx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi-Aventis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Kumar:Celgene, Millenium, Sanofi, Skyline, BMS, Onyx, Noxxon,: Other: Consultant, no compensation,; Janssen: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Millenium/Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding; Skyline, Noxxon: Honoraria. Lebovic:Onyx: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Lonial:Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding. Reece:Onyx: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Millennium: Research Funding; Merck: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding. Richardson:Millennium Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gentium S.p.A.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Siegel:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Merck: Speakers Bureau. Stewart:SkylineDx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Vij:Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy. Zimmerman:Celgene: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Fonseca:Onyx/Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Binding Site: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Millennium: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Applied Biosciences: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 2970 Background: Over a quarter of patients (pts) with symptomatic multiple myeloma (MM) have some degree of renal insufficiency at the time of diagnosis. Multiple studies show that presence of renal failure is strong predictor of inferior overall survival in MM. With effective therapy, renal function improves in a considerable number of patients. It is not clear if the return of renal function to normal levels will improve their outcome to that expected for patients without renal dysfunction. Methods: We evaluated 1478 patients with newly diagnosed myeloma seen at Mayo Clinic within 90 days of diagnosis, between January 1999 and January 2009. We examined these patients for improvement in renal function and identified the lowest serum creatinine obtained during the disease course. The outcomes were analyzed with respect to the renal function improvements. Results: The median age at diagnosis was 64 years (range; 22–93) and 50% were male. The median estimated follow up for the entire cohort was 53 months, with 781 patients alive at the time of analysis with a median follow of 3 years. The serum creatinine was over 1.5 mg/dL at diagnosis in 333 (22.5%) pts and over 2.5 mg/dL in 148 (10%) pts. The median overall survival for the 333 patients was 37 mos (95% CI; 28, 40) compared to 56 mos (95% CI; 51, 63) for those < 1.5 mg/dL; P < 0.001. Among the 333 pts with baseline Cr > 1.5 mg/dl, any improvement in Cr was seen in 263 (79%) including an improvement of at least 0.5 mg/dL in 208 (62%) pts. Among the 263 pts with any improvement, the median time to lowest Cr was 4 months (range; 1–13). The median survival of the group of patients with Cr <= 1.5 mg/dl, over 1.5 mg/dL at diagnosis but improved to <= 1.5 mg/dL, or remained >1.5 mg/dL were 56., 40 and 27 mos respectively; P < 0.001, Figure). We then examined the impact of renal function improvement in the group of patients where the baseline Cr was >2.5 mg/dL. The median OS for the 42 (out of 148 pts with Cr > 2.5 at diagnosis) who had improved to <=1.5 mg/dL was 40 mos compared to 56 mos for those with a Cr <= 1.5 mg/dL at diagnosis and 27.4 mos for the 106 pts whose Cr did not decrease to <= 1.5 mg/dL; P < 0.001. Conclusion: The results of this study point toward improved outcome among patients with renal dysfunction in whom renal function improves. However, it shows that this improvement in renal function does not necessarily improve survival to that observed for the patients with a comparable level of serum creatinine at diagnosis. While early treatment of asymptomatic myeloma has been shown to have little impact on overall survival, a strategy of waiting for serious features of target organ damage to appear before initiation of treatment may have a negative impact on survival in some patients, especially patients with high light chain production who have a higher predilection for renal insufficiency. Disclosures: Kumar: Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Genzyme: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cephalon: Research Funding. Off Label Use: Lenalidomide for treatment of newly diagnosed myeloma. Dispenzieri:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Binding Site: Honoraria. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 2998 Background: Multiple myeloma remains incurable with current therapies and novel approaches based on disease biology are needed. Inhibitors of apoptosis (IAP) proteins represent a conserved group of proteins that are important regulators of apoptosis. X-linked IAP (XIAP) is the best studied IAP and inhibits pro-apoptotic caspases 3, 7 and 9. Multiple myeloma (MM) cell lines express high levels of XIAP and levels are further increased when stimulated by cytokines IL6 and IGF-1, both secreted in copious amounts in the myeloma microenvironment. IL6 and IGF1 up-regulate XIAP by activating the NF-κB, MAPK and PI3K signaling pathways that are commonly aberrant in MM and other tumors. XIAP mRNA contains an internal ribosomal entry site (IRES) sequence in the 5` untranslated region. IRES sequences enable direct ribosome recruitment and aid in translation that is independent of cap-mediated translation. Thus, molecules like mTOR inhibitors might not lead to XIAP downregulation. This was observed when rapamycin, an mTOR inhibitor, was used on MM cell lines. XIAP protein levels were not reduced due to the IRES sequence which leads to translation that is independent of the 5` cap and 4EBP1. Thus XIAP inhibitors might be able to overcome resistance associated with rapamycin treatment. Methods: LC161 was synthesized by Novartis Inc. (Basel, Switzerland). Stock solutions were made in DMSO, and subsequently diluted in RPMI-1640 medium for use. MM cell lines were cultured in RPMI 1640 containing 10% fetal bovine serum (20% serum for primary patient cells) supplemented with L-Glutamine, penicillin, and streptomycin. Cytotoxicity was measured using the MTT viability assay and proliferation using thymidine uptake. Apoptosis was measured using flow cytometry upon cell staining with Annexin V-FITC and propidium iodide (PI). Immunoblotting was done on cell extracts at various time points following incubation with the drug in order to study the cell signaling pathways. Results: LC161 treatment resulted in a dose and time dependent inhibition of cell growth in the MM cell lines tested. Most of the cytotoxicity was evident by 72 hours, with minimal increase seen up to 96 hours of incubation. At 72 hours of incubation, the median inhibitory concentration varied considerably between various cell lines with an IC50 range of 2.5–25μ M. The IC50s were maintained when the cells were treated in co-culture with stromal cells or in the presence of IL6, IGF or VEGF. Dose-dependent decrease in proliferation of the cell lines was evidenced by decreased thymidine incorporation. Apoptotic changes in cells following drug treatment was confirmed by flow cytometry for Annexin and PI. Cleavage of caspases 3, 8 and 9 were confirmed on flow cytometry. Primary myeloma cells from patients were treated with increasing doses of the drug and dose dependent increase in apoptosis was observed. Immunoblotting studies demonstrated dose dependent significant down regulation of Xiap, cIAP1, cIAP2 and surviving and up-regulation of activated caspases 3, 8 and 9 and PARP. Furthermore, LC161 resulted in down regulation of pAkt, canonical and non-canonical NF-κB, pJNK, p-p38MAPK, c-Myc, Bcl-xL and Mcl1 and up-regulation of pErk and Bcl-2. We are currently examining basal levels of expression of the IAP proteins (Xiap, cIAP1 and cIAP2), pAkt and pErk in various MM cell lines to identify marker proteins that might predict response to this class of drug. In addition, our initial studies of LC161 in combination with the proteasome inhibitor bortezomib demonstrated synergy in killing MM cells in vitro. Additional combinations including inhibitors of the Akt/mTOR pathway and MEK/Erk pathway are currently been done. Conclusion: These studies demonstrate significant in vitro activity of LC161 in MM. Our results suggest the presence of two populations one very sensitive to IAP inhibition and one relatively less sensitive. Our current studies will help identify marker proteins that might predict response to LC161 treatment. We are currently testing LC261 in combination with known inhibitors of the other important signaling pathways implicated in MM disease biology as well as in-vivo experiments in mouse models. Performing these experiments will further validate the efficacy of LC161 as an anti-MM agent and form the basis for it to be taken up for clinical evaluation either as a single agent or in combination with other agent(s). Disclosures: Kumar: Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Genzyme: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cephalon: Research Funding.