Hobbs, Miriam

Abstract Background: The combination of a proteasome inhibitor (PI), an immunomodulatory drug (IMiD), and dexamethasone is the current standard induction therapy for myeloma. Daratumumab, a monoclonal antibody directed against CD38, is highly effective in treating myeloma and improves response rates and progression free survival (PFS) when added to PI or IMiD. Ixazomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone (IRd) is an effective, all oral, induction regimen that has been studied in phase 2 and 3 trials. We designed this trial to examine the feasibility and efficacy of adding daratumumab to the IRd regimen. Patients and Methods: Patients with previously untreated MM, with measurable disease and adequate organ function were enrolled irrespective of their transplant eligibility. The primary objective was to determine the rate of complete response to the IRD-Dara combination in patients with NDMM. Treatment consisted of Ixazomib 4mg days 1, 8, 15; lenalidomide 25 mg days 1-21, dexamethasone 40 mg, weekly and daratumumab 16 mg/kg, weekly for two cycles, every other week during cycles 3-6 and then every 4 weeks after that. Overall, 40 patients were accrued; data on 38 patients were available for analysis as of July 02, 2018 (Table 1). Results: The median age was 62 (41-81); 52.6% female. All patients were alive and progression free at last assessment with a median follow up of 5.2 (2.0-12.9) months (median 5 cycles, range 2-13). One patient had gone off for alternate therapy. Responses were rapid with 90% partial response or better (32% VGPR) after 2 cycles, and 100% PR or better (50% VGPR) for 32 patients who have completed 4 cycles. The overall best confirmed response rate among the 38 patients was 95% including 11% CR and 47% VGPR. Overall, 231 cycles have been administered across the study, with dose modifications/ hold required for ixazomib, lenalidomide, daratumumab and dexamethasone in 3 (8%), 11 (29%), 2 (5%), and 8 (21%) patients respectively, the most common reasons being hematologic and skin rash. A grade 3 or higher adverse event at least possibly attributed to the study drugs was seen in 42% of patients, hematologic in 37% and non-hematologic in 11% (Figure). 11 patients have so far proceeded to stem cell collection, all have collected adequate numbers of stem cells for one or two intended transplants(median CD34+ collected 8.4 million/kg; range 3.8-12.3). Updated results with additional 6 months of follow up and MRD testing will be presented at the meeting. Conclusion: This represents the first reported results of this combination for treatment of newly diagnosed myeloma. The early results from the use of IRd-Dara in newly diagnosed myeloma suggests excellent efficacy with rapid responses that deepen quickly over the initial cycles of therapy. The regimen was well tolerated with limited dose modifications and no discontinuation for toxicity and no influence on the ability to collect stem cells. Figure. Figure. Disclosures Kumar: Janssen: 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; 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. Kapoor:Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Dingli: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; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding. Dispenzieri:Celgene, Takeda, Prothena, Jannsen, Pfizer, Alnylam, GSK: Research Funding. Gertz:Prothena: Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Teva: Consultancy; annexon: Consultancy; janssen: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; Alnylam: Honoraria; Medscape: Consultancy; Apellis: Consultancy; spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; Ionis: Honoraria; Research to Practice: Consultancy.

