Abstract Abstract 201 Background: Pomalidomide at doses of 2 or 4 mg/d has demonstrated excellent activity in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma (MM). Between November 2007 and March 2012, we opened 6 sequential phase 2 trials and treated 345 patients with relapsed MM with pomalidomide at differing doses with weekly dexamethasone (Pom/dex). Results of 164 of these patients have been previously published. Here we describe long term follow up of these patients as well as results of an additional 181 patients with relapsed MM treated with the Pom/dex regimen. Methods: The six cohorts consisted of: Cohort 1 (N=60): relapsed MM with 1–3 prior regimens, 2 mg dose; Cohort 2 (N=34): lenalidomide (LEN) refractory, 2 mg dose; Cohort 3 (N=35): BZ)/LEN refractory, 2 mg dose; Cohort 4 (N=35): BZ/LEN refractory, 4 mg dose; Cohort 5 (N=60) LEN refractory, 1–3 prior regimens, 4 mg dose; and Cohort 6 (N=120) LEN refractory, 4 mg dose. Pomalidomide was given orally 2 mg daily or 4mg daily on days 1–28(cohorts 1–5) or 1–21 (cohort 6) of a 28-day cycle with oral dexamethasone given 40 mg daily on days 1, 8, 15 and 22. Response was assessed by the International Myeloma Working Group Uniform Response criteria. All patients received aspirin 325 mg daily for deep venous thrombosis (VTE) prophylaxis or full dose anticoagulation. Results: A total of 345 patients were enrolled across all 6 cohorts. One patient was ineligible and excluded from analysis. The median age was 64 years (32–88). The median time since diagnosis was 53 months. The median number of prior therapies was 3 (1–14). 147 (44%) had high-risk molecular markers by mSMART criteria. Prior therapies consisted of thalidomide 52%, lenalidomide 87%, bortezomib 75%, autologous stem cell transplant 70% and allogeneic transplant 3%. The median follow-up is 10.4 months (5.4–34 months). Sixty-seven percent are alive and 32% remain progression free. 46 patients are continuing to receive treatment. The most common toxicities (grade 3 or higher) were neutropenia (31%), anemia (16%), thrombocytopenia (12%), pneumonia (8%) and fatigue (8%). VTE was seen in 10 patients (3%). Outcomes are shown in Table 1. Across all 6 cohorts confirmed responses of partial response (PR) or better were seen in 34%. The response rate in all patients with mSMART high risk status was 30.6%. Responses and duration of response (DOR) in those with high risk molecular markers include: 17p– 19 of 56 (34%) DOR 8.2 months; t(4;14) 6 of 24 (25%) and DOR 4.8 months; t(14;16) 7 of 11(64%) and DOR 9.5 months; deletion 13 by cytogenetics 13 of 37 (35%) with DOR 8.2 months. In a multivariate analysis, only LDH > ULN, number of prior regimens, and prior BZ therapy were predictive of a shorter TTP and factors associated with a poor OS following initiation of pomalidomide therapy included B2M > 5.5, LDH > ULN,number of prior regimens, and prior BZ therapy. Conclusions: Pom/dex is active and well tolerated even in heavily pretreated patients and those with high risk molecular markers. Remissions are durable. Response rates and toxicity are similar between the 2 mg and 4 mg doses. Disclosures: Lacy: Celgene: Research Funding. Stewart:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Reeder:Celgene: Mayo Clinic receives funding from Celgene to support clinical trials Other, Research Funding.
Phase II Trial of Initial Safety and Toxicity Prior to the Phase III Trial of Lenalidomide Versus Observation Alone in Patients with Asymptomatic High-Risk Smoldering Multiple Myeloma (E3A06): A Trial Coordinated by the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group
Abstract Abstract 4079 The treatment and natural history of asymptomatic or smoldering myeloma has been an area of intense preclinical and clinical study. Historical attempts to treat these patients have not demonstrated significant benefit, likely as a consequence of limited therapeutic options as well lack of attention to the vast heterogeneity contained within the diagnosis of smoldering myeloma. More recent risk criteria from both US and Spanish investigators have identified a cohort of smoldering myeloma patients at high risk for progression to myeloma in a short time. Recently the PETHEMA group has conducted a randomized clinical trial testing lenalidomide and dexamethasone vs observation among high risk smoldering patients and has demonstrated a clear benefit in terms of progression free survival and hints towards improvement in overall survival favoring early intervention. To further evaluate the potential benefit of early intervention in a high risk smoldering cohort, the ECOG myeloma group designed a phase II trial testing the safety and efficacy of single agent lenalidomide with the intent of broadening to a randomized phase III trial if toxicity was acceptable. We report here on the safety portion of the phase II trial. The phase II group of patients received lenalidomide at a dose of 25 mg days 1–21 every 28 days to evaluate the early toxicity and tolerance of this dosing. The dose of lenalidomide could be adjusted based on toxicity using a defined dose-modification guideline in the protocol. The primary endpoint for the safety study was the rate of any treatment-related grade 4–5 non-hematologic toxicity plus grade 3 non-hematologic toxicity that affects vital organ function (such as cardiac, hepatic, or thromboembolic events) observed within 6 cycles of treatment. The goal was to enroll 34 patients; if 9 or more patients experience toxicity as defined, then the study would not continue. In terms of eligibility, patients were to be diagnosed with asymptomatic high-risk smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM) within the past 12 months, as confirmed by both of the following: bone marrow plasmacytosis with >= 10% plasma cells or sheets of plasma cells and an abnormal serum free light chain ratio (<0.125 or >8.0) by serum FLC assay. Further, patients must have measurable levels of monoclonal protein (M-protein): >=1g/dL on serum protein electrophoresis or >=200 mg of monoclonal protein on a 24 hour urine protein electrophoresis. Patients must have no lytic lesions on skeletal surveys and no hypercalcemia. Among the 36 patients enrolled in the phase II study, 56% were female, and 44% were 65 years and older. Treatment and toxicity data at a minimum through cycle 6 is complete as of August 2, 2102. The last patient enrolled completed cycle 6 treatment on June 7, 2012. The median treatment duration of the entire cohort is 9 cycles (range 1–18 cycles), with 86% of patients completing at least 6 cycles of treatment. Ten patients are off treatment for the following reasons: disease progression (n=1), AE/complication (n=5), death (n=1) and patient withdrawal/refusal (n=3); 5 of the 10 patients ended treatment before completing 6 cycles. Of 36 patients assessed for toxicity, 8 patients [22.2%, 90% CI: (11.6%-36.5%)] experienced worst grade treatment-related non-hematologic toxicity of grade 3 or higher. Separately, 6 patients experienced unrelated non-hematologic toxicity of grade 3 or higher. Three patients [8.3%, 90% CI: (2.3%-20.2%)] experienced a serious adverse event as defined for the purposes of the phase II toxicity analysis (treatment-related grade 4–5 non-hematologic toxicity or grade 3 non-hematologic toxicity that affects vital organ function (such as cardiac, hepatic, or thromboembolic events). Based upon this analysis of the study, the phase II portion of the trial met the prespecified safety benchmark established to allow for phase III expansion, and accrual to the phase III portion of this study will begin. Efficacy data will be presented at the time of presentation. Disclosures: Lonial: Novartis: Consultancy; Millennium: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Celgene Corp: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy. Off Label Use: Lenalidomide is not approved for treatment of smoldering MM. Fonseca:Medtronic: Consultancy; Otsuka: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Genzyme: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Lilly: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy; Binding site: Consultancy; Millenium: Consultancy; AMGEN: Consultancy; Celgene : Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding; prognostication of MM based on genetic categorization of the disease: Prognostication of MM based on genetic categorization of the disease, Prognostication of MM based on genetic categorization of the disease Patents & Royalties. Dhodapkar:Celgene: Research Funding; KHK: Research Funding.
