Liedtke, Michaela

BACKGROUND: AL amyloidosis is a rare, progressive, and typically fatal disease caused by both soluble and insoluble (amyloid) forms of misfolded immunoglobulin light chain (LC) proteins, with no approved treatments. Production and tissue deposition of LC aggregates result in various organ system dysfunction (most commonly cardiac and renal), causing significant morbidity and mortality. NEOD001 is an investigational humanized IGg1 designed to directly neutralize soluble toxic aggregates of misfolded LCs and promote phagocytic clearance of amyloid deposits. AIM: To evaluate efficacy and safety of NEOD001 + standard of care (SOC) vs placebo + SOC in patients with AL amyloidosis by assessing time to all-cause mortality (ACM) or cardiac hospitalization (CH). METHODS: This Phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled study randomized 260 newly diagnosed, untreated AL amyloidosis patients (stratified by Mayo stage (Kumar et al., 2012), renal stage, & 6MWD) with cardiac involvement. Patients were randomized 1:1 to 24 mg/kg IV NEOD001 + SOC or placebo + SOC every 28 days. SOC was concomitant chemotherapy with a first line bortezomib-containing regimen. Primary endpoint (PE) was time to ACM or time to centrally adjudicated CH (CH: >90 days after first study drug infusion). Futility analysis based on 103 adjudicated events favored NEOD001 but was not statistically significant (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.57-1.204, p=0.386). The study was terminated early and post hoc analyses were performed. To our knowledge, this study was the first randomized, placebo-controlled, Phase 3 study evaluating an amyloid-targeting agent in AL amyloidosis. RESULTS: Study arms were balanced with regard to demographics and baseline clinical characteristics. The final PE results (intent-to-treat, ITT) were consistent with the futility analysis: HR 0.835, 95% CI 0.5799-1.2011, p=0.330. Favorability of HR for NEOD001 was largely attributable to time to all-cause mortality rather than cardiac hospitalization. Study termination was the primary reason for discontinuation (majority occurring after 12 months). The 12-month study period was defined as modified ITT (mITT). Further mITT analyses by prognostic Mayo staging categories suggest benefit favoring NEOD001 for both PE (HR=0.635) and ACM (HR=0.498) in stage IV patients (n=77), who have highest risk of early mortality. Median overall survival in stage IV (mITT) was 8.3 months for placebo + SOC and was not reached (>12 months) for NEOD001 + SOC. One or more treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were experienced by 257 patients. Of the 88 NEOD001-treated patients with a serious adverse event (SAE), the majority of SAEs (95.5%) were considered not related to study drug. The most common TEAEs (fatigue, nausea, peripheral edema, constipation, and diarrhea) were similar in both arms. Overall safety results were similar within and across Mayo stages. CONCLUSION: After study termination, further calculations supported that the VITAL study as designed would not have achieved statistical significance. No statistically significant differences between NEOD001 + SOC vs. placebo + SOC were observed for the PE. Overall, the incidence, severity, and seriousness of AEs were similar in each arm, suggesting that NEOD001 was generally safe and well tolerated. Post hoc analyses suggest a potential survival benefit of NEOD001 for AL amyloidosis patients with the highest risk of early mortality (Mayo stage IV). This population has historically been the most in need of therapy to improve outcomes, therefore additional clinical studies for NEOD001 are warranted. Disclosures Gertz: Ionis/Akcea: Consultancy; Alnylam: Consultancy; Annexon: Consultancy; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Medscape: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Appellis: Consultancy; Prothena Biosciences Inc: Consultancy; Spectrum: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy; Abbvie: Other: personal fees for Data Safety Monitoring board; Research to Practice: Consultancy; DAVA oncology: Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Proclara: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; i3Health: Other: Development of educational programs and materials; Springer Publishing: Patents & Royalties; Amyloidosis Foundation: Research Funding; International Waldenstrom Foundation: Research Funding; Johnson and Johnson: Speakers Bureau; Teva: Speakers Bureau. Cohen:Poseida Therapeutics, Inc.: Research Funding. Comenzo:Caelum: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Research Funding; Unum: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Myself: Patents & Royalties: Patent 9593332, Pending 20170008966; Sanofi-Aventis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Prothena Biosciences: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Du Mond:Inclin, Inc.: Employment; Prothena: Consultancy. Kastritis:Genesis: Honoraria; Prothena: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria. Landau:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Research Funding; Caelum: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Libby:Alnylam: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics and Janssen: Consultancy; Akcea: Consultancy. Liedtke:Adaptive: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios: Research Funding; Amgen/Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; BlueBirdBio: Research Funding; Caelum: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celator: Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Genentech/Roche: Research Funding; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; IQVIA/Jazz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Merlini:University of Pavia: Employment. Sanchorawala:Proclara: Consultancy, Honoraria; Caelum: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Prothena: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Schönland:Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Medac: Other: Travel Grant; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Wechalekar:Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; GSK: Honoraria; Amgen: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria. Zonder:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncopeptides: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Intellia: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Caelum: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Alnylam: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kinney:Prothena Biosciences Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Patents & Royalties: named inventor on multiple patents and patent applications related to NEOD001.

Background Blinatumomab is a bispecific T cell antibody construct, that binds and allows CD-3 positive cytotoxic T cells to recognize and eradicate CD19-positive acute lymphocytic leukemia (ALL) blasts. The drug is approved for patient (pts) with relapsed/ refractory (RR) B-cell ALL and those with minimal residual disease (MRD) based on efficacy in clinical trials. We sought to evaluate the safety and efficacy of blinatumomab in the "real world" setting. Methods We conducted a retrospective multicenter study in collaboration with 11 U.S. academic institutions, and evaluated the outcome of RR B-cell ALL pts, who received blinatumomab outside of clinical trials. These pts were evaluated for response, duration of response (DOR), overall survival (OS) from the time of blinatumomab initiation and toxicity. DOR was estimated among pts who had achieved complete remission (CR)/CR with incomplete count recovery (CRi). Survival curves were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared via log-rank test. Results From December 2014 to May 2019, 239 pts with B-cell ALL were identified. Baseline characteristics are summarized in Table 1. The median age of pts at blinatumomab initiation was 48 years (yrs) (range, 18-85). Sixty-one (26%) pts had Philadelphia chromosome [t(9;22)] positive (Ph+ve) disease. Sixty-one (26%) pts had ≥ 3 prior therapies and 46 (19%) pts had allogeneic stem cell transplantation (allo-HCT) prior to blinatumomab. Twenty-two (9%) pts received inotuzumab ozagamicin prior to blinatumomab. Twenty-nine (12%) pts received blinatumomab in combination with tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI). Twelve (5%) pts received blinatumomab for MRD. Response rate (CR/CRi) in pts with RR disease was 61%; 44% had CR with MRD negativity by flow cytometry. Rate of CR/CRi in Ph+ve B-cell ALL was 74.5%. Among 12 pts who received Blinatumomab for MRD, 9 (75%) pts achieved MRD negativity. Overall 113 (48%) pts were successfully bridged to allo-HCT. Median DOR in pts with RR disease was 32.1 months (95% CI; 9.5-not reached [NR]) (Fig. 1a) and when censored at allo-HCT was 14.8 months (95% CI; 5.2-NR) (Fig. 1b). Median OS in pts with RR disease after blinatumomab was 12.7 months (95% CI; 9.2 -17.9) (Fig. 1c) and when censored at allo-HCT was 8.6 months (95% CI; 6.4-11.6) (Fig.1d). Median OS after blinatumomab in RR B-cell ALL Ph+ve pts was NR (59% alive at 2 yr). Among pts who received blinatumomab for MRD, median DOR was NR and 54% sustained MRD negativity at 2 yrs. Median OS was 34.7 months (95% CI; 8.8-34.7) in group of pts who received blinatumomab for MRD. Seven (3%) pts discontinued blinatumomab due to adverse events and 40 (21%) pts had dose interruptions. Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) of any grade (G) was reported in higher number of pts (93 [39%]) compared to clinical trials, though G3-4 CRS appears to be similar (G1-2 [36%], G3-4 [3%]). Forty-four (44%) pts were treated with steroids and 8 (8%) pts required tocilizumab with steroids for CRS. Ninety-three percent of pts had complete resolution of CRS. CNS toxicities were observed in 31 (13%) pts, among them 60% (n= 19) had G3-4 toxicities. Hepatic toxicities were observed in 84 (35%) pts as outlined in Table 1. Six (2.5%) pts died due to blinatumomab induced toxicities. Conclusion: Our real-world data with multicenter collaboration suggest that overall blinatumomab was well tolerated and had led to significant response in pts with RR B-cell ALL. Disclosures Advani: Amgen: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding; Macrogenics: Research Funding; Kite Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Glycomimetics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Aldoss:AUTO1: Consultancy; Helocyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel/accommodation/expenses; Agios: Consultancy, Honoraria; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Other: travel/accommodation/expenses, Speakers Bureau. Podoltsev:Agios Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Blueprint Medicines: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Boehringer Ingelheim: Research Funding; Astellas Pharma: Research Funding; Alexion: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Sunesis Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Astex Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Research Funding; Celgene: Other: Grant funding, Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; AI Therapeutics: Research Funding; Samus Therapeutics: Research Funding; Arog Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Kartos Therapeutics: Research Funding. Curran:Incyte: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding. Yang:Agios: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Research Funding. Mattison:Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Liedtke:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; IQVIA/Jazz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Genentech/Roche: Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celator: Research Funding; Caelum: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BlueBirdBio: Research Funding; Amgen/Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Adaptive: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios: Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Atallah:Helsinn: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Jazz: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Helsinn: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Jazz: Consultancy.

Abstract Introduction: Monoclonal antibodies (MoAbs) have shown activity in relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (MM). Elotuzumab is an anti-SLAMF7 MoAb that synergizes with immunomodulatory agents (IMiDs) and is approved for treatment of relapsed and refractory MM. Anti-CD38 MoAbs (daratumumab, FDA approved and isatuximab, in clinical trials) have also entered the therapeutic MM landscape but little is known about how to best sequence MoAbs and the existence of cross resistance between different classes of MoAbs. We analyzed outcomes of patients who become refractory to elotuzumab with emphasis on the activity of anti-CD38 MoAbs in the post-elotuzumab setting. Methods: We identified patients from 14 academic institutions within the US who were refractory to elotuzumab administered alone or in combination with other agents. Patients were considered refractory to elotuzumab if treated with at least 4 weeks of therapy and had evidence of progressive disease (PD) within 60 days of last dose. Time zero (T0) was defined as point when myeloma became refractory to elotuzumab-containing regimen. Data were collected with an electronic platform and submitted to peer-based quality check for completeness and internal consistency. We analyzed demographics, characteristics of their myeloma and prior therapy including number and type of therapy prior to elotuzumab, duration of elotuzumab therapy, and outcome after becoming refractory to elotuzumab. We performed a multi-variable analysis of these factors to determine significant factors associated with survival post T0. We subsequently identified a subset of patients who received an anti-CD38 MoAb alone or in combination as next or subsequent line of therapy after T0 and report their outcomes. Results: Eighty-nine patients were evaluated. Eighty-six (96.6%) had progression on elotuzumab in combination with IMiD (N=82) or another agent (N=4). Median age at T0 was 65 years (range 28-90), 51% of patients were males, 65% were White, 54% had IgG subtype, 27% had ISS stage III at diagnosis, and 27% had high-risk cytogenetics. Patients received a median of 4 prior lines of treatment (range 1-11) prior to elotuzumab-containing regimen, including 66% who underwent autologous transplant. Sixty-one patients (69%) were refractory to at least one IMiD and one proteasome inhibitor (PI) at T0, classified as double-refractory. Twenty-one (23.6%) were quad-refractory, i.e. refractory to 2 IMiDs and 2 PIs. Twenty-eight patients (31.5%) were refractory to prior anti-CD38 MoAb. The median time from diagnosis to T0 was 59.5 months and duration of elotuzumab therapy was 3 months (range 0.4 - 59.5). Median OS from T0 for the entire cohort was 15.1 months (95% C.I. 9.3-20.9). In multivariate analysis, the only factors affecting OS after T0 were high-risk cytogenetics (HR 3.31, 95% C.I. 1.74-6.27, P<0.001) and refractoriness to prior anti-CD38 MoAb (HR 4.22, 95% C.I. 2.22-8.01, P<0.001). Interestingly, median OS for patients not refractory to anti-CD38 MoAb was 33.1 months vs. 4.5 months for anti-CD38 MoAb-refractory patients (Figure 1). After T0, 45 patients (50.6%) received an anti-CD38 MoAb in the next (N=28, 62.5%) or subsequent regimens (N=17, 37.8%). Median time between T0 and initiation of anti-CD38 MoAb was 1.2 months (0-15.0). Anti-CD38 MoAbs employed were: isatuximab in 4 (8.9%) and daratumumab in 41 patients (91.1%). In most cases, the anti-CD38 MoAb was administered in combination with IMiD (N=30, 66.6%) or bortezomib (N=7, 15.6%). The overall response rate (ORR) for anti-CD38 MoAb regimens was 35.6%; responses to specific combinations are outlined in the Table. Median PFS for elotuzumab-refractory patients receiving therapy with anti-CD38 MoAbs was 4.6 months (95% C.I. 1.6-7.6), while median OS was 15.3 months (95% C.I. 8.2-22.4) (Figure 2). Conclusion: Patient who become refractory to elotuzumab have guarded prognosis, particularly dismal among patients also refractory to anti-CD38 MoAb, defining a population with great need for novel therapies. Failure of elotuzumab-based therapy does not preclude disease control with anti-CD38 MoAb, particularly in combination. Disclosures Paul: Bristol Myer Squibb: Other: Stock and pension plan (past employee). Amarendra:Amgen: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy. Liedtke:Caelum: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; celgene: Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Genentech/Roche: Research Funding; BlueBirdBio: Research Funding; Prothena: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen/Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Hari:Kite Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen Inc.: Research Funding; Spectrum: Consultancy, Research Funding. Vij:Karyopharm: Honoraria; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol Myer Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Usmani:Abbvie, Amgen, Celgene, Genmab, Merck, MundiPharma, Janssen, Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Merck, Pharmacyclics,Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, Takeda: Research Funding. Kumar:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Costa:Karyopharm: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria; Janssen: Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction Development of anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody therapies (MoABs), including daratumumab and isatuximab, have drastically changed the therapeutic landscape for management of relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). However, there is a paucity of information regarding response to treatment after progression on CD38 MoABs. This collaborative research study (MAMMOTH: Monoclonal Antibodies in Multiple Myeloma: Outcomes after Therapy Failure) investigates the therapeutic choices and outcomes of subsequent treatments after refractoriness to MoABs. Methods Patients from 14 US academic institutions with diagnosis of MM and refractory to daratumumab or isatuximab, administered alone or in combination, were evaluated. Patients were considered refractory to a CD38 MoAB if treated with at least 4 weeks of therapy and had evidence of progressive disease (PD) while on therapy or within 60 days after last dose. Time of progression was defined as time zero (T0). Data was collected by electronic platform and submitted to peer-based quality check for completeness and internal consistency. Results Two hundred and seventy-five patients with MM refractory to CD38 MoAB were evaluated; 249 (90.5%) of those patients who received at least one subsequent line of therapy were included in this analysis. The median age at T0 was 65 years (range 27-90) and 54% were male. At the time of diagnosis, 28% had ISS stage III disease and 29% had high-risk cytogenetics. Patients were heavily pre-treated at T0 with a median of 5 lines of therapy (range 2-17); most (74%) underwent a prior autologous stem cell transplant. The majority of patients were refractory to other anti-myeloma therapies including lenalidomide (78%), pomalidomide (65%), bortezomib (69%) and carfilzomib (45%). In total, 97.1% of patients were exposed to at least one immunomodulatory agent (IMiD) and one proteasome inhibitor (PI), 79.3% were ≥ triple-refractory (refractory to 1 IMiD, 1 PI and 1 CD38 MoAB), while 25.3% were penta-refractory (refractory to 2 IMiDs, 2 PIs and 1 CD38 MoAB). Responses to the next subsequent line of therapy after progression with CD38 MoAB are shown (Table). The overall response rate (ORR; ≥PR) of first regimen post-T0 was 31% with a median progression free survival (PFS) of 3.4 mo and median overall survival (OS) of 9.3 mo. Carfilzomib-based therapy resulted in an ORR of 32% with median PFS 4.2 mo and overall OS of 10.9 mo. The addition of an IMiD to daratumumab yielded an ORR of 37% with median PFS 4.5 mo and OS 12.6 mo. The addition of a PI to daratumumab yielded no responses. Elotuzumab-based therapy had an ORR of 21% with median PFS 2.6 mo and OS 8.3 mo. By multivariate analysis, alkylator-based therapies were found to have the highest ORR (OR 3.1, 95% CI 1.8-5.7, p<0.001), however, resulted in median PFS of only 3 mo and OS of 7.7 mo. Multivariate analysis evaluating for PFS and adjusting for refractoriness to prior therapies found lower risk of progression with carfilzomib-based therapy (HR 0.60, 95% CI 0.42-0.85, p=0.004, Figure 1) and with the addition of an IMiD to daratumumab (HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.43-0.94, p=0.02). The benefit of IMiD + daratumumab was essentially restricted to patients previously refractory to CD38 MoAB as monotherapy. These patients demonstrated improved PFS with subsequent daratumumab-combination therapy at time of progression compared with patients refractory to CD38 MoAB combination therapy (log-rank p=0.02, Figure 2). No particular regimen was associated with improved OS compared with the rest. Conclusions After progression on CD38 MoAB, treatment with carfilzomib-based regimens and the addition of an IMiD to daratumumab-monotherapy resulted in a higher ORR and PFS compared with other regimens. Alkylating agents resulted in the highest ORR but relatively short PFS and OS. The use of elotuzumab and the addition of a PI to daratumumab monotherapy resulted in relatively low response rates. Overall, progression after CD38 MoAB therapy is associated with a poor prognosis and innovative therapeutic strategies are needed. Disclosures Malek: Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Paul:Bristol Myer Squibb: Other: Stock and pension plan (past employee). Neppalli:Celgene: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy. Liedtke:Amgen/Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Caelum: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech/Roche: Research Funding; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Prothena: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; celgene: Research Funding; BlueBirdBio: Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Hari:Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Spectrum: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen Inc.: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria. Vij:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: 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, Research Funding; Jansson: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharma: 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; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Usmani:Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Merck, Pharmacyclics,Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, Takeda: Research Funding; Abbvie, Amgen, Celgene, Genmab, Merck, MundiPharma, Janssen, Seattle Genetics: Consultancy. Costa:Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria. Kumar:Roche: Research Funding; KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncopeptides: 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; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction Proteasome inhibitors (PIs) and immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs) have significantly improved survival in patients with multiple myeloma (MM). Refractoriness to PIs and IMiDs results in poor outcomes with a median survival of about 13 months.Daratumumab and isatuximab are CD38-targeting monoclonal antibodies (MoABs) with remarkable activity in relapsed and refractory MM. The outcome of MM patients in US clinical practice who becomes refractory to CD38 MoABs is unknown. The aim of this multicenter, retrospective study is to investigate the natural history of patients with MM who become refractory to CD38 MoABs (Monoclonal Antibodies in Multiple Myeloma: Outcomes after Therapy Failure: MAMMOTH study). Methods We identified patients from 14 academic institutions in the US with diagnosis of active MM and refractory to daratumumab or isatuximab, administered alone or in combination. Patients were considered refractory to CD38 MoAB if treated with at least 4 weeks of therapy and had evidence of progressive disease (PD) while on therapy or within 60 days after last dose. The time when patients met the above criteria of progression was defined as time zero (T0). Data including patient-disease characteristics and all therapies administered before and after T0 were collected with an electronic platform and submitted to peer-based quality check for completeness and internal consistency. For survival outcome analysis, patients were classified into three groups: "Penta-refractory" (refractory to 1 CD38 MoAB + 2 PIs + 2 IMiDs), "Triple-refractory and quad-refractory" (refractory to 1 CD38 MoAB + 1 PI + 1/2 IMiDs, or 1 CD38 MoAB + 1/2 PIs + 1 IMiD), and "Not triple-refractory" (refractory to 1 CD38 MoAB, and not both of a PI and an IMiD). Responses were evaluated using the IMWG criteria. Results Two hundred and seventy-five patients were included in this study; median age at T0 was 65 years (range 27-90). Fifty five percent of patients were males, 52% had IgG isotype, 29% had ISS stage III disease, and 29% had high-risk cytogenetics at diagnosis. Median interval from diagnosis of MM to T0 was 50.1 months (mo) (range 2.5-230.1). Patients received a median of 4 lines of treatment (1-16) prior to the CD38 MoAB-containing regimen; 72% underwent prior autologous transplant. Daratumumab-refractory patients formed a majority (256, 93.1%) of this cohort. Most of the patients were refractory to lenalidomide (77%), pomalidomide (65%), bortezomib (68%), and carfilzomib (47%). Seventy patients (25.5%) were "penta-refractory" and 148 (53.8%) were "triple-refractory and quad-refractory". Median follow-up from T0 for survivors was 10.6 mo (range 1.9-42.3 mo). The median overall survival (OS) from T0 for the entire cohort was 8.6 mo (95% C.I. 7.2-9.9); OS for the groups based on refractoriness to prior treatments are shown (Figure). Two hundred and forty-nine patients (90.5%) received at least one line of treatment after T0, (median 2, range 1-10). The response rates and depth of responses to each line of treatment post T0 are shown (Table). Among patients who received ≥ 1 subsequent treatment, the median PFS and OS from T0 were 3.4 (95% C.I. 2.8-4.0) mo and 9.3 (95% C.I. 8.1-10.6) mo, respectively; the median OS for the 26 patients who received no further treatment was only 1.3 (95% C.I. 0.6-1.9) mo. By multivariate analysis, penta-refractoriness (HR 2.4, p <0.001), high-risk cytogenetics (HR 1.5, p=0.01), elevated LDH (HR 2, p<0.001) and creatinine > 2 (HR 2.4, p=0.01) at the onset of CD38-based therapy predicted inferior OS. Conclusions Patients with MM who become refractory to CD38 MoAB are increasingly less responsive to subsequent therapies. While survival is particularly dismal for penta-refractory patients, the outcomes are poor even for patients who are not refractory to other mainstream MM agents. The MAMMOTH study defines a MM population in urgent need for new therapies, and provides benchmark OS, PFS and response data for subsequent investigational therapies in this setting. Disclosures Malek: Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Paul:Bristol Myer Squibb: Other: Stock and pension plan (past employee). Neppalli:Amgen: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy. Liedtke:Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Prothena: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen/Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; BlueBirdBio: Research Funding; celgene: Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Genentech/Roche: Research Funding; Caelum: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Hari:Amgen Inc.: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Spectrum: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Vij:Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Karyopharma: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jansson: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Usmani:Abbvie, Amgen, Celgene, Genmab, Merck, MundiPharma, Janssen, Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Merck, Pharmacyclics,Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, Takeda: Research Funding. Kumar:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Costa:Karyopharm: Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria; Janssen: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding.

Abstract Dasatinib with corticosteroid yields high complete remission (CR) rates in Ph+ ALL with minimal induction death. Optimal post-remission therapy is not known. We report a prospective study evaluating dasatinib/dexamethasone induction then consolidation with reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (alloHCT), autologous HCT (autoHCT), or chemotherapy alone (chemo), followed by dasatinib-based maintenance. Methods: We conducted a phase II, 3-arm, non-randomized trial (NCT01256398, Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, U10CA180861, U24CA196171) at 17 US centers with primary objectives to determine 3-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) of adults ≥18 years (yrs) old with untreated Ph+ ALL treated with dasatinib/dexamethasone induction, CNS prophylaxis with systemic and intrathecal methotrexate, consolidation with alloHCT, autoHCT, or chemo, then dasatinib maintenance. Induction (Course I) used dasatinib 140 mg orally daily and dexamethasone 10 mg/m2/day orally or IV days 1-7. If ≤20% lymphoblasts in marrow at Day 15, Course II continued dasatinib with 7 days of dexamethasone. If >20% lymphoblasts, patients (pts) also received vincristine and daunorubicin. Pts not in CR/CRi received a second induction (Course III) with dasatinib, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, daunorubicin, and dexamethasone. CNS prophylaxis (Course IV) used dasatinib, IV vincristine and IV, oral, and intrathecal methotrexate. Course V consisted of HCT or chemo. Pts 18-70 yrs old underwent RIC alloHCT if they had a HLA-matched donor; otherwise they underwent autoHCT. AlloHCT conditioning used fludarabine 30 mg/m2/day IV day -7 through -3, alemtuzumab 20 mg/day IV day -7 through -3, and melphalan 140 mg/m2 IV once on day -2. GVHD prophylaxis with tacrolimus began day -2. Pts undergoing autoHCT received etoposide 10 mg/kg/day (age >65, 5 mg/kg/day) CIV for 4 days and cytarabine 2 g/m2 (age >65, 1 g/m2) IV every 12 hours for 8 doses then G-CSF for mobilization. AutoHCT conditioning was melphalan 100 mg/m2/day IV on days -2 and -1. Pts >70 yrs old or unable to undergo HCT received etoposide/cytarabine alone. Dasatinib maintenance (Course VI) began day 30 of Course V and continued for 12 months and until 2 consecutive negative BCR-ABL1 RT-PCR assays 3 months apart or relapse. BCR-ABL1 isoform and ABL1 kinase domain (KD) mutation determination were done locally. Results: From 12/15/2010 to 11/14/2014, 64 eligible pts enrolled. Median age was 60 yrs (22-87); median WBC 23.2 x 103/μl (0.3-454). The dominant BCR-ABL1 isoform was p190 in 59%, p210 in 17%, and not reported in 23%. The CR rate was 97% with no induction deaths. Fifty-five pts completed CNS prophylaxis (Course IV). Twenty pts underwent protocol-specified alloHCT, 7 autoHCT, and 9 chemo. Nine pts underwent off-study alloHCT and 5 skipped Course V. Dasatinib maintenance was tolerable with 72%, 80%, and 80% receiving >50% of planned maintenance doses in alloHCT, autoHCT, and chemo arms, respectively. With a median follow up of 48 months (37-78) for survivors, 3-yr OS and DFS were 55% (median OS 45 months) and 43% (median DFS 30 months), respectively. For pts undergoing consolidation with protocol-specified alloHCT, autoHCT, or chemo, 3-yr OS was 75%, 71%, and 55% respectively with median OS not reached (NR) for all groups. DFS at 3-yrs was 55%, 43%, and 46% respectively. Median DFS for alloHCT was 42 months vs 15 months for autoHCT and 34 months for chemo (Log-Rank P=0.4). Outcomes were similar with inclusion of off-study alloHCT and chemo patients skipping Course V. Relative to p190 BCR-ABL1 isoform, p210 was associated with shorter median OS (NR vs 16 months, P=0.04) and median DFS (35 months vs 10 months, P<0.0001). Three-year DFS was 9% with p210. Relapse occurred in 23 pts with 5 CNS relapses reported, one isolated. Relapse occurred in 25% of alloHCT, 43% of autoHCT, and 37% of chemo pts. T315I mutation in ABL1 KD was detected in 6 of 8 marrow relapses (75%). One isolated CNS relapse had no ABL1 KD mutations. Conclusions: Dasatinib and dexamethasone followed by alloHCT, autoHCT, or chemo yield similar 3-yr survival comparable to approaches using intensive induction chemotherapy. Pts with the p210 BCR-ABL1 isoform had dismal outcomes and may benefit from alternate approaches. T315I mutation was the major cause of relapse and should be addressed in future studies. Disclosures Wieduwilt: Amgen: Research Funding; Reata Pharmaceuticals: Equity Ownership; Daiichi Sankyo: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Leadiant: Research Funding; Shire: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding. Uy:GlycoMimetics: Consultancy; Curis: Consultancy. Powell:Rafael Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kolitz:Magellan Health: Consultancy, Honoraria. Liedtke:Caelum: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen/Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; celgene: Research Funding; Genentech/Roche: Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Prothena: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BlueBirdBio: Research Funding. Stock:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Devine:Kiadis Pharma: Consultancy. Larson:BristolMyers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Ariad/Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Abstract Background: Potent inhibitors of BCR-ABL1have improved remission results and altered post-remission therapy for Philadelphia chromosome-positive (Ph+) acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). Dasatinib plus dexamethasone followed by hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) promises high response rates, reduced toxicity, and durable remissions. Methods: We conducted a Phase II trial at 17 U.S. centers with the primary objective being to estimate the 3-year overall survival and disease-free survival of patients with Ph+ ALL treated with dasatinib and dexamethasone for remission induction and intensification, central nervous system (CNS) prophylaxis, consolidation with reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) allogeneic HCT, autologous HCT, or etoposide and cytarabine, and dasatinib-based maintenance. Eligible patients had untreated Ph+ ALL, were ≥18 years old, and had normal cardiac function. Induction (Course I) used dasatinib 140 mg oral daily and dexamethasone 10 mg/m2/day oral or intravenous (IV) days 1-7. For patients with ≤20% blasts in the Course I, Day 15 bone marrow biopsy, intensification (course II) continued daily dasatinib with another 7 days of dexamethasone. Those with >20% lymphoblasts also received vincristine (VCR) and daunorubicin (DNR). Patients (n=3) not in CR/CRi after Course II received a second induction (Course III) with dasatinib, cyclophosphamide, VCR, DNR, and dexamethasone. After Course II or III, CNS prophylaxis (Course IV) consisted of IV VCR and IV, oral, and intrathecal methotrexate (MTX). Dasatinib was restarted at serum [MTX] <0.05 microM. Course V consisted of HCT or chemotherapy. Patients aged 18-70 years with an HLA-matched donor underwent RIC allogeneic HCT; otherwise they underwent autologous HCT. Allogeneic HCT conditioning used fludarabine 30 mg/m2/day IV day -7 through -3, alemtuzumab 20 mg/day IV day -7 through -3, and melphalan 140 mg/m2 once on day -2. GVHD prophylaxis with tacrolimus began day -2. Patients undergoing autologous HCT received etoposide 10 mg/kg/day (age >65 years, 5 mg/kg/day) continuous IV for 4 days and cytarabine 2 g/m2 (age >65 years, 1 g/m2) IV every 12 hours for 8 doses (EA) then G-CSF for mobilization. Autologous HCT conditioning used melphalan 100 mg/m2/day on days -2 and -1. Patients >70 years or unable to undergo HCT received EA alone. Dasatinib maintenance (Course VI) began on day 30 of Course V and continued for 12 months and until 2 consecutively negative bone marrow BCR-ABL1RT-PCR assays 3 months apart or until relapse. Dasatinib levels were measured on day 15 of induction. Results: Sixty-six patients enrolled from 12/15/2010 to 11/14/2014; 65 received dasatinib and are evaluable. Median age was 60 years (22-87); 49% were male. Median presenting WBC count was 23.1 x 103/ul (0.3-453.6). No deaths occurred during induction or intensification. CR or CRi occurred 31 patients (48%) by Day 15 of induction and in 62 patients overall (95%; CR 86%). Median dasatinib levels in serum and CSF on Day 15 of induction were 30.3 ng/mL (<3-308) and 0.29 ng/mL (<0.2-1.37), respectively suggesting approximately 1% of plasma dasatinib penetrates into the CSF, less than the unbound fraction (6%). Fifty-four patients started Course IV, 38 Course V, and 37 Course VI. Fourteen patients continue on protocol therapy. Of 38 patients receiving Course V, 22 had allogeneic HCT, 6 had autologous HCT, and 10 had EA chemotherapy. Median age of allogeneic HCT recipients was 61 years (31-69). Robust autologous stem cell mobilization was observed [median CD34+ cell count, 90 x 106/kg (31-166, n=6)]. Dasatinib maintenance was feasible after allogeneic HCT, autologous HCT, and chemotherapy alone with no missed doses in 59%, 83%, and 63% of cycles, respectively. Ten patients have relapsed with one isolated CNS relapse. No relapses have occurred after allogeneic HCT with 3 relapses after autologous HCT and one after Course V EA alone. Median follow up for survivors is 22.8 months (longest, 51 months). There have been 23 deaths: 5 treatment-related (4 after allogeneic HCT, 1 after course V EA), 16 disease-related and 2 unrelated. Conclusions: Dasatinib with dexamethasone yields CR rates comparable to those reported with tyrosine kinase inhibitors combined with conventional chemotherapy. Post-remission therapy with reduced-intensity allogeneic HCT, autologous HCT, or chemotherapy followed by dasatinib maintenance is feasible. Survival follow up is maturing. Disclosures Stock: Sigma-Tau: Honoraria, Research Funding; Royalties for a chapter in Up to Date: Patents & Royalties; ADC Therapeutics: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Gilead Sciences: Honoraria. Beumer:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding. Stone:Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Consultancy; Juno Therapeutics: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Sunesis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Celator: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy; Jansen: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; ONO: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Xenetic Biosciences: Consultancy. Larson:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Astellas: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Abstract Background: Retrospective analyses have demonstrated significantly improved survival for AYA ALL patients (pts) aged 16-21 years (yrs) when treated on pediatric versus adult U.S. NCI Cooperative group regimens where 2-yr event-free survivals (EFS) have been only 35-40%. The purpose of C10403, a large prospective US intergroup trial, was to evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness [with EFS as a primary endpoint), of treating AYA ALL pts (ages 16-39 yrs) using the standard arm of the successful Children's Oncology Group regimen (COG AALL0232) . Methods: Newly diagnosed AYA patients with B-precursor (B-ALL) or T-precursor (T-ALL) ALL were eligible to enroll on C10403. Burkitt type and Ph+ ALL were excluded. The regimen was identical to the Capizzi methotrexate arm of COG AALL0232 (Larsen E. JCO 2011; 29 suppl:3) and consisted of four intensive courses: remission induction, remission consolidation, interim maintenance, delayed intensification, and prolonged maintenance therapy. Pts with M2 marrow response (>5% but < 25% lymphoblasts) after remission induction received an extended remission induction course of therapy. Events were defined as induction failure (M3 [³25% blasts] day 29 of induction or M2 day 43 of extended induction), death, relapse, or second malignancy. Key correlative science studies in a subset of the total accrued population included assessment of Minimal Residual Disease (MRD) using quantitative real-time PCR of clonal IgH or TCR gene rearrangements as well as Low Density Microarray (LDA) assays designed to detect a previously validated gene expression profile (Harvey, R; ASH 2013, abstract 826) which can prospectively identify ALL pts with Ph-like (BCR-ABL1-like) ALL. Results: 318 pts were enrolled on C10403 from 11/2007 to 8/2012; 22 withdrew prior to therapy. Of 296 evaluable pts, the median age at diagnosis was 24 yrs (range: 17 to 39): 25% were 17-20 yrs, 53% were 21-29 yrs, and 22% were 30-39 yrs. The majority had B-ALL (76%) and were male ( 61%). Approximately 25% were non-Caucasian and 15% were Hispanic or Latino. 32% of pts were obese (BMI³30). There were 5 (2%) treatment-related deaths during protocol therapy: liver failure (n=2, both during induction), infection (1 in induction, 1 in consolidation), and ventricular arrhythmia (1 in induction). Overall, treatment toxicities were similar to those reported in the standard arm of COG AALL0232, with an increased thrombosis and early hyperbilirubinemia for C10403 pts, as reported previously (Advani A, ASH 2013, abstract 303). To date, 70 deaths have been reported and 87 pts remain on protocol therapy. With a median follow-up of 28 months for surviving pts, 105 events have been observed. The median EFS overall is 59.4 months (95% CI: 38.4 to NR) and the 2-yr EFS rate overall is 66% (95% CI: 60 – 72%) [Fig 1a] with similar 2-yr EFS rates for B and T- ALL pts (65%, and 68%). The 2-yr OS rate is 78% (95% CI: 72 – 83%)[Fig 1b], which is similar for B (78%, 95% CI: 72 – 84%) and T-ALL, (80%, 95% CI: 70 – 91%). These results allow rejection of the null hypothesis of this Phase II trial that the true median EFS is, at most, 32 months. In multivariable analysis of presenting clinical features, age > 20 years and initial WBC count ³ 30k/microliter were significantly associated with worse EFS and OS. Presence of MRD at day 28 following initiation of induction therapy and presence of a Ph-like gene expression signature were significantly associated with both worse EFS and OS. Notably, absence of detectable MRD noted in 22/58 [38%] evaluable pts at day 28 of induction was associated with 100% EFS (p=0.0006). The Ph-like like signature was detected in 28% of pts tested on C10403 and the 2 yr EFS for these patients was only 52%, compared to 81% for those without Ph-like disease (p = 0.04). Conclusions: This large prospective US adult intergroup trial (C10403) for pts 16-39 years old employing an intensive pediatric regimen demonstrates a significant improvement (compared to historical controls) in AYA EFS and OS and validates this approach for treatment of AYA with ALL by adult hematologists. The improved clinical outcomes and the predictive value of the correlative studies in this trial lay the foundation for the design of future trials, where incorporation of novel agents to eradicate MRD, and/or use of tyrosine kinase inhibitors to target the frequently detected Ph-like ALL in AYA pts may further improve survival for young adults with ALL. Figure 1a Figure 1a. Figure 1b Figure 1b. Disclosures Stock: Sigma-Tau: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Advani:Sigma Tau: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Liedtke:Onyx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Larson:Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction: Systemic amyloidoses are a group of rare disorders characterized by the accumulation of misfolded proteins in tissue, resulting in the dysfunction of vital organs (eg, heart and kidneys). In amyloid light chain (AL) amyloidosis, the most common form of systemic amyloidosis, the amyloidogenic protein is a misfolded light chain (LC) or a fragment of an LC produced by clonal plasma cells. Current therapies used to treat AL amyloidosis limit LC production but do not directly target deposits underlying multiorgan failure. NEOD001, a monoclonal antibody, targets misfolded LC and is thought to neutralize circulating LC aggregates and to clear insoluble deposits. In an interim analysis of a phase 1/2 dose-escalation study in 27 patients with AL amyloidosis and persistent organ dysfunction (NCT01707264; EudraCT2012-002683-27), monthly infusions of NEOD001 were safe, well tolerated, and associated with renal and cardiac responses.1 Here we report updated results from the escalation phase and new results from the expansion phase of this study. Patients and Methods: Inclusion criteria for this trial were that patients complete ≥1 PCD treatment before enrollment, attain partial hematologic response (HR) or better to any previous therapy, and have persistent organ dysfunction. NEOD001 was administered intravenously every 28 days. During the dose-escalation phase, 27 patients received NEOD001 at 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, or 24 mg/kg in a 3+3 study design. An additional 42 patients with renal, cardiac, or peripheral nerve involvement were enrolled and treated (24 mg/kg) in the expansion phase. We assessed safety/tolerability, pharmacokinetics, immunogenicity, cardiac and renal responses based on consensus criteria, and neuropathy responses using the Neuropathy Impairment Score-Lower Limb (NIS-LL). Results: The 42 additional patients enrolled in the expansion study included cohorts with renal (16 patients), cardiac (15 patients), and peripheral nerve (11 patients) involvement. In the overall population (n = 69), the median age was 60 years, and 61% of patients were men. Median (range) time since diagnosis was 2.8 (0.4-12.8) years, and 45% of patients underwent ≥3 previous plasma cell-directed regimens. The total number of infusions administered was 913 over a mean of 13.2 (range, 3-35) months. NEOD001 treatment was not associated with dose-limiting toxicities or discontinuations; patients did not develop antidrug antibodies or treatment-related serious adverse events. The most frequent treatment-emergent adverse events, regardless of relationship to study drug, were fatigue, upper respiratory tract infection, nausea, and diarrhea. In a best response analysis, 53% of cardiac-evaluable patients (N = 36) and 63% of renal-evaluable patients (N = 35) met respective criteria for organ response; no patients experienced disease progression. The median time to initial response was 2 months (cardiac) and 4 months (renal). After 9 months of treatment, 82% of patients with measurable peripheral neuropathy at baseline (N = 11) achieved a peripheral neuropathy response based on the NIS-LL score. Conclusions: Our interim results demonstrated that monthly NEOD001 infusions were safe and well tolerated and that organ response rates compared favorably with traditional chemotherapy. These updated results from the escalation phase and these new results from the expansion phase, including results from patients with peripheral nerve involvement, support the design of ongoing late-stage clinical studies. Antibody therapy may allow for effective treatment of patients with AL amyloidosis. Reference: 1. Gertz MA, Landau H, Comenzo RL, et al. First-in-human phase 1/2 study of NEOD001 in patients with light chain amyloidosis and persistent organ dysfunction. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(10):1097-1103. Disclosures Gertz: Prothena Therapeutics: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Alnylam Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Research to Practice: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Med Learning Group: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria; NCI Frederick: Honoraria; Sandoz Inc: Honoraria; GSK: Honoraria; Ionis: Research Funding; Annexon Biosciences: Research Funding. Comenzo:Karyopharm: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Prothena: Consultancy, Research Funding. Landau:Janssen: Consultancy; Spectrum Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Prothena: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Onyx/Amgen: Research Funding. Sanchorawala:Celgene: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Prothena: Research Funding. Weiss:Prothena: Other: Travel, accommodations, Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy; Millennium: Consultancy, Other: Travel, accommodations; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: Travel, accommodations, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy. Zonder:BMS: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Prothena: Consultancy; Array Biopharma: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy. Walling:Stealth: Consultancy; BioMarin: Equity Ownership; Apex: Consultancy; Pharm-Olam: Consultancy; NuMedii: Consultancy; Amgen: Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties; Crown Bioscience: Consultancy; KaloBios: Consultancy; Exelixis: Consultancy; Newgen: Consultancy; Mateon (was Oxigene): Consultancy; Corcept: Consultancy; Prothena: Consultancy; Aduro: Consultancy; Codexis: Consultancy; Upsher Smith: Consultancy, Patents & Royalties. Kinney:Prothena: Employment, Equity Ownership, Other: Leadership. Koller:Prothena: Employment, Equity Ownership, Other: Travel, accommodations. Schenk:Prothena: Employment, Equity Ownership, Other: Leadership. Guthrie:Prothena: Employment, Equity Ownership, Other: Leadership. Liu:Prothena: Employment, Equity Ownership; Weston Brain Institute: Honoraria. Liedtke:Prothena: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction:In amyloid light chain (AL) amyloidosis, the most common form of systemic amyloidosis, misfolded light chain (LC) or a fragment of an LC produced by clonal plasma cells accumulates in tissue, resulting in the dysfunction of vital organs and systems (eg, heart, kidneys, nervous system). Current therapies used to treat AL amyloidosis limit LC production but do not directly target deposits underlying multiorgan failure. Approximately 75% of patients do not achieve organ responses and have persistent organ dysfunction. Amyloid-directed therapies may stabilize and potentially reverse organ damage by specifically targeting existing LC aggregates. NEOD001, a monoclonal antibody, targets misfolded LC and is thought to neutralize circulating LC aggregates and to clear insoluble deposits. We have previously reported that monthly infusions of NEOD001 were safe and well tolerated. In addition, NEOD001 was associated with renal and cardiac responses. Here we analyzed the association between organ response and depth and time since last plasma cell-directed (PCD) treatment in the entire cohort of 69 patients enrolled in both the dose-escalation and the expansion phases of the phase 1/2 study. Methods: Inclusion criteria for this trial were that patients complete ≥1 PCD treatment before enrollment, attain partial hematologic response (HR) or better to any previous therapy, and have persistent organ dysfunction. NEOD001 was administered intravenously every 28 days. During the dose-escalation phase, 27 patients received NEOD001 at 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, or 24 mg/kg in a 3+3 study design. An additional 42 patients with renal, cardiac, or nerve involvement were enrolled and treated (24 mg/kg) in the expansion phase. We assessed cardiac and renal responses based on consensus criteria and neuropathy responses using the Neuropathy Impairment Score-Lower Limb (NIS-LL). For this analysis, we focused on the relationship between organ response after treatment with NEOD001 to the time since last or best HR and the depth of best and last HR. Results: A total of 69 patients were enrolled, 27 in the dose-escalation and 42 in the expansion cohorts. The entire population included 36 cardiac-evaluable patients, 35 renal-evaluable patients, and 11 patients evaluated for peripheral neuropathy; 39% were women, and the median age was 60 years. Time since diagnosis was 2.8 (0.4-12.8; median, range) years, and 45% of patients had undergone ≥3 previous PCD regimens. Of the patients evaluable for organ response, best response rates indicating organ response were observed in 53% of cardiac-evaluable patients (n = 19/36) and 63% of renal-evaluable patients (n = 22/35). NIS-LL scores indicated that 82% (n = 9/11) of patients met criteria for a peripheral neuropathy response to NEOD001. Cardiac and renal response rates for NEOD001-treated patients could not be attributed to previous PCD treatment regimens. For example, 37% of the NEOD001 cardiac responders and 35% of nonresponders received cyclophosphamide-bortezomib-dexamethasone. Similarly, for NEOD001 renal responders vs nonresponders, 27% vs 25% were treated with autologous stem cell transplantation and 27% vs 31% were treated with bortezomib-dexamethasone. There was no relationship between NEOD001 cardiac, renal, or peripheral nerve organ response and time since last chemotherapy, time since last or best HR, or depth of last or best HR. Finally, an equivalent percentage of evaluable patients experienced renal or cardiac response regardless of whether they had received their most recent PCD treatment ≤6 months or >6 months before NEOD001 initiation. The median time since last PCD treatment to the start of NEOD001 intervention for all patients was 6.5 (range, 0.6-85.8) months and the median time to first cardiac response after NEOD001 treatment for all cardiac responders was 2 months. NEOD001 treatment was safe and well tolerated. Conclusions: Patients treated with monthly NEOD001 infusions had high organ response rates that were independent of time since previous chemotherapy, depth of hematologic response, or predominant type of PCD treatment. Ongoing studies of NEOD001 include VITAL (phase 3 in patients with newly diagnosed AL amyloidosis) and PRONTO (phase 2b in previously treated AL amyloidosis patients with persistent cardiac dysfunction). Disclosures Liedtke: Gilead: Research Funding; Prothena: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Comenzo:Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Prothena: Consultancy, Research Funding. Landau:Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Prothena: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Onyx/Amgen: Research Funding; Spectrum Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy. Sanchorawala:Prothena: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Weiss:Prothena: Other: Travel, accommodations, Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy; Millennium: Consultancy, Other: Travel, accommodations; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: Travel, accommodations, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy. Zonder:Prothena: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Array Biopharma: Consultancy. Walling:Corcept: Consultancy; Stealth: Consultancy; Codexis: Consultancy; Exelixis: Consultancy; Newgen: Consultancy; Mateon (was Oxigene): Consultancy; Apex: Consultancy; Aduro: Consultancy; Prothena: Consultancy; Upsher Smith: Consultancy, Patents & Royalties; KaloBios: Consultancy; NuMedii: Consultancy; Pharm-Olam: Consultancy; Crown Bioscience: Consultancy; BioMarin: Equity Ownership; Amgen: Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties. Kinney:Prothena: Employment, Equity Ownership, Other: Leadership. Koller:Prothena: Employment, Equity Ownership, Other: Travel, accommodations. Schenk:Prothena: Employment, Equity Ownership, Other: Leadership. Guthrie:Prothena: Employment, Equity Ownership, Other: Leadership. Liu:Prothena: Employment, Equity Ownership; Weston Brain Institute: Honoraria. Gertz:Annexon Biosciences: Research Funding; Ionis: Research Funding; Prothena Therapeutics: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Alnylam Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Research to Practice: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Med Learning Group: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria; NCI Frederick: Honoraria; Sandoz Inc: Honoraria; GSK: Honoraria.