Sher, Taimur

Background: Median age at diagnosis for MM is 69 years with approximately 33% of the newly diagnosed MM (NDMM) patients aged ≥80 years (elderly). Yet, outcomes data and clinical trial participation in elderly MM patients are limited due to frailty and frequent comorbidities. Moreover, elderly patients are not candidates for stem cell transplant (SCT) and age is an independent poor prognostic marker, leading to disparate outcomes. The present study evaluated trends in outcomes and predictors of survival among elderly NDMM patients in the United States (U.S.). Methods: Using Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database, we extracted data on age, gender, geographical regions, year of diagnosis, and vital status for elderly patients (age ≥ 80 years) with MM from 1975 to 2016. Relative survival (RS) was estimated as the ratio of observed survival to the survival expected in the general population in the absence of malignancy. This adjusted for the competing causes of mortality prevalent in elderly patients. Mortality rates were age-adjusted. To estimate trends in mortality, we estimated annual percentage change (APC) and average annual percentage change (AAPC) by fitting the data in the join point regression model using the NCI's Join point Regression Program, Version 4.5.0.1. A multivariate analysis was conducted to analyze the predictors of overall and myeloma-specific mortality among elderly patients fitting into Cox proportion hazard regression model. Results: A total of 17,265 elderly MM patients were eligible for the study. Majority were females (n=9,487, 55%), were non-Hispanic whites (NHW) (n=12,895, 74.7%) and were diagnosed in the Western region of the U.S. (n=8,541, 49.5%). The median age was 84 years (IQR 81-87). The median RS for the whole period (1975-2016) was 19.8 months with 1- and 5- year RS of 60.1% (95%CI: 58.8-61.3) and 20.9% (95%CI: 19.5-22.3) respectively. The median RS increased from 8.45 months in 1975 to 29.86 months in 2013. One and 5- year RS also increased from 42.7% (95%CI: 32.4-52.5) and 12.9% (95%CI: 5.8-22.7) in 1975 to a 1- and 5-year RS of 72.3% (95%CI: 65.4-78.1) and 31.1% (95%CI: 23.4-39.1) in 2013, respectively (Fig.1). However, the age standardized mortality rate for the whole period showed an increasing trend with an AAPC of 2.3 (0.5-4, P<0.001). On fitting joinpoint regression, 2 distinct joinpoints were identified, calendar years 1977 and 1989 (Fig 2). Most of the increase in mortality rate was noted in the period 1975-1989. Since 1989, the mortality rates have shown a decreasing trend which is marginal but statistically significant, with an APC of -0.41 (95%CI: -0.7- -0.1, p<0.001). On multivariate analysis, increasing age (p<0.001) and non-northeast location (p<0.01) were associated with higher overall and MM-specific mortality. Female gender was associated with lower overall mortality (p<0.001) but not myeloma-specific mortality. While "other" race/ethnicity (not NHW, non-Hispanic black; NHB or Hispanic) was associated with lower risk of overall and myeloma-specific mortality, NHB were associated with a lower MM-specific (p<0.001) but not overall mortality. Conclusions: Our results suggest that although RS has improved significantly in the elderly patients, the mortality rates have not changed drastically over the years. Besides, factors like advancement in diagnosis and treatment which have improved RS, early diagnosis (leading to lead time bias) may also be contributing. Furthermore, there are several gender-specific, geographic and racial/ethnic disparities in outcomes of elderly MM patients, which need to be assessed prospectively. Although, a small decline in mortality rates in the more recent time is promising, further studies are warranted on interventions including aggressive supportive care directed at elderly patients with MM, so that MM survivorship can be improved. There should be strong consideration to increaseenrollment of the elderly in prospective clinical trials so that evidence-based guidelines can be developed. Disclosures Manochakian: Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Guardant Health: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novocure: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Chanan-Khan:Merck: Research Funding; Ascentage: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Jansen: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic: Employment; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding. Ailawadhi:Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cellectar: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding. Off Label Use: Do not remove- this information is relevant to Abstract ID 125629: TAK-169 is a dimeric fusion protein of an anti-CD38 antibody single chain variable fragment fused to a modified Shiga-like toxin-A subunit..

