Lee, Hans C.

BackgroundStudies have reported racial disparities in access to and use of multiple myeloma (MM) treatments between African American (AA) and White patients. Although AA patients demonstrate longer disease‐specific survival, this has not uniformly translated into improved survival over time. The association between race and treatment patterns and survival outcomes was analyzed using data from the Connect MM Registry.MethodsThe Connect MM Registry is a large US, multicenter, prospective observational cohort study of patients with newly diagnosed MM. Patients who received first‐line (1L) stem cell transplantation (SCT) or who did not receive SCT (non‐SCT or non–stem cell transplantation [NSCT]) were grouped by raceEffects of race and transplantation status on the use of triplet treatment were estimated using logistic regression.ResultsTreatment patterns in 1L (types and duration of induction, posttransplantation maintenance) were similar between AA and White patients. SCT rates in 1L (32% vs 36%) and triplet treatment use (AA: 44% for NSCT patients and 72% for SCT patients; and White: 48% for NSCT patients and 72% for SCT patients) during first induction were similar. No significant effect of race or transplantation status on 1L triplet treatment use was observed. Race was not found to be associated with survival outcomes among patients who underwent NSCT; however, AA patients who received SCT had significantly longer overall survival compared with White patients who underwent SCT (not reached vs 88.2 months; hazard ratio, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.35‐0.89 [P = .0141]).ConclusionsAA and White patients were found to have similar treatment patterns in the Connect MM Registry, suggesting that both groups had equal access to health care. In this real‐world setting, AA patients received standard‐of‐care treatment, which might have contributed to better MM‐specific survival compared with White patients.

8518 Background: Patients (pts) with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) and renal impairment (RI) are often excluded from clinical trials. Data are limited on the effects of induction treatment in these pts, who may also be ineligible for autologous stem cell transplant (SCT) due to severity of RI. This analysis investigated the impact of RVd induction on renal function in transplant eligible (TE) and noneligible (TNE) pts from the Connect MM Registry, a US, multicenter, prospective, observational study. Methods: Eligible pts were ≥ 18 y and had symptomatic MM diagnosed ≤ 2 mos prior to enrollment, as defined by the International Myeloma Working Group criteria. For this analysis, pts that received front-line RVd for ≥ 3 cycles were grouped per transplant eligibility and renal function at baseline (BL; creatinine clearance [CrCl] < 30, 30-50, > 50-80, and > 80). Pts with progressive disease at BL were excluded. Renal function at 3 mos was measured. Median unadjusted progression-free survival (PFS) was calculated from start of regimen in TE and TNE populations, with pts grouped by CrCl (≤ 60 or > 60) at BL. Results: As of 7/23/19, 421 TE and 212 TNE pts received RVd for ≥ 3 cycles. TE and TNE pts were grouped by BL CrCl of < 30 (20 and 16 pts), 30-50 (36 and 50 pts), > 50-80 (117 and 63 pts), and > 80 (248 and 83 pts). Renal function improvement was observed in all pts receiving RVd, including those with moderate (30-50 CrCl) and severe (< 30 CrCl) RI at BL (Table). In pts with > 60 CrCl and ≤ 60 CrCl at BL, median PFS in TE pts was 48.6 mos and 43.2 mos, respectively. In TNE pts, median PFS was 36.4 mos and 30.6 mos, respectively. Conclusions: The results from the Connect MM Registry indicate that pts with NDMM and RI (including moderate and severe) who receive front-line RVd for ≥ 3 cycles may see improvement in renal function at 3 mos, regardless of transplant eligibility. RVd therefore can potentially be used in pts with RI. This analysis provides real-world data that support further investigation of RVd treatment in pts with moderate or severe RI. Clinical trial information: NCT01081028 . [Table: see text]

8032 Background: The impact of t(11;14) (16%–24% of MM pts) on prognosis is not fully understood. Consensus is lacking on the effects of induction treatment (tx) on outcomes with t(11;14). The Connect MM Registry (NCT01081028) is a large, US, multicenter, prospective observational cohort study of pts with NDMM designed to examine real-world diagnostic patterns, treatment (tx) patterns, clinical outcomes, and HRQoL pt-reported outcomes in pts with NDMM. The impact of t(11;14) on tx outcomes are reported. Methods: Analysis included data from pts from 250 community, academic, and government sites in cohort (C) 1 (9/2009–12/2011) and C2 (12/2012–4/2016), who completed first-line (1L; induction) tx and were tested for t(11;14) by FISH or cytogenetics. Primary end points (progression-free survival [PFS] and overall survival [OS]) were measured from start of 1L tx to earliest event (PFS, death or progression; OS, death), loss to follow-up, or data cutoff, adjusted for baseline (BL) risk factors. A sensitivity analysis excluding pts with concomitant cytogenetic abnormalities [del 17p, t(4;14), t(14;16), 1q+] was also performed. Results: By 1/2018, 3011 pts were enrolled; 2938 were treated. Of 1574 enrolled pts tested for t(11;14), 378 were t(11;14)+ and 1196 were t(11;14)−. More pts in C2 vs C1 were t(11;14)+ (60% vs 40%). BL characteristics were similar between groups. t(11;14) status did not affect PFS ( P= NS) or OS ( P= NS; Table). Pts in C1 and C2 received similar 1L txs (IMiD agent + proteasome inhibitor [PI], 30% vs 42%; PI only, 42% vs 43%; IMiD agent only, 17% vs 11%). Results were similar when pts with concomitant abnormalities were excluded. Conclusions: Results of this analysis suggest that t(11;14) does not affect PFS and OS outcomes in NDMM pts. Clinical trial information: NCT01081028. [Table: see text]

Background: Multiple myeloma (MM) is common among the elderly, with 35% of patients (pts) diagnosed being aged ≥75 years (y). With increasing overall life expectancy, the incidence and prevalence of newly diagnosed and previously treated MM patients ≥80 y is expected to increase over time. Because elderly pts are often excluded from clinical trials, data focused on their treatment patterns and clinical outcomes are lacking. The Connect® MM Registry (NCT01081028) is a large, US, multicenter, prospective observational cohort study of pts with newly diagnosed MM (NDMM) designed to examine real-world diagnostic patterns, treatment patterns, clinical outcomes, and health-related quality of life patient-reported outcomes. This analysis reviews treatment patterns and outcomes in elderly pts from the Connect MM Registry. Methods: Pts enrolled in the Connect MM registry at 250 community, academic, and government sites were included in this analysis. Eligible pts were adults aged ≥18 y with symptomatic MM diagnosed ≤2 months before enrollment, as defined by International Myeloma Working Group criteria; no exclusion criteria were applied. For this analysis, pts were categorized into 4 age groups: <65, 65 to 74, 75 to 84, and ≥85 y. Pts were followed from time of enrollment to the earliest of disease progression (or death), loss to follow-up, or data cutoff date of February 7, 2019. Descriptive statistics were used for baseline characteristics and treatment regimens. Survival outcomes were analyzed using Cox regression. Time to progression (TTP) analysis excluded causes of death not related to MM. Results: Of 3011 pts enrolled (median age 67 y), 132 (4%) were aged ≥85 y, and 615 (20%) were aged 75-84 y at baseline. More pts aged ≥85 y had poor prognostic factors such as ISS stage III disease and reduced hemoglobin (<10 g/dL or >2 g/dL <LLN) compared with other age groups, although no notable differences between creatinine and calcium levels were observed across age groups (Table). A lower proportion of elderly pts (75-84 and ≥85 y) received triplet regimens as frontline therapy. More elderly pts received a single novel agent, whereas use of 2 novel agents was more common in younger pts (Table). The most common frontline regimens among elderly pts were bortezomib (V) + dexamethasone (D), followed by lenalidomide (R) + D, whereas those among younger pts included RVD, followed by VD and CyBorD (Table). No pt aged ≥85 y, and 4% of pts aged 75-84 y received high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplant (vs 61% in the <65 y and 37% in the 65-74 y age group). The most common maintenance therapy was RD in pts ≥85 y (although the use was low) and R alone in other age groups (Table). In the ≥85 y group, 27%, 10%, and 4% of pts entered 2L, 3L, and 4L treatments respectively, vs 43%, 23%, and 13% in the <65 y group. Progression-free survival was significantly shorter in the ≥85 y age group vs the 75-84 y age group (P=0.003), 65-74 y age group (P<0.001), and <65 y age group (P<0.001; Fig.1). TTP was significantly shorter in the ≥85 y group vs the <65 y group (P=0.020); however, TTP was similar among the 65-74 y, 75-84 y, and ≥85 y cohorts (Fig. 2). Overall survival was significantly shorter in the ≥85 y group vs the 75-84 y, 65-74 y, and <65 y groups (all P<0.001; Fig. 3). The mortality rate was lowest (46%) during first-line treatment (1L) in pts aged ≥85 y (mainly attributed to MM progression) and increased in 2L and 3L (47% and 54%, respectively); a similar trend was observed in the younger age groups. The main cause of death was MM progression (29% in the ≥85 y vs 16% in the <65 y group). Other notable causes of death in the ≥85 y group included cardiac failure (5% vs 2% in <65 y group) and pneumonia (5% vs 1% in <65 y group). Conclusions: In this analysis, elderly pts received similar types of frontline and maintenance regimens as younger pts, although proportions varied with decreased use of triplet regimens with age. Considering similarities in TTP across the 65-74 y, 75-84 y, and ≥85 y cohorts, these real-world data support active treatment and aggressive supportive care of elderly symptomatic pts, including with novel agents. Additionally, further clinical studies specific to elderly patients with MM should be explored. Disclosures Lee: Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline plc: Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Ailawadhi:Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Cellectar: Research Funding. Gasparetto:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations, or other expenses paid or reimbursed ; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations, or other expenses paid or reimbursed ; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations, or other expenses paid or reimbursed . Jagannath:AbbVie: Consultancy; Merck & Co.: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Rifkin:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Durie:Amgen, Celgene, Johnson & Johnson, and Takeda: Consultancy. Narang:Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Terebelo:Celgene: Honoraria; Jannsen: Speakers Bureau; Newland Medical Asociates: Employment. Toomey:Celgene: Consultancy. Hardin:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Wagner:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; American Cancer Society: Other: Section editor, Cancer journal. Omel:Celgene, Takeda, Janssen: Other: Patient Advisory Committees. Srinivasan:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Liu:TechData: Consultancy. Dhalla:Celgene: Employment. Agarwal:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Abonour:BMS: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Background: MM clinical trials often have stringent eligibility criteria that limit the enrollment of patients (pts) reflective of the general patient population (Shah, Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk 2017). The Connect® MM Registry, a prospective observational study of pts with newly diagnosed MM (NDMM) in the US, provided the opportunity to examine differences between pts with MM who were identified as RCT-eligible vs -ineligible, to observe the generalizability of clinical trial results to real-world clinical settings. Differences in baseline characteristics, treatment, clinical outcomes, and HRQoL were examined in RCT-eligible and -ineligible pts from this registry, which represents an unselected, broad real-world population. Methods: Pts with NDMM were enrolled at 250 community, academic, and government sites. Eligible pts were ≥18 y of age with symptomatic MM diagnosed ≤2 months preenrollment per the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) criteria. For this analysis, pts were considered ineligible for RCT per the following key exclusion criteria previously described: absolute neutrophil count ≤1.5 × 109/L, platelet count ≤75 × 109/L, creatinine >2.5 mg/dL, AST/ALT >3 times the ULN, peripheral neuropathy grade >2; ECOG PS 3/4; history of myelodysplastic syndromes/other hematologic malignancies, or solid tumors (Shah 2017). Sites administered pt HRQoL questionnaires and provided clinical data at baseline and quarterly during follow-up until death or study discontinuation. Differences in HRQoL at baseline, changes from baseline to 1 and 2 years, and survival outcomes, adjusted for covariates via propensity score, were compared between RCT-eligible/-ineligible pts. Results: Of the 3011 pts enrolled, 2873 pts met the CRAB (hyperCalcemia, Renal failure, Anemia, and Bone disease) criteria per IMWG at enrollment. Of these, 1622 (56.5%) were identified as RCT-eligible and 1251 (43.5%) as RCT-ineligible (data cut-off February 7, 2019). Both groups were similar in median age, sex, race, and ethnicity distribution, although the RCT-ineligible group had more pts aged ≥75 y (26.3% vs 23.2%) and more pts with ECOG PS 3/4 (6.2% vs none). Overall, 34.5% of RCT-ineligible pts received a transplant vs 42.8% of RCT-eligible pts. More RCT-ineligible pts had ISS stage III disease (39.4% vs 19.8%), elevated calcium (≥11.5 mg/dL; 12.7% vs 6.8%), elevated creatinine (>2.0 mg/dL; 40.3% vs 6.5%), and low hemoglobin (<10 g/dL or >2 g/dL <LLN; 60.8% vs 40.3%). Use of triplet treatment (54.2% vs 56.2%) and alkylator (24.9% vs 20.1%) was similar between the RCT-ineligible/-eligible groups. Lenalidomide + bortezomib + dexamethasone (RVd) was the most common initial therapy, and R was the most common maintenance therapy in both groups, but fewer RCT-ineligible pts received RVd as initial therapy (23.9% vs 31.0%) and R as first maintenance regimen (18.1% vs 22.7%). Absolute baseline HRQoL scores were significantly higher, indicating better HRQoL, in RCT-eligible (115.9) vs -ineligible (111.5) pts on the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Multiple Myeloma (FACT-MM) Total score (P=0.007), FACT-MM Trial Outcome Index (74.3 vs 70.3, P=0.002), and FACT-MM Subscale (37.3 vs 35.5, P=0.003). Scores were similar for EuroQol-5D Overall Index (0.73 vs 0.72, P=0.5) and Brief Pain Inventory (3.42 vs 3.43, P=0.9). Both RCT-eligible and -ineligible pts showed significant improvement in HRQoL from baseline at years 1 and 2, although the magnitude of improvement was similar between both groups (Fig. 1a and b). RCT-ineligible pts showed significantly shorter median PFS and OS vs RCT-eligible pts (Fig. 2 & 3, respectively). Conclusions: The CONNECT MM registry provided the opportunity to examine key differences between RCT-eligible and -ineligible pts. By applying common RCT eligibility criteria, a substantial proportion of MM pts (43.5%) in this real-world population may have been ineligible to participate in a RCT. RCT-ineligible pts had advanced disease, poor performance status, and poor laboratory parameters at baseline vs RCT-eligible pts, which could affect PFS and OS. These findings enhance our understanding of HRQoL among MM pts, which at present, is largely based on RCT participants. A similar magnitude of HRQoL improvement in both groups at 1 and 2 years suggests the need to evaluate RCT eligibility criteria in MM to help broaden enrollment and maximize external validity. Disclosures Wagner: Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; American Cancer Society: Other: Section editor, Cancer journal. Toomey:Celgene: Consultancy. Ailawadhi:Takeda: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Cellectar: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding. Jagannath:Merck & Co.: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy. Gasparetto:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations, or other expenses paid or reimbursed ; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations, or other expenses paid or reimbursed ; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations, or other expenses paid or reimbursed . Durie:Amgen, Celgene, Johnson & Johnson, and Takeda: Consultancy. Narang:Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Rifkin:Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Terebelo:Celgene: Honoraria; Jannsen: Speakers Bureau; Newland Medical Asociates: Employment. Omel:Celgene, Takeda, Janssen: Other: Patient Advisory Committees. Hardin:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Lee:Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy; GlaxoSmithKline plc: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Srinivasan:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Liu:TechData: Consultancy. Dhalla:Celgene: Employment. Catamero:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Abonour:BMS: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Marrow adipocytes reprogrammed by myeloma cells induce bone lesions.

Abstract Purpose: Waldenström's macroglobulinemia is an incurable lymphoproliferative disorder driven by an L265P mutation in the myeloid differentiation primary response gene 88 (MYD88), which activates downstream NF-κB signaling through the Myddosome. As this pathway depends in part on activity of interleukin-1 receptor-associated kinases (IRAKs)-1 and -4, we sought to evaluate the potential of the IRAK1/4 inhibitor R191 in preclinical models. Experimental Design: Patient-derived cell lines and primary samples were used in both in vitro and in vivo experiments to model Waldenström's macroglobulinemia and its response to IRAK1/4 inhibitors. Results: R191 induced a dose- and time-dependent reduction in viability of BCWM.1 and MWCL-1 Waldenström's cell lines, and suppressed activation of IRAK1/4. This was associated with cell-cycle arrest at G0–G1, reduced levels of cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6, and induction of apoptosis in cell lines and primary patient samples. Further downstream, R191 exposure led to reduced activation of NF-κB, and of protein kinase B/Akt/mammalian target of rapamycin signaling, whereas expression of a constitutively active Akt mutant induced R191 resistance. Gene expression profiling and gene set enrichment analysis revealed a signature consistent with inhibition of c-Myc and activation of the endoplasmic reticulum stress response. In both subcutaneous and systemic murine models of Waldenström's, R191 showed antitumor activity. Finally, the activity of R191 was enhanced when it was combined with novel chemotherapeutics such as bortezomib, afuresertib, and ibrutinib. Conclusions: Taken together, these data support the translation of R191 as an approach to target IRAK1/4 to the clinic for patients with Waldenström's macroglobulinemia.

ABSTRACTBackground and objectiveThe main purpose of treatment in patients with malignant pleural effusion (MPE) is symptom palliation. Currently, patients undergo repeat thoracenteses prior to receiving a definitive procedure as clinicians are not aware of the risk factors associated with fluid recurrence. The primary objective of this study was to identify risk factors associated with recurrent symptomatic MPE.MethodsRetrospective multicentre cohort study of patients who underwent first thoracentesis was performed. The primary outcome was time to fluid recurrence requiring intervention in patients with evidence of metastatic disease. We used a cause‐specific hazard model to identify risk factors associated with fluid recurrence. We also developed a predictive model, utilizing Fine–Gray subdistribution hazard model, and externally validated the model.ResultsA total of 988 patients with diagnosed metastatic disease were included. Cumulative incidence of recurrence was high with 30% of patients recurring by day 15. On multivariate analysis, size of the effusion on chest X‐ray (up to the top of the cardiac silhouette (hazard ratio (HR): 1.84, 95% CI: 1.21–2.80, P = 0.004) and above the cardiac silhouette (HR: 2.22, 95% CI: 1.43–3.46, P = 0.0004)), larger amount of pleural fluid drained (HR: 1.06, 95% CI: 1.04–1.07, P < 0.0001) and higher pleural fluid LDH (HR: 1.008, 95% CI: 1.004–1.011, P < 0.0001) were associated with increased hazard of recurrence. Negative cytology (HR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.43–0.64, P < 0.0001) was associated with decreased hazard of recurrence. The model had low prediction accuracy.ConclusionPleural effusion size, amount of pleural fluid drained, LDH and pleural fluid cytology were found to be risk factors for recurrence.

Abstract Rationale Patients with malignant pleural effusions have significant dyspnea and shortened life expectancy. Indwelling pleural catheters allow patients to drain pleural fluid at home and can lead to autopleurodesis. The optimal drainage frequency to achieve autopleurodesis and freedom from catheter has not been determined. Objectives To determine whether an aggressive daily drainage strategy is superior to the current standard every other day drainage of pleural fluid in achieving autopleurodesis. Methods Patients were randomized to either an aggressive drainage (daily drainage; n = 73) or standard drainage (every other day drainage; n = 76) of pleural fluid via a tunneled pleural catheter. Measurements and Main Results The primary outcome was the incidence of autopleurodesis following the placement of the indwelling pleural catheters. The rate of autopleurodesis, defined as complete or partial response based on symptomatic and radiographic changes, was greater in the aggressive drainage arm than the standard drainage arm (47% vs. 24%, respectively; P = 0.003). Median time to autopleurodesis was shorter in the aggressive arm (54 d; 95% confidence interval, 34–83) as compared with the standard arm (90 d; 95% confidence interval, 70 to nonestimable). Rate of adverse events, quality of life, and patient satisfaction were not significantly different between the two arms. Conclusions Among patients with malignant pleural effusion, daily drainage of pleural fluid via an indwelling pleural catheter led to a higher rate of autopleurodesis and faster time to liberty from catheter. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT 00978939).