Jagannath, Sundar

Introduction: Selinexor is a first-in-class Selective Inhibitor of Nuclear Export (SINE) compound that selectively binds and inactivates XPO1, therefore forcing the nuclear retention and re-activation of cell cycle regulators such as p53, FOXO, IkB, and Rb. Selinexor in combination with low dose dexamethasone (Sel-dex) was recently approved based on data from the STORM study, which induced an overall response rate (ORR) of 26.2% in patients with penta-exposed, triple-class refractory multiple myeloma (TCR-MM). Patients with TCR-MM often present with plasmacytomas along with serological markers of MM. Methods: Here we analyzed the effects of Sel-dex in patients from the STORM study who had baseline plasmacytomas. Results: 122 patients were in enrolled in the STORM study including 27 with a baseline plasmacytoma. The majority of plasmacytomas were soft tissue (22 patients) and 5 patients had soft tissue disease extension from a bone (rib (2), iliac (2), sacral vertebral). The median age of patients with plasmacytomas was 64 years, the median prior therapies were 7 (range 4 - 15), and 8/27 patients with a plasmacytoma had high risk cytogenetics. Of the 27 patients, 11 patients did not have a follow up plasmacytoma assessment: 6 were not evaluable for response as they came off therapy due to clinical progression and/or adverse events, 4 had stable disease (SD) with no evidence of plasmacytoma change, and 1 had progressive disease (PD) on serum M-protein with no evidence of plasmacytoma change. Sixteen of the 27 patients did have follow-up plasmacytoma assessments (methods of measurements included PET, CT, MRI or Clinical). The median days from baseline plasmacytoma evaluation to follow up was 41 days (range 22 - 119). Five patients had objective responses, based upon para-protein and plasmacytoma reductions according to IMWG criteria (1 very good partial response [VGPR], 4 partial responses [PR]) for an ORR of 18.5%. In addition, 2 patients had a minimal response (MR), 4 had SD and 5 had objective PD. Among the 5 patients with ≥PR, 3 plasmacytomas completely resolved, 1 showed near complete resolution, and another showed size reduction with no metabolic activity on PET. Of the 2 patients with a MR, 1 plasmacytoma completely resolved and 1 showed reduced PET uptake. Among the 4 patients with SD, 1 plasmacytomas completely resolved, 1 increased in size and 2 had unknown outcomes as they were assessed clinically. Among the 5 patients with PD, 1 plasmacytomas decreased in size, 1 increased in size, and 3 had unknown outcomes as they were assessed clinically. Conclusions: Of the 16 patients with TCR-MM and a follow up plasmacytoma assessment enrolled on STORM, 9/16 of the plasmacytomas either completely resolved or decreased in size and/or metabolic activity. Effects on plasmacytomas occurred in patients with objective responses (≥PR), as well as in patients with MR, SD and PD. These observations support the finding that Sel-dex is active in patients with plasmacytomas and heavily pretreated TCR-MM. Disclosures Yee: Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Adaptive: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding. Huff:Member of Safety Monitoring Board for Johnson and Johnson: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm, Sanofi, MiDiagnostics: Consultancy. Chari:Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Oncoceutics: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Millennium/Takeda: Consultancy, 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, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Array Biopharma: Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Vogl:Active Biotech: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy. Gavriatopoulou:Genesis: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses; Amgen: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses. Nooka:Adaptive technologies: Honoraria, Other: advisory board participation; Spectrum pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Other: advisory board participation; GSK: Honoraria, Other: advisory board participation; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: advisory board participation; Amgen: Honoraria, Other: advisory board participation; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: advisory board participation; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: advisory board participation; BMS: Honoraria, Other: advisory board participation. Moreau:AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria. Dingli:Karyopharm: Research Funding; Rigel: Consultancy; Millenium: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; alexion: Consultancy. Lonial:Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; GSK: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy. Dimopoulos:Sanofi Oncology: Research Funding. Vij:Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria; Karyopharm: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Genentech: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding. Tuchman:Prothena: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Honoraria; Alnylam: Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Hoffman:Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Costa:Abbvie: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Fujimoto Pharmaceutical Corporation Japan: Other: Advisor. Biran:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol Meyers Squibb: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria. Siegel:Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb Company: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Shah:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Picklesimer:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Saint-Martin:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Li:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kauffman:Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Shacham:Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Patents & Royalties. Richardson:Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Jagannath:Multiple Myeloma Research Foundation: Speakers Bureau; Medicom: Speakers Bureau; Merck: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy.

AbstractBackgroundThe Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database and National Cancer Database (NCDB) show improved overall survival (OS) in patients with multiple myeloma (MM) over the last 15 years. This analysis evaluated the validity of the largely community‐based Connect MM Registry as a national reference for MM.MethodsBaseline disease characteristics and survival in US newly diagnosed MM patients were examined using the Connect MM Registry as well as SEER and NCDB databases. Baseline characteristics predictive of longer survival in Connect MM were also identified.ResultsAs of February 2017, 3011 patients were enrolled in the Connect MM Registry; 2912 were treated. Median age at time of MM diagnosis and age range were numerically similar from 2010 to 2015 across all 3 registries; SEER had a higher representation of nonwhite racial groups than that in the other 2 registries. OS rates suggest proportionate improvement with year of diagnosis among the 3 registries. A Cox proportional hazards model suggests that younger age (<65 years) is associated with longer survival (vs ≥75; HR, 0.39; 95% confidence interval, 0.34‐0.46) in the Connect MM Registry. However, sex (HR, 0.91; P = .15) and race (black vs white; HR, 0.88; P = .21) were not associated with longer OS.ConclusionsData from the Connect MM Registry appear to be largely representative of national trends, comprehensive, and reliable representations of the national MM population. Baseline characteristics were comparable, and survival similarly improved over time among the 3 registries.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifierNCT01081028.

Abstract Introduction: Renal impairment (RI) is a classic clinicopathological feature of MM, is associated with poor prognosis and shorter survival (Eleutherakis-Papaiakovou Leuk Lymphoma 2007), and can complicate drug dosing and limit treatment options. In clinical trials, the proteasome inhibitors K and V have demonstrated efficacy in RRMM pts with RI, with superior efficacy observed in K-treated pts (Dimopoulos Blood 2017). K and V have also been observed to improve renal function in RRMM pts (Dimopoulos Clin Lymphoma Myeloma 2009; Dimopoulos Blood Advances 2017). However, few studies have investigated the real-world effectiveness of K- and V-based regimens in renal rescue. This study aimed to describe and compare renal response rates in RRMM pts treated with K + dexamethasone (Kd) and V + dexamethasone (Vd) in oncology clinics. Methods: The Oncology Services Comprehensive Electronic Records (OSCER) database (Lau Clin Epidemiol 2011) contains electronic medical records (EMR) from community- and hospital-affiliated oncology clinics in the United States. MM pts aged ≥18 who entered an OSCER clinic Jan 2012‒Feb 2018; initiated Kd or Vd treatment as line 2 (2L), 3L, or 4L; and had baseline renal impairment (Modification of Diet in Renal Disease Study estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] <50 mL/min from the most recent baseline serum creatinine measurement) were included. Index date was the date of Kd or Vd initiation. The baseline period was 60 d prior to index to 30 d post-index. Follow-up was 30 d after index date to 60 d after completion of the same line. Primary outcome was renal response during follow-up. Renal response was defined according to the International Myeloma Working Group criteria (Dimopoulos J Clin Oncol 2016): complete response (RCR; baseline eGFR <50 mL/min and best post-treatment eGFR ≥60 mL/min), partial response (baseline eGFR <15 mL/min and best post-treatment eGFR 30‒59 mL/min), minor response (baseline eGFR <15 mL/min and best post-treatment eGFR 15‒29 mL/min, or baseline eGFR 15‒29 mL/min and best post-treatment eGFR 30‒59 mL/min). Renal response rates in Kd- and Vd-treated pts were evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test. Incidence rate ratios (IRR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for renal overall response (ROR) and RCR using multivariate Cox proportional hazard models adjusted for baseline covariates (demographics, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status, International Staging System stage, baseline renal function, V use in 1L, time from MM diagnosis to line initiation, use of intravenous bisphosphonates, and baseline serum calcium, serum free light chain ratio, lactate dehydrogenase, and whole blood hemoglobin measurements). Missing baseline values were estimated by multiple imputations. Results: 543 Kd-treated and 1005 Vd-treated pts were included. Baseline characteristics were similar between cohorts, with no difference in baseline eGFR stages. More Kd pts were <65 yrs of age at MM diagnosis. Median time from diagnosis to line initiation was longer in Kd pts (Kd: 17.1 mos; Vd 16.1 mos). V-based regimens were the most common therapies in 1L. Median (interquartile range) treatment duration was 4.4 (2.3-8.3) mos for Kd and 4.3 (2.1-8.3) mos for Vd. Pts treated with Kd at 2L were more likely than those treated with Vd to achieve both ROR (51.4% [178/346] vs 39.6% [327/825]; log-rank test p<0.0001) and RCR (26.6% [92/346] vs 22.2% [183/825]; log-rank test p=0.0229). This pattern persisted when 3L and 4L pts were included, (ROR: 48.4% [263/543] vs 39.8% [400/1005]; log-rank p<0.0001; RCR: 26% [141/543] vs 22.1% [222/1005]; log-rank p=0.0084) (Figures 1A and 1B). Following adjustment for potential baseline confounders, 2L Kd pts were 45% more likely to achieve ROR (IRR, 95% CI: 1.45, 1.18‒1.78) and 68% more likely to achieve RCR (1.68, 1.24‒2.28) vs 2L Vd pts (Figure 2). Kd pts in 2‒4L were 36% more likely to achieve ROR (1.36, 1.15‒1.62) and 52% more likely to achieve RCR (1.52, 1.19‒1.94). Conclusions: Using one of the most complete oncology EMR databases available, we found that RRMM pts with baseline RI treated with Kd had higher rates of overall and complete renal response, and were more likely to have a renal response, compared with pts treated with Vd. A limitation of the study is that we could not account for all concomitant medications or comorbidities that affect renal function, as some may not be captured in OSCER. Disclosures Kumar: AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; 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. Fu:Amgen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Mezzi:Amgen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Braunlin:Amgen: Employment. Kim:Amgen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Iskander:Amgen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Niesvizky:Amgen Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding. Jagannath:Celgene: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Medicom: Speakers Bureau; Multiple Myeloma Research Foundation: Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy. Boccia:Sandoz: Consultancy; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Raje:Celgene: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Research to Practice: Honoraria; Medscape: Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy; Amgen Inc.: Consultancy.

Abstract Introduction: Selinexor is a novel, oral Selective Inhibitor of Nuclear Export (SINE) compound that blocks exportin 1 (XPO1). Selinexor treatment results in nuclear accumulation and activation of tumor suppressor proteins, inhibition of NF-kB, and translational suppression of several oncoprotein mRNAs (e.g., c-myc, cyclin D).Multiple myeloma (MM) remains incurable, and most patients (pts) eventually progress through standard drug classes of proteasome inhibitors (PIs), immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs), anti-CD38 mAbs and others. The increased use of combinations in MM treatment, (PIs/IMiDs/mAbs), has led to a growing number of pts with penta-refractory MM (pts that have been treated with bortezomib (bort), carfilzomib (carfil), lenalidomide (len), pomalidomide (pom) and daratumumab (dara)). Active novel therapies with different mechanisms of actions are needed to address this unmet medical need. Part 1 of STORM enrolled pts with both quad- (bort, carfil, len, pom, treated MM) or penta-refractory MM and demonstrated an overall response rate (ORR) of 21% (Vogl et al, JCO 2018). Based on these findings, the Pivotal Part 2 of STORM was initiated, enrolling an additional cohort of 122 patients with penta-refractory MM. Methods: Pts with penta-refractory MM were treated with 80 mg selinexor plus 20 mg dexamethasone (Sd) twice weekly. Pts must have received an alkylator, bort, carfil, len, pom and dara, and had MM refractory to ≥1 PI, ≥1 IMiD, dara, a glucocorticoid, and their last therapy. Pts must have a total ANC ≥1000 mm3,platelets ≥50k/mm3 (or ≥75k if marrow plasma cells <50%), and creatinine clearance ≥20 mL/min. The primary endpoint was ORR. Secondary endpoints: duration of response (DOR), clinical benefit rate (CBR), progression free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Efficacy was assessed by an Independent Review Committee (IRC) based on IMWG criteria. OS was also compared to a cohort of pts with PI, IMiD, dara refractory MM from the Flatiron Health Analytic Database (FHAD), (ref: ASH 2018 abs ID: 116493),who met all the inclusion criteria for STORM. Results: As of 1-Jun-2018, 122 pts (71 M/ 51 F) were enrolled in 38 sites (US and EU). Pt characteristics were [medians (range)]: age 65 yrs (40-85); 7 (3 - 18) prior treatment regimens, 6.6 yrs (<1 - 23.4) from initial MM diagnosis.65 pts (53%) had high risk cytogenetics, 86 pts (70%) had prior dara in combination, 102 pts (84%) had prior stem cell transplantation, 2 pts had prior CAR-T therapy. All pts enrolled with progressive disease (PD), 72% of pts had increases (3% - 792%) in MM markers from screening to C1D1 (median 11 days). Frequently reported Sd treatment related adverse events (AEs) included (all grades, grades 3/4): thrombocytopenia (67%, 53%), nausea (67%, 10%), fatigue (68%, 21%), anorexia (50%, 2%), anemia (46%, 28%), and weight loss (46%, 0%). Eight pts remain on study and 114 pts discontinued treatment (most commonly for PD). There were 4 deaths on treatment: sepsis, respiratory failure, pulmonary embolism, and an unrelated, unspecified cardiac event. IRC determined ORR (≥PR) was 26.2%, with 6.5% ≥ very good partial response, including 2 stringent complete responses (sCRs; MRD negative at 1:10-6 and at 1:10-4sensitivity). Both pts who relapsed after CAR-T achieved PRs. The CBR (≥minimal response, [MR]) was 39.3%, and 79% of pts achieved ≥stable disease (SD). Responses typically occurred within the first month. Medians: DOR 4.4 months (mo) (range <1 - 10 mo), PFS 3.7 mo, and OS 8.0 mo. Pts with ≥MR had significantly longer OS than pts with PD/NE (median not reached vs 1.9 mo, p=<0.0001). Compared to the FHAD cohort, STORM cohort had longer OS (Figure 1, HR 0.41, p=0.0001). Conclusions: Results of the pivotal STORM Part 2 in penta (PI, IMiD, dara)-refractory MM demonstrated that oral selinexor plus low-dose dexamethasone (Sd) was highly active with an ORR of 26.2%. Importantly, responses were rapid and deep with 2 patients achieving sCRs (both MRD negative) in these heavily pre-treated penta-refractory MM pts (median 7 prior regimens, 53% high risk). AEs are a function of dose/schedule/disease severity and can be managed with dose modifications and supportive care. No major organ toxicity was observed and AEs were typically transient and reversible. Sd is an all-oral, first in class mechanism with novel MOA and represents a potential therapeutic option to the growing number of pts with penta-refractory MM who have exhausted approved therapies. Disclosures Chari: Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; The Binding Site: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Array Biopharma: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, 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, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy. Vogl:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy. Dimopoulos:Takeda: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Nooka:GSK: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Adaptive technologies: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: 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; BMS: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Spectrum Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Moreau: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; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: 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. Cole:University of Michigan: Employment; Cancer Support Community myeloma advisory board: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Dingli:Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding. Vij:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; Karyopharm: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol Myer Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Raab:BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Weisel:Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, and Takeda: Honoraria; Amgen, Celgene, Janssen, and Sanofi: Research Funding; Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Juno, Sanofi, and Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Delforge:Celgene and Janssen: Research Funding; Amgen, Celgene, Janssen and Takeda: Consultancy. Stewart:Amgen Inc., BMS, Celgene, Takeda, Roche, Seattle Genetics, Janssen, Ono: Consultancy; Amgen Inc., Celgene, Roche, Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Mohty:Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Molmed: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Servier: Consultancy; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; MaaT Pharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers: Consultancy, Research Funding. Sylvain:Gilead: Other: scientific advisor board. Costa:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria; BMS: Research Funding. Shah:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Employment. Picklesimer:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Employment. Saint-Martin:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Employment. Li:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Employment. Kauffman:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Shacham:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Richardson:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Oncopeptides: 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; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Research Funding; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Jagannath:Celgene: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Multiple Myeloma Research Foundation: Speakers Bureau; Medicom: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy.

Abstract Background : Treatment for relapsed multiple myeloma (MM) has evolved with the availability of many novel agents; outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed MM have improved with IMiD® agents (lenalidomide [R] or pomalidomide) and proteasome inhibitor (PI) use. Regardless of autologous stem cell transplant, many patients receive R maintenance therapy (Jagannath, Blood Adv 2018; Palumbo, N Engl J Med 2012). However, there is a lack of data describing the nature of relapse and treatment choices for patients progressing on R maintenance therapy. Recent phase III data do not evaluate these patients who are relapsed or refractory to R; current treatment guidelines do not specifically recommend second-line (2L) treatment options for these patients (Laubach, Leukemia 2016). However, phase III data show that pomalidomide in combination with bortezomib and dexamethasone improves progression-free survival (PFS) (HR 0.54; P = 0.0027) in R-exposed and refractory patients, including those with 1 prior line (Richardson, J Clin Oncol 2018). The Connect MM Registry is a US, multicenter, prospective observational cohort study designed to examine diagnostic and treatment patterns, clinical outcomes and quality of life in patients with MM. For patients who received R maintenance therapy, we describe patterns of relapse, 2L treatment choice, and outcomes. Methods : From 250 sites, transplant eligible and ineligible adult patients ≤ 60 days from MM diagnosis were enrolled (N = 3011). Patients were treated at physicians' discretion and followed up for treatment and outcomes until early discontinuation or study end. Patients who relapsed during R maintenance therapy (≤ 15 mg; assessed by treating physician), were analyzed for baseline (BL) characteristics, nature of relapse, and 2L treatment. Patients with symptoms at time of relapse were defined as the presence of ≥ 1 CRAB (hyperCalcemia, Renal failure, Anemia, and Bone disease) criterion ± 60 d from PD; absence of CRAB criteria at PD in this window was considered nonsymptomatic relapse. Primary endpoint was PFS from start of 2L; safety (serious adverse events; SAE) from start of 2L was also assessed. Logistic regression analyses on all BL factors and factors before start of 2L treatment were performed to determine covariates differentiating comparator groups. Survival outcomes were analyzed using a Cox regression after adjusting for covariates. Results : Data cutoff: 1/15/18. Of 2938 treated patients, 1102 entered 2L, 236 having received R maintenance therapy in 1L. Of those patients, 52% (n = 123) and 47% (n = 112) experienced symptoms at time of relapse and nonsymptomatic relapse, respectively (data not available for 1 patient). The top ten 2L regimens are presented in the Table. Median duration of prior maintenance therapy (367 d [IQR: 577] vs 489 d [IQR: 599]) and time from first progression to start of 2L treatment (0.3 vs 0.3 mo) did not notably differ between nature of relapse groups. Prolonged median PFS from start of 2L was observed for patients receiving triplet+ (≥ 3 agents) vs doublet (≤ 2 agents) regimens (HR: 0.72; Figure 1). PFS was better for IMiD agent + PI group compared with PI (without IMiD agents) group (HR, 0.68; Figure 2). Results of sensitivity analyses and overall survival will be presented. SAEs occurred similarly among treatment groups: 42.6% with IMiD agent + PI, 34.5% with IMiD agent (without PI), and 35.8% with PI. Conclusions: This is the first description of relapse patterns, 2L treatment choice and survival outcomes after PD on R maintenance therapy in community-based patients. Nearly equal numbers of patients had symptoms at time of relapse and nonsymptomatic relapse on R maintenance therapy. After PD on R maintenance, approximately 50% of patients switched to PI regimens without IMiD agents, 25% continued with IMiD agent + PI regimens, and 25% continued in the IMiD agents group. Our data show PFS benefit for triplet+ over doublet treatment in 2L. Patients in the IMiD agent + PI group gained survival benefits over patients in the PI group. Further characterization of the patients continuing with IMiD treatment in 2L after R maintenance therapy relapse (~ 25% of patients) are ongoing. Follow-up with recently approved agents (elotuzumab, daratumumab) and their use in 2L is limited in this analysis. These data may be used to better inform treatment choices after relapse on R maintenance therapy. Disclosures Jagannath: Celgene: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Multiple Myeloma Research Foundation: Speakers Bureau; Medicom: Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy. Narang:Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Ailawadhi:Takeda: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy. Rifkin:Celgene: Consultancy; Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy; McKesson: Equity Ownership; EMD Serono: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Sandoz: Consultancy. Terebelo:Celgene: Consultancy; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Speakers Bureau. Toomey:Celgene: Consultancy; Myriad Genetics: Speakers Bureau; Dava Oncology: Other: Travel. Durie:Takeda: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy. Hardin:Celgene: Consultancy. Gasparetto:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel; Takeda: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, Research Funding. Wagner:EveryFit: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy. Omel:Takeda Oncology: 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. Srinivasan:Celgene: Employment. Kitali:Celgene: Employment. Agarwal:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Abonour:Prothena: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 813FN2 Introduction: Carfilzomib is a next-generation proteasome inhibitor that selectively and irreversibly binds to its target, resulting in sustained inhibition absent of off-target effects relative to bortezomib. Carfilzomib has demonstrated durable anti-tumor activity and an acceptable tolerability profile in patients with multiple myeloma (MM). Final results will be presented for the bortezomib-naïve group of PX-171-004, a phase 2 study of single-agent carfilzomib in patients with relapsed and/or refractory MM. Herein we report the most recent data analysis available at time of abstract submission. Updated final results for the bortezomib-naïve group of PX-171-004, including OS data, will be presented at the meeting. Methods: Patients received either 20 mg/m2 for all treatment cycles (Cohort 1) or a stepped-up dose-escalating regimen of 20 mg/m2 for Cycle 1 and 27 mg/m2 for all treatment cycles thereafter (Cohort 2). Carfilzomib was administered over 2–10 minutes on Days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16 of every 28-day cycle, for a maximum of 12 cycles. The primary endpoint was the best overall response rate (ORR; [CR + VGPR + PR]) determined according to the IMWG Uniform Response Criteria. Secondary endpoints included the clinical benefit response rate (CBR; [ORR + MR per EBMT criteria]), progression-free survival (PFS), time to progression (TTP), duration of response (DOR), OS, and safety. The result of efficacy analysis from disease assessment by the Independent Review Committee is presented in this abstract. Results: 127 of 129 enrolled bortezomib-naïve patients were evaluable for response. Prior therapies included thalidomide (59%), lenalidomide (59%), alkylating agents (81%), and stem cell transplant (73%). Patients had received a median of 2 prior regimens (1 in 54 patients, 2 in 40 patients, 3 in 28 patients, and ≥4 in 7 patients). 84 patients (65%) were disease refractory to their most recent therapy, defined as ≤25% response or progression during or within 60 days after completion of therapy. The median duration of carfilzomib treatment is 7 cycles (range 1−12) in Cohort 1; 8 patients were receiving drug as of February 2011 in Cohort 2 with a median treatment of 6.5 cycles (range 1−13) at that time. Best ORR was 42% in Cohort 1 and 52% in Cohort 2. Median TTP was 8.3 months and median DOR was 13.1 months in Cohort 1. The median TTP and DOR for Cohort 2 have not been reached at the time of this interim analysis; the lower bound of the 95% CI for the median TTP was 10.2 months, and 84% were estimated to have DOR ≥1 year at the time of data cutoff. Higher response rates for Cohort 2 compared with Cohort 1 do not appear to be associated with higher toxicities. Patients with unfavorable cytogenetic characteristics (≥1 abnormality) per mSMART criteria had an ORR of 37% and CBR of 42% compared with 50% and 65%, respectively, for patients with no abnormality. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs), regardless of relationship to carfilzomib in Cohorts 1 and 2, respectively, were fatigue (71%, 54%), nausea (54%, 43%), anemia (46%, 37%), and dyspnea (49%, 33%). These were primarily ≤Grade 2 in severity. The most common Grade 3/4 AEs were anemia (15%), lymphopenia (15%), thrombocytopenia (13%), pneumonia (12%) and neutropenia (12%). Treatment-emergent peripheral neuropathy (PN) was mild and infrequent (16%). Only 1 case of Grade 3 PN (0.8%) was observed. Overall, 38 patients (30%) completed 12 cycles and 22 of these patients continued to receive carfilzomib therapy under a safety extension protocol (PX-171-010), an ongoing, multicenter, open-label phase 2 study to monitor long-term use of single-agent carfilzomib. Conclusions: To date we have seen robust and durable single-agent activity for carfilzomib in bortezomib-naïve patients with relapsed and often refractory MM with an ORR of 42−52% and a CBR of 59−63% from 2 separate dose cohorts in a population wherein 92% received an immunomodulatry drug and 73% had undergone an autologous stem cell transplant previously. These data are suggestive of a dose–response relationship and are being further evaluated in the exploratory phase 1b/2 study PX-171-007. Carfilzomib was associated with minimal PN and excellent long-term tolerability, with nearly one-third of patients completing 12 cycles and 22 of these continuing treatment beyond 1 year in the extension protocol PX-171-010. Disclosures: Vij: Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Speakers Bureau. Kaufman:Millenium: Consultancy; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Keryx: Consultancy; Merck: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Jakubowiak:Ortho Biotech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Exelixis: Consultancy, Honoraria. Wang:Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Jagannath:Millennium: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; Merck: Honoraria; OrthoBiotec.Imedex: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Medicom World Wide: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Optum Health Education: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; PER Group: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kukreti:Celgene: Honoraria. Alsina:Millennium: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Allergan: Research Funding. Belch:Celgene: Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding. Gabrail:Millennium: Research Funding. Matous:Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Millenium: Speakers Bureau; Cephalon: Speakers Bureau. Vesole:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Speakers Bureau. Orlowski:Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kunkel:VLST biothech: Consultancy; Threshold: Consultancy; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Wong:Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Employment, Equity Ownership. Stewart:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction Few treatments options are available for patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) who have previously been treated with lenalidomide (LEN) and bortezomib (BORT), and their prognosis is poor. Pomalidomide (POM) is a distinct IMiD® immunomodulatory agent with a mechanism of action consisting of direct anti-myeloma, stromal-support inhibitory, and immunomodulatory effects. In randomized phase 2 and 3 trials (MM-002 and MM-003), POM plus low-dose dexamethasone (POM+LoDEX) demonstrated marked efficacy in RRMM pts who had received multiple prior therapies, including LEN and BORT. This side-by-side analysis presents the most recent survival and safety data from these trials. Methods The MM-002 and MM-003 trials enrolled pts with ≥ 2 prior therapies, including LEN and BORT. In MM-002, pts received POM (4 mg/day on days 1–21 of each 28-day cycle) alone or in combination with LoDEX (40 mg/week). In MM-003, pts were randomized 2:1 to receive POM+LoDEX or high-dose DEX alone (HiDEX) (40 mg/days 1–4, 9–12, 17–20 in a 28-day cycle); HiDEX was chosen as the comparator to isolate the effects of POM, as at the time of trial design it was the standard salvage therapy for heavily pretreated pts. Thromboprophylaxis was required for all pts treated with POM and pts at high risk of developing venous thromboembolism. Data cutoff was February 1, 2013 for MM-002 and March 1, 2013 for MM-003. The primary endpoint in both trials was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), response rates, duration of response, and safety. Results In each study, pts had received a median of 5 prior therapies (range 1-17), and all pts had received prior LEN and BORT. In MM-002, 113 pts were treated with POM+LoDEX and 108 were treated with POM alone (60% of POM alone pts subsequently received DEX). A total of 79% of pts were LEN refractory; 62% were refractory to both LEN and BORT; and 35% had received LEN as their last prior therapy. With a median follow-up of 14.2 months (mos), median PFS was 4.2 mos, OS was 16.5 mos, and overall response rate (ORR, defined as at least a partial response) was 33% with POM+LoDEX (Table 1). In MM-003, 302 pts were treated with POM+LoDEX and 153 pts were treated with HiDEX (50% of HiDEX pts subsequently received POM). A total of 94% of pts were LEN refractory; 74% were both LEN and BORT refractory; and 29% had received LEN as their last prior therapy. Survival outcomes were similar in MM-003; with a median follow-up of 10 mos, median PFS was 4.0 mos, OS was 12.7 mos, and ORR was 31% with POM+LoDEX. In both trials, LEN as last prior therapy did not impact response, PFS, or OS vs the overall population. Commonly observed adverse events (AEs) are presented in Table 2 for pts treated with POM+LoDEX. Grade 3 and 4 neutropenia was 28% and 13% in MM-002, and 26% and 22% in MM-003 for the POM+LoDEX arms, respectively. AEs were generally manageable for POM+LoDEX in MM-002 and MM-003 with dose interruptions (67% for both) and reductions (29% and 26%, respectively), and standard supportive care, including growth factor support (46% and 43%), red blood cell transfusions (45% and 49%), platelet transfusions (14% and 20%), and anti-infective agents (89% in both trials). Rates of POM discontinuation due to treatment-related AEs were low (2–4% with POM+LoDEX). In MM-002 and MM-003, 49% and 51% of pts in the POM+LoDEX arms experienced neutropenia of any grade. With appropriate AE management, 9% and 23% had dose interruptions, 4% and 8% had dose reductions, and 1 pt in both MM-002 and MM-003 discontinued due to neutropenia. Febrile neutropenia developed in 3% and 10% of pts; 1% and 4% had dose interruptions, 0% and 2% had dose reductions, and no pts discontinued due to febrile neutropenia in the MM-002 and MM-003 studies, respectively. The majority of infections occurred in the absence of neutropenia of any grade (54% in MM-002 and 66% in MM-003). The rate of POM discontinuation due to infection was low (1% in MM-002 and 2% in MM-003). Conclusion In both the MM-002 and MM-003 trials, POM+LoDEX consistently extended PFS in advanced RRMM pts. PFS, OS, and ORR were not negatively impacted in patients who were refractory to LEN or BORT, even as last prior therapy. Both trials demonstrated that with dose modifications and supportive care POM was well tolerated, leading to few discontinuations. POM+LoDEX should be considered a standard of care for pts with advanced RRMM who have exhausted LEN and BORT. Disclosures: Siegel: Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Richardson:Millennium: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Johnson & Johnson: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Dimopoulos:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Chen:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Song:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Vij:Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millenium: Speakers Bureau; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Bahlis:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Baz:Millenium: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Research Funding. Hofmeister:Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Weisel:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Jagannath:Millennium: Honoraria; Celgene Corporation: Honoraria. Lonial:Millennium: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy. Delforge:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria. Talpaz:Ariad, Sanofi, Novartis: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Ariad, Novartis, BMS, Pfizer: Speakers Bureau; Ariad, BMS, Sanofi, INCYTE: Research Funding. Moreau:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. San Miguel:Jansen, Celgene Corporation, Onyx, Novartis, Millenium: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Karlin:Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Expert board committee Other, Honoraria. Goldschmidt:Celgene Corporation, Janssen, Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Oriol:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy. Alegre:Janssen: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Cavo:Millennium: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Martinez-Lopez:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding. Lacy:Celgene Corporation: Research Funding. Chen:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Casey:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Sternas:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Zaki:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Jacques:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Anderson:Onyx: Consultancy, Equity Ownership; Gilead: Consultancy, Equity Ownership; sanofi aventis: Consultancy, Equity Ownership; Oncopep: Consultancy, Equity Ownership; Acetylon: Consultancy, Equity Ownership; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Equity Ownership.

Abstract Abstract 1024 Background: The MMRC is a non-profit, disease-focused consortium founded in 2004. Sixteen North American member institutions with expertise in multiple myeloma (MM) work collaboratively with the MMRC Inc. (Norwalk, CT) and numerous pharmaceutical partners to speed development of new treatment options to MM patients. In December 2007, MMRC Inc. implemented business solutions to address barriers to rapid activation of phase I-II trials and established benchmarks for initiating and conducting these studies. In December 2010, we reported significantly faster trial start up and accrual data from previous years1,2. Today, we update and expand on MMRC performance data and analysis of progress. Methods: Twenty-five (25) trials conducted within the Consortium from May 2006 to July 2011 had sufficient start up trial data for review. FPFD was defined as the time from the member institutions' receipt of the final protocol (FP) from the trial sponsor, to the time the first patient was dosed on the trial at any participating MMRC member institution. With respect to enrollment, pre-study enrollment commitment (EC) established between MMRC and the study sponsor was defined as the total number of subjects committed to receive at least one dose of study drug across all participating MMRC centers on a trial; baseline enrollment timeline (BET) was prospectively defined as the target time period to attain EC. Results: Mean time to FPFD in the recent group of trials (RG; n=18; Sept 08-Jul 11) held steady at 131 calendar days from receipt of FP as compared to 181 days for the early group of trials (EG; n=7; Jun06-Sept08) representing a 28% reduction in time to FPFD. More importantly, there was a 20% decrease in time to FPFD by all participating MMRC centers on any MMRC trial from 189 days in the RG compared to 236 days in the EG representing an important achievement especially in the Phase I/II arena. MMRC trial accrual data was available for 17/25 trials (2 EG trials were missing data and 6 RG trials continue enrolling). The pre-study mean MMRC EC was 44 subjects per trial (n=19 trials; 849 patients); the mean actual MMRC enrollment was 49 subjects per trial (n=19; 935 patients through July 11) representing a 10% over enrollment versus committed enrollment. A total of 17/19 evaluable trials (89%) met their EC; 12/19 trials met EC within BET (71%) of which 8/12 trials (67%) reached EC 34% faster than their BET (representing a mean reduction of 4.5 months). The overall pre-study mean BET for 19 trials was 13.6 months. MMRC's actual mean enrollment timeline was 12.8 months for the group of 17 evaluable trials representing improvement over the original BET by a mean of 10%. Discussion: MMRC's acceleration of clinical trials provides physicians and patients with rapid access to novel compounds; industry with data for important drug development decisions; and academic institutions with more trials of high scientific interest. Even so, our data uncovered opportunities for improvement. The submission time from receipt of the final protocol from the trial sponsor to Scientific Review Committee (SRC) took an average 30 calendar days across all trials. A reduction to half this time could make a difference to patients and therefore warrants further exploration. Conclusion: Today, drug development in multiple myeloma is fast-paced and highly competitive. MMRC's frequent review of trial metrics provides valuable insight to continually speed answers to physicians, patients and industry. Disclosures: Richardson: Multiple Myeloma Research Consortium: Annual grant in support Clinical Trial Project Management. Vij:Multiple Myeloma Research Consortium: Annual grant in support of clinical trial Project Management. Lonial:Multiple Myeloma Research Consortium: Annual grant in support of clinical trial Project Management. Siegel:Multiple Myeloma Research Consortium: Annual grant in support of clinical trial Project Management. Jakubowiak:Multiple Myeloma Research Consortium: Annual grant in support of clinical trial Project Management. Reece:Multiple Myeloma Research Consortium: Annual grant in support of clinical trial Project Management. Jagannath:Multiple Myeloma Research Consortium: Annual grant in support of clinical trial Project Management. Hofmeister:Multiple Myeloma Research Consortium: Annual grant in support of clinical trial Project Management. Stewart:Multiple Myeloma Research Consortium: Annual Grant in support of clinical trial Project Management. Wolf:Multiple Myeloma Research Consortium: Annual grant in support of clinical trial Project Management. Krishnan:Multiple Myeloma Research Consortium: Annual grant in support of clinical trial Project Management. Zimmerman:Multiple Myeloma Research Consortium: Annual grant in support of clinical trial Project Management. Kumar:Multiple Myeloma Research Consortium: Annual grant in support of clinical trial Project Management. Roy:Multiple Myeloma Research Consortium: Annual grant in support of clinical trial Project Management. Fay:Multiple Myeloma Research Consortium: Annual grant in support of clinical trial Project Management. Anderson:Multiple Myeloma Research Consortium: Annual grant in support of clinical trial Project Management.

Abstract Introduction Multiple Myeloma is not a single disease. There is increasing support for risk classification in combination with treatment decision making because of its impact on clinical outcomes. Here we demonstrate additional evidence of the prognostic value of SKY92, an established genetic marker of high risk Multiple Myeloma in a multicenter collection of samples with undisclosed treatments. Materials Methods A public GEP dataset (MMRC, MMGI portal) contained 114 cases of untreated Multiple Myeloma and was used for SKY92 high risk OS prediction (Kuiper et al. Leukemia 2012). In collaboration with MMRC, OS (with a minimum of at least 2 year follow-up) was collected for 91 of 114 cases for the purpose of this analysis. Briefly, CD138-positive plasma cells had been purified prior to total RNA extraction and subsequent gene expression profiling on Affymetrix U133Plus2.0 GeneChips. The 91 cases represented 9 different clinical sites and their CEL files were normalized as a single batch against a reference cohort of 329 cases after which the SKY92 risk scores were determined as either standard risk or high risk. Results SKY92 resulted in 19 high risk (20.9%) versus 72 standard risk (79.1%) cases in the unselected 91 case-cohort. Comparisons with other high risk GEP signatures will be performed. The OS analysis (Figure 1) shows that the HR cases have significantly shorter survival (Hazard Ratio 11, p = 7 x 10-5). Table 1 shows that high risk patients had more elevated B2M (26.3% vs 13.9%), more low albumin (26.3% vs 16.7%) and more high creatinine (26.3% vs 11.0%). There was no difference between high and standard groups in diagnosis dates (not shown). Cause of the 16 (84.2%) deaths among the high risk cases, and 21 (29.1%) deaths among the standard risk cases indicates that high risk contains less disease progression deaths (57.1% vs 31.3%), and more unknown deaths (56.3% vs 23.8%). Conclusions The SKY92 classifier identified 19 of 91 cases (21%) as high risk, recapitulating the percentage of high risk in previously studied cohorts (Kuiper et al. 2012). Moreover the hazard ratio of 11 when events up to 24 months or 8.18 when all events are considered, emphasizes the unmet medical need of high risk cases identified with SKY92 as 69% of all deaths within 2 years (9/13 death events) were in this category. Acknowledgments This research was performed within the framework of CTMM, the Center for Translational Molecular Medicine, project BioCHIP grant 03O-102. Rafael Fonseca is a Clinical Investigator of the Damon Runyon Cancer Research Fund. This work is supported by grants R01 CA83724, ECOG CA 21115T, Predolin Foundation, Mayo Clinic Cancer Center and the Mayo Foundation. Disclosures: van Beers: Skyline Diagnostics: Employment. Van Vliet:Skyline Diagnostics: Employment. Anderson:celgene: Consultancy; onyx: Consultancy; gilead: Consultancy; sanofi aventis: Consultancy; oncopep: Equity Ownership; acetylon: Equity Ownership. Jagannath:Celgene: Honoraria; Millennium: Honoraria. Jakubowiak:BMS: Consultancy, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Consultancy, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Kumar:Celgene: Clinical Trial Support Other, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Cephalon: Clinical Trial Support, Clinical Trial Support Other; Millennium: Clinical Trial Support, Clinical Trial Support Other, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Clinical Trial Support, Clinical Trial Support Other; Onyx: Clinical Trial Support Other, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Lebovic:Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Speakers Bureau. Lonial:Millennium: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy. Reece:Onyx: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Millennium: Research Funding; Merck: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding. Siegel:Celgene: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Vij:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Zimmerman:Celgene: Honoraria; Millennium: Honoraria; Onyx: Honoraria. Fonseca:Medtronic: Consultancy; Otsuka: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Genzyme: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Lilly: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Binding Site: Consultancy; Millennium: Consultancy; AMGEN: Consultancy; Cylene: Research Funding; Prognostication of MM based on genetic categorization of the disease: Prognostication of MM based on genetic categorization of the disease, Prognostication of MM based on genetic categorization of the disease Patents & Royalties.

Abstract Background: (CFZ) is a novel proteasome inhibitor of the epoxyketone class that exhibits a high level of selectivity for the proteasome and has been shown in a phase 1 study to result in greater than 80% proteasome inhibition on a QDx2 consecutive day schedule. We piloted this agent in MM patients with relapsed disease after one to three prior therapies. Methods: PX-171-004 is an open-label, multicenter study. Pts are stratified into bortezomib (BTZ) naïve, BTZ responsive (> 6 month response) or BTZ non-responsive(< 6 months response) cohorts. Pts received CFZ 20 mg/m2 IV Days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15 and 16 every 28 days, for up to 12 cycles. Dexamethasone 4 mg po was administered prior to each dose in cycle 1. Responses were evaluated by the International Uniform Response Criteria for Multiple Myeloma. Results: 31 patients were enrolled, including 45% BTZ naïve, 45% BTZ responsive, and 10% BTZ non-responsive. 29 pts initiated therapy, completed at least one cycle of CFZ, had measurable M-protein and were evaluable for response. The mean number of prior therapies (excluding transplant) was 2.4;65% received prior thalidomide(THAL), 36% prior lenalidomide (LEN) and 87% prior stem cell transplant (SCT).To date, pts received a median of 4 cycles (range 1–8) of CFZ. 19 pts started at least 4 cycles, and 17 remain on therapy. In the evaluable BTZ naïve population (n=13), the overall response rate (ORR) was 54%, including 1 complete response (CR), 2 very good partial responses (VGPR), and 4 partial responses (PR). There were 4 additional pts with stable disease (SD). In 1 pt with insufficient data to evaluate response, due to tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) onset after 2 CFZ doses, an M-protein drop was noted that suggested a PR. Time to response was rapid, frequently occurring in the 1st cycle. There have been no progressions in this subset. With a median follow-up of 109 days, the time-to-progression(TTP) has not yet been reached, and all responders remain in remission. In 16 evaluable BTZ prior treated pts, 3 pts (19%) achieved PR, 1 (6%) pt achieved a minimal response (MR, as defined by EBMT criteria), and 9 pts had SD. The median TTP is 169 days for this subset. CFZ was generally well tolerated. The most common non-hematologic adverse events (AEs) were fatigue (61%), nausea (58%), vomiting (36%), and insomnia (32%). Worsening of hematologic parameters: neutropenia (32%), anemia (29%), and thrombocytopenia (23%) were primarily Grade 1/2; Grade 3/4 occurred in 10% or less of pts. Reports of peripheral neuropathy (PN) were uncommon. Increased creatinine, both drug and non-drug related, was seen in 5 pts (16%), but treatment was discontinued in only 1 pt due to a renal adverse event. Possible tumor lysis was reported in 2 BTZ naïve patients and resulted in early drug discontinuation in 1 pt, as described above; the 2nd event was fatal. Conclusions: The preliminary results of this trial indicate that CFZ has substantial activity as a single agent in relapsed MM patients, with an ORR of >50% in BTZ naïve patients, indicating better activity in this pt population. CFZ was generally well tolerated, and toxicities were manageable. TLS, which was observed in 2 pts, may be a reflection of the robust drug activity of CFZ. As observed in prior studies with CFZ, reports of PN were uncommon. These observations support further evaluation of CFZ as a promising new agent in MM. Enrollment in this study is ongoing, and additional studies of CFZ in combination with other chemotherapy agents in MM pts are underway.