Dingli, David

Abstract Background: A recent preclinical study revealed an antiproliferative and apoptotic effect of propranolol on MM cell lines. This study was to investigate if propranolol and other beta blocker intake improved survival in MM patients. Methods: Among patients seen at Mayo Clinic, Rochester from 1993 to 2010, we identified those taking propranolol. Age, year of diagnosis, International Staging System (ISS), Mayo Stratification of Myeloma and Risk-Adapted Therapy (mSMART) were used as case-match variables to match propranolol users to two control populations: no beta blocker and other beta-blocker. Cox proportional hazard modeling was utilized to analyze the effect of propranolol and other beta blockers intake on overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS). Results: In 3 groups: propranolol (n=52), no beta blocker (n= 136), or other beta blocker (n=84), transplant eligibility was 63.5%, 66.9%, 66.7% respectively (p=0.90). Median age was 63 years. Median follow-up was 86 months. No statistically differences were seen in age, ISS, mSMART or year of diagnosis in 3 groups (p=0.46).In univariate analysis comparing propranolol vs no beta blocker or other beta blocker cohort, 5-year OS rate was 60.2% vs 47% or 64% (p=0.039), and 5-year DSS rate was 71.7% vs 50.3% or 69.1% (p=0.0029). In multivariate analysis adjusted for age, ISS, transplant eligibility, mSMART and year of diagnosis, compared to propranolol intake, no beta blocker group had poorer OS [HR= 2.081; 95% CI (1.353- 3.200); p=0.0008], and DSS [HR=2.833 (1.709-4.697); p<0.0001], but other beta blocker users had no difference in OS [HR =1.145 (0.728-1.803);p=0.56],and DSS [HR= 1.276 (0.745-2.185); p=0.38]. Conclusion: Propranolol and other beta-blocker intake among MM patients were equally associated with a more favorable OS and DSS. Figure 1 Figure 1. Figure 2 Figure 2. Disclosures Lust: Senesco: PI Other.

Abstract Background Suppression of uninvolved immunoglobulins is a common finding in multiple myeloma and the preservation of uninvolved immunoglobulins at diagnosis is associated with improved progression-free and overall survival. However, little is known about the impact of myeloma treatment on levels of uninvolved immunoglobulins, and the link between changes in uninvolved immunoglobulins during therapy and treatment response, disease progression and survival. Methods We identified patients who received therapy for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma at our institution between 2001 and 2014, and who had data available on absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) and quantitative uninvolved immunoglobulins (Ig) before commencing treatment. The ALC and levels of uninvolved Ig after 4 cycles of therapy were abstracted from the electronic medical record; patients who switched or stopped treatment, or died, before this time point were excluded. To assess change in ALC, the percentage difference in ALC between baseline and 4 cycles was calculated; for uninvolved Ig, the average of the percentage difference between baseline and 4 cycles for each uninvolved Ig (IgA and IgM for IgG myeloma, IgG and IgM for IgA myeloma, IgG and IgA for IgM and IgD myeloma, and IgG, IgM and IgA for light-chain only myeloma) was calculated. Treatment response at 4 cycles was retrospectively assigned according to International Myeloma Working Group criteria. Time to treatment failure (TTF) was defined as time from start of initial therapy to start of next line of therapy or death (if no additional treatment was received). A landmark analysis was used to calculate overall survival (OS) from the date of follow-up after 4 cycles of therapy. The Kruskal-Wallis, Chi-Square, and log rank tests were used to detect differences in medians, proportions, and survival times respectively. Results A total of 421 patients were included in this analysis. The median age was 63 years (range 33-91), 254 patients (60.3%) were male and median follow-up was 6.5 years (95% CI 5.6-7.3); the vast majority of patients had IgG (n=247 [58.7%]), IgA (n=98 [23.3%]) or light-chain only myeloma (n=68 [16.2%]). First line therapy comprised of pulse-dose dexamethasone (DEX, n=92 [21.9%]), lenalidomide-dexamethasone (RD, n=176 [41.8%]), bortezomib-dexamethasone (VD, n=22 [5.2%]), bortezomib-cyclophosphamide-dexamethasone (VCD, n=84 [20.0%]), and bortezomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (VRD, n=47 [11.2%]). Across the entire cohort, the median change in ALC and uninvolved Ig after 4 cycles of treatment was -11.0% (range: -92.7 to +718.8) and +9.0% (-77.7 to +1094.4) respectively; treatment with VCD was associated with the greatest median declines in ALC (DEX: -0.1%; RD: -9.9%; VD: -20.8%; VCD: -40.9%; VRD: -15.3%) and uninvolved Ig (DEX: -0.5%; RD: +15.5%; VD: +44.0%; VCD: -14.0%; VRD: +76.0%, both p<0.001). Conversion from suppression to normalization of the primary uninvolved Ig (IgA in IgG myeloma, and IgG in all other myeloma types) after 4 cycles was seen more frequently with the use of RD (13.1%) and VRD (12.8%) compared to DEX (4.7%), VCD (1.3%), or VD (4.8%), χ2=21.8, p=0.040. When considering only patients in whom the primary uninvolved Ig remained suppressed between baseline and 4 cycles, a ≥25% reduction in the primary uninvolved Ig occurred more frequently with the use of DEX (51.5%) and VCD (34.5%) compared to RD (24.8%), VD (23.5%) or VRD (25.7%), χ2=15.1, p=0.005 (Table 1). Although an average reduction in uninvolved Ig between baseline and 4 cycles (ΔIg<0) was independently associated with a lower likelihood of achieving very good partial response (VGPR) of better on multivariate analysis adjusting for age, sex and treatment regimen (OR=0.40 [0.24-0.63], p<0.001), there were no differences in TTF (2.0yrs vs. 2.0yrs, p=0.783) or OS (8.0yrs vs. 8.0yrs, p=0.721) between patients with ΔIg<0 (n=169) and those with ΔIg≥0 (n=222). Conclusions Myeloma treatments produce differential impacts on immune parameters, with VCD causing the greatest reduction in lymphocytes and uninvolved Ig, implying general targeting of plasma cells, in comparison to lenalidomide, which appeared to be more tumor-specific with relative sparing of lymphocytes and uninvolved Ig. While an average decrease in uninvolved Ig was an independent predictor of a lower likelihood of achieving VGPR or better after 4 cycles of therapy, it was not associated with a shorter TTF or poorer OS. Disclosures Kumar: BMS: Consultancy; Glycomimetics: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kesios: Consultancy; Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Noxxon Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Array BioPharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Skyline: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding. Dispenzieri:GSK: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; pfizer: Research Funding; Jannsen: Research Funding; Alnylam: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Kapoor:Amgen: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Bergsagel:Amgen, BMS, Novartis, Incyte: Consultancy; Novartis: Research Funding.

Abstract Background: The combination of MPD and amyloidosis is rare, and this patient population's clinical outcome is not well studied. Methods: Pts with a MPD and amyloidosis were identified via an clinical note search engine that searches through the electronic medical records of patients seen at Mayo Clinic Rochester, Jacksonville, and Scottsdale between 1990 and 2016. Terms used included amyloid or amyloidosis, chronic myelogenous leukemia or CML, essential thrombocytopenia or ET, and polycythemia vera or PV. Demographic and clinical data were abstracted from the medical record. Pts with both disorders were analyzed and their mortality rates along with median time to death were calculated. Prevalences at the Mayo Clinic were calculated for the years 2014 and 2015. Results: Twenty-three pts diagnosed with both a MPD and amyloidosis were identified. Thirteen (56.5%) were male, 10 (43%) were female. Eleven (47.8%) were initially diagnosed at the Mayo Clinic. Types of amyloidosis were as follows: Eleven (47%) had immunoglobulin light-chain (AL), four had localized (17%), two (8.7%) had wild-type transthyretin (ATTR), one (4.3%) had mutant ATTR, and five (21.8%) were unknown. Types of MPD were as follows: Seven (30%) had polycythemia vera (PV), seven (30%) had chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML), five (22%) had myelofibrosis, and four (17%) had essential thrombocytosis (ET). Fifteen (65%) were initially diagnosed with a MPD. Median time to last follow-up from second diagnosis was 1.7 years, and median time to death following second diagnosis was 1.4 years. The mortality rate was 87% in the total population. The median time to death for AL and PV was 2.7 years, AL and CML 1.0 years, and AL and ET 1.17 years. Myelofibrosis did not occur with AL. The most common combination was AL and PV, which accounted for five (22%) of the cases. Treatment regimens for the patients with AL were varied. Multiple drugs were combined with dexamethasone including melphalan, velcade, pomalidomide, lenalidomide, doxorubicin, and revlimid. Cyclophosphamide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (CyBorD) were used in two cases. The mean time to diagnosis of amyloidosis from symptom onset was 10.3 months. Prevalences of AL and a MPD in 2014 and 2015 at the Mayo Clinic were 2.8% and 1.5%, respectively. Conclusions: The mortality rate for the combined diagnoses is high. The most common combination of diagnoses was that of AL and PV, which was associated with a mean time to death of 2.7 years. Disclosures Al-Kali: Celgene: Research Funding; Onconova Therapeutics, Inc.: Research Funding.

Abstract Background: Pomalidomide has demonstrated excellent activity in patients with relapsed, lenalidomide refractory, multiple myeloma (MM). Between November 2007 and March 2012, we enrolled 285 patients with relapsed MM on 5 sequential phase 2 trials; patients received pomalidomide at 2mg or 4 mg daily with weekly dexamethasone (Pom/dex). The approved dose of pomalidomide is 4 mg for 21 of 28 days. We wished to compare efficacy, tolerability and long-term outcomes between cohorts treated with 2 mg or 4mg daily continuously and 4mg daily for 21/28 days. Methods: After excluding two ineligible patients, 283 patients with lenalidomide refractory, relapsed MM from 5 sequential cohorts were analyzed. These patients were divided into 3 groups: Group1 received Pom 2mg for 28/28 day cycle (N= 69), Group 2 received Pom 4 mg for 28/28 day cycle (N= 95) and Group 3 received Pom 4mg for 21/28 day cycle (N= 119). All patients received oral dexamethasone given 40 mg daily on days 1, 8, 15, and 22. Response was assessed by the IMWG Uniform Response criteria. All patients received aspirin 325 mg daily for DVT prophylaxis or full dose anticoagulation. Results: The median age was 63 years (32-85); 35% were female. The median time from diagnosis was 53 months and the median number of prior regimens was 4. 127 (46%) had high-risk molecular markers. Prior therapies (% received) included lenalidomide (100%), thalidomide (46%), bortezomib (78%), autologous stem cell transplant (71%), and allogeneic transplant (4%). The median follow-up is 16.4 months (3.2-64.4). Forty eight percent are alive and 26% remain progression free; 15 patients are continuing to receive treatment. Frequency of AEs by groups are shown in Table 1. The most notable difference is grade 3+ neutropenia seen in 39% of group 1 and 56% and 57% of groups 2 and 3. Confirmed responses of PR or better were seen in 29% (group1), 35% (group2) and 24% (group3). Median duration of response (DOR) was 14.1 months (group1), 14.5 months (group2) and 10.2 months (group3). Median PFS was 5.5 months (group1), 6.9 months (group2) and 4.3 months (group3). Although the dose level cohorts were sequential rather than randomized, we compared OS between the dose levels in an exploratory manner. There was no significant difference in OS between dose levels (p=0.26). Median overall survival (OS) was 16.6 months (group1), 21.9 months (group2) and 16.0 months (group3). Conclusions: Pom/dex is active and well tolerated even in heavily pretreated patients Responses are durable. Response rates and overall toxicity are similar between the 2 mg and 4 mg doses. Neutropenia is more common in those receiving doses of 4mg daily or for 21/28 days compared to those receiving 2 mg daily. Table 1. All Grades Grade 3+ 2mg 28 Day 4mg 28 Day 4mg 21 Day 2mg 28 Day 4mg 28 Day 4mg 21 Day Anemia 68% 58% 74% 14% 15% 27% Lymphopenia 22% 51% 11% 16% 32% 8% Neutropenia 71% 82% 77% 39% 57% 56% Thrombocytopenia 51% 61% 63% 10% 9% 23% Leukopenia 59% 77% 72% 26% 38% 39% Pneumonia 7% 11% 12% 6% 7% 11% Fatigue 51% 65% 60% 9% 5% 8% Neuropathy 28% 32% 28% 0% 3% 0% Elevated Blood Glucose 10% 21% 8% 4% 6% 3% Pneumonitis 3% 2% 3% 3% 1% 1% VTE (Thrombosis) 3% 3% 3% 1% 3% 3% Secondary Malignancy 0% 2% 1% 0% 2% 1% Figure1. Kaplan Meier Overall Survival Curves Figure1. Kaplan Meier Overall Survival Curves Disclosures Lacy: Celgene: Research Funding. Fonseca:Medtronic, Otsuka, Celgene, Genzyme, BMS, Lilly, Onyx, Binding Site, Millennium, AMGEN: Consultancy, patent for the prognostication of MM based on genetic categorization of the disease. He also has sponsored research from Cylene and Onyx Other, Research Funding. Bergsagel:Novartis: Research Funding; Constellation Pharmaceutical: Research Funding; OncoEthix: Research Funding; MundiPharma: Research Funding. Stewart:Novartis: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Array BioPharma: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co.: Research Funding. Reeder:Millennium, Celgene, Novartis: Research Funding. Mikhael:Onyx: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction - With over 12,000 deaths from MM anticipated in 2016, nearly all patients (pts) with multiple myeloma (MM) will become "quad refractory" to IMIDs (lenalidomide and pomalidomide) and proteasome inhibitors (bortezomib and carfilzomib), and eventually "penta refractory" to anti-CD38 Abs (daratumumab and isatuximab), defining high unmet need populations. Selinexor, an oral selective XPO1 inhibitor, induces nuclear accumulation and activation of tumor suppressor proteins, inhibition of NF-kB, and inhibition of translation of several oncoprotein mRNAs such as c-myc and cyclin D. Selinexor showed potent induction of apoptosis of MM cells independent of p53 signaling. In phase 1 clinical studies, selinexor with low dose dexamethasone (Sd) demonstrated potent anti MM activity in pts with MM. Methods - This phase II clinical trial evaluated Sd in pts with MM refractory to bortezomib, carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and pomalidomide ("quad"), with a subset also refractory to an anti-CD38 Ab ("penta"). Inclusion required CrCL≥20 mL/min, ANC≥1000/µL, platelets ≥50K/µL (≥30K if plasma cells were ≥50% of marrow cellularity). Pts were treated twice weekly (BIW) with oral selinexor 80 mg for 6 or 8 doses per 28 day cycle and dexamethasone (dex) 20 mg BIW. All pts received 5-HT3 antagonists. The primary objective was to determine the overall response rate (ORR) per IMWG criteria and duration of response (DOR), both adjudicated by an independent review committee (IRC). Secondary endpoints include progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). FISH analyses and gene expression profiling were performed on bone marrow aspirates. Results - 79 pts were enrolled: 48 quad (24 M/24 F, median age 62 yrs) and 31 penta (13 M / 18 F, median age 68 yrs). Both groups had a median of 7 prior treatment regimens including multiple dex-containing regimens. Baseline laboratory abnormalities included grade (Gr)≥3 anemia in 13% and Gr≥3 thrombocytopenia in 8%. Most penta pts received 8 doses / cycle (65%); most quad pts received 6 doses / cycle (83%). Common treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) hematological: thrombocytopenia (72%, Gr 3/4 58%), anemia (48%, Gr 3 25%) and neutropenia (29%, Gr≥3 21%). TRAEs non-hematological: nausea (72%, Gr 3 6%), fatigue (62%, Gr 3 14%) anorexia (49%, Gr 3 3%), vomiting (43%, Gr3 4%), asymptomatic hyponatremia (42%. Gr 3 20%), diarrhea (42%, Gr 3 5%) and weight loss (33%, Gr 3 1%). There was one case of febrile neutropenia (1%) and one case of clinically significant bleeding related to thrombocytopenia (1%). Seventy pts have discontinued therapy: PD (73%), AEs (17%), physician/pt preference (1%) and 6 deaths (one case related to selinexor, intracranial bleed in pt with Gr4 thrombocytopenia). Nine pts remain on study. Efficacy was evaluated in 78 pts (1 pt did not have measurable disease). The IRC-determined ORR (≥PR) for all pts was 21%, including 5% VGPR. ORR was 21% for quad pts and 20% for penta pts. Clinical benefit rates (≥MR) were 32% (all), 29% (quad), and 37% (penta). Median OS was 9.3 months (mo) for all pts, >11 mo (median not reached) for responders (≥PR), and 5.7 mo for non-responders. Median DOR in responding pts was 5 mo, and median PFS in all pts was 2.1 mo. Baseline cytogenetics were assessed in 41 pts. The ORR in 18 pts with high-risk FISH abnormalities was 33% (Table 1). Notably, 3 of the 13 pts with a 17p abnormality responded (ORR 23%). Transcriptomic profiling revealed differentially expressed genes (DEGs) between responders and non-responders in both whole blood RNA and CD138+ bone marrow cells. Pathways enriched in responders included IL-6, IL-8 and IGF-1 pathways. Conclusions - Oral Sd is active in heavily pretreated pts with refractory MM, including those with MM refractory to anti-CD38 Ab and those with high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities. Response was associated with longer survival. The main toxicities of Sd are thrombocytopenia, nausea, anorexia, and fatigue. AEs were manageable with supportive care and dose interruptions/reductions. To our knowledge, this is the first report of anti-tumor activity in the penta-refractory MM population. This population of MM pts has exhausted all currently available treatment options and has an extremely poor prognosis and therefore requires new therapies. Expansion of this trial in this high unmet medical need, penta refractory population is planned. Table 1 Activity of Sd in Patients with High Risk MM Cytogenetics Table 1. Activity of Sd in Patients with High Risk MM Cytogenetics Disclosures Vogl: Constellation: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Acetylon: Research Funding; GSK: Research Funding; Calithera: Research Funding; Teva: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding. Jagannath:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy. Baz:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Takeda/Millennium: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Signal Genetics: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding. Nooka:Spectrum, Novartis, Onyx pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Richter:Takeda: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Vij:Karyopharm: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria. Schiller:Incyte Corporation: Research Funding. Costa:Sanofi: Honoraria, Research Funding. Chari:Array Biopharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding. Siegel:Takeda: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Merck: Honoraria. Fonseca:Janssen: Consultancy; AMGEN: Consultancy; Millennium, a Takeda Company: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Patent Pending: Patents & Royalties: The use of calcium isotopes as biomarkers for bone metabolisms; Patent: Patents & Royalties: Prognostication of MM based on genetic categorization of FISH of the disease; AMGEN: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Millennium, a Takeda Company: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; AMGEN: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Millennium, a Takeda Company: Consultancy; Millennium, a Takeda Company: Consultancy; Patent: Patents & Royalties: Prognostication of MM based on genetic categorization of FISH of the disease; Bayer: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Patent Pending: Patents & Royalties: The use of calcium isotopes as biomarkers for bone metabolisms; AMGEN: Consultancy; Patent: Patents & Royalties: Prognostication of MM based on genetic categorization of FISH of the disease; Patent: Patents & Royalties: Prognostication of MM based on genetic categorization of FISH of the disease; Patent Pending: Patents & Royalties: The use of calcium isotopes as biomarkers for bone metabolisms; Patent Pending: Patents & Royalties: The use of calcium isotopes as biomarkers for bone metabolisms; Celgene: Consultancy. Kauffman:Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Shacham:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Saint-Martin:Karyopharm: Employment. Picklesimer:Karyopharm: Employment. Friedlander:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Employment. Choe-Juliak:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Employment.

Abstract Introduction: A recent study revealed an antiproliferative and apoptotic effect of propranolol on multiple myeloma (MM) cells. Our previous small matched case-control study showed longer survival in patients with propranolol and other beta-blockers (BB) intake than those without. This larger scale study was conducted to confirm the positive association of BB and MM survival. Methods: We identified 1971 newly diagnosed pts seen at Mayo Clinic between 1995 and 2010. Cardiac medication usage after diagnosis of MM was extracted from patient records and categorized based on BB intake. Cause of death was collected with death due to MM as the primary interest event and death due to cardiac disease or other reasons as competing risk events. The primary outcomes were MM disease-specific survival (DSS) and overall survival (OS). Cumulative incidence functions and Kaplan-Meier method were used to estimate the 5-year cumulative incidence rate (CIR) of MM death and OS rate, respectively. DSS and OS were compared by Gray's test and log-rank test, respectively. Multivarable Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate the adjusted cause-specific HR (HRCSadj.) and hazard ratio (HRadj.) for DSS and OS, respectively, adjusting for demographics, disease characteristics, diagnosis year, and various chemotherapies. Results: 930 (47.2%) of MM patients had no intake of any cardiac medications; 260 (13.2%) had BB only; 343 (17.4%) used both BB / non-BB cardiac medications; and 438 patients (22.2%) had non-BB cardiac drugs. Five-year CIR of MM death and OS rate were shown in table. Superior MM DSS was observed for BB only users, compared to patients without any cardiac drugs (HRCSadj., .53, 95% confidence interval [CI], .42-.67, padj.<.0001) and non-BB cardiac drugs users (HRCSadj., .49, 95% CI, .38-.63, padj.<.0001). Patients received both BB and other cardiac drugs also showed superior MM DSS than non-cardiac drugs users (HRCSadj.., .54, 95% CI, .44-.67, padj.<.0001) and non-BB cardiac drug users. (HRCSadj., .50, 95% CI, .40-.62, padj.<.0001). MM DSS does not differ between BB users with and without other cardiac drugs (padj.=0.90). Multivariable analysis showed the same pattern for OS. None of the MM therapies impacted the differences in DSS and OS among BB intake groups (interaction padj.>.60). Conclusion: MM patients with BB intake showed reduced risk of death due to MM and overall mortality compared to patients who used non-BB cardiac or never used cardiac drugs. The result warrants further investigation for anti-cancer effect of BB in MM. Disclosures Shi: Mayo Clinic: Employment. Kumar:Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Array BioPharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Skyline: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Research Funding; Glycomimetics: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Noxxon Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy; Kesios: Consultancy. Gertz:NCI Frederick: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Med Learning Group: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Research to Practice: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Alnylam Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Prothena Therapeutics: Research Funding; Ionis: Research Funding; Annexon Biosciences: Research Funding; GSK: Honoraria; Sandoz Inc: Honoraria. Kapoor:Celgene: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Dispenzieri:pfizer: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Alnylam: Research Funding; Jannsen: Research Funding; GSK: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Background: Autologous stem cell transplantation is an effective treatment modality for patients with multiple myeloma. While most of the patients relapse after ASCT with a median time to progression of 2 years, there is a significant heterogeneity in the duration of response. It has been hypothesized that the effect of high dose alkylator therapy used for conditioning may have a dual effect on the myeloma cells as well as marrow microenvironment. It is also known that hematopoiesis, especially thrombopoiesis, depends to some extent on signals form the marrow microenvironment. We examined if there was any relationship between delayed platelet engraftment and outcome after ASCT. Methods: We examined the outcomes in a group of patients undergoing ASCT for myeloma at our institution to compare the response duration to platelet engraftment kinetics. We studied 687 patients undergoing ASCT with melphalan conditioning followed by peripheral blood stem cell transplant. Results: Among the 687 patients undergoing ASCT, 200 pts (29%) achieved a platelet count of 50,000 by day 21 (early group) and the rest achieved this level after 21 days or never engrafted (late group). The median time to progression (TTP) among the late group was 24.8 months (95% CI; 19.6, 30 months) vs. 16.8 months (95% CI; 15.1, 18.6 months) for the late group (p < 0.001) (Figure). Patients in the late engraftment group were more likely to achieve a complete response compared to the early group; 39% vs. 30%, p = 0.02. In a multivariate analysis examining factors predicting for longer time to progression after ASCT, delayed platelet engraftment was independent of transplant within 12 months of diagnosis, CR with ASCT, absence of cytogenetic abnormalities, B2M < 3.5 mg/L and a plasma cell labeling index < 1% at the time of ASCT (Table). Conclusions: In this study, we have demonstrated for the first time a relationship between delayed platelet engraftment after ASCT and the duration of response following ASCT. This intriguing finding raises several hypotheses. It is possible that the delayed platelet engraftment is a marker of marrow microenvironment dysfunction secondary to high dose therapy, given the role of marrow microenvironment on thrombopoiesis. It is possible that this is a surrogate marker for the biological effectiveness of the melphalan dose, which can affect the other cells in the marrow microenvironment as well. It is likely a reflection of the marrow microenvironment dependence on the myeloma cells for its survival. These findings should be confirmed in other larger patient groups. Predictors of progression Variable Hazard Ratio P Platelet Engraftment > 21 days 0.80 (0.60, 0.96) 0.02 Late transplant (>12 months from diagnosis) 1.6 (1.3, 2.0) <0.01 Plasma cell labeling index > 1% 1.9 (1.5, 2.4) <0.01 Complete response 0.41 (0.33, 0.51) <0.01 Abnormal Cytogenetics 1.8 (1.4, 2.3) <0.01 B2M > 3.5 1.2 (0.96, 1.5) 0.12 Figure Figure

Abstract Background: Pomalidomide is an immunomodulatory agent (IMiD®) that has been approved for treatment of relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (MM). Combinations of IMiDs and proteasome inhibitors offer the potential for deeper and more durable responses due to enhanced efficacy. Preliminary results of a phase 1 study of twice weekly bortezomib with pomalidomide have been reported with promising results (Richardson, ASH 2012). This phase I/II trial was designed to evaluate the maximum tolerated doses (MTD) as well as safety and efficacy of the combination of pomalidomide, once weekly bortezomib and dexamethasone (PVD) in patients with relapsed, lenalidomide refractory, MM. Patients and methods: We included patients with relapsed MM who had 1-4 prior lines of therapy and were resistant or refractory to lenalidomide. In the phase I portion of the trial, dose level 1 consisted of pomalidomide 4 mg days 1-21 PO, bortezomib 1.0mg/m2 days 1,8,15, and 22 IV or SQ and dexamethasone 40 mg days 1,8,15, and 22 PO, given every 28 days. Bortezomib was increased to 1.3mg/m2 for dose level 2 and and was adopted for the phase 2 portion. The primary aim of the phase I cohort was to determine the MTD of the combination, and for the phase II cohort was to evaluate the confirmed response rate (PR, VGPR, or CR) in relapsed refractory MM. Response was assessed by the IMWG criteria and toxicity was graded using the CTCAE v4.0. Results: 50 patients were accrued between March 2012 and July 2014 (dose level (DL)1: 3, DL 2: 6, Phase II: 41). We describe results in 47 patients treated at MTD and phase II. Median age was 66, 51% were female and median time from diagnosis to study was 46 months (15-142). Twenty five percent had mSMART defined high-risk status. Median number of prior regimens was 3. All patients had prior lenalidomide, 68% had stem cell transplant, 17% received thalidomide, 56% had alkylators and 57% had bortezomib. With median follow up of 9 months, 72% remain progression free, 96% are alive and 66% remain on treatment. The most common AEs at least possibly attributable to the combination were anemia, fatigue, leukopenia and thrombocytopenia; however, the majority of these were grade 1-2. Grade ≥3 AEs (regardless of attribution) that occurred in at least 3 patients included neutropenia (29), leukopenia (15), lung infection (6), lymphopenia (8) dyspnea (3) and syncope (3). DVT/PE occurred in one patient. Among the 42 patients who were evaluable, confirmed responses (PR, VGPR, or CR) were seen in 34 (81%) including sCR (3), CR (5), VGPR (8), PR (18). Confirmed responses were seen in 9 of 11( 82%) high risk patients. Median progression free survival was 17.7 months (95%CI: 9.5-NA). Conclusions: PVD is a highly effective combination in patients refractory to lenalidomide with confirmed responses in over 80%. Weekly administration of bortezomib enhanced the tolerability and convenience of this regimen. Toxicities are manageable, mostly consisting of mild cytopenias with no significant neuropathy or DVT. PVD is a highly attractive option in patients with relapsed and refractory MM. Disclosures Lacy: Celgene: Research Funding. Lust:Senesco: PI Other. Fonseca:Medtronic, Otsuka, Celgene, Genzyme, BMS, Lilly, Onyx, Binding Site, Millennium, AMGEN: Consultancy, patent for the prognostication of MM based on genetic categorization of the disease. He also has sponsored research from Cylene and Onyx Other, Research Funding. Stewart:Celgene: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Array BioPharma: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Millenium: Research Funding. Reeder:Millennium, Celgene, Novartis: Research Funding. Mikhael:Onyx: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding.

Abstract Background Conflicting results have emerged, especially with respect to the impact on overall survival (OS), from trials evaluating lenalidomide maintenance (LM) therapy after induction therapy alone or post-autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) in multiple myeloma (MM). We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of existing outcome data from LM trials to evaluate role of lenalidomide as maintenance strategy in MM. Patients and methods A comprehensive search of electronic databases and abstracts through June 2013 was performed to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared LM vs. placebo/no maintenance. Single arm studies were excluded. Pooled hazard ratio (HR) or odds ratio (OR) estimates with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using the random-effects model for clinical endpoints of progression free survival (PFS), OS, response rate (RR) and adverse events (AEs), including second primary malignancies (SPMs). Analyses were performed using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis Software Version 2. We assessed between-study heterogeneity with the Cochran Q test and quantified its extent with the I2 statistic. Results Overall, five RCTs, with data extractable from four phase III trials (3 publications and 1 abstract) were identified (n= 1935). All studies were RCTs with an adequate randomization. MRC MM XI study was excluded from analyses as survival data are not available. Two placebo controlled trials (IFM 05-02, CALGB 100104) addressed the role of LM post-ASCT, one placebo-controlled trial (MM-015) studied LM therapy in the non-transplant setting and the remaining trial (RV-MM-PI209) had a 2 X 2 design comprising of both ASCT and non-transplant randomized arms followed by a second randomization of LM versus no maintenance. There was no heterogeneity for estimate of PFS results (Cochran Q, p=0.68; I2=0%), but considerable heterogeneity for estimate of OS (Cochran Q, p=0.09; I2= 55%), among the studies. There was significant prolongation of both PFS (HR 0.49, 95% CI, 0.41–0.58, p<0.001) and OS (HR 0.77, 95% CI, 0.62–0.95, p=0.013) with LM vs. placebo/no maintenance (Figure 1). Best response during maintenance was reported only in 2 studies and odds of responding (very good partial response or better) were not significantly different with LM (OR 1.28, p=0.3). Grade 3-4 AEs data were available from 3 trials for calculation of pooled OR with LM compared with placebo. We observed a nearly two-fold increase in the risk of SPMs with LM (OR 1.99; 95% CI, 1.31–3.04; p=0.001). Patients on LM were more likely to have grade 3-4 AEs than placebo: neutropenia (OR 4.9, p<0.001), thrombocytopenia (OR 2.7, p<0.001), fatigue (OR 2.3, p=0.01) and venous thromboembolism (OR 3.2, p=0.02). Odds of discontinuing treatment were also significantly higher in patients on lenalidomide (OR 2.9, p<0.001). Conclusions Meta-analysis of RCTs demonstrates significant improvement in PFS and modest improvement in OS with LM. There is an increased risk of grade 3-4 adverse effects, including SPMs with LM. Substantial heterogeneity for estimate of OS among protocols is a limitation of this analysis. Lack of uniform access to lenalidomide upon disease progression in the placebo/no maintenance arms of the constituent studies should be taken into account while interpreting aggregate effect estimates for OS in this meta-analysis. OS: Cochran Q p=0.09, I2=55%, substantial heterogeneity PFS: Cochran Q p=0.68, I2=0%, minimal heterogeneity Disclosures: Off Label Use: Lenalidomide for maintenance therapy in multiple myeloma. Kumar:Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: The Takeda Oncology Company: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Genzyme: Research Funding. Dispenzieri:Celgene, Millenium, Jansenn, Pfizer: Research Funding. Bergsagel:Onyx: Consultancy. Lacy:Celgene Corporation: Research Funding.

Abstract Background: Previous studies have demonstrated inferior overall survival (OS) among patients with AL amyloidosis who have bone marrow plasmacytosis (BMPC) >10%. It is well recognized that AL patients who achieve the deepest hematologic responses have superior organ response and OS rate. Methods: We designed a study to determine if BMPC% affects CR rate post ASCT and whether pre-transplant induction therapy improves response rate and OS among patients with a higher baseline BMPC burden. Results: Among 415 AL patients who underwent ASCT at Mayo Clinic, Rochester within 12 months of diagnosis, 116 (28%) had BMPC>10% at diagnosis. The median age was 57.2 years. The median follow up for surviving patients was 67.3 months. There was no statistically significant difference in age, gender, time from diagnosis to transplant, or use of attenuated conditioning regimen between groups with high (>10%) and low (≤ 10%) bone marrow involvement. The high BMPC group tended to receive more induction chemotherapy before ASCT, and presented with greater value of albumin, beta-2 microglobulin and difference in serum free light chain (dFLC). A higher CR rate was observed in low BMPC group (44.6% versus 26.7%, p=0.0013). In patients with high BMPC, a higher CR rate (33.9% versus 17.7%, p<0.05) was seen in those who received pre-ASCT induction therapy compared with no induction therapy. Among 3 groups of patients who had: no pre-ASCT therapy; steroid only as induction; and induction chemotherapy, the 5-year OS rates were 50.5%, 40% & 67.5%, respectively, p<0.03. Conclusions: Lower bone marrow burden at diagnosis yielded a deeper response following ASCT. Compared to no therapy, patients who were treated with steroid only pre-ASCT had an inferior OS, but other induction regimens appeared to improve survival. These data would support the concept that using induction therapy prior to ASCT conditioning among patients with higher tumor burden may be of value. Figure 1. In BMPC > 10% at diagnosis, OS comparison between induction therapies pre-ASCT Figure 1. In BMPC > 10% at diagnosis, OS comparison between induction therapies pre-ASCT Figure 2. Figure 2. Figure 3. Figure 3. Disclosures Kumar: Celgene: Research Funding; Celgene, Millenium, Sanofi, Skyline, BMS, Onyx, Noxxon,: Other: Consultant, no compensation,; Sanofi: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Millenium/Takeda: Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding; Skyline, Noxxon: Honoraria; Janssen: Research Funding. Gertz:Celgene: Honoraria; millenium: Consultancy, Honoraria; Onyx: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Smith Kline: Honoraria.