Development of Myelodysplastic Syndrome and Acute Leukemias in Patients with Monoclonal Gammopathy of Undetermined Significance (MGUS): A Population-Based Study of 17,315 Patients
Abstract Abstract 934 Background: An increased risk of developing myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) and acute myeloid leukemia (AML) has been observed for over 40 years in patients with multiple myeloma (MM). While treatment for MM has been implicated as the cause of excess MDS/AML, the risk may also be related to the underlying plasma cell proliferative disease process or an inherent predisposition to other hematologic malignancies in patients with plasma cell disorders. A recent study found an increased risk of AML/MDS for patients with monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) where there is no confounding chemotherapy effect to consider (Mailankody S, Blood2011; 118:4086-92). However, that report is subject to detection bias (i.e. association is related to reason for electrophoretic testing rather than the result of the test) since the population was not uniformly screened for MGUS. The purpose of this study was to determine if there was an increased risk of AML/MDS and other acute leukemias in persons with MGUS in a large population-based cohort systematically screened for the presence or absence of MGUS. Methods: The study utilized the population-based cohort established to estimate the prevalence of MGUS in the general population (N Engl J Med 2006; 354:1362-9). Serum samples were collected from 21,463 of the 28,038 residents of Olmsted County, Minnesota age 50 years or older as of 1/1/1995. Serum electrophoresis and immunofixation were used to determine MGUS status by testing all serum samples for the presence of a monoclonal protein. MGUS status was then linked to diagnoses entered in the Mayo Clinic Medical Index from 1/1/1975 to last follow up or 5/31/2006. For any patient in whom the diagnosis of AML/MDS or acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) was in doubt, the diagnosis was verified by medical record review. For MGUS patients who progressed to MM or related disorder, only diagnosis of leukemia made prior to progression was considered. Results: 17,315 patients who consented to serum analysis were included in this study; blinded patients included in the original cohort could not be evaluated. The final study cohort represents 435,021 person-years of follow-up. Mean follow up for patients with MGUS (n=605) was 24.64 years (range 0.11–30.57); controls (n=16,710) had a mean follow up of 25.14 years (range 0.01–31.40). MGUS patients had a significantly higher risk of developing acute leukemia (AML/ALL) or MDS compared to controls, risk ratio 2.20 (95% CI 1.23–3.92), p=0.008 (see Table). There was a higher risk of developing AML/MDS compared to controls, risk ratio 1.80 (95% CI .09-3.59), p=0.09. The risk of developing MDS was statistically significant (RR=2.10, p=0.049). MGUS patients had a 4.18-fold increased risk of developing ALL (p=0.010) and a 2.35-fold increased risk of developing any acute leukemia (p=0.050) over the general population. In subset analysis, patients with IgA/IgG MGUS had a 1.99-fold increased risk of developing MDS (p=0.108), while patients with an IgM M spike had a 2.81-fold increased risk of developing MDS over controls (p=0.152). Though MDS was observed in patients with IgA, IgG, and IgM M-spikes, AML was only observed only in patients with IgA or IgG isotypes (n=2/484). Conclusion: Our population-based study suggests MGUS is associated with a 1.8-fold increased risk of developing MDS/AML over the general population. The risk of AML/MDS is more modest than the 8-fold increased risk suggested in a previous report (Mailankody S, Blood2011; 118:4086-92). The smaller risk ratios in our study are likely related to our population-based cohort design that uniformly screened for the presence or absence of MGUS, and thereby minimized any amplification of risk that can occur in the presence of ascertainment bias. We also found a significant increase in the risk of ALL in persons with MGUS that requires further study. Our study supports the hypothesis that there may be an inherent increased risk of acute leukemia and MDS in patients with plasma cell disorders that is independent of myeloma therapy. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.
Continued Improvement in Survival in Multiple Myeloma and the Impact of Novel Agents
Abstract Abstract 3972 Background: The treatment paradigm for myeloma has undergone a dramatic shift in the past decade with the introduction of the novel agents and their application at every stage of the treatment. We and others had previously shown that survival of patients with myeloma had improved in the earlier half of the last decade and attributed this to a combination of novel therapies as well as increased use of stem cell transplant. It is not clear if this momentum in improving survival has been maintained. We examined the survival trends of patients with newly diagnosed myeloma seen within the past decade to examine this question. Patients and Methods: We studied 1056 patients with newly diagnosed myeloma, who were seen at Mayo Clinic between January 1, 2001 and December 31, 2010; who were seen within 30 days of their diagnosis. For examination of the time trends, we grouped the time interval into two five year periods, 2001–2005 and 2006–2010. Survival was estimated using Kaplan Meier method and survival curves were compared by log rank test. Impact of various prognostic factors was evaluated using Cox proportional hazards test. Results: The median age at diagnosis was 65 (range; 22–92), and 59% were male. The median estimated follow up for the entire cohort was 4.6 years (95% CI; 4.4, 4.9) and 57% of the patients were alive at last follow up. The median overall survival (OS) for the entire cohort was 5.4 years (95% CI; 5, 6.3). The overall survival for patients in the 2001–2005 group was 4.6 years compared with not reached for the 2006–2010 cohort (P< 0.001). The five-year estimated OS was 48% for the earlier group compared with 66% for the latter group. The estimated 1-year survival was 90% for the recent cohort compared with 83% for the earlier cohort, suggesting improvements in the early mortality. Interestingly, the improvement was predominantly seen in the older age group (>65 years; 49%). The 5-year survival of the older patients improved significantly from 31% (2001–2005) to 56% (2006–2010) (P<0.001). In contrast, among younger patients (≤65 years of age), the 5-year survival improved only marginally from 63% (2001–2005) to 73% (2006–2010) (P=NS). One or more novel agents (Lenalidomide, thalidomide or bortezomib) were used as part of initial therapy in 631 (62% of 1021 in whom treatment data was available). The OS among of this group was 7.3 years (95% CI; 5.9, NR) compared with 3.8 years (95% CI; 3.1, 4.6). In a multivariate model that included both use of novel agent and the year group, only the novel agent use was associated with improved survival suggesting that the improvement in the survival is related to the increased use of novel agents in the initial therapy. No significant differences were observed between the groups in terms of conventional prognostic factors. Conclusions: The current results confirm continued improvement in the overall survival of patients, even within the last 10 year period, and highlight the impact of initial therapy with novel agents. Most importantly, we demonstrate that the improved survival has primarily benefited older patients. Our study highlights that urgent need for additional new agents to provide further survival improvement for younger patients, and in order achieve a cure for this disease. Disclosures: Kumar: Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Cephalon: Research Funding; Genzyme: Research Funding. Dispenzieri:Celgene: Research Funding; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding; Janssen Research & Development: Research Funding. Gertz:Binding Site: Honoraria.
Differences in the Distribution of Cytogenetic Subtypes Between Multiple Myeloma Patients with and without a History of Familial MGUS and Multiple Myeloma
Abstract Abstract 4000 Background: We have previously reported that there is an increased risk of monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) in first-degree relatives of patients with multiple myeloma (Vachon CM. Blood 2009 114: 785–790). There are several cytogenetic subtypes of myeloma, and there are no data on whether certain cytogenetic subtypes of myeloma are more frequently associated with familial MGUS. Methods: We studied patients with myeloma who participated in the familial MGUS study in whom presence or absence of MGUS in the first-degree relatives had been ascertained (Vachon CM. Blood 2009 114: 785–790). Probands were seen at the Mayo Clinic Hematology/Oncology practice (Rochester, MN, USA) between February 2006 and September 2007. Cytogenetic data was acquired via electronic medical record abstraction of fluorescence in-situ hybridization (FISH) lab reports, and used to categorize patients into one of nine cytogenetic subgroups: trisomy(ies), t(6;14), t(11;14), t(4;14), t(14;16), t(14;20), Mixed (those with trisomy(ies) and an IgH translocation), other cytogenetic abnormalities (in the absence of trisomy(ies) or IgH translocation), and normal (Kumar S. Blood 2012;119:2100–2105). We examined whether a difference in the distribution of the six primary cytogenetic categories of myeloma existed between probands with a family history of MGUS and/or myeloma and those without. Results and Conclusions: Of the 248 patients invited to participate, FISH data (with sufficient plasma cells) was available on 119 participants to establish the primary molecular cytogenetic classification of myeloma. All had available information regarding family history of MGUS and multiple myeloma. 27 had an affected first-degree relative with MGUS, and 92 did not. Distributions of cytogenetic subtypes in the two groups are shown in Table 1. IgH translocated MM was more common in myeloma patients who lacked an affected first-degree relative compared to those with familial MGUS (19% vs 30%, P=0.32) Interestingly, the t(11;14) subtype was more common in myeloma patients without familial MGUS compared to those with an first-degree relative with MGUS (19.6% vs 7.4%, P=0.24). The differences in Table 1 did not reach statistical significance, possibly due to the small numbers of individuals with a family history in this sample. However, the distribution (Table 1) suggests that the distribution of cytogenetic subtypes may be different in myeloma that is not associated with familial MGUS compared with myeloma in which a familial tendency is detected. IgH translocated MM appears to have a lower risk of familial tendency. Further investigation is needed to estimate the risk of familial MGUS within each cytogenetic subtype. Disclosures: Kumar: Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria; Millennium: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Genzyme: Research Funding.
Treatment Trade-Offs in Myeloma: a Survey of Consecutive Patients
Abstract Abstract 2059 Introduction: Two randomized trials have demonstrated a benefit in progression free survival (PFS) of 18–20 mofor maintenance treatment with lenalidomide after auto-PBSCT for multiple myeloma (MM). Although results on survival benefit are conflicting and quality of life (QOL) data is lacking, some have begun to recommend maintenance. No study has evaluated patient perceptions of maintenance. We conducted a systematic survey of MM patients (pts) regarding what constitutes a meaningful benefit that would make burdens of maintenance (toxicity and cost) acceptable. Methods: We mailed a brief self-administered survey in 3 waves to 1159 consecutive living pts evaluated at Mayo Clinic. The survey provided background on the standard of care for MM in transplant eligible pts and data on maintenance. Pts were asked to estimate the magnitude of OS benefit that would be acceptable for varying degrees of toxicity and cost. Results: Of the 1159 surveys sent, 886 pts (83.2%) responded, including 150 notifying us of a decision not to participate. 736 pts returned a completed survey (66% raw response rate). (56%) male, 407 (55%) had undergone auto-PBSCT, 467 (63%) had discussed maintenance with a physician, and 9 (1%) pts had received no treatment. 10% of pts had MM for 3–12 mo, 14% for 1–2 yr, 13% for 2–3 yr, 20% for 3–5 yr, 44% for 5 yr or more. Pt age: 4% 18–49 yr, 24% 50–59 yr, 40% 60–69 yr, 27% 70–79 yr, and 6% >80 yrs. The most worrisome potential toxicity was identified as peripheral neuropathy by 27% of pts, cytopenias by 24%, LE DVT 20%, fatigue 15%, nausea 8%, diarrhea/constipation 7%. In response to a question about whether they would choose maintenance if there was a PFS benefit but no improvement in OS, 92% would opt for maintenance if it were known to cause mild toxicity, while 77% would opt for maintenance despite moderate toxicity. Subsequent questions included cost and toxicity considerations and required pts to identify minimum acceptable duration of OS benefit to estimate more precisely a meaningful clinical benefit. If treatment was free, had no toxicity, and the OS benefit was 1 yr or less, 49% would choose maintenance (see Figure). In the same scenario, if toxicities were mild, the proportion of pts who choose maintenance was similar (46%). If pts experienced moderate toxicity, 42% choose maintenance. With rising financial burden (out-of-pocket) and toxicity, the proportion of pts who choose maintenance declined (see Table). For example, if the cost was $25/mo, mild toxicity experienced, and the OS benefit was one year or less, 46% would choose maintenance, while 39% of pts would choose maintenance if it cost $250/month and there was moderate toxicity. If maintenance cost $10,000/mo and was associated with mild or moderate toxicity, 18% and 17% of pts would choose treatment, respectively. Conclusions: For the first time, we have described the broad range of patient perspectives regarding trade-offs in the treatment of MM with maintenance therapy. We found that willingness to be treated with maintenance declined when actual benefits were provided in concrete numeric terms compared with a general statement of PFS benefit. The discrepancy between the 92% of pts choosing to undergo maintenance if free and mild toxicity when there is a PFS benefit but no OS benefit, compared to 49% of pts choosing maintenance if free, mild toxicity, and associated with an OS benefit of 1 yror less; suggests pts have difficulty understanding the concept of PFS. We also found that the magnitude of benefit required to consider maintenance was affected by cost and toxicity. In our experience, pts typically incur a cost of approximately $25/mo and experience mild toxicity. In this study, nearly half (46%) of such pts would opt for maintenance if the OS benefit was 1 year or less while only 33% of pts would opt for maintenance if the OS benefit was 6 months or less. Our data implies that good care in MM requires detailed conversations about each and every patient's priorities and expectations prior to making recommendations for or against such treatments. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.
Idiopathic Bence Jones Proteinuria (Smoldering Monoclonal Light-Chain Proteinuria): Clinical Course and Prognosis
Abstract Abstract 1861 Idiopathic Bence Jones Proteinuria (Smoldering Monoclonal Light-Chain Proteinuria), first reported in 1982, is an asymptomatic plasma cell proliferative disorder associated with an elevated risk of progression to symptomatic MM or amyloidosis (AL). We defined it as the presence of a monoclonal light chain in the urine ≥200 mg/24h, absence of an intact immunoglobulin M protein (IGH expression) in the serum and no evidence of MM, AL or other related plasma cell proliferative disorders. Following approval by our Institutional Review Board, we searched a computerized database and reviewed the records of all patients seen at Mayo Clinic within 30 days of the recognition of a monoclonal light chain (Bence Jones protein) in the urine from January 1, 1960 through June 30, 2004. Patients with end-organ damage at diagnosis resulting from the plasma cell proliferative disorder (including MM or AL), or who had received chemotherapy or had a nephrotic syndrome were excluded. Follow-up included review of each patient's medical record at Mayo Clinic, as well as review of death certificates for patients who died. Patients were sent letters of inquiry if they had not visited Mayo Clinic in the preceding year. The risks of progression to MM and AL were compared to those expected on the basis of Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) rates for MM in Iowa and the incidence of AL in Olmsted County, Minnesota. One-hundred and one patients fulfilled the criteria for diagnosis during the 44-year period (1960–2004). The median age at diagnosis was 67 years (range 18–90 years), and only 2% were < 40 years old. Seventy-three percent were male. The urine M protein ranged from 200 mg/24h to 4.7 g/24h (median value, 500 mg/24h); 29% had > 1 g/24h. Kappa light chain accounted for 50% while the remaining 50% were lambda. Fifty-seven (56%) had a monoclonal light chain in the serum on immunofixation. Concentrations of uninvolved (normal, polyclonal or background) immunoglobulins were reduced in 62%. Eighty-eight percent of patients died during follow-up. During 900 person years of follow-up, 29 patients developed symptomatic MM (relative risk, 140.3; 95% CI, 93.9–201.5) and an additional 9 patients developed AL (relative risk, 104.4; 95% CI, 47.8–198.4). Four patients had both multiple myeloma and AL amyloidosis. The cumulative probability of progression to active MM or AL was 19% at 5 years, 31% at 10 years and 42% at 15 years. The factors associated with progression to MM or AL included size of urine M protein, percentage of bone marrow plasma cells, serum free light chain ratio < 1/100 or > 100, serum creatinine and reduction of all 3 uninvolved immunoglobulins. We conclude that patients with Idiopathic Bence Jones Proteinuria (Smoldering Monoclonal Light-Chain Proteinuria) are at risk for the development of MM or AL and must be followed indefinitely. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.
Impact of FISH and Cytogenetics On Overall and Event Free Survival in Myeloma: An IMWG Analysis of 9,897 Patients.
Abstract Abstract 743 Background There has been considerable recent focus upon the molecular classification of myeloma. However, the prognostic impact of molecular changes has mostly been assessed from small and/or incomplete studies from single institutions or groups. There has been no large scale analysis of molecular features linked to ISS stage. Methods In order to clarify the overall impact of molecular changes we undertook a collective analysis of 9,897 patients through the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG). Within this population 2,295 patients had presence of cytogenetic abnormalities (Any CA); 1,713 hypodiploidy; 1,673 hyperdiploidy; 2,309 cytogenetic deletion 13; 3,226 deletion 13 by FISH; 1,573 FISH t(4;14); 1,486 FISH del p17; 1, 683 FISH t(11:14); and 366 FISH t(4;16). Enrolled patients had complete clinical and treatment details available including baseline standard prognostic factors, ISS stage, as well as both progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) information. Data came from 14 sites: 3 from the US and the remainder from Europe, Asia, and Latin America as for the ISS staging system analyses. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. Results Each of the known adverse molecular features had a negative impact upon both PFS and OS (p=002 - <0.0001). Among the deleterious FISH abnormalities the t(4;14) abnormality was the most highly correlated with poorer outcomes by PFS: 4 year estimate: 32% vs. 60% (p<0.0001). The t(4;14) abnormality combined with ISS Stage also significantly enhanced predictive capability: ISS Stage I without t(4;14) OS 81% @ 4 years; ISS Stage III with t(4;14) OS 22% @ 4 years (P<0.0001) [Figure 1]. The best outcomes were for ISS Stage I in the presence of t(11;14): OS 89% @ 4 years. Absence of any one adverse feature correlated with 80-81% OS @ 4 years for Stage I. Presence of any one adverse feature had a more variable impact and correlated with 22%-40% OS at 4 years for Stage III. In univariate correlations the most predictive correlations with OS were presence of Any CA, t(4;14), 17p-, hypodiploidy, cytogenetic 13q- with R2 values of 6.9%, 4.5%, 4.1% and 3.8% respectively. In multivariate analyses, ISS stage provided the best predictions: R2 values = 13.3%. The added contributions from molecular features were: t(4;14) 3.8%; cytogenetic 13q- 2.9%; Any CA 2.3%; and 17p- 1.0%. The maximum total R2 for OS was 22%. Conclusions This large multicenter analysis confirms the correlations between abnormal molecular findings and outcomes. Combinations with ISS Stage provide the best predictive capability. Presence of Any CA, t(4;14), 17p-, hypodiploidy and cytogenetic 13q- contribute to poorer outcomes by ISS stage. The presence of hyperdiploidy and/or t(11;14) contribute to better outcomes. There is thus validation of prior molecular studies related to prognosis utilizing this large IMWG database. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.
Novel Agents for Initial Therapy of Multiple Myeloma: Comparable Results with Continued Initial Therapy and Delayed Transplantation at Relapse Versus Early Transplantation.
Abstract Abstract 956 Background: Autologous SCT has been an integral part of myeloma therapy since randomized trials demonstrated improved survival for SCT compared to conventional therapy. However, the conventional treatment of MM has changed with the introduction of novel therapies such as IMiDs and there is an increasing trend towards delaying SCT. While trials in the pre-novel agent area have shown equivalent outcomes with early or delayed SCT, it is not clear if this holds true with novel agent induction. Patients and methods: We reviewed the outcome of patients seen at Mayo Clinic between 2001 and 2008, who received initial therapy with thalidomide-dexamethasone (TD) or lenalidomide-dexamethasone (LD) (n=410). All patients in whom a stem cell harvest was attempted (started on growth factor irrespective of collection success; n=292, 71%) were included as a method to identify transplant eligible patients. Patients undergoing SCT within 12 months of diagnosis and in whom the SCT was performed within 2 months of stem cell harvest were considered in the early SCT group vs. delayed SCT for the remaining patients irrespective of whether an SCT was actually done (immediate vs. collect and store approach). Variables were compared between the groups using a chi-square or t-test as appropriate. Survival curves were generated using Kaplan Meier method and compared using log rank test. Results: Among the 292 transplant eligible patients, 125 (43%) received TD and 167 (57%) received LD as initial therapy. An early SCT approach was undertaken in 174 patients 60%, with the remaining 118 in the delayed group, 46 of whom have been transplanted to date. The median estimated follow up for the entire group was 54 months from diagnosis, 52 and 61 months respectively for the early and delayed groups. The median estimated time to SCT was 5.3 months among the early group compared to 39 months in the delayed group COMMENTS/* MERGEFORMAT . 83 (66%) patients receiving TD had an early SCT compared to 91 (55%) patients in the LD group; p =0.04. At baseline, the groups were comparable for age and gender. The median overall survival from diagnosis was 86 months for the early SCT compared to NR for the late SCT; P=0.3. The median OS was similar between the Early and Delayed group in the TD group (86 vs. 64 months respectively) as well as in the LD group (NR for either group; 82% vs. 86% at 4 years respectively). Conclusion: In this group of newly diagnosed patients treated with thalidomide or lenalidomide as initial therapy, an approach of continued initial therapy and delayed transplant at the time of first relapse appears comparable to upfront transplant. This is consistent with the findings of randomized trials in the setting of alkylator based initial therapies. The timing of transplant in the era of novel agents remains the top question on the mind of physicians and patients, and this is the first study to examine this very important question. The rationale governing the decision to go forward with an early SCT or delayed transplant is difficult to ascertain for any particular patient in this retrospective study. These findings should be confirmed in prospective randomized trials. Disclosures: Kumar: celgene: Research Funding; millenium: Research Funding. Gertz:celgene: Honoraria; millenium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.
Evidence for Cytogenetic and Fluorescence in Situ Hybridization (FISH) Risk Stratification of Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma in the Era of Novel Therapies.
Abstract Abstract 1802 Poster Board I-828 Background Heterogeneity in multiple myeloma (MM) leads to disparate outcomes with a wide variation in overall survival (OS). Based upon the evidence predominantly gathered from newly diagnosed patients treated with standard chemotherapy and/or transplantation, the current Mayo (mSMART) prognostic model uses a combination of metaphase cytogenetics, fluorescence in-situ hybridization (FISH) and plasma cell labeling index (PCLI) for risk-stratification at diagnosis of MM. The objective of our study was to evaluate the significance of this stratification model in the era of novel therapies, and to assess the independent prognostic value of each of the components in the model. Methods Data were abstracted from a cohort of 1556 consecutive patients with MM who presented to our institution between January 1999 and March 2009 within ninety days of diagnosis of MM A total of three hundred and eighty six patients had been evaluated with conventional cytogenetics near diagnosis in addition to interphase FISH. Out of this cohort, three hundred and sixty six patients had availability of all the three tests, including the slide-based PCLI. High-risk MM was defined as presence of any one or more of the following: cytogenetics: hypodiploidy, monosomy of chromosome 13 or deletion 13q ; FISH: deletion of p53 (locus 17p13) or immunoglobulin heavy chain (IgH) translocations, t(4;14) (p16.3;q32) or t(14;16)(q32;q23); PCLI ≥3%. Survival estimates were created using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared by log-rank tests. The impact of each of the three tests was assessed by a multivariate (MV) analysis using Cox proportional hazards model. Results The median OS of the cohort of 366 patients was 65 months from presentation. One hundred and twelve (31%) patients were deemed high risk by any one or more of the three tests: Metaphase cytogenetics, FISH or PCLI (current mSMART definition of high-risk MM). The median OS of high risk patients was 52 months versus 71 months for standard-risk (P=0.007). We then studied the prognostic value of the three tests separately. Patients classified as high risk by FISH had a median OS of 35 months versus 65 months for the standard risk, HR= 2.3, P<0.001. Similarly, cytogenetics alone was also able to classify patients into high and standard risk with a comparable HR of 2.1 (P=0.008, median survival 37 vs. 64 months). In contrast, PCLI did not have a significant prognostic value (HR =1.41, P=0.32). This was confirmed on multivariate analysis in a model that included all 3 tests. FISH (HR=2.36, P=0.001) and cytogenetics (HR=1.99; P=0.017) emerged as independent determinants of prognosis in the multivariable analysis, while PCLI (HR=1.03, P=0.93) did not provide additional prognostic value. We then examined whether the prognostic value of FISH contributed additionally in patients classified into high and standard risk by conventional cytogenetics, and vice versa. Those classified as high risk by cytogenetics (n=44, 11 %), were further categorized into 2 groups by additional prognostic information obtained by FISH (median survival 18 vs. 52 months; P=0.005). Similarly, those classified as standard risk by cytogenetics (n=342, 89 %), were further categorized into 2 groups (median survival 52 vs. 71 months; P=0.017) by additional FISH-based stratification. Similarly, high-risk patients defined by FISH (n=65, 17 %) were further classified into 2 groups with significant difference in median OS (18 vs. 52 months, P=0.004), based on the presence or absence of high-risk features on cytogenetics. In contrast, no additional prognostic information was gained by cytogenetics in patients who were stratified as standard risk by FISH alone (n=321, 83%). Conclusion Our study validates high risk features defined by FISH and conventional cytogenetics in the mSMART risk stratification model among patients treated after the introduction of novel therapies. Either test identifies a high risk cohort with a hazard ratio of approximately 2 (median survival ∼37 versus ∼65 months). In patients known to have high risk disease by one of the two tests, knowledge of the other appears to add additional prognostic value. Disclosures Fonseca: Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Otsuka, Genzyme and Medtronic: Consultancy. Gertz:celgene, millennium: Honoraria. Dispenzieri:celgene: Research Funding. Kumar:celgene, genzyme, millennium, novartis, bayer: Research Funding; genzyme: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.