Abstract Introduction: Thrombocytopenia is a major dose-limiting hematologic toxicity of anti-myeloma therapy. Clinical trial data in the relapsed/refractory setting have linked the development of thrombocytopenia during therapy with bortezomib with improved response to treatment. Less is known about the prognostic significance of early treatment related thrombocytopenia during initial therapy for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) using novel agents. Aims: The aim of this study was to characterize the effect of new, treatment related thrombocytopenia during initial therapy for newly diagnosed MM with novel agents on survival and clinical response. Methods: We identified 690 patients with newly diagnosed MM treated at Mayo Clinic, Rochester from January 2004 to December 2015 through a retrospective record review. All patients received novel agents including proteasome inhibitors (PI) and/or immunomodulatory drugs, were evaluable using the International Myeloma Working Group uniform response criteria, and had platelet counts greater than 150,000/µL prior to initial treatment. Survival outcomes and response were compared in patients who became thrombocytopenic within two cycles of first line treatment, defined as a nadir platelet count less than 150,000/µL, and in patients who did not develop thrombocytopenia. Survival estimates were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and the log-rank test was used to compare survival in subgroups. Multivariable-adjusted proportional hazards regression models were fit to adjust for known prognostic factors including age, sex, International Staging System (ISS) stage, and the presence of cytogenetic high-risk abnormalities. Logistic regression was performed to evaluate for differences in response between groups. P-values less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Results: Of the 690 patients treated with novel agents, 495 patients (72%) received a PI as initial therapy. Median follow up was 3 years (0.1-13.2), median overall survival (OS) was 6.6 years (95% CI 5.9-8.0), and median progression free survival (PFS) was 4.84 years (95% CI 3.53-8.98). 123 patients (18%) developed thrombocytopenia within two cycles of first line therapy; two patients developed platelet counts less than 20,000/µL and none developed counts less than 10,000/µL. Differences in survival estimates for OS and PFS for patients who did not develop thrombocytopenia and those who became thrombocytopenic are illustrated in Figure 1. Median OS in patients who did not develop thrombocytopenia was 7.4 years (95% CI 5.9-8.9), compared to 4.6 years (95% CI 4.1-6.0) in those who became thrombocytopenic (p = 0.003), while median PFS was 5.4 years (95% CI 3.63-NR) and 3.53 years (95% CI 0.49-NR), respectively (p = 0.008). Similar results for both OS and PFS were observed when using a platelet nadir of less than 100,000/µL. These relationships remained statistically significant when adjusting for the effect of known prognostic factors including age, sex, ISS stage, and high-risk cytogenetics, for both OS and PFS (HR = 1.70, 95% CI 1.12-1.59, p = 0.013, n = 387 and HR = 1.56, 95% CI 1.03-2.37, p = 0.036, n = 387, respectively). Multivariable-adjusted estimates were similar for the subset of patients receiving PI containing regimens. Development of thrombocytopenia within two cycles was not associated with very good partial response or better (VGPR+) (p = 0.588) or with complete response (CR) (p = 0.968). This was also true for the subset of patients receiving PIs (p = 0.827 and p = 0.772, respectively). Conclusions: Our results suggest that the development of new, treatment related thrombocytopenia within two cycles of first-line therapy with novel agents is independently associated with inferior survival in newly diagnosed MM. This was also true in the subset of patients receiving PI containing regimens. In contrast to prior studies, there was no association between early treatment-related thrombocytopenia and response to treatment for either novel agents in general or PI based therapies. Figure 1: Kaplan-Meier progression free and overall survival estimates stratified by platelet count ≥ 150,000/µL (no thrombocytopenia) and <150,000/µL (new thrombocytopenia) within two cycles of initial therapy with novel agents. Figure 1. Figure 1. Disclosures Lacy: Celgene: Research Funding. Gertz:Prothena: Honoraria; Teva: Consultancy; Ionis: Honoraria; Alnylam: Honoraria; Research to Practice: Consultancy; Apellis: Consultancy; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; janssen: Consultancy; spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Medscape: Consultancy; annexon: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy. Dispenzieri:Celgene, Takeda, Prothena, Jannsen, Pfizer, Alnylam, GSK: Research Funding. Kapoor:Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. 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; 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.

Abstract Aims: Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is an important component in the treatment of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM). However, relapse following ASCT is considered almost inevitable, with a median time to progression (TTP) of approximately 23-26 months (without maintenance) and 40-46 months (with maintenance)(Attal MA et al. N Engl J Med 2012; 366:1782-1791; McCarthy PM et al. N Engl J Med 2012; 366:1770-1781). However, some patients can experience a prolonged period of remission with ASCT. The purpose of this study was to identify and characterize patients who have an exceptional response to upfront ASCT without maintenance therapy, and to determine the frequency of relapse in such patients. Methods: We searched the Mayo Clinic Multiple Myeloma bone marrow transplant database for patients who were diagnosed with MM between Aug 1, 1988 to Jan 3, 2006, and underwent ASCT within 12 months of initial diagnosis. For the purposes of this study, we defined exceptional responders as patients who were free of progression for 96 months or more, which is 2-3 fold more than the median TTP expected in this population. Since maintenance therapy was not standard of care at the time, only a small minority (6) of patients with prolonged TTP had received maintenance therapy; these patients were excluded since the study was focused on exceptional response with ASCT alone. One patient who had a tandem autologous transplant was excluded. Results: 509 patients underwent transplant during the study period. Of those, 46 (9%) met criteria for exceptional response. Twenty seven (59%) were female, 19 (41%) were male. Median age was 57.28 years, range, 31.9-73.0. Of 45 patients with response data available, the best response status was complete response or better in 32 patients (73.3%), VGPR in 4 patients (8.9%), and PR in 8 patients (17.7%). FISH data were available during the disease course for 41 patients. Of these, the majority, 28 patients (68.3%), had no abnormalities detected by the probes used; 3 patients (7.3%) had high risk cytogenetics (t(4;14) in 2 patients and t(14;16) in one patient) , 4 (9.8%) had trisomies; 6 patients had other isolated abnormalities. At last follow up, 23 patients have progressed (50%); 14 (30.4%) have died, including one who died without progression to MM. The median overall survival from time of diagnosis of the exceptional responders was 18.5 years, range 9.2-22 years. From the landmark time of 96 months, the median TTP was 6.2 years, range, 0.4-10.6 years (Figure 1); No plateau was seen in the TTP curve. From the landmark time of 96 months, the median OS was 10.5 years, range, 0.4-14 years. Conclusions: We conclude that approximately 10% of patients with newly diagnosed myeloma have an exceptional response to a single ASCT without maintenance therapy. These patients have a remarkable overall survival, both from diagnosis and from the landmark time point where they are classified as having achieved an exceptional response. Although TTP from the landmark time point is excellent, with median TTP of 6.2 years, there appears to be no plateau in the curve indicating ongoing risk of relapse despite a prolonged period of disease stability. Exceptional responders tended to have normal FISH studies (likely an indicator of responsive, low-tumor burden disease), and nearly 20% achieved this state despite not attaining a complete response. Figure. Figure. Disclosures Gertz: Research to Practice: Consultancy; Apellis: Consultancy; spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria; Medscape: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; janssen: Consultancy; Teva: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; annexon: Consultancy; Ionis: Honoraria; Alnylam: Honoraria; Prothena: Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy. Kumar:KITE: 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; 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; 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; Merck: 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; Novartis: Research Funding; KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; 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. Dispenzieri:Celgene, Takeda, Prothena, Jannsen, Pfizer, Alnylam, GSK: Research Funding. Dingli:Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; 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.. Russell:Vyriad: Equity Ownership. Kapoor:Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding.

Abstract Background: The introduction of novel therapeutics has led to improved outcomes in patients with multiple myeloma (MM). MM and its precursor lesion smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM) have traditionally been associated with increased mortality despite treatment. We aimed to assess the impact of a diagnosis of SMM and MM compared to the general population in the context of established prognostic factors. Methods: We studied the overall survival of 1697 patients with smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM, n = 582) and multiple myeloma (MM, n = 1115) diagnosed at Mayo Clinic between 01/2005 and 12/2015. Expected survival accounting for age and sex was calculated using the United States general population (US) as the reference group. Observed and expected overall survival was expressed as the standardized mortality ratio (SMR) of observed to expected deaths. Kaplan-Meier overall survival estimates were calculated and the log-rank test was used to compare overall survival in subgroups. The subgroups of interest were based on the International Staging System (ISS) and the presence of fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) high-risk cytogenetics: t(4;14), t(14;16), t(14;20), and del(17p). Proportional hazards regression models were used to assess the associations between the aforementioned prognostic factors and overall survival. P-values below 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Results: The median age at diagnosis in patients with SMM and MM was 65 (32 - 92) and 63 years (24 - 90), respectively. Two hundred forty-nine patients (57%) and 663 (60%) were male. The median follow-up in patients with SMM and MM was 4.7 (0.1 - 11.0) and 2.6 years (0.2 - 9.5). The median overall survival for patients with SMM and MM was 9.0 (95% CI 8.4 - 9.7) and 7.9 years (6.4 - 8.7). With age- and sex-matched population controls as the reference, the SMRs in patients with SMM and MM were 2.6 (95% CI 2.2 - 3.0) and 4.6 (4.1 - 5.2). Among those MM patients with available data on ISS staging and FISH cytogenetics, 30% (236/780) had ISS III and 21% (188/878) had high-risk cytogenetics. Patients with MM (compared to SMM) experienced worse overall survival (HR 1.5, 95% CI 1.2 - 1.8, p < 0.001, n = 1697). Patients with ISS I/II MM (compared to SMM) experienced similar survival (HR 1.0, 95% CI 0.8 - 1.3, p = 0.698, n = 1131). Patients with ISS III MM (compared to MM with high-risk cytogenetics) experienced similar survival (HR 1.3, 95% CI 0.9 - 2.0, p = 0.128, n = 329). Conclusions: Patients with SMM and MM in this cohort experienced excess mortality compared to the general population. In the absence of universal screening the true morbidity and mortality of patients with SMM and MM remains unknown and is likely overestimated in hospital-based cohorts. Overall survival in patients diagnosed with SMM and patients with ISS I/II MM receiving contemporary anti-myeloma therapy was clinically indistinguishable. Patients treated for ISS III MM experienced overall survival similar to patients with cytogenetic high-risk disease. MM remains associated with excess mortality, the magnitude of which varies considerably based on the presence of additional tumor and host factors. The outcomes with modern therapy among the ISS I/II patients highlight the potential for improving outcomes of SMM by early intervention, especially for the higher risk patients. Figure. Figure. Disclosures Lacy: Celgene: Research Funding. Gertz:Medscape: Consultancy; Alnylam: Honoraria; janssen: Consultancy; spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria; Ionis: Honoraria; annexon: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; Teva: Consultancy; Prothena: Honoraria; Apellis: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Research to Practice: Consultancy. Dispenzieri:Celgene, Takeda, Prothena, Jannsen, Pfizer, Alnylam, GSK: Research Funding. Russell:Vyriad: Equity Ownership. Kapoor:Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Kumar:Roche: Research Funding; 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; AbbVie: 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; 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; Janssen: 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; Novartis: Research Funding; Celgene: 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; Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Abstract Background : Ibrutinib, a Bruton's tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor was approved for the treatment of Waldenstrom Macroglobulinemia (WM) in January, 2015 based on the results of a clinical trial of 63 previously-treated patients with WM. Data on outcomes with ibrutinib outside of clinical trials are limited. Methods : Medical records of patients with WM seen consecutively between 02/01/2015 and 06/01/2018 at Mayo Clinic, MN, FL and AZ were reviewed and those treated with ibrutinib at any point during their disease were included. Refractoriness to prior therapy was defined as disease progression on therapy or within 2 months of stopping treatment. The response rates were assessed by WM VI International Workshop Criteria. Adverse events were graded using National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events (AEs) v4.03. All time-to-event analyses were performed from the time of initiation of ibrutinib. Results : Eighty patients [previously treated, n=67 (84%), treatment-naïve, n=13 (16%)] received ibrutinib for active WM. Median follow-up was 18 months (95% CI: 12-19) and the median overall survival (OS) was not reached (NR) (95% CI: 27-NR) for the entire cohort at the date of last follow-up. The median age was 67 years (range: 50-88) and the median ECOG performance score was 1 (range: 0-3) at the time of ibrutinib initiation. Median lines of therapies prior to ibrutinib for the previously-treated patients was 2 (range: 1-9) and 35 patients (44%) had received ≥3 prior lines of therapy. Of the 80 patients, 52 patients (43 previously treated, 9 treatment-naïve) had data for response assessment. The baseline characteristics and laboratory parameters at initiation of ibrutinib are outlined in Table 1a and prior therapies are mentioned in Table 1b. Overall response rate (ORR) was 90% (100% in patients with ibrutinib as primary therapy and 88% in salvage therapy setting); major-response rate (MRR) was 77%. Median time to first and best response was 2.1 months (95% CI: 1.5-3.5) and 5.4 months (95% CI: 3.5-13), respectively. Other clinically relevant endpoints and AEs related to ibrutinib therapy are outlined in Table 2 and 3, respectively. The median time-to-next therapy was 33 months (95% CI: 28-NR). At last follow-up, 25 (32%) patients had discontinued ibrutinib therapy. The reasons for discontinuation was progression (n=8), elevated liver enzymes (n=4), cognitive changes (n=1), inability to achieve better than MR (n=1), atrial fibrillation (n=3), consolidation with autologous stem cell transplantation after PR with ibrutinib (n=1), transition to hospice care due to progressive head and neck cancer (n=1), infection in lower extremity (n=1), transformation to DLBCL (n=1), blistering rash which resolved after ibrutinib discontinuation (n=1), obscure GI bleed that resolved after ibrutinib discontinuation (n=1), fatigue (n=1) and for unclear reasons recorded as treatment intolerance (n=1). Following discontinuation of ibrutinib, 21 patients received salvage therapy. Of these, data regarding the response to salvage therapy was available in 9 (43%) patients (VGPR=2, PR=3, SD=3 and progressive disease=1); median PFS from the salvage therapy following ibrutinib discontinuation was 18 months (95% CI: 2-25). Of the 4 patients who were not treated following ibrutinib discontinuation; 1 elected hospice care due to concurrent head and neck cancer progression, and the other 3 patients elected to be monitored off therapy (one had achieved SD and two had PR from ibrutinib). Fourteen patients were evaluable for IgM rebound following ibrutinib discontinuation. Of those, 5 (36%) had sudden increase in IgM level [median: 158% from the IgM level after ibrutinib discontinuation (range: 22%-1368%)] within a median of 2 months (range: 1-3 months) and 1 patient required plasmapheresis for symptomatic hyperviscosity. Four of 5 patients received salvage therapy between 0-15 months. At last follow-up, 11 patients (14%) had died of whom 3 were on ibrutinib at the time of death [CNS involvement, (n=1), causes unrelated to WM, (n=2)]. Conclusions : Ibrutinib is an effective agent in WM patients with MYD88L265Pmutation. Our data regarding outcomes in non-trial setting appear comparable to the results observed in the pivotal clinical trial. Hematologists should be aware of unique ibrutinib associated toxicities and clinically relevant IgM rebound phenomenon following abrupt discontinuation of ibrutinib. Disclosures Ailawadhi: Celgene: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy. Gertz:janssen: Consultancy; Prothena: Honoraria; Medscape: Consultancy; Teva: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; annexon: Consultancy; Alnylam: Honoraria; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria; Apellis: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Ionis: Honoraria; Research to Practice: Consultancy. Kumar: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; Roche: Research Funding; AbbVie: 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; 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; Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; KITE: 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. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding. Dispenzieri:Celgene, Takeda, Prothena, Jannsen, Pfizer, Alnylam, GSK: Research Funding. Witzig:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. 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. Kapoor:Celgene: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction: Prognosis of AL amyloidosis has improved in recent years; however for many patients prognosis remains poor. We aimed to define patient-, disease- and treatment characteristics which are associated with long-term survival. Method: A retrospective chart review of all patients with biopsy-proven systemic AL amyloidosis, who were seen within 90 days of the confirmed diagnosis. Long-term survival was defined as 5-year and 10-year survival from the time of diagnosis. For 5-year survival we selected patients seen between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2012 (allowing a minimum of 5-year follow-up, n=1331) and for 10-year survival we screened patients seen between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2007 (allowing a minimum of 10-year follow-up; n=779). Treatment allocation was defined as the first regimen given, irrespective of subsequent treatment modifications. Results: Of the screening population, 498 patients survived ≥5 years from diagnosis (37% of the 5-year screening cohort) and 168 patients survived 10 years or more (22% of the 10-year screening cohort). Five-year survivors and 10-year survivors as compared to their counterparts were (Table): younger, higher proportion of women, more likely to have single organ involvement, less heart/liver/nerve involvement and more kidney involvement. Long-term survivors also had lower bone marrow plasma cell percentage at the time of diagnosis and lower tumor burden measured by the difference between involved to uninvolved light chain (dFLC). Similarly, long-term survivors had lower Mayo stages and higher systolic blood pressure. No difference in light chain isotype was observed between long-term survivors to long term non-survivors. Long-term survivors were less likely to be seen within 30 days of diagnosis compared to their counterparts (52% among 5-year survivors vs 67% among 5-year non-survivor; P<0.001). FISH abnormalities (data available for 555/1331 patients, 42%) were comparable between groups with regard to t(11;14) (50% among 5-year survival compared to 50% among 5-year non-survivors; P=0.93) and 13q abnormalities (34% vs 36%, respectively; P=0.53). However, trisomies were less frequently encountered in the 5-year survivor group (20% vs 29%, respectively; P=0.01), and far less common among 10-year survivors (11% vs 26%, respectively; P=0.04). Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) was more likely to be associated with long-term survival. Of all patients who underwent ASCT, 74% survived more than 5 years and 49% survived more than 10 years. In comparison, among the standard-intensity therapies, 5-year survival rates for melphalan-dexamethasone, bortezomib-based regimens, immunomodulatory drug-based regimens and single agent dexamethasone/ melphalan-prednisone were 29%, 28%, 30% and 10%, respectively. The corresponding 10-year survival rates were 15%, 20%, 20% and 5%, respectively. Conclusions: Long-term AL survivors have distinct favorable baseline characteristics (including those introduced by referral bias) and ASCT as their initial therapy. Identification of these patients, especially the Mayo 2004 stage III and the Mayo 2012 stage III-IV patients who unexpectedly survived 10 years, will allow for further study and insights. Disclosures Gertz: Teva: Consultancy; Prothena: Honoraria; Alnylam: Honoraria; celgene: Consultancy; Ionis: Honoraria; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; Research to Practice: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; janssen: Consultancy; Apellis: Consultancy; Medscape: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria; annexon: Consultancy. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding. Dingli:Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.. Kapoor:Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Russell:Vyriad: Equity Ownership. Kumar:KITE: 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; Novartis: 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; Merck: 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; 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; Roche: Research Funding; AbbVie: 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; Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Dispenzieri:Celgene, Takeda, Prothena, Jannsen, Pfizer, Alnylam, GSK: Research Funding.

Abstract Background: The introduction of several novel agents has led to an improvement in response rates and survival outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Despite significant therapeutic advances a subset of patients with multiple myeloma do not achieve a deep response to first-line treatment and biomarkers are needed to identify those at risk. Methods: We studied 472 patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were treated in clinical practice (n = 280, training cohort) or on prospective clinical trials (n = 192, validation cohort) at Mayo Clinic between 12/2003 and 12/2015. All patients had measurable disease (M-spike ≥ 1.0 g/dL) and received treatment with novel agents. Serum M-spike and free light chains (FLC) were measured before and after the first treatment cycle. The outcome of interest was the best response to first-line treatment (evaluated using the International Myeloma Working Group Uniform Response Criteria). Failure to achieve a deep response was defined as not achieving a very good partial response or better. The serum parameters of interest were the relative decrease in M-spike and absolute free light chain difference (ΔFLC). The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to compare the serum parameters before and after the first treatment cycle. Logistic regression models were used to assess the associations between the change in serum parameters after the first treatment cycle and best response to first-line treatment. P-values below 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Results: The median age at diagnosis in the training and the validation cohort were 67 (32 - 94) and 66 years (41 - 86), respectively. One hundred eighty one (65%) and 103 patients (54%) were male, respectively. The three most common regimens in the training cohort were lenalidomide + dexamethasone, lenalidomide + cyclophosphamide + dexamethasone, and bortezomib + lenalidomide + dexamethasone. In the validation cohort, the three most common regimens were carfilzomib + thalidomide + cyclophosphamide, lenalidomide + cyclophosphamide + dexamethasone, and ixazomib + cyclophosphamide + dexamethasone. In the two cohorts, the median baseline M-spike decreased from 3.1 g/dL (1.0 - 10.0) to 1.7 g/dL (0.0 - 6.6) and 3.2 g/dL (1.0 - 8.5) to 1.4 g/dL (0.0 - 4.5) after the first treatment cycle, respectively (p < 0.001 for both comparisons). The median baseline ΔFLC decreased from 31.1 mg/dL (0.0 - 2269.7) to 5.4 mg/dL (0.0 - 785.8) and from 23.3 mg/dL (0.1 - 3579.6) to 4.3 mg/dL (0.0 - 1139.3) after the first treatment cycle, respectively (p < 0.001 for both comparisons). M-spike reduction < 50% during the first treatment cycle was associated with failure to achieve a deep response: OR 4.54 (95% CI 2.72 - 7.58, p < 0.001) in the training cohort and OR 6.68 (95% CI 3.42 - 13.03, p < 0.001) in the validation cohort. Patients with reduction in M-spike < 10% during the first treatment cycle experienced failure to achieve a deep response in 86% (25/29) and 100% (10/10), respectively. ΔFLC reduction < 50% during the first treatment cycle was associated with treatment failure to achieve a deep response: OR 4.83 (95% CI 2.83 - 8.25, p < 0.001) in the training cohort and OR 5.09 (95% CI 2.37 - 10.92, p < 0.001) in the validation cohort. Patients with reduction in ΔFLC < 10% during the first treatment cycle experienced failure to achieve a deep response in 83% (34/41) and 91% (19/21), respectively. Conclusions: Early changes in M-spike and ΔFLC are strong predictors of response to treatment. We established and prospectively validated two readily available biomarkers that can identify patients at risk for treatment failure and may inform treatment decisions in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Disclosures Lacy: Celgene: Research Funding. Gertz:Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; janssen: Consultancy; Teva: Consultancy; Alnylam: Honoraria; Research to Practice: Consultancy; Apellis: Consultancy; Medscape: Consultancy; annexon: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; Prothena: Honoraria; Ionis: Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy; spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria. Dispenzieri:Celgene, Takeda, Prothena, Jannsen, Pfizer, Alnylam, GSK: Research Funding. Russell:Vyriad: Equity Ownership. Kapoor:Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: 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.

Abstract Background: It is well known that the staging stratification at diagnosis predicts survival in immunoglobulin light chain (AL) amyloidosis, but there is a paucity of literature delineating the prognostic value of these systems at the time of 2nd-line therapy. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study to evaluate the prognostic value of AL staging among 563 patients with staging data, who initiated a 2nd-line therapy between 2000 and 2015. Both the Revised Mayo 2012 staging system and the European revision of the Mayo 2004 staging system were used. Results: The median time from initial treatment to 2nd-line therapy was 11.6 months. Median follow-up from institution of 2nd-line therapy was 54.1 months. The 1st-line therapy for patients was autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) in 216 (38%) patients; and 2) non-ASCT therapies in 347 patients. Both staging systems were prognostic with a risk ratio of 9.4 (95%CI: 6.0, 15.1; p<0.0001) between stage IIIb and I, and of 12.2(8.1, 18.5; p<0.0001) between IV and I. At the time of 2nd-line therapy the staging systems' predictive values were independent of what the patients' 1st-line therapies had been despite the fact that the median time from initial treatment to 2nd-line therapy was 19.4 months in ASCT group and 8.0 months in non-ASCT group. Among the patients receiving 2nd-line therapy after ASCT, the 5-year overall survival (OS) from 2nd-line therapy for those with ≤ stage II versus >stage II was 65% and 31% (Mayo 2004) and 70% and 23% (Mayo 2012). The respective numbers for patients relapsing from a non-ASCT therapy were 57% and 26% (Mayo 2004) and 60% and 23% (Mayo 2012). Conclusions: This study indicates that the Mayo staging systems work well at the time of instituting 2nd-line therapy and is independent of whether 1st-line therapy was ASCT based. Figure. Figure. Disclosures Gertz: annexon: Consultancy; Medscape: Consultancy; Apellis: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; Prothena: Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria; Ionis: Honoraria; Research to Practice: Consultancy; Teva: Consultancy; janssen: Consultancy; Alnylam: Honoraria. Kumar: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; 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. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding. 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. Kapoor:Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Russell:Vyriad: Equity Ownership. Dispenzieri:Celgene, Takeda, Prothena, Jannsen, Pfizer, Alnylam, GSK: Research Funding.

Abstract Background: Among patients with immunoglobulin light chain (AL) amyloidosis, there is little consensus on when reinstitution of chemotherapy should occur (Milani and Dispenzieri, International Society of Amyloidosis 2016). AL amyloidosis patients who are treated with high dose chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) are a relatively low-risk and homogenous population, making them an ideal group to study practice patterns. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study to evaluate the patterns of relapse or progression and the timing of re-initiation of therapy among 146 patients who were initially treated with ASCT at Mayo Clinic between 1996 and 2009 and who received second-line therapy between 7/9/1997 and 4/12/2012. Results: The median time from ASCT to second-line therapy was 23.6 months and the median follow up post ASCT was 57.5 months. The indications for second-line treatment were: 1) both hematologic and organ progression 24.7% (36 patients); 2) organ progression only 41.1% (60); 3) hematologic relapse only 34.2% (50). The median dFLC at the time of starting second-line therapy was 10.5 mg/dL (1.6 - 59.5 mg/dL), which was 44.9% (13.8-167.2%) of dFLC level at diagnosis. Increase in proteinuria by > 50% from nadir (that was also at least 1g/24 hours, i.e. renal progression) was present in 35.8%. Increase in NT proBNP by >30% from nadir and minimum of 300 pg/mL was present in 48.9% of patients. The respective 4 years overall survival rates from the time of ASCT were 87.8%, 63.9%, and 56.7% (p=0.0016) for patients who had hematologic relapse, organ progression only and both organ and hematologic progression. Comparisons of laboratory markers at diagnosis, nadir of post ASCT and initiation of second-line therapy are listed in the table. Conclusions: Our study investigated the patterns of relapse / progression following upfront ASCT. This provides some insights on practice patterns of when physicians re-initiate therapy. Table Table. Disclosures Gertz: NCI Frederick: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Med Learning Group: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Research to Practice: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Research Funding; Prothena Therapeutics: Research Funding; GSK: Honoraria; Sandoz Inc: Honoraria; Ionis: Research Funding; Alnylam Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Annexon Biosciences: Research Funding. Kumar:Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Array BioPharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Noxxon Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Glycomimetics: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy; Skyline: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kesios: Consultancy. Kapoor:Celgene: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Dispenzieri:Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Alnylam: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Jannsen: Research Funding; pfizer: Research Funding; GSK: 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.

Abstract Introduction High dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is an effective therapy for eligible patients with newly diagnosed systemic AL amyloidosis. Dose attenuated melphalan is used in patients with older age, renal dysfunction, and multi-organ involvement in an effort to limit treatment related mortality. Reducing the dose of melphalan compromises response rates and survival outcomes, but this is often contributed to frailty of these patients. The revised Mayo staging (MS) system improves risk stratification and helps develop risk-adapted therapies. We analyzed the outcomes of ASCT following standard [(200 mg/m2); SD group] versus risk adapted [(140-160 mg/m2); RD group] melphalan conditioning, in the context of the factors typically leading to dose modification. Methods Three hundred and twenty nine patients with newly diagnosed systemic AL amyloidosis who underwent conditioning with melphalan followed by ASCT at Mayo Clinic between 2006 and 2015 were identified using existing databases. The clinical and laboratory data, treatment and follow - up details were collected by chart review and analyzed retrospectively. Overall survival(OS) was defined as the time from start of initial therapy until death from any cause or last follow up. Progression free survival(PFS) was defined as the time to relapse or progression requiring change or reinstitution of treatment or death from any cause. The OS and PFS curves were estimated using Kaplan-Meier method while log rank test was used to estimate their difference. Multivariate survival analysis was performed using the Cox proportional hazards model. Results Among the 329 patients, 240 patients were in SD group and 89 patients were in RD group (1 patient received 120 mg/ m2, 2 received 160 mg/m2 and the rest received 140 mg / m2). In the SD group, median age was 58.5 years (25.6 - 72.3); 59.6% were males; 38.7% / 61.7 %/ 7.5% had cardiac / renal /hepatic involvement; and 47.1% / 35.7% / 8.8% / 8.4% had MS I/II/III/IV. In the RD group, median age was 60.8 years (40 - 73.7); 62.9% were males; 66.3% / 71.9 %/ 11.2% had cardiac / renal /hepatic involvement; and 26.2% / 32.5% / 21.2% / 20% had MS I/II/III/IV. The response rates for patients in the SD group [complete response (CR) - 53.7%, very good partial response (VGPR) - 19.6%, partial response (PR) - 12.5%, no response (NR) - 1.2%, progressive disease (PD) - 1.6%] were significantly higher than patients in the RD group (CR - 34.8%, VGPR - 20.2%, PR - 15.7%, NR - 10.1%, PD - 1.1%) (85.8 vs 70.7%; p < 0.002). The PFS and OS for both the groups according to Mayo stage are presented in Figure 1. Multivariate survival analysis for PFS and OS was performed using age (≤ vs > 70 years), serum creatinine (≤ vs > 2 mg/dL), number of major organs involved (heart, kidney, liver, gastrointestinal tract and autonomic neuropathy), MS (1 vs 2 vs 3 and 4) and dose of melphalan (SD vs RD). The dose of melphalan (p=0.0002), MS (p=0.03) and the number of organs involved (p=0.04) were significant for PFS while the dose of melphalan (p=0.0001) and the MS (p = 0.004) were significant for OS. Conclusion Reducing the dose of melphalan during conditioning for frontline ASCT in systemic AL amyloidosis renders more patients eligible for transplant but compromises on the response rates. There is no impact on PFS and OS in Mayo stage I patients. However the OS as well as PFS in Mayo stage II, III and IV were significantly lower in RD group as compared to SD group. These results suggest a suboptimal outcome with use of reduced dose melphalan, even after accounting for the pother prognostic factors, suggesting that high dose therapy should potentially be limited to those eligible to receive the full dose conditioning. Disclosures Dispenzieri: Jannsen: Research Funding; pfizer: Research Funding; GSK: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Alnylam: Research Funding; Prothena: 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. Kapoor:Takeda: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Kumar:Skyline: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy; AbbVie: Research Funding; Array BioPharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Glycomimetics: Consultancy; Kesios: Consultancy; Noxxon Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding.