Citations 128

Safety and Efficacy of Venetoclax (ABT-199/GDC-0199) Monotherapy for Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma: Phase 1 Preliminary Results

Blood | October 12, 2019 | Volume: 126 | Issue: 23 | Pages: 4219-4219

10.1182/blood.v126.23.4219.4219

Abstract Background: The anti-apoptotic protein BCL-2 has been implicated in mediating the survival of multiple myeloma (MM) cells. Venetoclax is a potent, selective, orally bioavailable small-molecule BCL-2 inhibitor. Venetoclax induces cell death in MM cell lines in vitro and primary MM samples ex vivo. Certain genetic subtypes of MM cells are particularly sensitive to venetoclax, including t(11;14) cells, which express a high ratio of BCL2 to MCL1 (venetoclax resistance factor). The current Phase 1 study evaluates safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetics (PK) in patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory MM. Methods: Primary objectives are to evaluate safety, PK, and recommended phase two dose; other objectives include assessing preliminary efficacy and the impact of chromosomal abnormalities. In dose-escalation (DE) cohorts, venetoclax was given orally daily at 300, 600, 900, or 1200 mg after a 2-week dose ramp-up (3+3 design). Patients in the safety expansion (SE) cohort received 1200 mg daily after ramp-up. All patients were monitored for tumor lysis syndrome (TLS). Results: As of June 17, 2015, 37 patients were enrolled in the study: 30 from DE cohorts and 7 from the SE. Median (range) age was 66 years; 19 (51%) were female. Fourteen were ISS stage I, 13 stage II, 8 stage III, 2 unknown. The median (range) number of prior lines of therapy was 6 (1-19). Thirty-two had prior bortezomib (20 refractory), 35 lenalidomide (18 refractory), and 26 had prior stem cell transplant. Fourteen patients had t(11;14), 4 had t(4;14), 5 had del 17p, and 17 had del 13q. Adverse events (AEs) in ≥20% of patients were nausea (49%), diarrhea (38%), vomiting (30%), anemia (27%), fatigue (24%). Grade 3/4 AEs (≥10%): thrombocytopenia (22%), anemia (19%), neutropenia (11 %). Serious AEs (≥2 patients): pyrexia (n=3), cough, malignant neoplasm progression, and sepsis (2 each); 2 (upper abdominal pain and anemia) were possibly related to venetoclax. Thirty (81%) patients have discontinued venetoclax: 24 due to PD, 3 for AEs (worsening shortness of breath, hypokalemia, and nausea), 2 withdrew consent, 1 due to death (brain hemorrhage following injury). Four deaths occurred (2 due to PD, 1 due to brain hemorrhage, 1 due to pneumopathy). Two of the 6 patients in the 600 mg cohort experienced DLTs of upper abdominal pain and nausea with abdominal pain. No patients met the criteria for laboratory or clinical TLS. Based on preliminary PK (n=21), the mean Cmax and AUC24 were ~dose-proportional at all studied doses (300, 600, 1200 mg) except 900 mg, and dose-normalized venetoclax exposure in MM was similar to that in CLL and NHL pts. Thirty-two of the 37 patients were evaluable for preliminary efficacy (Table). Two patients, both t(11;14), achieved a complete response (1 at 600 mg and 1 at 900 mg). Responses were first achieved at 1.8 and 1.1 months and were maintained for 9.7 and 9.0 months, respectively (900 mg pt remains in CR). Among the 16 patients receiving 1200 mg in the DE or SE cohort, 6 of whom had t(11;14), 5 achieved SD, 6 experienced PD, and 5 are not yet evaluable. Conclusions: Venetoclax monotherapy had a tolerable safety profile in heavily-pretreated relapsed/refractory MM, and no new safety signals were observed compared to other venetoclax studies. The study continues to enroll in the SE cohort at 1200 mg. Responses (including CR) and longer time on venetoclax were observed in t(11;14) patients. These early results suggest that venetoclax has single agent activity, most prominently in t(11;14) patients. Figure 1. Figure 1. Disclosures Kumar: Celgene: Research Funding; Millenium/Takeda: Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Celgene, Millenium, Sanofi, Skyline, BMS, Onyx, Noxxon,: Other: Consultant, no compensation,; Skyline, Noxxon: Honoraria. Off Label Use: Venetoclax is an investigational drug that is not yet approved in this indication.. Vij:Takeda, Onyx: Research Funding; Celgene, Onyx, Takeda, Novartis, BMS, Sanofi, Janssen, Merck: Consultancy. Kaufman:Janssen: Consultancy; Spectrum: Consultancy; Merck: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Novartis: Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding. Mikhael:Sanofi: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding. Moreau:Takeda: Other: Adboard; Janssen: Other: Adboard; Celgene: Other: Adboard; Novartis: Other: Adboard; Amgen: Other: Adboard. Alzate:AbbVie: Employment, Equity Ownership. Morris:AbbVie: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ross:AbbVie: Employment, Equity Ownership. Dunbar:AbbVie: Employment, Equity Ownership. Zhu:AbbVie: Employment, Equity Ownership. Maciag:AbbVie: Employment, Equity Ownership. Agarwal:AbbVie: Employment, Equity Ownership. Leverson:AbbVie: Employment, Equity Ownership. Enschede:AbbVie: Employment, Equity Ownership. Humerickhouse:AbbVie: Employment, Equity Ownership. Touzeau:AbbVie: Research Funding.
A Phase II Study of Allogeneic Transplantation for Older Patients with AML in First Complete Remission Using a Reduced Intensity Conditioning Regimen: Results From CALGB 100103/BMT CTN 0502

Blood | October 12, 2019 | Volume: 120 | Issue: 21 | Pages: 230-230

10.1182/blood.v120.21.230.230

Abstract Abstract 230 The prognosis for patients (pts) with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) who are aged 60 years or older at the time of initial diagnosis is poor. Even for pts achieving a first complete remission (CR1), prospects for long-term survival are poor due to the very high risk of relapse. Conventional myeloablative conditioning followed by allogeneic blood or marrow transplantation is associated with significantly less relapse compared with conventional chemotherapy when performed in younger pts with AML in CR1. However, the toxicity of this approach in older pts is prohibitive. A reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) regimen may mitigate the risk of early toxicity and while early results in older AML pts have been encouraging and suggest disease free survival (DFS) rates above 30% at 3 yrs (Farag et al, Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2011), most data are retrospective and pts have not been treated uniformly. We therefore sought to determine the effectiveness of a uniform RIC regimen given to older pts with AML in CR1 on a prospective multi-center phase II trial conducted by the Alliance (formerly Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB)) and the Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinical Trials Network (BMT CTN). The study, activated in 2004, was initially limited to recipients of a matched related donor (MRD) graft but was amended in 2006 to include matched unrelated donor grafts (URD). The primary endpoint of the study was 2-year DFS. We hypothesized that DFS at 2-years would exceed 20% and powered the study to detect a 2-year DFS probability of 35% for URD recipients. We focused the primary analysis on URD recipients since the majority of older pts require an URD graft. Eligible pts were from 60–74 years old inclusive, had AML in CR1 following induction chemotherapy, availability of a 6/6 MRD or 8/8 URD, and absence of significant end-organ damage prior to transplantation. Adverse events (AE) were initially recorded according to NCI-CTCAE v3.0, amended to v4.0 in 10/2010. Accrual was completed in 12/2011. 132 pts were registered at 21 centers and 123 transplanted (MRD (47%); URD (53%). All donor grafts were mobilized and collected following G-CSF (PBSC). The median age of pts was 65 (range 60–74) and 76 pts (62%) were male. At diagnosis, 67% had an intermediate risk karyotype, 20% adverse risk, <1% favorable, and in 11% data were missing. More than 90% achieved CR following standard “7+3” based induction. CR1 was achieved after 1 (59%) or 2 (41%) induction cycles. Consolidation therapy was administered for one (50%) or two (24%) cycles and 17% received no consolidation with data missing in 9%. All but the initial 8 MRD recipients (who received fludarabine and busulfan alone) were conditioned with the same regimen containing fludarabine (30mg/m2/day × 5), busulfan (6.4mg/kg IV total dose), and antithymocyte globulin (ATG; thymoglobulin) (7.5mg/kg total dose). Only one case of primary graft failure was reported. With a median follow-up of 3.3 yrs, the results in the 123 transplanted pts are depicted below: Event Cumulative incidence at 100 days* or 2yrs† 95% CI Acute GVHD 2-4 9.4%* 4.1–15% Acute GVHD 3-4 3.4%* 1.2–6.7% Chronic GVHD 26%† 17–34% Relapse 47%† 37–57% Treatment related mortality (TRM) 14%† 7.2–21% Event Probability at 2 yrs 95% CI DFS 39% 30–50% DFS URD only 38% 26–55% Overall survival (all pts) 46% 36–57% The rates of both acute and chronic GVHD as well as TRM were relatively low. There were 81 grade 3–5 non-hematologic AE recorded, including 7 grade 5 (4 infections, 1 each cardiac, pulmonary, and second malignancy). Relapse was the most common cause of death. In conclusion, the results of this first prospective US cooperative group trial conducted in a homogeneously treated group of older AML patients in CR1 demonstrate the feasibility and effectiveness of RIC allografting using MRD or URD PBSC grafts. DFS appears better following a RIC allograft compared to results achieved historically after conventional therapies, warranting prospective comparison in pts with contemporary cytogenetic and molecular disease characterization. Future research should also focus on preventing disease relapse after RIC allografting in this population. Disclosures: Devine: Sanofi: Honoraria, Research Funding. Off Label Use: Antithymocyte globulin for GVHD prophylaxis is included in the abstract. Vij:Millennium: Speakers Bureau. Shea:Otsuka: Research Funding.
Thrombotic Microangiopathy in Multiple Myeloma

Blood | October 12, 2019 | Volume: 126 | Issue: 23 | Pages: 5317-5317

10.1182/blood.v126.23.5317.5317

Abstract Background: Thrombotic microangiopathy (TMA) is a hematologic syndrome associated with endothelial injury, microvascular thrombosis, and hemolytic anemia resulting in end organ damage. TMA is rarely associated with multiple myeloma (MM) and is usually reported in the setting of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplants (AHSCT), with associated graft versus host disease and calcineurin inhibitor use. We present 11 cases of TMA in MM patients not associated with AHSCT. Methods: Cases were collected from multiple centers in patients with confirmed diagnosis of MM. TMA was diagnosed by the presence of thrombocytopenia and evidence of microangiopathic hemolytic anemia. Results: Eleven patients with MM were identified to have developed TMA during the course of their disease. Two patients presented with TMA at the time of MM diagnosis. A third had been off treatment for over a year prior to presenting with a TMA which correlated with a significant increase in her free light chains. The other cases occurred during active treatment. All remaining patients received proteasome inhibitors, with three patients on bortezomib-based regimens and five patients on carfilzomib. One patient on a bortezomib-based regimen had been stable prior to developing a TMA in the setting of sepsis. In the remaining patients, the TMA developed rapidly after initiating the proteasome inhibitor. In all cases, the TMA improved after drug withdrawal. One patient was later rechallenged with bortezomib and again developed TMA. Discussion: A review of the literature reveals only nine cases of TMA with MM. Of these, 4 patients had TMA as the initial presentation of MM, and 5 patients were on treatment, most often bortezomib-based regimens. Our series patients match those in the literature closely and demonstrate that TMAs can occur in MM outside of the context of AHSCT. In roughly one third of patients, TMAs were the initial presentation of MM and improved with treatment of the MM. In others, the use of proteasome inhibitors appears to be associated with development of TMA. In these cases, the temporal correlation, resolution of TMA after medication withdrawal, and the instance of recurrence of TMA with rechallenge of bortezomib, support a causal relationship between the medication and the TMA. Thus, a high clinical suspicion for TMA must exist for patients on proteasome inhibitors who develop worsening anemia and thrombocytopenia. Medication should be withdrawn if TMA is diagnosed. Disclosures Vij: Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy.
Pooled Safety Analysis From Phase (Ph) 1 and 2 Studies of Carfilzomib (CFZ) In Patients with Relapsed and/or Refractory Multiple Myeloma (MM)

Blood | October 12, 2019 | Volume: 116 | Issue: 21 | Pages: 1954-1954

10.1182/blood.v116.21.1954.1954

Abstract Abstract 1954 Background: Carfilzomib (CFZ) is a novel, highly selective epoxyketone proteasome inhibitor that produces potent and sustained proteasome inhibition both in vitro and in vivo. CFZ appears to lack many of the off-target activities frequently associated with bortezomib (BTZ). This lack of off-target activity may account for observed differences in tolerability seen with CFZ including lack of significant neuropathy and minimal neutropenia and diarrhea. To date, single agent CFZ has been evaluated in Ph 1 and 2 studies in >600 patients, and the vast majority of patients treated had relapsed and/or refractory (R/R) MM. In these settings, CFZ has demonstrated durable single-agent activity and was well-tolerated in patients with advanced stage disease with co-morbidities including baseline neuropathy or renal insufficiency. Here we present the results of parallel safety analyses of patients from four Ph 1 and 2 studies with CFZ. Materials and Methods: The present safety analyses were based on data accumulated from patients enrolled in the following trials: PX-171-003 A0 (R/R MM), PX-171-003 A1 (R/R MM), PX-171-004 (relapsed MM), and PX-171-005 (R/R MM with varying degrees of renal function). In all studies, the treatment schedule was based on a 28-day cycle, dosing CFZ QDx2 each week for 3 weeks (Days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16) with 12 days of rest. Doses of CFZ ranged from 15–20 mg/m2 in cycle 1 (005 [15 mg/m2], 003 A0 and A1, 004 [20 mg/m2]). In three studies CFZ was escalated to 27 mg/m2 after the first cycle, as tolerated (003- A1, 004-BTZ naïve subset and 005). In PX-171-005, low-dose dexamethasone was added in the majority of patients. Results: CFZ was well-tolerated by patients across the 4 studies analyzed. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) included fatigue, anemia, nausea, dyspnea, and thrombocytopenia. Detailed descriptions of the incidence of treatment-related AEs (all Grades (G) in ≥25% of pts; ≥G3 in ≥5% of pts) across studies are presented in the table. Peripheral neuropathy (PN) occurred infrequently across all 4 studies (N= 517), with only 20 patients (3.9%) experiencing PN of any G and only 2 patients (0.4%) with G3 PN. Febrile neutropenia was likewise uncommon, occurring in only 3 patients (0.6%). Serious treatment emergent AEs (SAEs) occurring in ≥1% of patients and considered possibly/probably related to study drug across all 4 studies included: pneumonia (3.5%), congestive cardiac failure (2.5%), acute renal failure (1.7%), pyrexia (1.2%), and dyspnea (1%). Conclusions: Despite a substantial disease burden present in the patient populations described here, CFZ was well-tolerated by patients with MM across all studies examined. The excellent safety/tolerability profile of CFZ has permitted prolonged administration (in some cases over 24 mos of continuous therapy including extension study) with minimal dose modifications or discontinuations due to toxicity. The low levels of neuropathy seen with CFZ make this agent a potentially important treatment option for patients with pre-existing neuropathy from either underlying disease or prior neuropathic anti-myeloma therapy. Disclosures: Singhal: Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Takeda/Millenium: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Research Funding. Siegel:Millenium: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Martin:Celgene: Honoraria; Onyx: Consultancy. Vij:Onyx: Honoraria. Wang:Celgene: Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding; Millenium: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Jakubowiak:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Centocor Ortho Biotec: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Exelixis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Lonial:Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding. Kukreti:Celgene: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Ortho Biotech: Honoraria. Zonder:Millenium: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Cephalon: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria. Wong:Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Employment. McCulloch:Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Kauffman:Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Niesvizky:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millenium: Consultancy, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding. Stewart:Millennium: Consultancy; Celgene: Honoraria. Jagannath:Millenium, OrthoBiotec, Celgene, Merck, Onyx: Honoraria; Imedex, Medicom World Wide, Optum Health Education, PER Group: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau.
PX-171-004, An Ongoing Open-Label, Phase II Study of Single-Agent Carfilzomib (CFZ) in Patients with Relapsed or Refractory Myeloma (MM); Updated Results From the Bortezomib-Treated Cohort.

Blood | October 12, 2019 | Volume: 114 | Issue: 22 | Pages: 303-303

10.1182/blood.v114.22.303.303

Abstract Abstract 303 Background: Carfilzomib (CFZ) is a novel proteasome inhibitor that binds its target selectively and irreversibly, resulting in greater and more sustained proteasomal inhibition compared to BTZ (Demo et al, Cancer Res 2007). CFZ overcomes BTZ-resistance in vitro (Kuhn et al, Blood 2007) and in a previous Phase 2 study (PX-171-003), single-agent CFZ achieved durable responses and maintained disease control [e.g. ≥ Stable Disease (SD)] in patients with progressive multiple myeloma (MM) despite treatment with essentially all available agents. PX-171-004 is an ongoing Phase 2 study of CFZ monotherapy in MM patients with relapsed or refractory disease following 1–3 prior therapies. Here we report updated data for the BTZ-treated cohort. Methods: Patients with relapsed or refractory (defined as < 25% response or disease progression during therapy) MM were enrolled and stratified based on prior BTZ exposure (e.g. BTZ-naïve and BTZ-treated). For the BTZ-treated cohort, tolerability and response to prior BTZ [≥ Minor Response (MR)] was not required. CFZ 20 mg/m2 IV was administered on Days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15 and 16 every 28 days, for up to 12 cycles. The primary endpoint was Overall Response Rate (ORR) [≥ Partial Response (PR)] by IMWG criteria. Secondary endpoints included Clinical Benefit Response (CBR = ORR + MR) and safety. Results: Thirty-five BTZ-treated patients were enrolled. Six (17%) patients had previously received BTZ exclusively as a single agent, 15 (43%) received BTZ as part of a chemotherapy combination and 10 (29%) received BTZ as part of a stem cell transplant (SCT) regimen. An additional 4 (11%) received BTZ in a chemotherapy combination as well as part of a separate transplant regimen. Other prior therapies included alkylators (89%), SCT (81%), thalidomide (69%), lenalidomide (37%), and anthracyclines (31%). Six (17%) patients had disease refractory to BTZ and 9 (26%) additional patients had discontinued BTZ due to toxicities. At baseline, 19 (54 %) patients had an ECOG score ≥ 1, 17 (49%) patients had neuropathy of Grade ≥ 1, 9 (26%) patients had impaired renal function (CrCl <60 mL/min) and 9 (26%) had diabetes. The median time since diagnosis was 3.6 years (range 1.2–13.2). To date, the mean number of CFZ doses administered was 29.3 (∼5 four-week cycles; range 4–72 doses, 0.7–12 cycles). Thirty-three patients who initiated therapy were evaluable for response per protocol. The ORR was 18% (6/33), including 1 CR and 5 PRs. An additional 4 (12%) patients had MR (CBR= 30%) and 13 (39%) had SD for ≥ 6 weeks. For evaluable patients who were either refractory or intolerant to their prior BTZ therapy, responses to CFZ included 1 PR and 1 MR and 8 SDs. The most common adverse events (AEs) (≥ 30% patients) were primarily Grades 1/2 and included fatigue (57%), nausea (54%), vomiting (37%), dyspnea (34%), diarrhea (34%), anemia (31%), increased creatinine (31%) and upper respiratory tract infection (31%). Grade 3/4 AEs occurring in ≥ 10% of patients were anemia (14.3%) and neutropenia (11.4%). There were no reports of febrile neutropenia. Dose modifications were rarely required. Peripheral neuropathy (PN) was uncommon (4 patients, 11%); only 1 patient had a Grade 3 event that lasted < 36 hours and did not result in missed doses or dose modification. None of the 9 patients with baseline renal impairment were discontinued for renal AEs. To date, 6 (17%) patients have completed the full 12-cycle protocol at the initial dose and schedule, 6 (17%) remain on study and 1 patient has received > 19 cycles on a recently initiated extended treatment protocol. Conclusions: In a BTZ-exposed population that includes BTZ treatment failures and significant comorbidities (e.g. diabetes, renal insufficiency, etc), the 18% ORR (CBR 30%) is notable for this steroid- and anthracycline-sparing regimen. Single-agent CFZ is well tolerated, even in patients with renal insufficiency, and both myelosuppression and PN are uncommon. These data support the continuing evaluation of CFZ as a safe and effective treatment option in MM. Disclosures: Siegel: Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Wang:Proteolix, Inc.: Research Funding. Stewart:Genzyme, Celgene, Millenium, Proteolix: Honoraria; Takeda, Millenium: Research Funding; Takeda-Millenium, Celgene, Novartis, Amgen: Consultancy. Kukreti:Celgene: Honoraria. Jakubowiak:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Centocor Ortho Biotech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Exelixis: 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, Speakers Bureau. Jagannath:Millennium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. McDonagh:Proteolix: Research Funding. Belch:Ortho Biotech: Honoraria, Research Funding. Bahlis:Celgene: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Ortho Biotech: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Le:Proteolix, Inc.: Employment. Kunkel:Proteolix: Consultancy, Employment. Bennett:Proteolix: Employment. Kauffman:Proteolix, Inc.: Employment. Vij:Proteolix, Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding.
Updated Results of Bortezomib-Naïve Patients in PX-171-004, An Ongoing Open-Label, Phase II Study of Single-Agent Carfilzomib (CFZ) in Patients with Relapsed or Refractory Myeloma (MM).

Blood | October 12, 2019 | Volume: 114 | Issue: 22 | Pages: 302-302

10.1182/blood.v114.22.302.302

Abstract Abstract 302 Background: Carfilzomib (CFZ) is a proteasome inhibitor with unique target selectivity and an irreversible binding mechanism that results in sustained proteasome inhibition. In preclinical studies, CFZ lacks non-proteasome off-target activities associated with bortezomib (BTZ) (Kapur et al, Blood 2008). This may account for observed differences in tolerability with CFZ (e.g. minimal neuropathy and myelosuppression), permitting consecutive day dosing and treatment over an extended period of time. We previously observed higher response rates in multiple myeloma (MM) patients without prior BTZ exposure (BTZ-naïve) compared to those with relapsed disease following BTZ therapy (BTZ-treated). Here we present updated data on the BTZ-naïve cohort from PX-171-004, an ongoing Phase 2 study of single-agent CFZ in MM patients with relapsed or refractory disease following 1–3 prior therapies. Methods: Patients with relapsed or refractory (e.g, < 25% response or disease progression during last treatment) MM were enrolled and stratified into two cohorts: BTZ-naïve and BTZ-treated. CFZ 20 mg/m2 IV was administered on Days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15 and 16 every 28 days, for up to 12 cycles. The primary endpoint was Overall Response Rate [≥ Partial Response (PR)] per International Uniform Response Criteria for Multiple Myeloma. Secondary endpoints included Clinical Benefit Response [CBR = ORR + Minor Reponse (MR)] and safety. Results: Fifty-seven BTZ-naive patients have been enrolled and 56 subjects have received at least one dose of CFZ. Prior therapies included alkylators (81%), stem cell transplant (SCT) (77%), thalidomide (THAL) (67%), lenalidomide (LEN) (42%), and anthracyclines (23%). Ten (18%) patients had received both LEN and THAL and 18 (32%) patients were refractory to their most recent regimen prior to study entry. At baseline, 30 (53%) patients had an ECOG score ≥ 1, 21 (37%) had neuropathy Grade ≥ 1, 12 (21%) had impaired renal function (CrCl < 60 mL/min) and 10 (18%) had diabetes. The mean time from diagnosis was 4 years (range 0.7–24). To date, the mean number of CFZ doses administered was 29.2 (∼5 four-week cycles; range 2–72 doses, 1–12 cycles). Fifty-one patients initiated therapy and were evaluable for response per protocol. The ORR was 45% (23/51 patients) and included 1 CR, 4 VGPR and 18 PR. An additional 9 (18%) patients had MR and 10 (20%) had stable disease (SD) for ≥ 6 weeks. The most common (>25%) adverse events (AEs) were fatigue (59%), nausea (41%), dyspnea (36%), and anemia (29%), and were primarily ≤ Grade 2. Grade 3/4 AEs occurring in ≥ 5% of patients were thrombocytopenia (9%), fatigue (9%), neutropenia (7%), lymphopenia (7%), anemia (5%), pneumonia (5%) and hyperglycemia (5%). One (1.7%) patient had febrile neutropenia. Dose modifications were rarely required. Peripheral neuropathy (PN) of any grade was infrequent (7 patients, 12%) with a single case of Grade 3 PN (2%) in a pt with a history of THAL-induced PN that lasted 41 days. The CFZ dose was reduced and the event resolved to Grade 1 while on CFZ and prior to study discontinuation. Of the12 patients with impaired renal function at baseline, none required dose modifications due to renal AE. Overall, 5 patients have completed the full 12-cycle protocol and another 5 (9%) have completed ≥ 9 cycles; 17 patients (30%) are continuing on study. Conclusions: The 45% ORR (CBR 63%) is noteworthy for a single-agent regimen in patients with tumor progression despite therapy with novel combinations. CFZ can be safely administered to patients with significant comorbidities (e.g. peripheral neuropathy, leukopenia, renal dysfunction, diabetes) when other anti-myeloma agents may not be well tolerated. Enrollment to PX-171-004 is continuing and, based on the safety profile, subjects are now permitted to dose escalate to 27 mg/m2. Disclosures: Wang: Proteolix: Honoraria, Research Funding. Off Label Use: testing testing. Siegel:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Jakubowiak:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Centocor Ortho Biotech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Exelixis: 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, Speakers Bureau. Kukreti:Celgene: Honoraria. Bahlis:Celgene: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Ortho Biotech: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. McDonagh:Proteolix: Research Funding. Belch:Ortho Biotech: Honoraria, Research Funding. Le:Proteolix, Inc.: Employment. Bennett:Proteolix: Employment. Kunkel:Proteolix: Consultancy, Employment. Kauffman:Proteolix, Inc.: Employment. Vij:Proteolix, Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding.
Alkaline Phosphatase (ALP) Variation During Carfilzomib Treatment Is Associated to Best Response in Multiple Myeloma.

Blood | October 11, 2019 | Volume: 114 | Issue: 22 | Pages: 2865-2865

10.1182/blood.v114.22.2865.2865

Abstract Abstract 2865 Poster Board II-841 BACKGROUND: The ubiquitin-proteasome pathway, which has been shown to be an essential cellular degradative system in myeloma cells, can also regulate bone formation through its effects on osteoblast differentiation. Retrospective analysis of variation of ALP during treatment with bortezomib indicates a close correlation between myeloma response and serum ALP levels which multiple studies have shown to be of bone origin. To determine if this effect is a class effect of proteasome inhibitors (PIs), this retrospective study analyzed variation of ALP in relationship to myeloma response during treatment with carfilzomib, the first in a new class of selective epoxyketone PIs that has demonstrated encouraging safety and efficacy in two phase 2 studies of relapsed or refractory myeloma patients. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of serum ALP was performed on relapsed or refractory myeloma patients enrolled on two phase 2 studies (PX-171-003 and PX- 171-004) evaluating the safety and efficacy of single agent carfilzomib. We analyzed data from 38 patients in the first cohort of the PX-171-003 study, a relapsed and refractory myeloma trial for patients who have received ≥ 3 prior therapies including bortezomib and an IMiD and 29 patients in PX-171-004, a relapsed or refractory myeloma trial that included bortezomib naïve patients. All patients received 20 mg/m2 of carfilzomib on Days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16 of a 28-day cycle. RESULTS: Seventy-seven patients were enrolled. The median age was 63 years with a median time since diagnosis of 4.6 years, 52% were male, 84.% had relapsed after autologous transplants, 82.% were previously exposed to bortezomib, and 92% were previously exposed to an IMiD. Sixty seven patients with ALP data were evaluable for response. In PX-171-003 the ORR (≥PR) was 18% and the clinical benefit response (CBR; ≥MR) was 26%, while in PX-171-004 the ORR was 35.5% overall and 57% in bortezomib naive patients. ALP increment from baseline, which was most evident during the second cycle of treatment, was statistically different in patients who achieved ≥VGPR compared to all others on Days 1 (P=0.0049) and 8 (P=0.006) of Cycle 2. In all patients achieving a VGPR or better, ALP increased more than 15 units per liter at Cycle 2 Day 1 over baseline An ALP increase over the same period of time was seen in 26 %, 13%, and 11% of patients achieving PR, MR, and SD, respectively. None of the patients with progressive disease exhibited a similar increase. Our study indicates that response first assessed on Day 15 of Cycle 1 parallels the ALP elevation which returned to baseline levels at the end of Cycle 3. CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective analysis on a subset of patients in these ongoing phase 2 studies of single agent carfilzomib in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma suggests that elevation in ALP may be associated with best response. Taken with previous publications describing bortezomib treatment, these results suggest that this specific anabolic bone phenomenon could be a class effect of proteasome inhibitors. These phase 2 studies are ongoing with a higher dose of carfilzomib (27 mg/m2) being evaluated. The data from this small subset analysis suggests that further exploration of this relationship is warranted. Disclosures: Zangari: Milllennium: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria; OrthoBiotech: Honoraria; Optum Health: Honoraria; Educational Concepts Group, LLC: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Vij:Proteolix: Consultancy, Research Funding. Jagannath:Millennium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria; Merck: Honoraria. Siegel:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Stewart:Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Proteolix: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Wang:Proteolix: Honoraria, Research Funding. Belch:Ortho Biotech: Honoraria, Research Funding. Jakubowiak:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Centocor Ortho Biotech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Exelixis: 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, Speakers Bureau. Trudel:Celgene: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Ortho Biotech: Honoraria. Bahlis:Celgene: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Ortho Biotech: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Lonial:Celgene: Consultancy; Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Gloucester: Research Funding. Singhal:Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Speakers Bureau.
Natural History of Relapsed Myeloma, Refractory to Immunomodulatory Drugs and Proteasome Inhibitors: A Multicenter IMWG Study

Blood | October 11, 2019 | Volume: 128 | Issue: 22 | Pages: 4414-4414

10.1182/blood.v128.22.4414.4414

Abstract Background: Treatment of multiple myeloma has evolved considerably in the past few years with availability of several news drugs as well as increasing use of multidrug combinations. These changes have no doubt led to the improved survival seen among patients with MM. We have previously shown that outcomes of patients intolerant or refractory to one of the IMiDs and bortezomib had a poor outcome. Since that time, other drugs of the same class as well as new classes of drugs have been introduced for the treatment of MM. We designed this retrospective study to estimate the outcomes in patients with relapsed myeloma, who have become refractory to the current generation IMiDs and proteasome inhibitors. Patients and Methods: Patients with relapsed multiple myeloma who have received at least 3 prior lines of therapy, is refractory to both an IMiD (lenalidomide or pomalidomide) AND a proteasome inhibitor (bortezomib or carfilzomib), and has been exposed to an alkylating agent were identified from multiple centers. The time patients met the above criteria was defined as T0, and details of all treatment regimens before and after T0 were collected using electronic CRFs. The study was approved by the IRB at the respective centers. Results: 543 patients were enrolled in this study; median age was 62 years (31-87) and 61% were males. Patients were enrolled from centers in North America (n=181), Europe (n=318), and Asia Pacific (n=44). Patients were diagnosed between 2006 and 2014, the median duration between diagnosis of myeloma and study entry (T0) was 3.1 years (0.3 to 9). The median (95% CI) estimated follow up from diagnosis and from T0 were 61 (57, 66) months and 13 (11, 15) months respectively. The median number of lines of therapy prior to T0 was 4 (3-13), 48% had a prior transplant. The median OS from T0 for the entire cohort was 13 (11, 15) months. For these 462 patients, the median number of recorded regimens was 2 (1-9). The overall response and the depth of response to each line of treatment following T0 are as shown in the table. The median (95% CI) PFS and OS from T0 was 5 (4, 6), and 15.2 (13, 17), respectively. The overall survival for the 81 patients with no treatment post T0 was only 2.1 months. In a multivariate analysis, duration from diagnosis to T0, ISS stage III and number of lines of therapy were all associated with inferior PFS, as well as OS, and in addition, serum creatinine>2 mg/dL at T0 also predicted inferior OS. Conclusions: The study provides the expected outcome following development of myeloma that is refractory to a PI and an IMiD. The outcomes of these patients appear to be better than we had seen historically in patients refractory/ intolerant to bortezomib and IMiDs, highlighting the increased treatment options available for these patients. However, there is decreasing response rate to sequential regimens highlighting the development of drug resistance. The data provides a bench mark for comparison of new therapies that are being evaluated in this disease. Table Table. Disclosures Dimopoulos: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, 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; Genesis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kastritis:Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Genesis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Terpos:BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Genesis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria. Hillengass:Sanofi: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria. Leleu:TEVA: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria; LeoPharma: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Pierre Fabre: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria. Oriol:Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Expert board committee; Amgen: Honoraria, Other: Expert board committee. Cavo:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Millennium: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Mateos:Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: 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; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Vij:Shire: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Jazz: Consultancy; Karyopharma: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Lokhorst:Genmab: Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. van de Donk:Amgen: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Mark:Onyx: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millenium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Ludwig:Amgen: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau. Jagannath:Novartis: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy. Usmani:Array: Research Funding; Britsol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Skyline: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BioPharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millenium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Dytfeld:Janssen Poland: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, 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. Moreau:Novartis: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Lee:Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Shustik:Janssen: 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; Millenium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. de la Rubia:Celgene: Consultancy; Bristol Myers: Consultancy; Amgen,: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy. Durie:Takeda: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy.
Phase I Study of Aurora Kinase Inhibitor MLN8237 and Bortezomib in Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma

Blood | October 11, 2019 | Volume: 120 | Issue: 21 | Pages: 1859-1859

10.1182/blood.v120.21.1859.1859

Abstract Abstract 1859 Genome wide RNA interference studies identified Aurora Kinase (AURK) A and B as lethal targets in Multiple Myeloma (MM) while suppression of these genes also sensitized MM to bortezomib (BTZ). MLN8237 is an oral inhibitor of AURKA. We therefore conducted a Phase I clinical trial of MLN8237 in combination with BTZ. The study enrolled a total of 19 patients at 5 institutions. 9 patients are still receiving active treatment as of the date of this report. Study Design: The phase I portion of this study uses a standard 3+3 design to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of MLN8237 and BTZ in patients with relapsed/refractory MM. Eligibility required a minimum of 1 and maximum of 4 lines of prior therapy. Patients who have received prior BTZ therapy were allowed on trial as long as they did not progress during prior BTZ or ≤ 60 days of therapy discontinuation. The following laboratory values were required £7 days prior to registration. ANC3 1000/mL, Hgb ≥9 g/dl, PLT3 100,000/mL, Total bilirubin £1.5 × upper limit of normal (ULN), Creatinine £ 2.5 × ULN, a baseline LVEF ≥45%. Patients were required to be able to take oral medication and to maintain a fast as required for 2 hours before and 1 hour after MLN8237 administration. Treatment Overview: The first 3 patients received MLN8237 at 25 mg po days 1–14 and BTZ at 1.3 mg/m2/dose iv. days 1, 4, 8, 11 on a 28 day schedule. Based on data from other concurrent trials an amendment changed dosing of MLN8237 to 20, 30, 40 or 50 mg po twice daily on days 1–7 and BTZ was given at 1.5mg/m2 iv weekly on a 28 day schedule. Results: Median age of patients was 64, 63% were male, 31% had high risk genetics, 84% had prior stem cell transplant, 53% of patients were relapsed and 47% were relapsed and refractory to therapy. No DLTs were observed even at the highest dose level tested. However, one patient at the highest dose level required a platelet transfusion in order to initiate treatment on time in Cycle 2. Thus, a further 3 patients accrued at the highest dose level before declaring the MTD and proceeding to phase II. The highest dose level (Dose Level 3: MLN8237 50 mg po twice daily on days 1–7; BTZ 1.5 mg/m2 iv. given on days 1, 8, 15, 22) was the final dose level tested (the MTD of single agent MLN8237 is 50mg as defined in other Phase I trials). The ORR was 26% (1 CR, 4 PR); when minor responses are included the ORR was 52%. Median follow up was 4.3 months (range 0.9–23.4) and PFS was 5.5 months. At last follow up 12 patients showed no progression and 7 had progressed. Toxicity: 63% of patients experienced a grade 3AE and 5% a grade 4 AE. Grade 3 or 4 toxicity seen in more than one patient was all hematologic with thrombocytopenia and neutropenia being common. Other toxicity of any grade regardless of attribution occurring in more than 20% of patients included neuropathy 63%, fatigue 63%, diarrhea 53%, nausea 47%,vomiting 26%, infection 32%, alopecia 21%, Conclusions: The MTD of the combination is MLN8237 50 mg po twice daily on days 1–7 and BTZ at 1.5mg/m2 iv weekly. Phase II testing is underway and updated results will be presented. Disclosures: Stewart: Millenium: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Onyx: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy. Vij:Millennium: Speakers Bureau. Hofmeister:Celgene: Advisory board Other, Honoraria.
Phase I/II, Multicenter, Open-Label, Dose-Escalation Study of Bendamustine in Combination with Lenalidomide and Dexamethasone (BRD) in Patients with Relapsed Multiple Myeloma: A Multiple Myeloma Research Consortium Study.

Blood | October 11, 2019 | Volume: 120 | Issue: 21 | Pages: 2965-2965

10.1182/blood.v120.21.2965.2965

Abstract Abstract 2965 Background: Alkylating agents have been the mainstay of multiple myeloma (MM) therapy for decades and despite introduction of several new therapies, it continues to play a significant role in its management as part of various drug combinations. While melphalan has been the most commonly used alkylator in MM, recent studies have suggested significant activity for bendamustine, a bifunctional alkylator. The combination of lenalidomide and melphalan has been associated with high response rates in relapse and newly diagnosed MM. Based on these promising results we designed a trial to evaluate the maximally tolerated dose of lenalidomide and bendamustine when used in combination as well as the efficacy of the combination in relapsed disease. Patients and Methods: Patients with relapsed MM and measurable disease were enrolled on this phase 1/2 trial provided they had not more than 4 prior lines of therapy for MM, had adequate performance status and organ and hematological function. Patients refractory to lenalidomide were allowed to enroll. The primary objectives were to (i) to determine the MTD of bendamustine and lenalidomide in combination with dexamethasone in subjects with relapsed MM (phase 1) and (ii) to evaluate the confirmed response rate of bendamustine in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed MM (phase 2). Bendamustine (B) was administered on days 1 and 2 of a 28-day cycle at doses of 50–100 mg/m2. Lenalidomide (R) was given days 1–21 at doses of 15–25 mg daily. Dexamethasone (D) was administered at 40 mg weekly. Dose escalation was done using a 3+3 design and MTD was defined as one dose level below that resulted in >=2 DLTS among 6 patients. The primary end point for this trial was the proportion of patients with confirmed hematologic response (sCR, CR, VGPR, or PR) over the first 6 cycles of treatment. Results: A total of 72 patients were accrued to this study from March 2010 to May 2012: 21 patients in phase 1 and 51 in phase 2. The 6 patients from the MTD dose level of phase 1 were also included in phase 2. The median age of all 72 patients was 62.1 (range, 40–86) and 57% were male. Majority (75%) of patients had previously been exposed to lenalidomide and 69% had prior exposure to bortezomib. Median # of prior therapies was 3 (range, 1–5) and 74% of patients had a prior autologous stem cell transplant. Patients have received a median of 4 cycles (range, 1–25), with 27 patients still continuing on active treatment. Disease progression led to study discontinuation in 22 (49%) and adverse events were the reason for discontinuation in 14 (31%). In phase I, two DLTs (Grade (Gr) 2 neuropathy and Gr 4 neutropenia) were seen at the highest dose level (100 mg/m2 B, 25 mg R), and the MTD was determined as 75 mg/m2 of B given days 1 and 2 and 25 mg of R days 1–21, along with D 40 mg weekly. Overall patients, 12/21 (57%) had a PR or better. In phase 2, 17 (40%) confirmed responses (>=PR) were seen among the 43 patients evaluable for response (received at least 6 cycles of treatment or have gone off study prior to 6 cycles); including 9 (21%) VGPR and 8 (19%) PR. An additional 5 patients had a minor response. Over all dose levels, a gr 3 or higher adverse event at least possibly attributed to the study was seen in 75% of patients. The most common toxicities were all hematological (thrombocytopenia and leukopenia), and most common non-hematological toxicity was infection. Prolonged time to recovery of blood counts was seen in a few patients, but majority of patients were able to tolerate the regimen with adequate dose reductions. Conclusion: The recommended dose of the combination for further studies is bendamustine at 75 mg/m2 days 1 and 2, lenalidomide 25 mg daily on days 1–21 and dexamethasone days 1, 8, 15, 22; with cycles repeated every 28 days. The regimen is well tolerated with hematological toxicity being the most common and manageable with dose reductions. The regimen is effective with high response rates and durable responses seen. Updated results with response rates and time to event analyses will be available for the entire cohort at the time of meeting. Disclosures: Kumar: Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Cephalon: Research Funding; Genzyme: Research Funding. Krishnan:celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Zimmerman:Celgene: Honoraria; Millennium: Honoraria; Novartis: Expert Testimony, Expert Testimony Other. Vij:Teva: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Honoraria, Research Funding.