Background: The development of novel treatment strategies has extended the median survival of MM to nearly a decade but the disease remains incurable and relapse is inevitable. The Bcl-2 pathway is highly relevant to MM cell survival and can be mitigated therapeutically. AT-101 is a novel, orally available pan Bcl-2 inhibitor (Bcl-2, Bcl-xl, Mcl-1, and Bcl-w). Preclinical in vitro and in vivo studies showed that AT-101 enhanced cytotoxicity of lenalidomide-dexamethasone (Rd). We conducted a phase I study in RRMM patients to establish the effective dose of AT-101 with Ld as well as record safety and preliminary efficacy of this combination (NCT02697344). Methods: Key eligibility criteria included: RRMM with measurable disease (serum monoclonal protein ≥1.0 g/dL or urine monoclonal protein >200mg/24 hour or serum immunoglobulin free light chain >10mg/dL AND abnormal serum free light chain ratio). Patients must have received 1-3 prior treatment regimens and have an absolute neutrophil count ≥1.0 x 109, platelets 75 x 109, creatinine clearance ≥50 mL/min, and ECOG performance status ≤2. AT-101 dosing was designed to reach a maximum daily target of 20mg (Cohort 1; 10 mg PO QD, Cohort 2; 20 mg PO QD) utilizing a standard 3 +3 dose escalation design in combination with standard doses of Rd. Treatment was given as outpatient for a maximum of 12, 28-day cycles. For pharmacodynamic studies, AT-101 alone was given in cycle 1, with R (25 mg on days 1-21) and d (40 mg weekly) added cycle 2 onwards. Results: Enrolled patients (n=10) included 60% males with median age 68.5 years (range 55-75) and median time since MM diagnosis 4.5 years (range 0.6-8.3). MM ISS stage was II/III in 7 patients and 8/10 had high-risk cytogenetics with 4 each having del17p and 1q+. Only 1 patient had t(11;14).Patients had received median 2 prior lines of therapy (range 1-3), with 7 having had prior autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) and the initial induction regimen being bortezomib (V), R and dexamethasone (d) (VRd) in 8, Rd in 1 and cyclophosphamide (C) with Vd (VCd) in 1 patient. At the time of study entry, 3 patients were R refractory while 2 were refractory to both, V and daratumumab (Dara). Median duration of treatment was 7.5 cycles (range 2-12) and 3 patients completed all planned 12 cycles of treatment. Among the evaluable patients, dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) at 20 mg daily dose of AT-101 with 25 mg of R and 40 mg weekly included one patient with grade 4 febrile neutropenia and grade 4 neutropenia lasting 9 days and one patient with grade 4 thrombocytopenia lasting 8 days. G3/4 adverse events (AEs) included atrial flutter (n=1), white blood cell count decrease (n=3), neutropenia (n=5), febrile neutropenia (n=1) and thrombocytopenia (n=2), and back pain (n=1) . No G3/4 non-hematological AEs were noted. Any grade non-hematologic AEs seen in at least 20% (n=2) patients included fatigue (n=9), neuropathy (n=6), nausea (n=3), diarrhea (n=5), constipation (n=3), and creatinine increased (n=2). No patients experienced tumor lysis syndrome. Overall response rate (ORR) was 44% (2 each with very good partial response, VGPR and PR) and clinical benefit rate (CBR) was 89% with 2 additional patients showing minor response (MR) and 2 experiencing stable disease (SD) (Fig 1). Patients with high-risk disease had an ORR of 43% and a CBR of 100%. Median progression-free survival (PFS) for all patients was 8.1 months. Correlative analysis from patients who showed an objective response to treatment revealed a significant increase in bone marrow Th-effector cells, NK cells and cytotoxic CD8+ T-cells along with a significant decrease in immunosuppressive T-regulatory and B-regulatory cells was noted after 1 complete cycle of the combination therapy (p<0.05, Fig 2). Conclusions: This is the first reported clinical trial combining a Bcl-2 inhibitor with immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs) in MM. AT-101-Rd is a clinically active regimen with an ORR of 40% in predominantly high-risk RRMM patients with an acceptable toxicity profile. Additional patients with MM experienced clinical benefit despite refractory status to prior therapy in this early phase clinical trial. These early findings support the further investigation of AT-101 specifically, and Bcl-2 inhibitors in general, with IMiDs in patients with MM. Disclosures Ailawadhi: Celgene: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Cellectar: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy. Chanan-Khan:Xencor: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Jansen: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic: Employment; Ascentage: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: AT-101 is not currently FDA-approved for treatment of any condition.

Background: Combinations of alkylating agents with proteasome inhibitors have demonstrated efficacy in newly diagnosed and relapsed multiple myeloma (MM), with melphalan or cyclophosphamide combinations being some of the commonly used regimens for initial treatment of MM. Ixazomib (Ixa) is an oral proteasome inhibitor that is approved for use in combination with lenalidomide for patients with relapsed MM. We examined if Ixa can be effectively combined with cyclophosphamide (Ctx) in order to develop a less expensive, all oral regimen for patients with relapsed MM. Patients and Methods: Patients with relapsed MM, who were proteasome inhibitor naïve OR have received less than 6 cycles of therapy with bortezomib and had a better than PR with no progression at the time of discontinuation, were enrolled. The primary objective was to determine overall response rate (ORR). Treatment consisted of Ixa 4mg PO days 1, 8, 15; Ctx 300 mg/m2 PO days 1, 8, 15, 22 and dexamethasone (Dex) 40 mg PO weekly in a 28-day cycle. Overall, 37 patients were accrued; data on 33 eligible patients were available for analysis as of July 18, 2019. Results: The median age was 71 (48-89), 61% were male and the median duration from diagnosis was 46 months (mos). Median number of prior lines of therapy was 4 (range 1-5), 76%, 42% and 67% respectively had a prior IMiD, proteasome inhibitor or stem cell transplant, respectively. At data cutoff, 22 (67%) had progressed, 4 (12%) had died and the median follow up of those alive was 21.3 mos. Fourteen patients are still receiving treatment, with median of 8.5 cycles. Most common reason for treatment discontinuation was disease progression (10 pts; 53%). The ORR was 60% including 6% CR and 24% VGPR. The median event free survival was 11.3 mos (95%CI: 9.0 - 26.8). Overall, 401 cycles have been administered across the study, with dose modifications/ hold required for Ixa, Ctx, and Dex in 9 (27%), 14 (42%), and 22 (67%) patients respectively, the most common reason being hematologic toxicity. A grade 3 or higher adverse event at least possibly attributed to the study drugs was seen in 77% of patients, hematologic in 67% and non-hematologic in 30%. (Table 1) The most commonly observed hematologic toxicities included thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, lymphopenia and anemia; for non-hematologic was nausea, diarrhea, peripheral neuropathy toxicity and fatigue. Conclusions: The combination of Ixa, Ctx and Dex (ICd) offers a convenient, all oral regimen for treatment of relapsed disease not refractory to proteasome inhibitors. The regimen has good efficacy in this group f heavily pretreated patients, with an acceptable toxicity profile. Disclosures Lacy: Celgene: Research Funding. Gertz:Ionis: Honoraria; Spectrum: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Prothena: Honoraria; Alnylam: Honoraria. Ailawadhi:Takeda: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cellectar: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy. Bergsagel:Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Ionis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Fonseca:AbbVie, Amgen, Bayer, Celgene, Kite, Janssen, Juno, Merck, Pharmacylics, Sanofi, Takeda: Other: Consultant/Advisor; Prognosticatin of MM based on Genetic Categorization by FISH: Patents & Royalties; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Other: Scientific Advisory Board. Dingli:alexion: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Millenium: Consultancy; Rigel: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Research Funding. Kapoor:Amgen: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Glaxo Smith Kline: Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria; Cellectar: Consultancy; Janssen: Research Funding. Chanan-Khan:AbbVie: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Jansen: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic: Employment; Ascentage: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding. Larsen:Janssen Oncology: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Russell:Imanis: Equity Ownership. Stewart:Roche: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Ionis: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Consultancy; Ono: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol Myers-Squibb: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding. Kumar:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding.

Background: Ibrutinib (ibr) is a small-molecular inhibitor of Bruton's Tyrosine Kinase (BTK), active in the treatment of various B-cell malignancies. B-cell receptor signaling blockade by BTK inhibition using ibr down regulates IRF4 (survival transcription factor) which is down regulated by lenalidomide (R) as well, suggesting possible synergistic effect on cell death. Higher doses of ibr (560-840 mg daily) have been used in combination regimens for MM with no significant dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) but the combination of ibr and len has not been previously tested. We present safety and preliminary efficacy of the combination ibr, R, and dexamethasone (d) in RRMM patients. Methods: This is a phase I dose escalation study (NCT03015792) of 28-day cycles of ibr (420 mg daily, 560 mg daily, 700 mg daily or 840 mg daily) days 1-28 in combination with R 25 mg PO days 1-21, and d 40 mg PO weekly utilizing a 3+3 dose-escalation design. Eligible RRMM patients had progression after ≥2 prior lines of treatment, measurable disease as per International Myeloma Working Group criteria, ECOG performance status ≤2, adequate bone marrow (BM) (absolute neutrophil count ≥1.0 x 109, platelets ≥50,000 cells/mm3 for patients with BM plasmacytosis <50% or ≥30,000 cells/mm3 for patients with BM plasmacytosis ≥50%), kidney (creatinine clearance ≥30 mL/min), and liver function [total bilirubin ≤1.5 x upper limit of normal (ULN), aspartate aminotransferase and alanine aminotransferase ≤3 x ULN], and PT/INR ≤1.5 X ULN. Treatment was to be continued till progressive disease (PD) or any unacceptable toxicity. The primary objective was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of ibr+Rd in RRMM and secondary objective was to evaluate safety profile of this regimen. Results: As of July 26 2019, 18 patients had been enrolled in the trial. Three patients had to be replaced (2 at 700 mg cohort, 1 each due to withdrawal and ineligibility, and 1 at 840 mg due to withdrawal). Median age of all patients was 67 years (range 49-79) with 9 of the 15 evaluable patients being females. Evaluable patients as per ibr dose level included 3 at 420 mg, 3 at 560 mg, 3 at 700 mg, and 6 at 840 mg. Four out of 15 patients had high-risk cytogenetics. Median prior lines of treatment were 4 (range 2-13) and prior treatments included bortezomib in 87% (n=13), carfilzomib in 47% (n=7), ixazomib in 47% (n=7), lenalidomide in 87% (n=13), pomalidomide in 40% (n=6), thalidomide in 40% (n=6), daratumumab in 60% (n=9), and stem cell transplant in 53% (n=8). High risk cytogenetics [del 17p, t(4;14), t(14;16), t(14;20)] were noted in 4 of the 15 evaluable patients (27%). Median follow up for alive patients was 8.6 months (range 1.1-25.1 months) and the median number of treatment cycles was 2 (range 1-5). Most common reason for treatment discontinuation was PD (40%) followed by adverse events (AEs) (26.7%). Only 1 DLT possibly related to ibr was a grade 3 rash at the 840 mg dose. Grade 3/4 AEs at least possibly related to study treatment included anemia (n=3), thrombocytopenia (n=3), neutropenia (n=3), leucopenia (n=3), lymphopenia (n=2), febrile neutropenia (n=1), and rash (n=2). Overall, the most common all grade AEs included anemia (n=12), thrombocytopenia (n=10), fatigue (n=10), neutropenia (n=8), leucopenia (n=5), and diarrhea (n=5). (Figure 1) No treatment-related deaths were noted. Overall response rate (ORR) was 7% with partial response (PR) noted in 1 patient. Additionally, 1 patient achieved a minor response (MR) and 10 patients had stable disease (SD) for a clinical benefit rate (CBR) of 80%. (Figure 2) PD was noted in 1 patient and 2 patients did not get response assessment. Ibr 840 mg (daily) with R 25 mg (days 1-21) and d 40 mg weekly was considered the MTD of this regimen. The median progression-free survival (PFS) for the 15 evaluable patients was 4.5 months (95% CI: 1.8-not reached). Conclusions: We report the first phase 1 trial of combining a BTK inhibitor with Rd in RRMM patients. MTD of ibr was determined as 840 mg (daily) in combination with R 25 mg (days 1-21) and d 40 mg weekly. This dose of ibr is consistent with some other trials showing the benefit of a higher dose of ibr in various regimens for treatment of B-cell malignancies. We noted this regimen to be well-tolerated without much high-grade AEs. Disease stabilization was noted in majority of patients. These data lay the basis for a larger trial in a more uniform cohort of patients to better define the efficacy of this regimen. Disclosures Ailawadhi: Celgene: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Cellectar: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy. Chanan-Khan:AbbVie: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Jansen: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic: Employment; Ascentage: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: Ibrutinib is not FDA-approved for the treatment of multiple myeloma. The regimen of ibrutinib with lenalidomide and dexamethasone is not FDA-approved for the treatment of multiple myeloma.

Background: Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy has revolutionized the treatment of relapsed/refractory B-cell lymphoid malignancies. Axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel), an anti-CD19 CAR-T not only targets the malignant B-cell, but can potentially also target and eliminate normal B-cells. This can interfere with the normal B-cell repertoire, compromising host humoral immunity such as decreased titers of common vaccines (DTaP, MMR). To assess if this was a clinically significant problem, we evaluated all recipients of axi-cel at our center between 6/2018 through 7/2019. Patients and methods: For patients who received commercial axi-cel, humoral immunity was evaluated both quantitatively [absolute lymphocyte count (ALC)] as well as qualitatively by serology titers [IgG antibodies (Abs)] for diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, measles, mumps, and rubella, and total Immunoglobulin G (IgG) levels. Data was collected within 30 days prior to CAR-T infusion, then at day +30 and between days +60 and +100 after CAR-T infusion. Results: We identified 10 patients (males = 5, 50%), with a median age of 49.9 years (range 30-65) who received commercial axi-cel during the study period. Patient characteristics and indications for CAR-T therapy are shown in Table 1; the cohort represented a heavily pre-treated aggressive B-cell lymphoma patient population. Baseline information on antibody (Ab) titers was available in 8 patients. At baseline, all patients had positive tetanus IgG Abs (≥0.01 IU/mL), 7 had positive diphtheria IgG Abs (≥0.01 IU/mL), 6 had positive measles IgG Abs (≥ 1.1 AI), 5 had positive rubella IgG Abs (≥ 1.0 AI), 3 had positive mumps IgG Abs (≥ 1.1 AI). None of the patients had a positive pertussis IgG Abs (≥100 IU/mL). At follow-up, all patients with positive Ab at baseline maintained titers in the positive range at day +30 and between days +60 and +100 (Figure 1). None of the patients demonstrated a clinically meaningful decrease in Abs titers, despite a drop in ALC and IgG levels (table 2). Conclusions: Albeit a small sample size, IgG Ab titers for diphtheria, tetanus, measles, mumps, and rubella did not appear to be affected by axi-cel at a short interval follow-up after infusion (up to day +100). We plan to extend this analysis in a larger cohort with a longer-term prospective follow-up to validate our findings, especially in light of dropping absolute lymphocyte counts and IgG levels. Disclosures Ailawadhi: Celgene: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cellectar: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding. Foran:Agios: Honoraria, Research Funding. Tun:Celgene: Research Funding; Curis: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Mundi-pharma: Research Funding; DTRM Biopharma: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding. Chanan-Khan:Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Jansen: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic: Employment; Ascentage: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding. Kharfan-Dabaja:Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy.

Abstract Background: Multiple myeloma (MM) is characterized by the invasion of malignant plasma cells into the bone marrow. While first line treatment options result in significant clinical benefit to patients, spatiotemporal clonal evolution results in disease relapse and mortality. Advances in genomics have armed clinicians with unprecedented insight into the molecular architecture of MM cells, however, the clinical benefit derived by genomics-guided intervention has been limited. We present a novel computational biology modelling (CBM) tool, which takes into account the combined effect of individual mutations, gene copy number abnormalities and large scale chromosomal changes in order to predict the salient molecular pathways utilized by the MM cell for survival. By reverse-engineering MM cell architecture in silico, the CBM tool is able to predict drug response and resistance mechanisms. Thus, our aim was to determine the accuracy of the CBM tool in predicting treatment response of relapsed/refractory MM patients for future management of their disease, in a more individualized manner. Methods: Cytogenetics and somatic mutations (by targeted NGS) for 15 MM patients were input into the CBM model to predict responses to different therapeutic combinations. All patients were relapsed to prior treatment. CBM uses PubMed and other online resources to generate patient-specific protein network maps of activated and inactivated disease pathways. We simulated the specific combinations of the drugs per patient and measured the quantitative drug effect on a composite MM disease inhibition score (i.e., cell proliferation, viability, apoptosis and paraproteins). The actual clinical outcome of the treatments was compared with predicted outcomes. Results: Fifteen patients were analysed using CBM for prediction of treatment response after NGS was performed. 13/15 were clinically evaluable, of which 1 was a responder and 12 were non-responder. 6/13 patients were treated on clinical trial and 7/13 were on drug combinations per physician decision. CBM correctly predicted 1 responder and 11 non-responder with a PPV of 50%, NPV 100%, specificity 91.67%, sensitivity 100%. The accuracy of CBM prediction was 92.30%. CBM also predicted the response of prior drug therapies for its non-response at relapse. For prior drug treatment options, 14 patients were evaluable. All the 14 patients were clinically non-responders and CBM correctly predicted for 13 patients with NPV 100%, Specificity 92.85% and overall accuracy of 92.85%. The majority of patients did not respond to therapies recommended at relapse. As an example, the operative molecular pathways from 2 patients who did not respond to combination treatment, either pre-NGS or post-NGS profiling, are shown in Fig. 1 and Table 1. CBM identified amplification (AMP) of chromosome (chr) 1 (WNT3A, IL6R, CKS1B, MCL1, PIK3C2B, USF1), chr 3 (HES1, PIK3CA, CTNNB1, WNT7A, FANCD2), chr 5 (IL6ST, IRF1, GLRX, SKP2), chr 7 (CDK5, EZH2, IL6, CAV1, ABCB1), chr 9 (NOTCH1, HSPA5, FANCC, FANCG), chr 15 (DLL4, FANCI, ALDH1A2), chr 19 (ERCC1, ERCC2, USF2); deletion(DEL) of chr 13 (CUL4A) , chr 16 (AXIN1, CDH1) and TP53 mutation in different combinations, which confer resistance to therapies at relapse. Conclusions: The CBM technology represents a potential means to identify therapeutic options for MM patients based on the patients individual tumor-genome profile and which can also be deployed for uncovering drug resistance mechanisms. This tool may aid clinicians in decision making for recommending the most appropriate therapy based on standard of care agents or clinical trials; thus improving patient outcomes and reducing unnecessary costs or drug-related toxicities. Disclosures Singh: Cellworks Research India Private Limited: Employment. Sauban:Cellworks Research India Private Limited: Employment. Husain:Cellworks Research India Private Limited: Employment. Kumar:Cellworks Research India Private Limited: Employment. Kumari:Cellworks Research India Private Limited: Employment. Tyagi:Cellworks Research India Private Limited: Employment. Abbasi:Cell Works Group Inc.: Employment. Vali:Cell Works Group Inc.: Employment. Ailawadhi:Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy.

Abstract Background: Therapeutic advancements have led to significant improvement in outcomes for MM patients. Revised diagnostic criteria from International Myeloma Working Group focus on initiating treatment before the onset of end-organ damage. Thus, timeliness of initial therapy can significantly improve patient morbidity and outcomes. Such an analysis has not been reported for MM. Methods: We analyzed patients diagnosed with MM between 2004-2015 from the National Cancer Database (NCDB). Patients who received systemic treatment any time within the first year of diagnosis were included; those treated later than one year were considered possibly initially diagnosed with smoldering myeloma and hence, excluded. Time to initial treatment was divided into centiles with the 4 centiles analyzed being 0-7 days, 8-18 days, 19-37 days and >37 days. We performed univariate and multivariate analyses to compare sociodemographic and clinical factors influencing patient distribution across these timeliness categories and trends over time. Results: A total of 53,665 patients were included with 15,282 in 0-7 days, 12,462 in 8-18 days, 12,723 in 19-37 days and 13,198 in the >37 days treatment categories. Distribution across these centiles over time is shown in Figure. Univariate analyses showed a significant difference in distribution across the timeliness categories by year of diagnosis, patient age, gender, race/ethnicity, education level, insurance type, comorbidity score, treatment facility type, geographical location and distance to treating facility (all p<0.001) but no effect of income level. Multivariate analysis showed that there was a significantly higher likelihood of being in 4th centile (>37 days to treatment) for women (p<0.001), African Americans (p<0.001) or Hispanics (p=0.03; reference: Whites) or diagnosed in more recent years (p<0.001). Patients were less likely to be in the 4th centile if they were ≥80 years (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.81-0.98, p=0.02), had >0 Charlson comorbidity score (p<0.001), were uninsured (p=0.02) or had Medicaid (p=0.03) as compared to having private insurance, were in non-community treatment facilities or geographical location other than Northeast (p<0.001). Patient education, income level or distance from treating facility was no longer significant. Conclusions: Several factors were found to affect timeliness of treatment in MM. We noted relatively faster time to initial treatment in elderly, uninsured or those who were treated in academic/comprehensive cancer programs but a delay in treatment for women and racial/ethnic minorities among other factors. These factors need to be addressed for equitable access and treatment practices and to realize improved outcomes for all. Figure. Figure. Disclosures Ailawadhi: Amgen: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding.

Abstract INTRODUCTION: Significant burden of pain syndromes are reported in patients with hematological malignancies undergoing HSCT mostly due to underlying disease and associated treatments. Opioid analgesics and benzodiazepines are routinely used for symptomatic management in this patient population. The use of narcotic analgesics and benzodiazepines in non-transplant hospitalized patients has been shown to adversely affect health related outcomes such as length-of-stay (LOS), falls and other complications. However, there is a significant knowledge gap regarding the patterns of opioid and benzodiazepine use and their impact on health outcomes in HSCT patients. METHODS: We identified 275 patients from the year 2015-2018 who underwent HSCT (allogeneic and autologous transplants) at our center for a variety of hematological malignancies. Opioid exposure was defined in three groups of patients 1) Opioid naïve: those did not report prior use of opioid at admission and who were not prescribed opioid during hospitalization, 2) Previous Opioid users: those who reported active use of opioid at admission and continued during hospitalization 3) New Opioid users: Patients who did not report opioid use at admission but were prescribed opioid during hospitalization. Multivariable analysis was performed to identify differences in opioid status, opioid use, benzodiazepine use, disease diagnosis, Karnofsky score, gender, age, race, and marital status with associated complications (Poisson regression), emergency department visits (Logistic Regression) and length of stay (Ordinal Logistic Regression) Figure 1 and Figure 2. RESULTS: The median age of patients was 59 (range: 25-74 ) years with slight male predominance (57%). Patients undergoing autologous transplants for multiple myeloma (MM) comprised 48% of the population. The majority (72 %) were exposed to opioid during hospitalization. Ninety two percent of the opioid naïve population (28% of the total population) underwent autologous transplant. Conversely, 36% of patients undergoing autologous transplants never received opiates during hospitalization as compared to 7% of those who received an allogeneic transplant. Median morphine milligram equivalent daily dose was 3.1 mg. Median diazepam equivalent daily dosage in patients that were opiate exposed was 2.07 milligram. Of the total transplant population, 55% received benzodiazepine concurrently with opiates during hospitalization. 76 % of the population was exposed to both opioid and benzodiazepine. Twenty five percent of those who were exposed to opioid did not receive benzodiazepines. Sixty four percent of the MM patients were exposed to opioid of which majority (59%) were previous opioid users. Of the non-MM patients undergoing HSCT, 80% were exposed to opioid of which 36% were previous opioid users and 64% were new users. A wide range of complications from neutropenic fever to death, were seen in 89% of all patients (opioid users and non-users) but all the falls occurred in patients who were on opioid medications. Autologous transplant recipients had higher odds of having a greater number of complications compared to Allogeneic transplant patients (OR 1.25, 95% CI: 1.01 - 1.55, p=0.04), as well as a reduced odds of having a medium or high length of stay (OR 0.03, 95% CI: 0.02 - 0.07). Of the opioid naïve patients, 6% presented to the ED within 30 days of discharge versus 15% of those that were exposed to opiates during hospitalization. Benzodiazepine use at admission for HSCT was associated with greater odd of presenting to ED within 30 days of discharge (OR 3.94, 95% CI: 1.55-10.04) and this was more significant in patients with MM (OR 4.08, 95% CI: 1.01-16.44). Finally, we also saw a trend towards longer stay in patients who were exposed to opioids as compared to opioid naïve (40% vs. 17%). CONCLUSION: Our study, albeit limited due to its retrospective design, is among the first to report the patterns of use and the impact of opioids and benzodiazepines in patients undergoing HSCT. Our results indicate that the use of these medications is frequent in this population and as in the non-transplant hospitalized patients and is associated with more emergency room visits post discharge, along with other potentially adverse outcomes. Disclosures Kharfan-Dabaja: Incyte Corp: Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Speakers Bureau; Alexion Pharmaceuticals: Speakers Bureau. Ailawadhi:Amgen: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy.

Abstract Background AFM13 is a bispecific, tetravalent NK cell-engaging antibody construct binding to CD30 on CD30+ tumor cells and CD16A on NK cells. By engaging CD16A-positive NK cells, AFM13 leads to NK cell-mediated killing of CD30-positive lymphoma cells (Reusch et al., 2014) making it an attractive agent to target classical Hodgkin lymphoma (HL). Pembrolizumab is a PD-1 blocking antibody which has shown high single-agent response rates in patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory HL (RRHL; Armand et al., 2016, Chen et al., 2017). AFM13 has shown clinical activity in RRHL as a single agent in a preceding Phase 1 study (Rothe et al., 2015). Preclinical in vivo data of the combination of AFM13 with PD-1 blockade showed synergistic activity and the potential for induction of cross-talk between innate and adaptive immunity (Zhao et al., 2016). We hypothesize that the combination of the two agents could improve outcomes in pts with RRHL. Methods This Phase 1b study is evaluating the safety and tolerability of the combination of AFM13 with pembrolizumab (Keytruda) as salvage therapy after failure of standard therapies including brentuximab vedotin (BV) in HL (NCT02665650). Pts receive escalating doses of AFM13 in combination with pembrolizumab at a dose of 200 mg flat administered every 3 weeks following a classical 3+3 design, followed by enrollment into an extension cohort at the maximum tolerated dose (MTD)/maximum administered dose (MAD). Response assessment is performed every 12 weeks by PET/CT according to the Lugano Classification (Cheson et al., 2014). The main objectives of the study is to ascertain the MTD/MAD along with the preliminary efficacy of the combination. Results As of June 29, 2018, 30 pts have been enrolled into the study. The median age is 34 years (range, 18-73), with a median of 4 (range 3-7) prior lines of therapy. All pts had relapsed or refractory disease (43% relapsed, 57% refractory) and had failed standard treatments including BV and 43% of pts (13/30) had BV as their latest therapy. Thirty seven percent (11/30) had undergone prior autologous stem cell transplantation. All 30 pts have completed the 6-week dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) observation period. Twelve pts were enrolled into the dose escalation cohorts (Cohorts 1 (n=3), 2 (n=3), and 3 (n=6)) and 18 into the Extension Cohort, with a total of 24 patients treated at the MAD (dose level 3). One DLT was observed in Cohort 3 (missing ≥25% of AFM13 during the DLT period) and another observed in the Extension Cohort (G4 infusion-related reaction; IRR). The most common related adverse events (AEs) were IRRs (80%), rash (30%), pyrexia (23%), nausea (23%), diarrhea (20%), fatigue (17%), headache (17%), increased aspartate aminotransferase (13%), and increased alanine aminotransferase (10%). Treatment related G3/4 AEs included IRRs (13%), elevated AST (3%), gastritis (3%), hypotension (3%), nausea (3%), neutropenia (3%), and vomiting (3%). The majority of IRRs were manageable with standard of care measures and did not lead to treatment discontinuations. Included in the efficacy analysis were the best response from 29 evaluable pts who had at least one post-baseline disease assessment as of the data cutoff on June 29, 2018. The overall response rate (ORR) and complete response (CR) rate for evaluable pts treated at the dose and schedule chosen for expansion (n=23; Cohort 3 and Extension Cohort) were 87% and 35% by the investigator-confirmed assessment, respectively. Independent assessment resulted in an ORR of 87% and CR rate of 39% for these pts. Updated data for all 30 patients will be presented at the meeting. Conclusions The combination of AFM13 and pembrolizumab is a well-tolerated salvage therapy in pts with RRHL. IRRs were the most frequently observed adverse events; however, most of these events were of mild or moderate severity and manageable. Both the ORR and CR rate compare favorably to monotherapy pembrolizumab in a similar RRHL population (Chen et al., 2017). The combination of AFM13 and pembrolizumab could be a potential new therapeutic option for HL patients. Disclosures Bartlett: Immune Design: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Bristol-Meyers Squibb: Research Funding; Merck & Co: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Forty Seven: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; ImaginAB: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; KITE: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; Acerta: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Chen:Affimed: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech Inc.: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Merck & Co., Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Domingo-Domenech:Affimed: Research Funding. Forero-Torres:Affimed: Research Funding. Garcia-Sanz:Affimed: Research Funding. Devata:Affimed: Research Funding. Rodriguez Izquierdo:Affimed: Research Funding. Lossos:Affimed: Research Funding. Reeder:Affimed: Research Funding. Sher:Affimed: Research Funding. Choe-Juliak:Affimed: Employment. Prier:Affimed: Research Funding. Schwarz:Affimed: Employment. Strassz:Affimed: Employment. Alland:Affimed: Employment. Ansell:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Celldex: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Merck & Co: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding.

Abstract INTRODUCTION: Treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) has expanded significantly with the approval of multiple small molecule inhibitors. This is of great significance for patients with adverse cytogenetic features who tend to respond poorly to standard chemo-immunotherapy (CIT). While single agent ibrutinib and venetoclax (V) have shown high rates of overall response, complete remission and minimal residual disease (MRD) eradication rates remain low. This argues for further testing and development of various combination strategies. The MURANO trial compared venetoclax and rituximab (VR) versus bendamustine and rituximab (BR) in patients with relapsed/refractory CLL reporting clear superiority of VR over BR. MRD rates in the bone marrow were reported to be 27.3% for VR versus 1.5% for BR. Given much higher rates of MRD eradication with combination of small molecule inhibitors and monoclonal antibodies (mAb) compared to standard CIT, we performed a comparative investigation into the direct and immune-mediated cytolytic effects of VR versus V + Obinutuzumab (O, type II anti-CD20 mAb) in primary CLL cells and B-lymphoid cell lines. METHODS: CD19+ B-cells were isolated from PBMCs of CLL patients (N=3). For all experiments using primary CLL cells, concentration of VR and VO was 3nM (V) and 10ug /ml (R, O), respectively. For cell lines, VR and VO was used at 5uM (V) and 10ug /ml (R, O), respectively. Apoptosis was determined by annexin-V/PI staining followed by flow cytometry. Antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity (ADCC) induced by VR and VO was assessed in Calcein AM labeled CLL cells or cell lines co-cultured with healthy donor PBMCs (E:T ratio, 40:1); complement-dependent cytotoxicity (CDC) was measured using 10% serum from a healthy human donor. RESULTS: We assessed the ability of V+/-O or V+/-R to induce apoptotic cell death in the CD20+ BCWM.1 cell line (Waldenström's macroglobulinemia [WM] phenotype) and the MEC-1 cell line (B-PLL phenotype); with CD20- RPCI-WM1 (WM cells, negative control). Notably, Bcl-2 protein is expressed in all the aforementioned cell lines. We observed that single agent V, O and R induced ~30%, 61% and 13.64% annexin V/PI positivity in BCWM.1 cells, respectively. However, a significant degree of cell death was noted in VO-treated cells (~74%) compared to VR-treated cells (~40%) (p<0.01). Next, we examined for apoptosis in MEC1 cells and noted a similar trend; where the VO combination induced markedly more cell death (~71%) than VR (~57%). Contrastingly, in RPCI-WM1 cells neither single agent O or R could elicit >12% annexin V/PI positivity and where the addition of V increased apoptosis by only 3 - 4%. We also examined the apoptotic potential of VO or VR in tumor cells from low, intermediate and high-risk CLL patients. In low and intermediate-risk CLL cells from low and intermediate-risk patients, V alone induced ~30% cell death, which increased significantly with the addition of O (VO) to between 48 - 52%. Contrastingly, the combination of VR did not induce more than 29 - 32% apoptosis. In CLL cells from high-risk patient, we noted that exposure to single agent V induced ~ 28% cell death and in VO-treated cells, this number increased to 47%. We also examined for ADCC and CDC in the same cell lines and primary CLL cells. Despite considerable variability, single agent O and VO treatment of tumor cells resulted in greater ADCC than VR treatment. By contrast, in single agent R or VR-treated cells, more CDC was observed. CONCLUSION: Our preliminary investigation in VR- and VO-treated cell lines and primary CLL cells suggests the VO combination may be superior to VR in induction of direct tumor cell death. Mechanistic experiments underway will provide further insight and can aid in design of future VO-based clinical studies in CLL. Disclosures Ailawadhi: Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy.