Citations 920

Novel Three- and Four-Drug Combination Regimens of Bortezomib, Dexamethasone, Cyclophosphamide, and Lenalidomide, for Previously Untreated Multiple Myeloma: Results From the Multi-Center, Randomized, Phase 2 EVOLUTION Study

Blood | October 12, 2019 | Volume: 116 | Issue: 21 | Pages: 621-621

10.1182/blood.v116.21.621.621

Abstract Abstract 621 Background: Two- and three-drug regimens incorporating bortezomib (Velcade®, V), lenalidomide (Revlimid®, R), dexamethasone (D), or cyclophosphamide (C) have been shown to be effective and well tolerated in previously untreated multiple myeloma (MM). Combining all four drugs in a single regimen (VDCR) may further enhance efficacy. Published results from the phase 1 dose-escalation portion of the non-comparative, multi-center EVOLUTION study showed that the VDCR regimen was highly active and generally well tolerated (Kumar et al Leukemia 2010). Here we present updated results from the phase 2 portion of the trial, focusing on efficacy and safety of the VDCR, VDR, and VDC regimens. Methods: Previously untreated patients with measurable disease were randomized to one of four treatment groups receiving up to eight 21-d cycles of VDCR (V 1.3 mg/m2 d 1, 4, 8, 11; D 40 mg d 1, 8, 15; R 15 mg d 1–14; C 500 mg/m2 d 1, 8), VDR (VD as in VDCR but with R 25 mg d 1–14), VDC (VDC as in VDCR), or VDC-mod (as for VDC but with an additional dose of C on d 15) as induction therapy, followed by four 42-d maintenance cycles of V 1.3 mg/m2 (d 1, 8, 15, 22) (all treatment arms). Patients eligible for autologous stem cell transplant (SCT) could undergo stem cell mobilization any time after cycle 2 and SCT any time after cycle 4. The primary endpoint was the combined complete response (CR) + very good partial response (VGPR) rate; secondary endpoints included safety/tolerability, time to response, duration of response, progression-free survival, and rate of minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity. Responses were assessed according to International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) uniform criteria using an automated computer algorithm. Adverse events (AEs) were graded using the CTCAE v3.0. Results: Patient characteristics were similar among the groups with respect to age, performance status, ISS stage, and proportion of patients with high-risk cytogenetic features. Patients received a median of 5, 6, 6, and 6 treatment cycles in the VDCR, VDR, VDC, and VDC-mod arms, respectively; 65%, 60%, 52%, and 47% of patients had dose reductions of any drug. In the VDCR, VDR, VDC, and VDC-mod arms, respectively, 52%, 62%, 58%, and 65% of patients completed treatment; 31%, 43%, 24%, and 41%, respectively, underwent SCT. In the phase 2 response-evaluable patients (n=132), all treatment regimens showed substantial efficacy, with CR+VGPR rates of 59% (VDCR), 50% (VDR), 41% (VDC), and 59% (VDC-mod) (Table) (includes pre-transplant responses only in SCT patients). Of MRD-assessed patients, 46% (21/46) of those who achieved CR (including sCR) or nCR were MRD-negative; 48% (10/21), 75% (9/12), 0% (0/7) and 33% (2/6) in the VDCR, VDR, VDC and VDC-mod arms, respectively. Median time to first response was similar across arms (range 1.6–1.8 months); median time to best response of CR+VGPR was 4.0 months (VDCR), 3.4 months (VDR), 5.1 months (VDC), and 3.1 months (VDC-mod). Median duration of response has not been reached in any arm to date. All treatment regimens were generally well tolerated. In the VDCR, VDR, VDC, and VDC-mod arms, at least one grade ≥3 AE was observed in 81%, 76%, 79%, and 88% of enrolled patients, respectively; serious AEs were experienced by 42%, 40%, 21%, and 41% of patients, and AEs resulting in study discontinuation were reported for 19%, 17%, 12%, and 6% of patients. The five most common all-grade AEs across all treatment groups were fatigue (range 47–67%), nausea (36–67%), constipation (40–62%), diarrhea NOS (42–65%), and neutropenia (19–52%). The incidence of grade ≥3 (grade ≥2) peripheral neuropathy (PN) was 13% (40%) in the VDCR arm, 14% (45%) VDR, 9% (48%) VDC, and 18% (41%) VDC-mod; there was no grade 4 PN. Rates of grade ≥3 neutropenia/thrombocytopenia were 42%/10% for VDCR, 7%/7% VDR, 36%/12% VDC, and 65%/18% VDC-mod. Conclusions: All regimens appear highly active and generally well tolerated in previously untreated MM patients. The four-drug combination did not result in a substantial increase in response rate and was associated with a modest increase in the incidence of hematologic toxicities. Continuous weekly C in the VDC regimen was associated with high response rates and rapid responses, comparable to the VDR and VDCR arms. Outcome data will be presented following longer follow-up. Disclosures: Kumar: Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Genzyme: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cephalon: Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding. Off Label Use: Lenalidomide for treatment of newly diagnosed myeloma. Flinn:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Richardson:Celgene, Millennium, Novartis, Johnson & Johnson: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Hari:Celgene: Research Funding. Callander:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Noga:Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Ortho-Centicor: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Cephalon: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Stewart:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria. Rifkin:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Speakers Bureau; Cephalon: Speakers Bureau; Dendreon: Speakers Bureau. Wolf:Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Genentech and Multiple Myeloma Research: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; OrthoBiotech: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Estevam:Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Mulligan:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Shi:Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Webb:Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Employment.
Scattome: A Single-Cell Analysis of Targeted Transcriptome Program to Predict Drug Sensitivity of Single Cells within Human Myeloma Tumors

Blood | October 12, 2019 | Volume: 126 | Issue: 23 | Pages: 4249-4249

10.1182/blood.v126.23.4249.4249

Abstract Multiple myeloma (MM) is characterized by significant genetic diversity at subclonal levels that likely plays a defining role in the heterogeneity of tumor progression, clinical aggressiveness and drug sensitivity. Such heterogeneity is a driving factor in the evolution of MM, from founder clones through outgrowth of subclonal fractions. DNA Sequencing studies on MM samples have indeed demonstrated such heterogeneity in subclonal architecture at diagnosis based on recurrent mutations in pathologically relevant genes that may ultimately to lead to relapse. However, no study so far has reported a predictive gene expression signature that can identify, distinguish and quantify drug sensitive and drug-resistant subpopulations within a bulk population of myeloma cells. In recent years, our laboratory has successfully developed a gene expression profile (GEP)-based signature that could not only distinguish drug response of MM cell lines, but also was effective in stratifying patient outcomes when applied to GEP profiles from MM clinical trials using proteasome inhibitors (PI) as chemotherapeutic agents. Further, we noted myeloma cell lines that responded to the drug often contained residual sub-population of cells that did not respond, and likely were selectively propagated during drug treatment in vitro, and in patients. In this study, we performed targeted qRT-PCR analysis of single cells using a gene panel that included PI sensitivity genes and gene signatures that could discriminate between low and high-risk myeloma followed by intensive bioinformatics and statistical analysis for the classification and prediction of PI response in individual cells within bulk multiple myeloma tumors. Fluidigm's C1 Single-Cell Auto Prep System was used to perform automated single-cell capture, processing and cDNA synthesis on 576 pre-treatment cells from 12 cell lines representing a wide range of PI-sensitivity and 370 cells from 7 patient samples undergoing PI treatment followed by targeted gene expression profiling of single cells using automated, high-throughput on-chip qRT-PCR analysis using 96.96 Dynamic Array IFCs on the BioMark HD System. Probability of resistance for each individual cell was predicted using a pipeline that employed the machine learning methods Random Forest, Support Vector Machine (radial and sigmoidal), LASSO and kNN (k Nearest Neighbor) for making single-cell GEP data-driven predictions/ decisions. The weighted probabilities from each of the algorithms were used to quantify resistance of each individual cell and plotted using Ensemble forecasting algorithm. Using our drug response GEP signature at the single cell level, we could successfully identify distinct subpopulations of tumor cells that were predicted to be sensitive or resistant to PIs. Subsequently, we developed a R Statistical analysis package (http://cran.r-project.org), SCATTome (Single Cell Analysis of Targeted Transcriptome), that can restructure data obtained from Fluidigm qPCR analysis run, filter missing data, perform scaling of filtered data, build classification models and successfully predict drug response of individual cells and classify each cell's probability of response based on the targeted transcriptome. We will present the program output as graphical displays of single cell response probabilities. This package provides a novel classification method that has the potential to predict subclonal response to a variety of therapeutic agents. Disclosures Kumar: Skyline: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding.
Unraveling Early Mortality In Patients with AL Amyloidosis

Blood | October 12, 2019 | Volume: 116 | Issue: 21 | Pages: 4990-4990

10.1182/blood.v116.21.4990.4990

Abstract Abstract 4990 Background: Although there have been improvements in 5-year overall survival (OS) rates among patients with AL amyloidosis over the past decades, OS is still poor, and death rates within the first 3–6 months after diagnosis have not changed significantly. This retrospective study was performed to identify risk factors for and causes of death during the first 90 days following diagnosis of AL amyloidosis. Method: From July 2002 to April 2009, 301 patients with a diagnosis of AL amyloidosis who were seen at Mayo Clinic within 30 days of diagnosis were identified from the dysproteinemia database. The 100 who died within 90 days were the focus of our study. The other 201 who were alive beyond 90 days were used as a comparator group. Outside physician offices were contacted to obtain further information pertaining to treatment and cause of death for our study group. Results: Of the 100 patients with early death, median age at diagnosis was 63.7 years (range: 34.7–89.4). 25 patients were diagnosed with concurrent multiple myeloma (MM) based on MM-specific end-organ damage. Overall, the number of patients with 2, 3 and 4 organs (cardiac, renal, nerve or liver) involved with amyloidosis was 37, 15 and 4, respectively. Using the cardiac biomarker staging system, 78% of 46 evaluable patients were stage III at diagnosis followed by 22% stage II and no stage I. Table 1 describes the characteristics of the studied population. Amyloid-related deaths were identified in 61 patients with the most common cause being cardiac arrest or sudden death (33%) followed by end-organ failure (24%). Treatment was started in 50% of patients; 34% received no treatment; and no treatment information was available for the remainder. OS was 54.5 days in patients who received treatment as compared to 7.5 days in those who received no treatment (p<0.0001); outcomes were similar in the group in whom no treatment information was available and those patients who were known to have received treatment. Melphalan with dexamethasone was the most common treatment (21%) and was associated with improved OS compared to other treatments including novel agents (57 vs. 26 days, p=0.003). Outcomes were no different if the patients had received novel therapies, but numbers were small. When compared to patients who lived for more than 90 days from their diagnosis, patients with early mortality had higher median intraventricular septum (IVS) (15 vs. 13 mm, p<0.0001), lower ejection fraction (EF) (50 vs. 64%, p<0.0001), and higher troponin-T (0.125 vs. 0.01 ng/ml, p<0.0001) and NT-proBNP (9020 vs. 1292 pg/ml, p<0.0001). We also found that patients who died within 90 days of their diagnosis had significantly higher plasma cell labeling index (PCLI), uric acid, beta-2 microglobulin, involved free light chain (FLC) and creatinine. Conclusion: This study highlights the characteristics of patients who died within 90 days of diagnosis of AL amyloidosis. The majority of patients died from arrhythmia and organ failure. This implies that other interventions aside from treatment of the underlying plasma cell (PC) disorder will likely be required to change the early outcomes of this disease. Disclosures: Lacy: Celgene: Research Funding. Kumar:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Genzyme: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cephalon: Research Funding. Dispenzieri:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Binding Site: Honoraria.
Survival Trends in Young Patients with Waldenstrom Macroglobulinemia: Over 5 Decades of Experience

Blood | October 12, 2019 | Volume: 128 | Issue: 22 | Pages: 1810-1810

10.1182/blood.v128.22.1810.1810

Abstract Background Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia (WM) is an IgM-associated lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma, first described over seven decades ago. Although WM is typically a disease of the elderly, with a median age at diagnosis of ~ 67 years, approximately 10% of patients are ≤50 years (y) of age at diagnosis. Data for young patients are sparse and the few available studies demonstrate inconsistent findings, with potential overestimation of survival owing to inclusion of patients with smoldering WM. In this case-control study, we evaluate outcomes, prognostic features and impact of changing therapies in a large cohort of young symptomatic WM patients compared to matched older patients seen over the course of the past five decades. Methods The medical records of all WM patients seen consecutively at Mayo Clinic from 01/1960 to 10/2013 were reviewed. Of 1181 patients, 140 (11.8%) were ≤ 50 y of age at diagnosis. A cohort of patients 65 y or older at diagnosis, matched 1:1 by the time of diagnosis, served as the control population. The patients were divided into 3 groups based on the timing of initiation of therapy: Group 1 (1960-1977), Group 2 (1978-1995) and Group 3 (1996-2013). The baseline characteristics were compared. Initiation of frontline therapy was used for all time-to-event analysis using the Kaplan Meier method. Results Younger patients were more likely to present with adenopathy and splenomegaly, have higher IgM levels and hyperviscosity symptoms (Table 1). The median follow-up from the frontline therapy was similar (10.7 y vs. 10 y for the control population). At the time of analysis, 91% of the deaths for the younger cases were WM-related compared to 58% in the control arm (p=0.0001). Younger patients had a better OS with a median disease-specific survival (DSS) of 15.6 y (95% CI: 13-21; 10-y OS of 77%) vs. 11 y (95% CI: 7.8-12; 10-y OS of 51%) for the older patient (p=0.0003). Among the young patients, there was no difference in the median DSS across the 3 groups (p=0.42). However, the median DSS for the control group incrementally improved (p=0.02) over the 3 time periods (Table 1). In the younger patients, no improvement in DSS was noted with the use of either frontline rituximab-based therapy compared to non-rituximab based regimens [median NR (95% CI: 7.6-NR) vs. 15.8 y (95% CI: 13-22) with other regimens, p=0.30], or frontline chlorambucil-based compared to non-chlorambucil based regimens [median 16 y (95% CI: 12-22) vs 15.6 y (95% CI: 12-NR) with other regimens, p=0.73]. In the control group, however, there was significant difference in DSS among patients who received frontline rituximab-based compared to non-rituximab based regimens [median NR (95% CI: 8.3-NR) vs 9.1 y (95% CI: 5.6-12) with other regimens, p=0.04], or frontline chlorambucil-based vs non-chlorambucil based regimens [8 y (95% CI: 5-12) vs 12.3 y (95% CI: 11-NR) in other regimens; p=0.001]. Conclusion Striking differences in presentation are evident in young WM patients compared to their older counterparts. The incorporation of rituximab to the previously existing anti-WM regimens and the transition to non-chlorambucil based regimens has resulted in substantial survival gains in the older WM population over the past five decades. However, such improvement in outcome has not yet been observed in the young patients. The majority of younger patients, despite a protracted disease course, succumb to their disease. Disclosures Ansell: BMS, Seattle Genetics, Merck, Celldex and Affimed: Research Funding. Ailawadhi:Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Amgen Inc: Consultancy; Takeda Oncology: Consultancy. Reeder:Novartis: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding. Kumar:Kesios: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Glycomimetics: Consultancy; Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Noxxon Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Array BioPharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Skyline: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Dispenzieri:Alnylam: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GSK: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; pfizer: Research Funding; Jannsen: Research Funding. Kapoor:Celgene: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding.
Non-Clonal Serum Immunoglobulin Free Light Chains (FLC) as Markers of Overall Survival

Blood | October 12, 2019 | Volume: 116 | Issue: 21 | Pages: 3893-3893

10.1182/blood.v116.21.3893.3893

Abstract Abstract 3893 Background: When screening for clonal disease, the kappa (k) to lambda (l) FLC ratio (FLC-R) is employed to correct for both impaired catabolism (renal function) and non-specific production (generalized immune overstimulation). This adjustment makes it possible to identify patients with relative imbalances between k and l levels, which typically qualifies for clonal excess and has been of value in screening for and prognosticating in patients with most clonal plasma cell disorders. We previously performed a population-based study among Olmsted County residents to ascertain the prevalence of monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) and light chain MGUS. We hypothesized that by using this cohort, we could identify whether the FLC assay provides information that would be prognostic in a general population of people 50-years and older. Methods: The Olmsted MGUS prevalence cohort was comprised of 21,463 of the 28,038 enumerated individuals over the age of 50 who were living Olmsted between 1/1/95 and 11/21/2003. The final sample size of individuals for the present study was 15839 due to patient losses secondary to blinding, inadequate sample to perform the FLC assay, and known MGUS or LC-MGUS. For the multivariate analyses, another 772 were excluded due lack of coincident creatinine measurement. The FLC measurements were performed using the FLC assay (Binding Site, Birmingham, UK). The respective reference ranges for k FLC and l FLC are 0.33–1.94 mg/dL and 0.57–2.63; therefore, the reference range for the sum of k and l FLC (S FLC) is 0.90–4.57 mg/dL. Survival time was calculated from the time of sample ascertainment. Results: Forty-five percent of the cohort was male. The median age was 63 years (range 50, 109). On univariate analysis, the hazard ratio for death for those patients with the highest decile of S FLC relative to the other 90% of patients in the cohort was 4.3 (95%CI 4.01, 4.62), Figure 1. Because serum immunoglobulin FLC rise with age and with renal insufficiency, a multivariate analysis was performed to exclude the possibility that S FLC was merely a surrogate for these other parameters. Table 1 shows both univariate and multivariate risk for death. With these other variables included, the hazard ratio for death with highest S FLC decile was lower, but remained significant; hazard ratio, 2.0 (95%1.88, 2.2). Conclusions: The finding that S FLC above the normal range (i.e. highest decile) is associated with inferior overall survival among individuals above the age of 50, excluding patients with known MGUS or LC-MGUS, is important and merits further investigation. Although there is an association between S FLC, renal function, gender, and age, excess risk of death still exists after adjusting for these risk factors on multivariate analysis. The mechanism by which S FLC predicts for outcomes is uncertain, but one could postulate that conditions resulting in overactivation of the immune system contributes to excess risk of death. Whether the S FLC adds above and beyond other conventional inflammatory markers like ESR or CRP cannot be determined by the present study, but is worthy of further investigation. Disclosures: Dispenzieri: Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Binding Site: Honoraria. Off Label Use: No FDA approved indication. Kumar:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Genzyme: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cephalon: Research Funding. Mead:Binding Site: Employment. Bradwell:Binding Site: Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties.
Bendamustine and Rituximab Versus Dexamethasone, Rituximab and Cyclophosphamide in Patients with Waldenstrom Macroglobulinemia (WM)

Blood | October 12, 2019 | Volume: 128 | Issue: 22 | Pages: 2968-2968

10.1182/blood.v128.22.2968.2968

Abstract Background Bendamustine/rituximab (BR) and dexamethasone/rituximab/cyclophosphamide (DRC) combination therapy are acceptable options for the treatment of WM, both in the frontline or salvage setting. Prospective data, however, are only available in treatment-naïve (TN) WM patients, and no direct comparison between BR and DRC has been reported. We compared outcomes of BR and DRC in relapsed/refractory (R/R) and TN WM patients seen at a single institution. Methods Records of WM patients seen consecutively at Mayo Clinic from 01/2007 to 12/2014 were reviewed. The MYD88L265P status, as assessed by AS-PCR, was recorded when available. The data obtained from symptomatic patients treated with DRC or BR were analyzed. The time-to-event analyses were performed from DRC or BR therapy using the Kaplan-Meier method. We used the Consensus criteria (6th International Workshop) for response assessment. Results Of 160 WM patients, 60 patients received BR (73% in R/R setting) and 100 patients received DRC (50% in R/R setting). In the R/R population, BR was the 2nd line (range 2-11) therapy in 47% of patients, while DRC was 2nd line (range 2-8) in 58% of patients. Rituximab monotherapy was the only prior line of therapy in 8 (20%) patients in the BR group and 20 (40%) in the DRC group (p=0.66). Baseline characteristics were similar in patients treated with BR or DRC (Table 1). Six patients received both BR and DRC during their disease course and overlapped between the 2 cohorts. Among the previous untreated patients, the median IgM levels decreased from 3,785 mg/dL to 724 mg/dL (p=0.0001) at best response with BR, while it decreased from 4,130 mg/dL to 1,250 mg/dL (p=0.001) with DRC. The median time to best response was 6.1 (1-25) months in the BR group and 11 (0.5-47) months in the DRC group (p=0.13). For patients treated with BR, the overall response rate (ORR) was 93% [VGPR 29% (n=4), PR 57% (n=8), MR 7% (n=1)]. One patient (7%) had progressive disease. For patients treated with DRC, ORR was 96% [VGPR 17% (n=8), PR 70% (n=32), MR 9% (n=4)]. One patient (4%) achieved SD. Median follow up in the BR and DRC groups were similar (30 months). The 2-year progression-free survival (PFS) was 88% and 61% in the BR and DRC groups, respectively (p=0.08). The 2-year time-to-next therapy (TTNT) was 88% and 76% in the BR and DRC groups, respectively (p=0.35). Median PFS, TTNT and disease specific survival (DSS) were not reached with either regimen. In the R/R setting, the median IgM levels decreased from 3,880 mg/dL to 659 mg/dL (p=0.0001) at best response with BR, and from 3,870 mg/dL to 1,846 mg/dL (p=0.001) with DRC. The median time to best response was similar [7 (1-39) months with BR and 7 (0.5-28) months with DRC (p=0.77)]. For patients treated with BR, ORR was 95% [CR 3% (n=1), VGPR 38% (n=14), PR 41% (n=15), MR 13% (n=5)]. Two patients (5%) had progressive disease. With DRC, the ORR was 87% [VGPR 4% (n=2), PR 64% (n=30), MR 19% (n=9)]. Four patients (9%) achieved SD and 2 patients (4%) had progressive disease. Median follow up from BR was 32 months and 51 months from DRC (p=0.24). The 2-year PFS was 66% and 53% in the BR and DRC groups, respectively (p=0.08). The 2-year TTNT was 75% and 68% in the BR and DRC groups, respectively (p=0.24). The median DSS in the BR group was 69 months (95% CI: 65-69) and NR (95% CI: NR-NR) in the DRC group (p=0.57). The proportion of patients with R/R disease was significantly higher in the BR cohort (Table 1). In a bivariate analysis of the entire cohort for PFS, incorporating the setting (TN vs. RR) and the regimen involved (BR vs. DRC), the latter emerged as a significant factor (hazard ratio 0.52, p=0.019) in favor of BR. Time-to-event outcomes and response rates were similar in the MYD88L265P and MYD88WT patients. Grade ≥ 3 adverse events were neutropenia (12%), infections (7%) and nausea/vomiting (2%) with BR, and neutropenia (20%), thrombocytopenia (7%) and infections (3%) with DRC. Conclusions Although both DRC and BR regimens show activity and comparable toxicities, BR regimen shows a trend for superior PFS in WM patients, both in the TN and R/R setting. No difference was seen in TTNT. MYD88 L265P mutation status does not appear to impact activity of BR or DRC. Randomized controlled trial(s) are needed to confirm our findings. Disclosures Ailawadhi: Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Amgen Inc: Consultancy; Takeda Oncology: Consultancy. Ansell:BMS, Seattle Genetics, Merck, Celldex and Affimed: Research Funding. Reeder:Millennium: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Dispenzieri:Jannsen: Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; pfizer: Research Funding; Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Research Funding; Alnylam: Research Funding; GSK: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kumar:Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Array BioPharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy; Kesios: Consultancy; Glycomimetics: Consultancy; Skyline: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Noxxon Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding. Kapoor:Celgene: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding.
Necrobiotic Xanthogranuloma (NXG) Associated with Monoclonal Gammopathies (MG): Clinical Features and Treatment Outcomes

Blood | October 12, 2019 | Volume: 126 | Issue: 23 | Pages: 1830-1830

10.1182/blood.v126.23.1830.1830

Abstract BACKGROUND: Necrobiotic Xanthogranuloma (NXG) is a rare chronic granulomatous disorder of the skin associated with monoclonal gammopathies (MG). Due to its rarity, data on response to various therapies are largely limited to single case reports or small case series. Hence, we described the clinical features in patients with NXG and MG as well as their subsequent disease course and response to treatment. METHODS: This was a retrospective study evaluating 35 patients with NXG and coexisting MG from 1994-2015 who were evaluated in the Hematology Outpatient Clinic at the Mayo Clinic, Rochester. All patients had a biopsy proven diagnosis of NXG with the concurrent presence of a serum monoclonal gammopathy. RESULTS: The median age at diagnosis was 56 years (range: 26-88). Most patients had a plasma cell dyscrasia (28 MGUS; 5 Smoldering myeloma) while 2 had chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Themost common monoclonal (M) protein was IgG kappa (60%). The median M-spike was 1.1 g/dL (range: 0-3). The most common site of NXG was periocular (66%). All patients received treatment, with over half requiring >3 different lines of treatment. The treatments were heterogeneous and included excision, intra-lesional injection, radiotherapy as well as systemic treatment. The types of systemic treatment used and clinical response are reported in Table 1. The median follow up was 46 months (range: 4-234) and the median survival was not reached but at the time of analysis 80% were still alive. At last follow-up, 80% of patients had signs of either clinical improvement or stable skin disease. Eight patients (23%) had disease progression to multiple myeloma at a median of 67 months (Range: 21 - 107). CONCLUSIONS: We report the clinical findings and treatment outcomes of one of the largest series of patients with NXG associated with MG. The clinical course is generally indolent but malignant transformation is not uncommon. Cutaneous objective responses can be achieved with various systemic agents used in the treatment of lymphoproliferative malignancies. Table 1. Treatment Types and Clinical Response Rates Treatment No of patientsA Clinical Benefit Rate B Response rateC Chemotherapy - Chlorambucil +/- Steroids - Melphalan/Steroids - Cytoxan/Steroids - Cladribine - Vincristine/doxorubicin/dexamethasone - High dose therapy with stem cell rescue - Fludarabine/cyclophosphamide/rituximab 5 3 4 3 2 3 1 2/5 (40%) 0/3 (0%) 1/4 (25%) 1/3 (33%) 1/2 (50%) 2/3 (67%) 1/1 (100%) 1/5 (20%) 0/3 (0%) 0/4 (0%) 1/3 (33%) 0/2 (0%) 2/3 (67%) 1/1 (100%) Novel agents - Thalidomide +/- Steroids - Lenalidomide +/- Steroids - Bortezomib +/- Steroids - Bortezomib/Lenalidomide/Dexamethasone 11 14 4 1 5/11 (45%) 10/14 (71%) 2/4 (50%) 1/1 (100%) 4/11 (36%) 7/14 (50%) 1/4 (25%) 1/1 (100%) Intravenous immunoglobulin 4 3/4 (75%) 2/4 (50%) Systemic steroids alone 11 4/11 (36%) 4/11 (36%) Rituximab 6 2/6 (33%) 1/6 (17%) AntibioticsD 3 0/3 (0%) 0/3 (0%) ImmunosuppressantsE 6 1/6 (17%) 0/6 (0%) ANo of patients who underwent a particular therapy amongst the 35 patients in the study cohort. BClinical Benefit: Improvement or stable skin disease CResponse: Improvement in skin disease DAntibiotics: Fluoroquinolones, Tetracycline EImmunosuppressants: Cyclosporine, Methotrexate, Plaquenil Disclosures Kumar: Celgene, Millennium, Onyx, Novartis, Janssen, Sanofi: Research Funding; Celgene, Millennium, Onyx, Janssen, Noxxon, Sanofi, BMS, Skyline: Consultancy; Skyline, Noxxon: Honoraria.
Randomized Phase 2 Trial of Two Different Doses of Ixazomib in Patients with Relapsed Multiple Myeloma Not Refractory to Bortezomib

Blood | October 12, 2019 | Volume: 126 | Issue: 23 | Pages: 3050-3050

10.1182/blood.v126.23.3050.3050

Abstract Background: Ixazomib is an experimental, orally bioavailable, proteasome inhibitor that has demonstrated anti-tumor activity in relapsed multiple myeloma (MM). In the dose escalation studies, ixazomib was tolerated up to a dose of 5.5 mg given every week as a single agent, while a dose of 4 mg was utilized in the combination studies with lenalidomide. We undertook this study to examine the efficacy and tolerability of the two doses of ixazomib in combination with dexamethasone in patients with relapsed MM. Patients and methods: This was a randomized phase 2 study of two doses of ixazomib (4mg; Arm A or 5.5 mg; Arm B) given weekly for three weeks with a week off along with weekly dexamethasone (40 mg) in patients with relapsed MM, who are proteasome inhibitor na•ve (including bortezomib) or have received less than 6 cycles of therapy with bortezomib and had a PR or better with no progression at the time of discontinuation. The primary objective was to determine the confirmed overall response rate (>=PR); secondary objectives included progression free and overall survival. A total of 71 patients were accrued from February 2013 to April 2015; one patient was ineligible. Results: Baseline characteristics were similar in the two arms; median age across the study was 70 years (46-84); 53% were male. Median number of prior therapies was 4 (range 2-6); 90% of the patients had prior IMiDs, 70% had prior transplant and 29% had prior bortezomib. At a median follow up of 10 months, 17 (49%) and 19 (54%) of patients had disease progression in arms A and B respectively with 12 (34%) patients in each arm still continuing on treatment. All patients in each arm were evaluable for response; the overall response rates were 31% in arm A (95%CI: 17-49) and 51% (95%CI: 34-69) in Arm B. The depth of response, event free survival and overall survival are outlined in Table 1. Among the patients with no prior bortezomib exposure the response rates were 38% for Arm A and 52% for Arm B. The treatment was well tolerated with 2 patients in each arm discontinuing treatment for adverse events; there were no on study deaths. A grade 3 or higher AE that was at least possibly related to treatment was seen in 21% and 54% in Arms A and B respectively; with 15% and 37% hematologic and 6% and 29% non-hematologic AEs. The most common attributable toxicities encountered included fatigue, thrombocytopenia, diarrhea and nausea with more grade 3 toxicities among Arm B. Peripheral neuropathy, possibly related to ixazomib, was seen in 55% (only grade 1 or 2) in arm A and 43% (2 patients with grade 3) in Arm B. Toxicities led to dose reduction of ixazomib in 17% and 43% of patients in Arm A and B respectively; the median number of cycles administered were 5 (1-24) and 5 (1-22) respectively. Conclusions: Ixazomib in combination with dexamethasone was well tolerated with significant anti-myeloma activity in this group of patients with relapsed MM. Deep responses including stringent CR were observed. The higher dose of ixazomib appears to be associated with a higher response rate but with higher rate of adverse events requiring dose reductions. Table 1. Treatment outcome in all patients Arm B (4 mg) (N=35) Arm C (5.5 mg) (N=35) Response Rate 31% (95%CI: 17-49) 51% (95%CI: 34-69) No. of Responders 11 18 sCR 0 1 CR 1 0 VGPR 7 8 PR 3 9 MR 5 1 Median Overall Survival1 NA NA 6 Months 100% 100% Median Event Free Survival1,2 8.4 mos (95%CI: 4.3-13.2) 8.2 mos (95%CI: 3.8-16.3) %Event Free at 6 Months 60% (95%CI: 45-81) 60% (95%CI: 45-81) Median Duration of Response1 16.7 mos (95%CI: 9.3-22.0) 16.3 mos (95%CI: 7.0-20.1) Median Time to Response 1.1 mos (range: 0.8-3.6) 1.0 mos (range: 0.8-7.5) CI: confidence interval; mo: month; NA: not attained 1Kaplan Meier 2Event-free survival time is defined as the time from registration to the first of disease progression, death due to any cause, or subsequent treatment for multiple myeloma. Disclosures Kumar: Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Skyline: Consultancy, Honoraria; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy.
Outcome with Lenalidomide Plus Dexamethasone Followed by Early Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation In the ECOG E4A03 Randomized Clinical Trial

Blood | October 12, 2019 | Volume: 116 | Issue: 21 | Pages: 38-38

10.1182/blood.v116.21.38.38

Abstract Abstract 38 INTRODUCTION: Lenalidomide and bortezomib have moved into the management of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma leading to dramatically improved outcomes. As a consequence, the role of upfront autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplant (ASCT) has become more controversial. The ECOG E4A03 clinical trial randomized newly diagnosed MM patients to lenalidomide with high-dose dexamethasone (LD) vs lenalidomide with low-dose dexamethasone (Ld) (Rajkumar et al Lancet Oncol 2010; 11: 29–37). Upon completing four cycles of therapy, pts had the option of ASCT or continuing on the assigned therapy. The purpose of this abstract is to determine the outcome of patients on this trial pursuing early ASCT according to various age-groups. MATERIALS and METHODS: This is a post hoc, retrospective analysis of overall survival within age subgroups stratified by early ASCT status. This is a landmark analysis including only pts surviving the first 4 cycles of therapy. RESULTS: In all three age-groups studied, 1, 2, and 3-year survival probability estimates with ASCT were excellent (Tables 1, 2, and 3). For patients under the age of 65 who survived the first 4 cycles of therapy, overall survival at 3-years was 94% with early ASCT, 78% in pts continuing protocol therapy. Although direct comparison with patients not going to early transplant is not possible because the assignment to early ASCT versus no early ASCT was not randomized, survival with ASCT at 3-years appeared higher. While we attempt to correct for age, the differences may be influenced by other factors such as performance status, comorbidities, response to therapy, etc. The presumption that treatment related mortality (TRM) should be more problematic for older pts undergoing ASCT is addressed by looking at the >65 and >70yo cohorts. In the >65 age group, one-year mortality is similar between the early ASCT population and the no early ASCT population. In the >70 age group, no adverse impact of early ASCT was seen in the first year on overall survival but the sample size is extremely small. In all age groups early ASCT seemed to mitigate some of the survival disadvantage associated with randomization to the LD arm. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis shows that the strategy of lenalidomide plus dexamethasone induction followed by early ASCT has a remarkably good outcome in terms of overall survival in all age groups studied and supports the continued role of early consolidative ASCT in newly diagnosed patients. The risk of early mortality was notably low in the first year in all age groups. The risk of early mortality seems to increase at 2 years for the LD pts not choosing early ASCT and at 3 years for the Ld pts not choosing early ASCT. Selection bias makes it difficult to compare results for pts that chose early ASCT directly to the patients who did not receive early ASCT in this trial. As such, these results emphasize the need for randomized trials investigating the timing of ASCT in myeloma in the era of novel therapy. Disclosures: Siegel: Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Off Label Use: Lenalidomide for front line therapy. Abonour:Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Speakers Bureau. Callander:Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Fonseca:Amgen: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genzyme: Consultancy; Onyx: Research Funding; Otsuka: Consultancy; Medtronic: Consultancy. Vesole:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau.
Occurrence and Prognostic Significance of Cytogenetic Evolution in Patients with Multiple Myeloma

Blood | October 12, 2019 | Volume: 126 | Issue: 23 | Pages: 4176-4176

10.1182/blood.v126.23.4176.4176

Abstract Background: Cytogenetic evaluation, especially using fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), at the time of diagnosis is essential for initial risk stratification and the employment of risk-adapted treatment strategies in multiple myeloma. Little is known about the occurrence and prognostic significance of cytogenetic evolution during follow up. Methods: We studied 433 patients who were diagnosed with multiple myeloma between January 2000 and December 2011 and had at least two FISH evaluations at Mayo Clinic Rochester, including the diagnostic specimen. Bone marrow aspirates were evaluated for deletions, monosomies, trisomies, and tetrasomies using chromosome- or centromere-specific FISH probes. IGH rearrangements were evaluated using an IGH break-apart probe and up to five potential partners (FGFR3, CCND1, CCND3, MAF, and MAFB). Cytogenetic evolution was defined as a new deletion, monosomy, trisomy, tetrasomy, or translocation during follow up. Multivariable-adjusted logistic regression models were used to assess the associations between the parameters of interest and the presence of cytogenetic evolution in follow-up specimens. Multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess the effect of cytogenetic evolution on overall survival. All models were adjusted for sex, age, the presence of high-risk FISH abnormalities, and the number of abnormalities at the time of diagnosis. Likelihood ratio tests were used to assess the goodness of fit of nested models. The χ2 or Fisher's exact test was used to assess the distribution of cytogenetic abnormalities in subgroups. Results: The median age at diagnosis was 60 years (32 - 82), 264 (61%) of the patients were male. The median overall survival for the entire cohort was 7.0 years (6.2 - 7.8). At the time of diagnosis, 150 (35%) and 57 (13%) of the 433 patients presented with a hyperdiploid karyotype and cytogenetic high-risk abnormalities, respectively. Independent of each other, the presence of a translocation at the time of diagnosis was associated with decreased odds of cytogenetic evolution during follow up (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.24 - 0.63, p < 0.001) while the presence of at least one trisomy or tetrasomy at the time of diagnosis was associated with increased odds (OR 2.53, 95% CI 1.37 - 4.70, p = 0.003). A greater proportion of patients presenting with a hyperdiploid karyotype experienced cytogenetic evolution during follow up. Those patients more frequently evolved additional trisomies and tetrasomies, while translocations were more common in those presenting with a non-hyperdiploid karyotype (Table 1). The development of additional abnormalities during the three years following diagnosis (compared to no new abnormalities) was associated with increased subsequent mortality in those who survived at least three years (HR 3.22, 95% CI 1.82 - 5.68, p < 0.001). Including the time between first and last cytogenetic evaluation as a covariate did not significantly change the parameter estimates or improve model fit (p = 0.727). Conclusions: Demographics, risk profile, and overall survival of this cohort reflect the fact that patients had to survive long enough to undergo repeated cytogenetic evaluation. Hyperdiploid and non-hyperdiploid genotypes were associated with distinct behavior regarding cytogenetic evolution during follow up. The identification of cytogenetic evolution was an adverse prognostic factor in those who survived at least three years after diagnosis. These findings emphasize the importance of the dynamics of the underlying clonal disease process for accurate risk assessment and suggest that selected subgroups of patients may benefit from risk stratification during follow up. Table 1. Cytogenetic evolution during follow up in 433 patients with multiple myeloma stratified by karyotype at the time of diagnosis Hyperdiploid (n = 150) Non-hyperdiploid (n = 283) p New abnormality 76 (51%) 108 (38%) 0.012 New monosomy 8 (5%) 24 (8%) 0.243 New trisomy 48 (32%) 55 (19%) 0.004 New tetrasomy 37 (25%) 27 (10%) < 0.001 New deletion 17 (11%) 27 (10%) 0.557 New translocation 1 (1%) 11 (4%) 0.065 Most common new abnormality [type (percent of type in each group)] Monosomy mono(13) (75%) mono(13) (62%) Trisomy tri(11) (22%) tri(3) (22%) Tetrasomy tetra(15) (48%) tetra(15) (30%) Deletion del(17p) (79%) del(17p) (63%) Translocation t(11;14) (100%) t(11;14) (36%) Data are given as count (percent) unless denoted otherwise. Disclosures Binder: American Society of Hematology: Research Funding. Kumar:AbbVie: Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Celgene, Millenium, Sanofi, Skyline, BMS, Onyx, Noxxon,: Other: Consultant, no compensation,; Skyline, Noxxon: Honoraria; Millenium/Takeda: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding.