Facon, Thierry T.F.

Introduction : Daratumumab (DARA) is a human CD38 antibody approved in combination with standard-of-care (SoC) regimens in pts with NDMM who are TIE. DARA-based treatments showed significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) in pts with TIE NDMM in ongoing phase 3 studies ALCYONE (DARA + bortezomib/melphalan/prednisone [D-VMP] vs VMP) and MAIA (DARA + lenalidomide/dexamethasone [D-Rd] vs Rd continuous). An NMA allows estimation of the relative efficacy of regimens not compared in head-to-head trials. A previous NMA examined D-VMP and D-Rd vs comparators (Facon T et al., EHA 2019), excluding the SWOG S0777 study (bortezomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone [VRd]; Durie BG, et al. Lancet 2017) as it enrolled both transplant-eligible (TE) and TIE pts, and data for pts who are TIE only (~50% [aged ≥65 y and frail]) were unavailable. In this NMA, D-Rd and D-VMP had the highest probabilities of being more effective than reference treatment Rd continuous in terms of PFS. Recently, VRd received EMA approval for treatment of TIE NDMM based on SWOG S0777, but results specific to TIE pts are still unavailable. Recent NMAs of TIE pts (Blommestein HM et al., Haematologica, 2019; Weisel et al., EHA 2019; Cao Y et al., Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk, 2019) have included data from the the intent-to-treat (ITT) population of SWOG S0777, though its inclusion violates the similarity assumption. Here, we present a sensitivity analysis of the previously-conducted NMA including all pts who received VRd in SWOG S0777 for a comprehensive view of the comparative effectiveness of DARA-based treatments in TIE NDMM. Methods: VRd was included as part of a sensitivity analysis of the previous NMA based on the ITT population, reporting PFS and overall survival (OS). The Guyot method was used to estimate OS hazard ratios (HRs) for pts aged ≥65 y (proxy for TIE) from SWOG S0777 (Durie BG et al., ASH 2018). Median follow-up in ALCYONE and MAIA was 27.8 months and 28.0 months, respectively. Based on a systematic literature review conducted through January 2019, both PFS and OS were extracted and synthesized in Bayesian NMAs. Choice of fixed- or random-effects (FE or RE) model was based on lowest deviance information criterion (DIC) and/or presence of heterogeneity in the network. Rd continuous was selected as reference, as it was commonly included in guidelines across regions. For PFS and OS, HR <1 indicates the comparison is not in favor of Rd continuous. In addition to the previous NMA, we also report an NMA sensitivity analysis including only comparators approved by the EMA that are relevant for the European, Middle East and/or Africa (EMEA) region (EMEA NMA). Results: Global NMA: RE model was used for both PFS and OS. Compared with Rd continuous, the PFS HR for VRd in the sensitivity analysis was 0.74 (95% credible interval [CrI], 0.42-1.30), which was similar to SWOG S0777 (0.71; [96% Wald confidence interval [CI], 0.56-0.91]) and higher than HRs for D-Rd (0.55; 95% CrI, 0.31-0.97) and D-VMP (0.58; 95% CrI, 0.20-1.62; Table). For OS, the SWOG S0777 HR estimated by Guyot algorithm for pts aged ≥65 y was 0.80 (95% CI, 0.56-1.16). Compared with Rd continuous, the OS HR for VRd in the sensitivity analysis was 0.80 (95% CrI, 0.51-1.26), which was similar to SWOG S0777 and higher than D-Rd (0.78; 95% CrI, 0.51-1.18). EMEA NMA: FE model was used for both PFS and OS. Compared with Rd continuous, the PFS HR for VRd in the sensitivity analysis was 0.74 (95% CrI, 0.60-0.92), which was higher than HRs of D-Rd (0.55; 95% CrI, 0.43-0.71) and D-VMP (0.64; 95% CrI, 0.41-1.02). Compared with Rd continuous, the OS HR for VRd in the sensitivity analysis was 0.80 (95% CrI, 0.55-1.17), which was higher than for D-Rd (0.78; 95% CrI, 0.56-1.09). These results are consistent with the Global NMA, but differ slightly as the EMEA NMA has fewer evidence-loops (only EMEA SoC regimens were included). Conclusions: This study demonstrated favorable efficacy outcomes for DARA-based regimens vs other relevant frontline options, such as VRd, for pts with NDMM who are TIE. Limitations of the sensitivity analysis include lack of comparative trial data and demographic differences between pts from SWOG S0777 and trials of frontline MM treatments for pts who are TIE included in our network. The majority of SWOG S0777 pts are TE (<65 y), who often have better prognoses than TIE pts (≥65 y), and thus violates the similarity assumption of NMAs. However, DARA-based regimens still showed a comparative clinical advantage. Disclosures Facon: Takeda: 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, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. San-Miguel:Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, and Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria. Usmani:Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Janssen, Merck, SkylineDX, Takeda: Other: Consultant/Advisor; Amgen Array Biopharma, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Janssen, Merck, Pharmacyclics, Sanofi, Takeda: Other: Research Grant; Amgen, Celgene, Janssen, Sanofi, Takeda: Speakers Bureau. Dimopoulos:Sanofi Oncology: Research Funding. Kumar:Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding. Mateos:Adaptive: Honoraria; EDO: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmamar: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: 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; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GSK: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Cavo:Janssen, Celgene, Amgen, Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene, Janssen, Amgen, BMS, Abbvie, Takeda: Honoraria; Janssen, Celgene: Other: Travel Accommodations; Janssen, Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Heeg:Ingress-Health: Employment. Van Beekhuizen:Ingress-health: Consultancy. Pisini:Janssen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Nair:Janssen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Lam:Janssen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Slavcev:Janssen: Employment, Equity Ownership. He:Janssen: Employment, Equity Ownership.

Introduction: Daratumumab (DARA) is a human, CD38-targeted, IgG1κ monoclonal antibody approved as monotherapy in heavily pretreated relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) and in combination with standard-of-care regimens for transplant-ineligible NDMM and RRMM. The addition of DARA to standard-of-care regimens in phase 3 studies has consistently demonstrated a near doubling of complete response (CR) rates, tripling of minimal residual disease (MRD)-negativity rates, and reduction in the risk of disease progression or death by ≥44% in patients with transplant-ineligible NDMM or RRMM. In the primary analysis of the phase 3 MAIA study (median follow-up: 28.0 months), a significant progression-free survival (PFS) benefit (median not reached [NR] vs 31.9 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.56; P<0.001) and a >3-fold increase in MRD-negativity rates (10-5 sensitivity threshold; 24.2% vs 7.3%; P<0.001) were observed for D-Rd vs Rd in patients with transplant-ineligible NDMM (Facon T, N Engl J Med 2019). Here, we report updated efficacy and safety findings from MAIA after 9 months of additional follow-up. Methods: Patients with NDMM ineligible for high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation due to age ≥65 years or comorbidities were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive Rd ± DARA. Stratification factors included International Staging System stage (ISS [I vs II vs III]), region (North America vs other), and age (<75 vs ≥75 years). All patients received 28-day cycles of Rd (R: 25 mg orally once daily on Days 1-21; d: 40 mg orally on Days 1, 8, 15 and 22). In the D-Rd arm, DARA (16 mg/kg intravenously) was given weekly for Cycles 1-2, bi-weekly for Cycles 3-6, and every 4 weeks thereafter. Patients were treated until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity in both treatment arms. The primary endpoint was PFS. Key secondary endpoints included overall response rate (ORR), MRD-negativity rate (10-5 sensitivity, clonoSEQ® version 2.0), and safety. PFS on the next line of therapy (PFS2), defined as the time from randomization to progression on the next line of therapy or death, was also measured. Results: A total of 737 patients were randomized (D-Rd, N = 368; Rd, N = 369). Patient baseline characteristics were well balanced between the two treatment arms. Median (range) age was 73 (45-90) years, with 44% of patients ≥75 years of age. 27%, 43%, and 29% of all patients were ISS stage I, II, and III, respectively. Among 642 patients evaluable for FISH/karyotyping analysis, 86% had standard and 14% had high cytogenetic risk. After a median follow-up of 36.4 months, median PFS was NR with D-Rd vs 33.8 months with Rd (HR, 0.56; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.44-0.71; P<0.0001; Figure). The estimated 36-month PFS rate was 68% with D-Rd vs 46% with Rd. The PFS benefit of D-Rd vs Rd was observed in all prespecified subgroups, except for patients with impaired hepatic function. Adding DARA to Rd continued to result in deeper responses with higher rates of ≥CR and ≥very good partial response (VGPR; Table). Median duration of response among responders was NR with D-Rd vs 40.7 months with Rd. Median PFS2 was NR vs 47.3 months with D-Rd vs Rd, respectively (HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.53-0.91; P=0.0079); follow up is ongoing. 143 (39%) vs 233 (64%) patients with D-Rd vs Rd, respectively, have discontinued treatment. 85 (23%) patients with D-Rd vs 103 (28%) patients with Rd have discontinued the study due to death. Grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs; D-Rd/Rd) occurring in ≥10% of patients were neutropenia (51%/35%), lymphopenia (15%/11%), pneumonia (15%/9%), anemia (14%/21%), leukopenia (11%/6%), and hypokalemia (10%/10%); grade 3/4 infection rates were 36%/27%. The most common serious TEAE was pneumonia (14%/9%). 9% of patients in the D-Rd arm and 18% of patients in the Rd arm discontinued treatment due to TEAEs. The complete updated data set will be presented at the meeting with additional efficacy endpoints, including MRD-negativity rate. Conclusion: After longer follow up, the addition of DARA to Rd continues to demonstrate a significant PFS benefit and improved rates of deeper and more durable responses vs Rd alone in patients with transplant-ineligible NDMM. The longer follow-up also demonstrated a significant improvement in PFS2 favoring D-Rd, and no new safety concerns were observed. These results continue to support the use of D-Rd in the first line of treatment for transplant-ineligible patients with NDMM. Disclosures Bahlis: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Facon:Janssen: 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, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Usmani:Amgen Array Biopharma, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Janssen, Merck, Pharmacyclics, Sanofi, Takeda: Other: Research Grant; Amgen, Celgene, Janssen, Sanofi, Takeda: Speakers Bureau; Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Janssen, Merck, SkylineDX, Takeda: Other: Consultant/Advisor. Kumar:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Plesner:Oncopeptides: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Genmab: Consultancy. Orlowski:Poseida Therapeutics, Inc.: Research Funding. Hulin:celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen, AbbVie, Celgene, Amgen: Honoraria. Quach:Sanofi: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; GSK: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Goldschmidt:ArtTempi: Honoraria; John Hopkins University: Other: Grants and/or provision of Investigational Medicinal Product; BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Grants and/or provision of Investigational Medicinal Product, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Grants and/or provision of Investigational Medicinal Product, Research Funding; Dietmar-Hopp-Foundation: Other: Grants and/or provision of Investigational Medicinal Product; Mundipharma: Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MSD: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other, Research Funding; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Grants and/or provision of Investigational Medicinal Product, Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Grants and/or provision of Investigational Medicinal Product, Research Funding; Molecular Partners: Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Chugai: Honoraria, Other: Grants and/or provision of Investigational Medicinal Product, Research Funding. O'Dwyer:GlycoMimetics Inc: Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Onkimmune: Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy. Venner:Janssen: Honoraria; J&J: Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Weisel:GSK: Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Juno: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Adaptive Biotech: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Krevvata:Janssen: Employment. Pei:Janssen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Wang:Janssen: Employment. Van Rampelbergh:Janssen: Employment. Ukropec:Janssen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Uhlar:Janssen: Employment. Kobos:Janssen: Employment. Perrot: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; Amgen: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria.

Abstract Background Melphalan, prednisone and thalidomide (MPT) is a standard therapy for NDMM recognized worldwide based on a statistically significant advantage in overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) vs. MP (Facon Lancet 2007; Fayers Blood 2011; NCCN 2013). The combination of lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone (Rd) increased OS with fewer adverse events (AEs) than treatment with lenalidomide and high-dose dexamethasone in NDMM pts (ECOG E4A03) (Rajkumar Lancet Oncol 2010). The FIRST trial is a multicenter, open-label, phase III trial comparing the efficacy and safety of Rd versus MPT in transplant-ineligible NDMM pts. Methods NDMM pts either ≥ 65 years of age, or not candidates for SCT were randomized to one of three arms: Rd in 28-day cycles until disease progression (Arm A), Rd in 28-day cycles for 72 weeks (18 cycles, Arm B), or MPT in 42-day cycles for 72 weeks (12 cycles, Arm C). Assessments by International Myeloma Working Group criteria were done after each cycle. Pts with renal impairment were enrolled; however, pts on dialysis were excluded. Starting doses of lenalidomide and dexamethasone were adjusted based on renal function and age, respectively. Melphalan starting dose was adjusted based on age, absolute neutrophil count, platelet count, and renal function; and thalidomide was adjusted for age. Dose adjustments were permitted for AEs. All pts were required to receive anti-thrombotic prophylaxis. Stratification factors included age, International Stage System, and country. The primary endpoint was a comparison of PFS in Arm A vs. Arm C. Secondary endpoints included OS, overall response rate (ORR), time to response, duration of response (DOR), safety, and quality of life (QOL). A preplanned additional analysis included time from randomization to second progression event or death (PFS2). The final preplanned analysis of independently adjudicated progressive disease (PD) events in Arm A vs. Arm C conducted after 960 events of death or PD, and an interim of OS in 64% of survival events (574/896 events) are presented in this abstract. Comparisons of PFS and all secondary endpoints, including OS for all three arms, will be presented at the meeting. Results A total of 1,623 pts were randomized 1:1:1 in three arms. As of today, 121 pts continue to receive lenalidomide on study (Arm A). The median age was 73 (40.0–92.0) years; 35% pts were aged ≥ 75 years; and 41% of pts had ISS stage 3 disease. After a median follow-up of 37 months, the trial met its primary endpoint (PFS), demonstrating a 28% reduction in risk of progression or death (HR=0.72; p= 0.00006). The preplanned interim analysis of OS demonstrated a 22% reduction in risk of death in favor of Arm A vs. Arm C (HR=0.78, p=0.01685); however, the pre-specified boundary (p<0.0096) was not crossed. All other secondary endpoints consistently showed improvement in favor of Arm A vs. Arm C; ORR (PR or better) 75% vs. 62% (p < 0.00001), DOR (HR=0.63; p<0.00001), and PFS2 (HR=0.78, p=0.0051). Relevant Grade 3/4 adverse events in Arm A vs. Arm C were neutropenia (28% vs. 45%), thrombocytopenia (8% vs. 11%), febrile neutropenia (1% vs. 3%), infection (29% vs. 17%), neuropathy (5% vs. 15%), and deep-vein thrombosis (5% vs. 3%). The incidence of secondary primary malignancies (SPM) was evaluated. Hematologic malignancies were 0.4% in Arm A vs. 2.2% in Arm C; the overall incidence of solid tumors was identical (2.8%). Conclusion Continuous treatment with the all oral doublet Rd significantly improved the primary endpoint of PFS compared with the standard triplet, MPT. All secondary endpoints support the clinical benefit of continuous Rd treatment. The safety profile of Rd was manageable, with reduced hematologic SPM compared to MPT. Disclosures: Facon: Celgene: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Off Label Use: Lenalidomide as treatment for NDMM. Dimopoulos:Celgene, Orthobiotech: Honoraria. Dispenzieri:Celgene, Millenium, Jansenn, Pfizer: Research Funding. Catalano:Celgene, Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Hulin:Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Cavo:Celgene, Janssen, Millennium, Onyx, Brystol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Pinto:Mundipharma: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Weisel:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Ludwig:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Bahlis:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Delforge:Celgene: Honoraria. Chen:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Lundbeck: Consultancy; Johnson & Johnson: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria; GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding. Oriol:Celgen: Consultancy. White:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Binder:Celgene: Research Funding. Anderson:Acetylon, OncoPep: Equity Ownership; Celgene, Onyx, Sanofi Aventis, Gileod: Consultancy. Moreau:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Attal:Janssen: Lectures, Lectures Other, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene Corporation: Lectures Other, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Knight:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Chen:Celgene: Employment. Van Oostendorp:Celgene: Employment. Jacques:Celgene: Employment. Ervin-Haynes:Celgene: Employment, Patents & Royalties. Benboubker:Celgene: Consultancy.

Abstract Introduction: Cytogenetic abnormalities in patients (pts) with multiple myeloma (MM) are of prognostic importance and can be associated with poor outcomes (Bergsagel, Blood, 2011). The FIRST trial is a pivotal phase 3 study with the largest data set in transplant-ineligible pts with newly diagnosed MM (NDMM). This subanalysis evaluates the impact of cytogenetics on outcomes in transplant-ineligible pts with NDMM continuously treated with lenalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone until disease progression (Rd continuous). Methods: Transplant-ineligible pts with NDMM were randomized to 1 of 3 treatment arms: Rd continuous, Rd18 (Rd for 18 cycles [72 weeks]), or melphalan-prednisone-thalidomide (MPT; for 12 cycles [72 weeks]). Cytogenetics were assessed using fluorescence in situ hybridization. Pts were categorized into cytogenetic risk groups according to International Myeloma Working Group criteria. High-risk cytogenetics included del(17p), t(4;14), and t(14;16); all other pts were categorized as non-high risk. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS; primary comparators were Rd continuous vs MPT), and key secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), and safety. Results: A total of 762 of 1623 pts from the intent-to-treat population had validated cytogenetic profiles, with 142 pts in the high-risk group and 620 pts in the non-high-risk group. Baseline characteristics were well balanced across cytogenetic risk groups (Table 1). The median follow-up for OS was 40.2 months for the 762 pts in this analysis (data cutoff, March 03, 2014). In the non-high-risk group, median duration of treatment was 19.4 months with Rd continuous and 16.6 months with both Rd18 and MPT. In the high-risk group, median duration of treatment was 10.0 months with Rd continuous, 8.2 months with Rd18, and 12.0 months with MPT. Rd continuous treatment resulted in a 24% reduced risk of death or progression compared with MPT and an even greater 32% reduced risk in pts without high-risk cytogenetics (Table 2). In non-high-risk pts, median PFS was 31.1 months with Rd continuous compared with 21.2 and 24.9 months with Rd18 and MPT, respectively (Figure). However, in high-risk pts, the observed numerical median PFS favoring Rd18 is mainly due to small pt numbers influenced by long runners (n = 5), and the greatly overlapping 95% CIs from all 3 arms show the difference is likely to be minimal. Rd continuous treatment resulted in a 28% reduced risk of death vs MPT overall and a 34% reduced risk in pts without high-risk cytogenetics. OS was similar across treatment arms for high-risk pts. ORRs in all cytogenetic risk groups favored Rd continuous vs MPT. In pts with high-risk cytogenetics, higher-quality responses were also observed with Rd continuous vs MPT treatment. Similar results were seen with Rd continuous compared with Rd18, although OS and ORR benefits overall and in pts without high-risk cytogenetics were not as pronounced. In all 3 treatment arms, adverse events were consistent across cytogenetic risk groups. Conclusions: Rd continuous treatment resulted in PFS and OS benefits vs MPT in pts with validated cytogenetic profiles. This was largely due to PFS and OS improvements in pts without high-risk cytogenetics. In the high-risk group, the longest PFS was observed with Rd18 treatment and OS was similar across treatment arms. Despite being on the continuous vs fixed duration treatment arm, high-risk pts on Rd continuous received a shorter duration of treatment than those on MPT, which may explain why PFS favored MPT vs Rd continuous. Higher response rates were observed with Rd continuous vs MPT, regardless of cytogenetic risk, and greater quality responses were observed in pts with high-risk cytogenetics. The safety profile of Rd continuous was manageable and consistent between cytogenetic risk groups. Results support Rd continuous as a standard treatment option for pts with NDMM who are ineligible for transplant, especially those without high-risk cytogenetics. Additional PFS and OS benefits may be achieved in pts with high-risk cytogenetics when Rd continuous is used as a backbone for combination therapy with a novel agent. Promising activity in pts with high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities has been demonstrated using this approach (Lonial et al, N Engl J Med, 2015; Stewart et al, N Engl J Med, 2015). Disclosures Hulin: Celgene Corporation: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria. Dimopoulos:Celgene: Honoraria; Onyx: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Genesis: Honoraria. Reece:Lundbeck: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Merck: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Onyx: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; Otsuka: Research Funding. Catalano:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria. Pinto:Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Honoraria; Spectrum: Honoraria. Ludwig:Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen Cilag: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Bahlis:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding. Cavo:Janssen-Cilag, Celgene, Amgen, BMS: Honoraria. Moreau:Takeda: Other: Adboard; Janssen: Other: Adboard; Novartis: Other: Adboard; Amgen: Other: Adboard; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Adboard. Qiu:Johnson & Johnson: Speakers Bureau; Celgene Corporation: Speakers Bureau; Roche: Speakers Bureau. Schots:Celgene Corporation: Research Funding. Marek:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Chen:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Yiu:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ervin-Haynes:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Facon:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Millenium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Onyx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pierre Fabre: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Abstract Background: The anti-apoptotic proteins BCL-2 and MCL-1 promote multiple myeloma (MM) cell survival. Bortezomib (BTZ) can inhibit MCL-1 activity by stabilizing the MCL-1 antagonist, NOXA. Venetoclax is an orally bioavailable, highly selective BCL-2 inhibitor, which enhances BTZ efficacy in MM xenograft models. This Phase 1 study evaluates venetoclax with BTZ and dexamethasone (Dex) in patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory MM. Methods: Objectives include safety, pharmacokinetics, preliminary efficacy and maximum therapeutic dose of venetoclax with BTZ and Dex. A fixed dose of venetoclax ranging from 50 to 800 mg PO daily, according to dose cohort assignment, was given in combination in cycles (C) 1-11 and alone in C12 and beyond. Dose escalation decisions were made using the continual reassessment method. Pts received BTZ (1.3 mg/m2 SC, days [D] 1, 4, 8, 11) and Dex (20 mg PO, D1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, 12) in cycles (C)1-8 (21D), then BTZ + Dex (D1, 8, 15, 22) in C9-11 (35D). Results: Forty-one pts were enrolled as of June 15, 2015 (pts in each cohort: 50 mg, n=3; 100 mg, n=5; 200 mg, n=6; 300 mg, n=7; 400 mg, n=6; 500 mg, n=7; 600 mg, n=5; 800 mg, n=2). Median age was 65 (38-79); 15/26 F/M. 14 were ISS stage I, 11 stage II, 11 stage III, 5 missing. Median (range) number of prior lines of therapy was 5 (1-15). Thirty-five pts had received prior BTZ (10 refractory), 34 prior lenalidomide (22 refractory); 29 had undergone stem cell transplantation. Based on FISH analysis, 5 pts had MM with t(11;14); 3 with t(4;14), 20 with del 17p, and 10 with del 13q. Treatment-emergent AEs occurring in ≥20% of pts were constipation (37%), diarrhea (37%), thrombocytopenia (32%), asthenia (29%), insomnia (29%), anemia (27%), peripheral neuropathy (27%), dyspnea (24%), peripheral edema (22%), and nausea (20%). Grade 3/4 AEs in ≥10% of pts were thrombocytopenia (20%), and anemia (17%). SAEs occurred in 18 pts; SAEs in ≥2 pts were cardiac failure, embolism, pyrexia, respiratory failure, sepsis, thrombocytopenia (n=2 each, no SAEs were venetoclax-related). Twenty-nine pts have discontinued treatment: 23 due to PD, 2 due to AEs [adenocarcinoma; cardiac and respiratory decompensation attributed to Dex (DLT at 300 mg)], and 4 withdrew consent. Three deaths occurred (all due to PD). No TLS occurred. In preliminary PK analyses (n=41), dose-normalized venetoclax exposure when given with BTZ+Dex was similar when compared to venetoclax monotherapy in MM as well as CLL and NHL pts. Forty of 41 pts were evaluable for efficacy. All responses occurred in BTZ sensitive or naïve pts. Median (range) duration or response was 5.9 (0-14.1) months in all pts, 8.5 (2.3-11.4) months in BTZ naïve pts, and 4.7 (0-14.1) months in BTZ-sensitive pts. Conclusions: Venetoclax with BTZ and Dex has an acceptable safety profile in heavily pretreated MM pts; no new safety signals were identified compared to other venetoclax studies. These early data suggest the combination of proteasome and BCL-2 inhibition resulted in anti-tumor activity. Responses were observed only in pts naïve or sensitive to prior BTZ (ORR = 100% and 58%, respectively) and occurred in all dose cohorts. The study is currently enrolling pts in the 1000 mg dose escalation cohort. Figure 1. Figure 1. Disclosures Moreau: Celgene, Janssen, Takeda, Novartis, Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Off Label Use: Venetoclax is an investigational drug that is not yet approved in this indication. Roberts:AbbVie and Genentech: Research Funding; Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research: Employment. Agarwal:Amgen, Millennium: Consultancy; Celgene, Onyx: Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Research Funding. Facon:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Millenium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Onyx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pierre Fabre: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kumar:Skyline, Noxxon: Honoraria; Celgene, Millennium, Onyx, Janssen, Noxxon, Sanofi, BMS, Skyline: Consultancy; Celgene, Millennium, Onyx, Novartis, Janssen, Sanofi: Research Funding. Touzeau:AbbVie: Research Funding. Darden:AbbVie: Employment, Equity Ownership. Morris:AbbVie: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ross:AbbVie: Employment, Equity Ownership. Salem:AbbVie: Employment, Equity Ownership. Munasinghe:AbbVie: Employment, Equity Ownership. Zhu:AbbVie: Employment, Equity Ownership. Leverson:AbbVie: Employment, Equity Ownership. Maciag:AbbVie: Employment, Equity Ownership. Enschede:AbbVie: Employment, Equity Ownership. Verdugo:AbbVie: Employment, Equity Ownership. Humerickhouse:AbbVie: Employment, Equity Ownership. Harrison:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Research Funding.

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.

Abstract Abstract 1876 Poster Board I-901 Background: Multiple Myeloma (MM) remains incurable in spite of new effective agents and combination regimens. SRC family kinases (SFK) are potential targets for therapy in MM: Hck, Fyn and Lyn are implicated in IL6-induced proliferation. Dasatinib is a potent inhibitor of not only BCR-ABL, but also SFK, c-KIT, PDGFRb, and EPHA. In myeloma and endothelial cells (ECs) isolated from MM patients (pts), dasatinib blocked proliferation, survival, adhesion, migration, and angiogenic potential, through a combined targeting of PDGFRβ as well as VEGF-triggered phosphorylation of SRC. Lenalidomide has clinical efficacy in the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) as a single agent and in combination with dexamethasone. The combination of dasatinib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone exhibits synergistic inhibition of MMIS cells. Methods: The primary objective of this Phase I, multicenter, open-label, non-randomized study was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of the combination of dasatinib, with lenalidomide and dexamethasone in pts with relapsed or refractory (RR) MM. Secondary objectives were to assess the tolerability of the combination, to establish the dose for future clinical investigations, and to assess the efficacy by International Uniform Response and EBMT Criteria. Pts ≥18 years with confirmed RR MM, measurable disease (at least 1 g/dL for IgG or 0.5 g/dL for IgA in serum or urinary excretion of 200 mg monoclonal light chain/24 hours), and at least one prior treatment were enrolled sequentially into increasing dose cohorts (using a 3+3 design). Pts received oral dasatinib daily on a continuous schedule, oral lenalidomide daily for 21 days, and oral dexamethasone 40 mg/day (Days 1, 8, 15, and 22). Cycles were repeated every 28 days. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were assessed in the first cycle. If there was no DLT, dose escalation continued to MTD, followed by an expansion phase of the established dose. Results: Enrollment is ongoing. 16 pts (6 M, 10 F; median age 70.5 years, range 51–80) were treated in cohorts 1, 2, 3 and 4; MTD has not been established (as by July 2009). The median number of prior lines of therapy was 3 (range 1–6). Seven pts had prior autologous stem cell transplantation; 8 pts had prior thalidomide, 4 prior lenalidomide and 3 pts both. Baseline β2 microglobulin levels of >3.5mg/L were reported in 4 pts. The most common (310%) treatment related adverse events (AEs) diarrhea 6 (38%); nausea 4 (25%); constipation 2 (13%); stomatitis 2 (13%); asthenia 3 (19%); weight decrease 5 (31%); dyspnea 2 (13%); rash 2 (13%); vertigo 2 (13%); insomnia 2 (13%). The most common grade 3 / 4 hematologic AEs included neutropenia 6 (38%), anemia 4 (25%) and thrombocytopenia 3 (19%). Two DLTs were identified in cohorts 1 and 4: 1 pt had 2 point decline in ECOG Performance Status and other pt had a drug interruption > 15 days due to nausea and vomiting, respectively. Six out of 16 pts discontinued treatment: 1 due to death in first cycle (D19); 3 for AEs (2 study drug related and 1 unrelated), 1 withdrawal of consent, 1 following maximal clinical benefit (minor response) after 12+ cycles. As of July 2009, 10 pts remain on treatment, with a median duration of treatment of 4.2 months (range 0.6–12). Responses were observed in 13 pts: 8 partial responses (PR), and 5 minor responses (MR). 1 pt had stable disease (SD) and 2 pts were not evaluable (1 pts died before completion of cycle 1 and other pt was too early for assessment). Conclusion: Dasatinib in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone is well tolerated and preliminary activity has been observed. Disclosures: Facon: Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen Cilag: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Stewart:Takeda-Millenium, Celgene, Novartis, Amgen: Consultancy; Takeda, Millenium: Research Funding; Genzyme, Celgene, Millenium, Proteolix: Honoraria. Garzon:BMS: Employment. Bleickardt:BMS: Employment. Gialelis:BMS: Employment. Tuozzoli:BMS: Employment. Derreumaux:BMS: Employment. Sonneveld:Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria.

Abstract Lenalidomide (Len), an analog of thalidomide (thal) is a novel, oral, immunomodulatory agent that is effective against multiple myeloma (MM). In 2 prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase III trials. Len with dexamethasone (Dex) induced a significantly higher overall response rate (OR) and complete remission rate (CR), as well as longer time-to-progression (TTP) in comparison with Dex alone. This prospective analysis assessed whether prior thalidomide exposure might induce subsequent resistance to Len/Dex. We evaluated 704 patients (pts) from both trials (MM009, MM010) who had relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma, had not been resistant to Dex and were randomized to receive either oral Len (25 mg daily for 3 weeks every 4 weeks) plus Dex (40 mg on days 1–4, 9–12, 17–20 every 4 weeks for 4 cycles) or placebo plus Dex. Two hundred seventy four pts (39%) received prior thal, while 430 (61%) had not. The prior thal exposed pts and thal-naive pts were similar in regard to age, Beta-2-microglobulin, hemoglobin, serum M protein, albumin and history of previous transplantation. The frequency of deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism (DVT/PE) with prior thal exposure was higher at 14% with Len/Dex than 4% with Dex alone (p < 0.01). However, the frequency of DVT/PE with no prior thal exposure was similar at 8% with Len/Dex to 6% with Dex alone (p = 0.49). In the prior thal pts, severe neuropathy occurred in 4% with Len/Dex, not significantly different from the 1% with Dex alone (p=0.2). The pooled data from all 704 pts showed that pts treated with Len/Dex, compared with those treated with Dex alone, had superior median Time-To-Progression (TTP) (48 vs 20 weeks) and OR (60% vs 22%, p <0.001). Similarly, among the subgroups exposed or not exposed to thal, Len/Dex was superior to Dex alone in OR and TTP. For the 126 patients who received prior thal, the OR with Len/Dex was significantly less (43%) among 54 Pts resistant to thal than that observed for 72 Pts who had been sensitive to thal (63%, p < 0.05). Multivariate analysis using Cox proportion hazards model indicated that after controlling for treatment (Len/Dex vs Dex) and baseline disease characteristics, independent and significant predictors of shorter TTP included prior thal exposure, duration of myeloma and number of prior therapies. Len in combination with Dex was more effective than Dex in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma despite prior thal exposure. Results with Len/Dex were superior for those not exposed to thal, suggesting some, but not complete, cross resistance between Len and thal. Len/Dex vs Dex with or without Prior Thal Thal (N=274) No Thal (N=430) LD D p LD D p Intent-to-Treat (n) 126 148 227 203 TTP (med. weeks) 36.9 19.9 <.001 61.3 20.4 <.001 OR (%) 54.0 14.9 <.001 63.4 27.6 <.001 PR (%) 42.1 12.8 <.001 32.2 23.2 <.05 NCR (%) 4.0 0.7 <.001 13.2 2.0 <.001 CR (%) 7.9 1.4 <.01 18.1 2.5 <.001

Abstract Background: Venetoclax (VEN) is a potent, selective, orally available small-molecule BCL-2 inhibitor that induces cell death in multiple myeloma (MM) cell lines and primary samples, particularly those with t(11;14), which mostly have a favorable high BCL-2, low BCL-XL, and low MCL-1 profile. Methods: In this Phase 1, open-label study, patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory (R/R) MM received VEN monotherapy. Objectives of the study were to assess safety, pharmacokinetics, maximum tolerated dose, recommended phase 2 dose, and efficacy (objective response rate [ORR], time to progression [TTP], and duration of response [DoR]) of VEN. After a 2-week lead in period with weekly dose escalation, VEN was given daily at final doses of 300, 600, 900, or 1200mg in dose escalation cohorts and 1200mg in the safety expansion. Pts who progressed during VEN monotherapy could receive VEN plus dexamethasone and continue in the study. Results: As of 01July2016, 66 pts were enrolled in the study (30 in dose escalation cohorts and 36 in safety expansion). Median age was 63 years and 39 (62%) pts were ISS stage II/III. The median number of prior therapies was 5 (range: 1-15), and 62 (94%) pts had received bortezomib (46 [70%] refractory), 62 (94%) received lenalidomide (51 [77%] refractory), and 50 (76%) had prior autologous stem cell transplant. Thirty (46%) pts had t(11;14) MM. Median time on VEN monotherapy for all pts was 2.5 months (.2-23); 17 (26%) elected to receive VEN and dexamethasone combination after disease progression for a median of 1.4 months (.1-11). Fifty-one (77%) pts discontinued the study for the following primary reasons: 39 related to disease progression, 5 due to AEs/toxicity, 2 withdrew consent, 1 was lost to follow up, and 4 for other reasons not specified. Common adverse events (AEs) in ≥20% of pts were nausea (48%), diarrhea (36%), neutropenia (32%), thrombocytopenia (32%), fatigue (27%), anemia (23%), back pain (21%), and vomiting (21%). Grade 3/4 AEs in ≥10% of pts were thrombocytopenia (26%), neutropenia (20%), lymphopenia (15%), anemia (14%), and decreased white blood cells (12%). Serious AEs in ≥2 pts were pneumonia (n=5), sepsis (3), pain, pyrexia, cough, and hypotension (2 each). Two pts experienced dose-limiting toxicities at 600mg of abdominal pain and nausea. Eight deaths were reported: 6 due to disease progression, 1 due to lung disorder, and 1 due to brain hemorrhage following injury; neither were considered by the investigator as related to VEN. Steady state VEN exposures were approximately dose proportional at all doses but 900mg. As of 20July2016, ORR for all pts on VEN monotherapy was 21% (14/66) and 10 (15%) achieved very good partial response (VGPR) or better (2 stringent complete response [sCR], 2 CR, 6 VGPR) (Figure); median DoR and TTP was 9.7 and 2.6 months, respectively. Most objective responses (12/14 [86%]) were reported in the subset of pts with t(11;14) MM. In this group, ORR was 40% (12/30) and 27% (8/30) achieved a response of ≥VGPR; median DoR for pts with t(11;14) was 9.7 months (95% CI: 6.3, -). Pts who achieved at least minimal response in the t(11;14) group (14/30) had a median of 4 prior therapies and were mostly refractory to bortezomib, lenalidomide, or double refractory (71% [10/14] each). For two pts with response in the non-t(11;14)/undetermined group, 1 had a translocation of chromosome 14 with an unidentified partner, and the other had no cytogenetics data available. DoR was 9.5 and 7.2 months in these pts and both are still ongoing. Median TTP for pts with or without/undetermined t(11;14) was 6.6 and 1.9 months, respectively. The median best percent change in primary M protein for pts with t(11;14) (n=23) was -53% vs +11% in the non-t(11;14)/undetermined group (n=23). Additional biomarker subgroup analyses (n=32) showed that efficacy was primarily observed in pts with myeloma cells expressing a favorable BCL-2 family expression profile (high BCL-2, low BCL-XL, low MCL-1) by immunohistochemistry, which was significantly enriched in the t(11;14) population. Indeed, although high BCL-2 expression was observed in a majority of bone marrow core biopsy samples (88%), the t(11;14) subgroup was enriched (81% vs 25%) for tumors expressing high BCL-2, low BCL-XL, and low MCL-1. Conclusions: VEN monotherapy has an acceptable safety profile and clear anti-myeloma activity in pts with R/R MM, primarily with t(11;14) having a high BCL-2, low BCL-XL and low MCL-1 expression levels. Figure Figure. Disclosures Kumar: Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Noxxon Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Skyline: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Glycomimetics: Consultancy; AbbVie: Research Funding; Array BioPharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kesios: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy. Kaufman:Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy. Mikhael:Abbvie: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding. Facon:Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy; Bristol: Consultancy; Millenium/Takeda: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Consultancy. Benboubker:Takeda: 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; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Moreau:Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria. Alzate:AbbVie: Employment. Ross:AbbVie: Employment, Equity Ownership. Dunbar:AbbVie Inc.: Employment, Other: may own stock. Xu:AbbVie: Employment. Agarwal:AbbVie: Employment. Leverson:AbbVie: Employment, Other: Shareholder in AbbVie. Maciag:AbbVie: Employment. Verdugo:AbbVie: Employment, Other: may own stock. Touzeau:AbbVie: Research Funding.

Abstract Background . Cell-free DNA (cfDNA) sequencing enables serial temporal sampling, which offers the possibility of following the dynamics of biomarkers and clonal evolution in Multiple Myeloma (MM) over time. The use of cfDNA in clinical practice as a molecular biomarker and for monitoring response/resistance is dependent on a comprehensive profile of matched cfDNA and tumor DNA (tDNA) samples. Here we performed Ultra-Low Pass Whole Genome Sequencing (ULP-WGS) followed by whole-exome sequencing (WES) and targeted deep sequencing of matched cfDNA/tDNA samples from MM patients. Methods. We performed next generation sequencing of matched cfDNA/tDNA samples for 63 patients with newly diagnosed or relapsed MM, SMM, or MGUS. Libraries were constructed using the Kappa Hyper kit and sequenced by ultra-low-pass whole-genome sequencing (ULP-WGS, 0.1x coverage) to quantify tumor fraction within cfDNA. WES was performed on 30 matched samples cfDNA/tDNA/germline DNA from 10 patients with more than 5% of tumor fraction. Libraries were hybridized to the Nextera Rapid Capture Exome kit (Illumina) and then sequenced on HiSeq 4000 (Illumina). Targeted deep sequencing was performed on 32 matched cfDNA/tDNA samples from 16 patients using the HaloPlex HS technology (Agilent), allowing for molecular barcoding. Libraries were constructed according to the manufacturer's instructions and sequenced on HiSeq 2500 (Illumina). Sequencing data were analyzed using the Firehose pipelines, including MuTect, ABSOLUTE, ReCapSeg, GISTIC and MutSig. Results. We first used a cost-effective approach to establish the tumor content of cfDNA in a large-scale manner by ULP-WGS. Among 63 tested samples (53 MM, 6 SMM and 4 MGUS patient samples), the tumor fraction within cfDNA ranged from 0 to 81% with a mean of 10%. About 43% of these samples had tumor fraction greater than 5% within cfDNA. To assess whether cfDNA can capture the genetic diversity of MM and inform clinical management, we performed WES of matched cfDNA/tDNA/germline DNA samples for 10 patients (mean target coverage 194x). Copy number alterations (CNAs) assessed by WES (ReCapSeg) were consistent between cfDNA and tumor DNA. Similarly, focal CNAs assessed by GISTIC were consistent between tDNA and cfDNA. We then examined the overlap of somatic single nucleotide variants (SSNVs) between WES of cfDNA and matched tDNA. We found, on average, 100% of the clonal and 96% of the subclonal (range 54-100%) SSNVs that were detected in the tumor were confirmed to be present in cfDNA. Similarly, for mutations detected in the cfDNA, we found, on average, 100% of the clonal and 99% of the subclonal (range 98-100%) SSNVs were confirmed in the tumor. To assess whether targeted deep sequencing of cfDNA could be a good proxy for tumor biopsy we used a targeted deep sequencing approach of known MM driver genes. Libraries were prepared using unique molecular barcodes to avoid duplication rates, for 32 matched cfDNA/tDNA samples from 16 patients with MM. The mean target coverage was 596x. We found similar frequencies of altered MM driver genes in both cfDNA and tDNA, including KRAS, NRAS, and TP53, indicating that cfDNA can be used for precision medicine. Conclusions. Our study demonstrates that both WES and targeted deep sequencing of cfDNA are consistently representative of tumor DNA alterations in terms of CNAs, focal CNAs and SSNVs. This approach could therefore be used to longitudinally follow clonal evolution across the course of the disease and precision medicine in patients with MM. Disclosures Palumbo: Takeda: Employment, Honoraria; Janssen Cilag: Honoraria. Kumar:Noxxon Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Skyline: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kesios: Consultancy; Glycomimetics: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Array BioPharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding. Roccaro:Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited: Honoraria. Facon:Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Bristol: Consultancy; Millenium/Takeda: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Consultancy. Ghobrial:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding; Noxxon: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria.