Citations

Abstract Background Deafness and hearing loss are common conditions that can be seen independently or as part of a syndrome and are often mediated by genetic causes. We sought to develop and validate a hereditary hearing loss panel (HHLP) to detect single nucleotide variants (SNVs), insertions and deletions (indels), and copy number variants (CNVs) in 166 genes related to nonsyndromic and syndromic hearing loss. Methods We developed a custom-capture next-generation sequencing (NGS) reagent to detect all coding regions, ±10 flanking bp, for the 166 genes related to nonsyndromic and syndromic hearing loss. Our validation consisted of testing 52 samples to establish accuracy, reproducibility, and analytical sensitivity. In addition to NGS, supplementary methods, including multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification, long-range PCR, and Sanger sequencing, were used to ensure coverage of regions that had high complexity or homology. Results We observed 100% positive and negative percentage agreement for detection of SNVs (n = 362), small indels (1–22 bp, n = 25), and CNVs (gains, n = 8; losses, n = 17). Finally, we showed that this assay was able to detect variants with a variant allele frequency ≥20% for SNVs and indels and ≥30% to 35% for CNVs. Conclusions We validated an HHLP that detects SNVs, indels, and CNVs in 166 genes related to syndromic and nonsyndromic hearing loss. The results of this assay can be utilized to confirm a diagnosis of hearing loss and related syndromic disorders associated with known causal genes.

ABSTRACT Inactivating mutations of the ENPP1 gene are associated with generalized arterial calcification of infancy (GACI) and less often autosomal-recessive hypophosphatemic rickets type 2 (ARHR2). We aimed to investigate the spectrum of phenotypes in a family with monoallelic and biallelic mutations of ENPP1 after identification through whole exome sequencing of a 54-year-old female with biallelic mutation of ENPP1, c.323G > T; p.Cys108Phe and c.1441C > T; p.Arg481Trp. Including the proband, 2 subjects had biallelic mutations, 5 had monoallelic mutations, and 2 had no mutation of ENPP1. The maternal mutation, a known pathogenic variant associated with GACI, was found in 3 subjects with monoallelic mutations, while the paternal mutation, which was not previously reported, was present in 2 subjects with monoallelic mutations. Both subjects with biallelic mutations had bowing of bilateral femurs, periarticular mineral deposition, normocalcemic primary hyperparathyroidism with multigland parathyroidectomy, increased carotid intima-media thickness, and enthesopathy was also noted in one subject. Intact FGF23 was elevated in both subjects with biallelic mutations, while C-terminal FGF23 was only elevated in one and PPi was reduced in one. Subjects with monoallelic mutations did not have periarticular calcifications or bone deformities. To conclude, patients with biallelic GACI causing mutations can survive well into adulthood, and despite the same biallelic ENPP1 pathogenic variants, clinical and biochemical manifestations can significantly differ, and include enthesopathy and primary hyperparathyroidism, which have not been previously described. Although carriers of monoallelic ENPP1 variants appear unaffected by classic disease manifestations, there may be subtle biochemical and clinical findings that warrant further investigation. © 2019 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Objective:Radiation therapy (RT) is the primary treatment of intracranial metastasis (ICM) from lung cancer (LC). Radiation necrosis (RN) has been reported post-RT with an incidence of 5% to 24%. We reviewed the spectrum of imaging changes in patients treated with RT for ICM from LC in an effort to identify potential risk factors for RN.Methods:We reviewed 63 patients with LC and ICM who received RT (radiosurgery [stereotactic radiosurgery] with/without whole brain radiation therapy) at our institution between 2013 and 2018. Data evaluated included demographics, tumor type, ICM burden and location, chemotherapy, surgery, and RT details as well as treatment choices and outcomes.Results:Of the 63 patients, clinical and radiographic criteria for RN were noted in 24 (38%) as early as 2 months and as late as 5 years posttreatment. Six patients required surgical resection due to refractory symptoms revealing pathology-proven RN and occasionally tumor. Patients were significantly more likely to develop RN if they had surgical resection of an ICM (45.8% vs. 20.5%,P=0.05). No differences were found in location, size, or genetic profile of lesions. In total, 80% of patients received treatment for symptoms and/or radiographic change. This was generally a combination of steroids, bevacizumab, laser interstitial thermal treatment, or surgical resection. Most patients required >1 treatment modality.Conclusions:This review of outcomes of RT for ICM in LC demonstrates a higher rate of RN than previously reported in the literature in those having had a surgical resection plus stereotactic radiosurgery. Our observation of RN as late as 5 years post-RT for ICM necessitates clinician awareness.

Abstract Background: Isatuximab (SAR650984) is a humanized IgG1 monoclonal antibody that binds selectively to a unique epitope on the human CD38 receptor. In the dose escalation part of the Phase I portion of the trial (NCT01749969), isatuximab ≥10 mg/kg IV given every other week (q2w) or 10 mg/kg weekly (qw) induced responses in 6/19 recipients (ORR 32%). Responses were noted at doses as low as 1 mg/kg q2w. The maximum tolerated dose (up to 20 mg/kg IV qw) was not reached. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were fatigue and nausea; few serious grade 3/4 TEAEs were reported (pneumonia 6%). The most common category of drug-related TEAE involved infusion-associated reactions (IARs) occurring in half of the patients, with grade 3/4 IARs in <5% of the patients. Based on promising Phase I activity, a Phase II dose finding study was added to investigate single-agent isatuximab in patients with relapsed or refractory myeloma (RRMM). Methods: In Phase II, eligible patients were originally randomly assigned (1:1:1) to one of 3 treatment groups: 3 mg/kg q2w, 10 mg/kg q2w, and 10 mg/kg q2w x 4 doses then q4w. A 4th treatment group was enrolled at a higher isatuximab dose with an optimized schedule of 20 mg/kg qw x 4 doses then q2w. Patient assignment was stratified by prior anti-myeloma therapy (Stratum 1: prior treatment with pomalidomide (POM) and/or carfilzomib (CAR); Stratum 2: no prior POM or CAR). Patients continued therapy until disease progression, unacceptable AEs or physician/patient decision. Eligible patients had measurable disease (serum M-protein >1 g/dL or urine M-protein ≥200 mg/24 h, or serum free light chain ≥10 mg/dL), prior exposure to ≥3 lines of anti-myeloma therapy or were double-refractory to immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs) and proteasome inhibitors (PIs), prior treatment with an alkylating agent, and adequate baseline bone marrow reserve and organ function. Enrollment of 24 patients was planned for each treatment group. An interim efficacy analysis is planned when all patients have completed ≥2 disease assessments, with central review of these data currently ongoing. Enrollment has now been completed and all patients who completed at least 1 cycle of isatuximab at the cutoff date (5/29/15) are included in this preliminary analysis. Results: Patient characteristics (n=96): median age 62.5 yrs (range 38-85); median time from initial diagnosis to study treatment 5.85 yrs (1.2-24.1); 76% had IgA/G MM; 24% had light-chain only disease; and 22%, 22%, and 44% had Stage I, II, and III disease, respectively. The median number of prior lines of therapy was 5 (2-14) with 100%, 99%, and 98% having prior exposure to PIs, IMiDs, and alkylator-containing therapy, respectively. Overall, 78% of patients had previously received POM and/or CAR; 55% had been exposed to both of these agents. At data cut-off, 36.5% of patients remained on therapy and 53.1%, 6.3%, and 4.2% had discontinued therapy due to disease progression, AEs, or other reason, respectively. The median number of cycles received was 3 (1-9), with a median duration of treatment of 11.7 wks. Approximately 17% of patients required at least 1 dose delay and 7.3% of isatuximab infusions were interrupted. TEAEs occurred in 93% of patients, with 51% being grade ≥3. Drug-related TEAEs occurred in 61% of patients (grade ≥3, 10%). The most common drug-related TEAEs (>5% of patients) were nausea (14.6%), chills (14.6%), dyspnea (13.5%), chest discomfort (10.4%), flushing (7.3%), headache (7.3%), cough (6.3%), and vomiting (5.2%). The majority of the symptoms occurred within 24 h of isatuximab infusion and were attributed to an IAR. IARs occurred in 50% of patients, were predominantly grade 1/2 (grade ≥3, 3.1%), and were mostly limited to Cycle 1 (2 patients had IARs in Cycle 2). Pneumonia (6.3%) and sepsis (5.2%) were the most common serious TEAEs. Six deaths have occurred within 30 days of last dose, 4 due to disease progression, and 2 due to serious AEs unrelated to study therapy (cardiopulmonary arrest and cerebral hemorrhage). Conclusion: Isatuximab administered to heavily pre-treated patients with RRMM appears well tolerated. IARs are common in Cycle 1, but typically do not recur. Results by treatment arm, including interim analysis response data, will be presented. Disclosures Martin: Sanofi: Research Funding. Richter:Takeda: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Vij:Millennium: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy. Zonder:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS, Amgen, Prothena, Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kaufman:Spectrum: Consultancy; Merck: Research Funding; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millenium: Consultancy. Bensinger:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Acetylon: Research Funding; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millenium: Research Funding; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Dimopoulos:Novartis: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Genesis: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Onyx: Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria. San Miguel:Millennium, Celgene, Novartis, Janssen, Onyx, BMS, MSD: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Zimmerman:Onyx: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Hari:Celgene: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Spectrum: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy. Gasparetto:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Honoraria; Millennium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Kumar:Skyline, Noxxon: Honoraria; Celgene, Millennium, Onyx, Janssen, Noxxon, Sanofi, BMS, Skyline: Consultancy; Celgene, Millennium, Onyx, Novartis, Janssen, Sanofi: Research Funding. Hsu:Sanofi: Employment. Charpentier:Sanofi: Employment. Strickland:Alexion Pharmaceuticals: Other: Advisory Board Particpation; Amgen: Other: Advisory Board Particpation; Daiichi-Sankyo: Other: Advisory Board Particpation; Boehringer-Ingelheim: Other: Advisory Board Particpation; Sunesis Pharmaceuticals: Other: Steering Committee and Advisory Board Participation. Mikhael:Sanofi: Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding.

Abstract This is the case of an 86-yr-old gentleman who presented with left facial pain exacerbated by eating, drinking, chewing, and shaving (distribution: V2, V3). The patient was diagnosed with trigeminal neuralgia and was refractory to medications. Imaging showed a superior cerebellar artery (SCA) loop adjacent to the trigeminal nerve root entry zone and a decision to perform a microvascular decompression of the fifth nerve was presented to the patient. After patient informed consent was obtained, a standard 3 cm × 3 cm retrosigmoid craniotomy was performed with the patient in a supine head turned position and in reverse Trendelenburg. The arachnoid bands tethering the SCA to the trigeminal nerve were sharply divided. A slit was then made in the tentorium and a 3 mm fenestrated clip was then used to secure the transposed SCA away from the trigeminal nerve. The SCA proximal to this was slightly patulous in its course so a small amount of a fibrin glue was also used to secure the more proximal SCA to the tentorium. The patient was symptom-free postoperatively and no longer required medical therapy. Additionally, imaging was consistent with adequate separation of the nerve from adjacent vessels. 1-5

Abstract INTRODUCTION Locations of gliomas may influence clinical presentations, molecular profiles, treatment options, and prognoses. Using the Mayo Clinic Arizona Cancer Center registry, we analyzed the frequency at which gliomas were identified in different regions of the brain. We evaluated molecular profiles, clinical courses and survival by anatomic location. METHODS Registry was queried to include patients with glioma over a 10-year period. Statistical analyses were used to compare demographic, genetic, and clinical characteristics among patients with gliomas in different locations. RESULTS 182 gliomas were identified. Of the tumors confined to a single lobe, there were 51 frontal (28.0%), 50 temporal (27.5%), 22 parietal (12.1%), and 7 occipital tumors (3.8%) identified. Multifocal disease was noted in 38 patients (20.9%). Tumors affecting temporal lobe were associated with reduced overall survival when compared to all other tumors (11.0 months vs. 13.0 months, log-rank p=0.0068). However, this disparity became insignificant when adjusted for tumor grade, age, and surgical approach [HR(95% CI) 1.26(0.87, 1.82), p=0.212]. Out of 82 cases tested for IDH-1, 10 were mutated (5.5%). IDH-1 mutation was present in 6 frontal, 2 temporal, 1 thalamic, and 1 multifocal tumor. Out of 21 cases tested for 1p19q deletions, 12 were co-deleted, 9 of which were frontal lobe tumors. MGMT methylation was assessed in 45 cases; 7 of 14 frontal tumors and 6 of 13 temporal tumors were methylated. ATRX loss was detected in 2/42 assessed cases. CONCLUSION Our results support the hypothesis that the anatomical locations of gliomas influence patients’ clinical courses. Tumors involving the temporal lobe were associated with poorer survival, though this association appeared to be driven by these patients’ more aggressive tumor profiles and higher risk baseline demographics. Molecular analysis was limited by low prevalence of genetic testing in the study sample, highlighting the importance of capturing this information for all gliomas.

Abstract INTRODUCTION The quantification of intratumoral heterogeneity – through radiomics-based approaches - can help resolve the regionally distinct genetic drug targets that may co-exist within a single Glioblastoma (GBM) tumor. While this offers potential diagnostic value under the paradigm of individualized oncology, clinical decision-making must also consider the degree of uncertainty associated with each model. In this study, we evaluate the performance of a novel machine-learning (ML) algorithm, called Gaussian Process (GP) modeling, that can quantify the impact of multiple sources of uncertainty in ML model development and prediction accuracy, including variabilities in the copy number measurement, radiomics features, training sample characteristics, and training sample size. METHOD We collected 95 image-localized biopsies from 25 primary GBM patients. We coregistered stereotactic locations with preoperative multi-parametric MRI features (conventional MRI, DSC perfusion, Diffusion Tensor Imaging) to generate spatially matched pairs of MRI and copy number variants (CNV) for for each biopsy. We developed a Gaussian Process (GP) model to predict CNV for Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) based on MRI radiomic features in each patient. We used leave-one-patient-out cross validation to quantify prediction accuracy and model uncertainty. Spatial prediction and uncertainty (p-value) maps were overlaid to help visualize regional genetic variation of EGFR and uncertainty of the radiomic predictions. RESULT: The initial GP radiomics model for EGFR amplification (CNV > 3.5) produced a sensitivity of 0.8 and specificity of 0.8. Samples/regions associated with high uncertainty (p-value >0.05) correlated with either 1) extrapolation of radiomic features from the training set-defined feature space or 2) insufficient training samples in the feature space. CONCLUSION We present a ML-based model that quantifies spatial genetic heterogeneity in GBM, while also estimating model uncertainties that result from multi-source data variabilities. This approach lays the groundwork for prospective clinical integration of modeling-based diagnostic approaches in the paradigm of individualized medicine.

Abstract BACKGROUND Radiation is an integral component of the multidisciplinary treatment of patients with intracranial metastasis (ICM) from melanoma. The risk of radiation necrosis (RN) post-treatment can range from 5–25%. We retrospectively evaluated pre- and post-radiation clinical and radiographical characteristics in patients with ICM from melanoma to identify potential risk factors for RN. METHODS After IRB approval, patients with ICM from melanoma who received radiation at our institution between 2013 and 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. We recorded demographics, intracranial metastasis (burden and location), systemic therapy, resection, stereotactic radiosurgery versus whole brain radiation, and outcomes. Brain MRI was evaluated using the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology criteria (RANO). RESULTS A total of 27 patients were included in the study. RN was diagnosed in 14 patients (52%) at one month to three years following radiation. Cerebellar location (n=7) was significantly associated with RN (p=0.0058). Metastasis-associated hemorrhage was present in 7 patients, 6 of which developed RN (43% vs 8%, p=0.08). Surgical resection prior to radiation was performed in 9 patients, 7 of which developed RN (50% vs 15%, p=0.1). RN appeared to be less often diagnosed when ICM were treated with higher doses of radiation (24 Gy vs 20 Gy, p=0.07). Systemic treatment was administered prior to radiation in 25 patients and we found no relationship with systemic therapy type and RN. Presumed RN was treated in 12 of 14 patients (86%). Steroids or surgical resection were the primary treatment modalities, with laser ablation used in 1 case. Following treatment, improvement was noted in 3 patients radiographically and in 1 of these clinically. CONCLUSIONS This series of patients with radiotherapy-treated brain metastases from melanoma reveals cerebellar involvement, hemorrhage, and prior surgical resection as potential risk factors for radiation necrosis. Neoadjuvant systemic treatment did not appear to be a risk factor in our review.

Abstract Background: Myelofibrosis (MF) is a clonal bone marrow disorder characterized by a constitutional symptoms, splenomegaly, anemia, elevated WBC and bone marrow fibrosis. Ruxolitinib is a JAK2 inhibitor approved for patients with Intermediate-2 (INT-2) or high risk disease based on dynamic international prognostic scoring system (DIPSS)), however, there are limited options for patients with early disease. Interferon alpha (IFNa) is a cytokine therapy that has been used in treatment of chronic myelogenous leukemia and polycythemia vera (PV). In these diseases, there can be a reduction in the clonal burden in addition to a hematologic response. Therefore, we sought to use this therapy in patients with MF. Methods: Patients who had MF were enrolled on an IRB approved clinical protocol in a single arm, single institution study. Patients were stratified to either an early disease arm (characterized by intermediate 1 (INT-1) risk or advanced disease (Int-2 or high risk disease based on DIPSS). Patients were started on Ropeginterferon alfa 2b (P1101) at 50 ug every two weeks, and the dose was titrated up to either 300 ug every other week, or unacceptable toxicity. Patients were monitored for response based on international working group criteria. Results: Demographics: Eight patients with MF have been enrolled on the study to date (Early: 2, Int/High: 6). Median age was 69.5 (45 - 88), five patients were female. Five patients had primary MF (PMF) and 3 had post-essential thrombocythemia or post PV MF. Three patients had previous treatment for their disease. Four patients continue to receive active treatment (2 early disease, and 2 advanced disease), and for those who remain on treatment, they range from 7 - 29 cycles. Efficacy: Three patients experienced a clinical improvement (1 based on MPN-SAF total symptom score, and 2 based on reduction of spleen size). Both early stage patients have had a CI based on spleen responses as their best response and currently remain on treatment. The remaining 2 who are on therapy had stable disease. Those who remain on therapy have been receiving treatment for 7-29 cycles with continued response. Toxicity: A grade 3 adverse event (AE) potentially attributable to the treatment occurred in 4 patients (50%), 3 (37.5%) patients had anemia, and 2 (25.0%) patients had lymphopenia. Only one patient discontinued therapy due to AEs (dizziness, atrial fibrillation). Reasons for stopping include disease progression (1), toxicity (1) and lack of benefit (2). The median number of cycles for those who ended treatment was 8 (4-10). No deaths have occurred. Discussion: P1101 appears to be a well-tolerated therapy that has shown a durable clinical improvement in 37.5% in a small study. These results, along with historic data suggesting possible reduction in clonal burden, suggest that ongoing studies are warranted to further understand the clinical benefit of P1101 in MF. Disclosures Palmer: Novartis: Research Funding. Zimmerman:PharmaEssentia: Employment. Zagrijtschuk:PharmaEssentia: Employment. Mesa:Gilead: Research Funding; CTI: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Ariad: Consultancy; Promedior: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Galena: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy.

Abstract Abstract 816 Background: Proteasome inhibition is a very effective therapeutic strategy in multiple myeloma (MM). The investigational agent MLN9708 is an oral, specific, reversible inhibitor of the 20S proteasome that has shown antitumor activity in solid tumor and hematologic malignancy xenograft models. Phase 1 trials are evaluating both intravenous and oral formulations using different dosing schedules in a variety of tumor types. Here we report the findings from the dose-escalation portion of a phase 1 trial of once-weekly, orally administered MLN9708 in patients with relapsed and/or refractory MM (NCT00963820). Methods: The primary objectives were to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and the safety/tolerability of MLN9708. Secondary objectives included determination of response rate, and characterization of the pharmacokinetics (PK, of MLN2238, the biologically active hydrolysis product) and pharmacodynamics (PD, 20S proteasome inhibition in blood) of once-weekly oral MLN9708. Patients with MM who had received ≥2 prior therapies, which must have included bortezomib, thalidomide or lenalidomide, and corticosteroids, were eligible. Treatment consisted of MLN9708 administered orally on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle. Dose-escalation proceeded from 0.24 mg/m2 using a standard 3+3 schema based on dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) occurring in cycle 1. Adverse events (AEs) were graded by NCI-CTCAE v3. Response was assessed by modified EBMT/IMWG criteria. Blood samples were collected after dosing on days 1 and 15 of cycle 1 for PK and PD analyses; parameters were calculated using noncompartmental methods (WinNonlin software v5.3). Results: A total of 28 patients have been enrolled to date (data cut-off: June 29, 2011), including 3 each at dose levels of 0.24, 0.48, 0.80, and 1.20, 4 at 1.68, 3 at 2.23, 4 at 2.97, and 5 at 3.95 mg/m2. The median age was 63.5 years (range 40–76); 54% were male. The median number of prior regimens was 5 (range 2–15), and median time from diagnosis was 4.6 years. Nineteen (68%) patients had prior stem cell transplant, and 16 (59%) were refractory to their last prior therapy, including 7 (26%) to bortezomib and 11 (41%) to lenalidomide or thalidomide. The MTD has not been reached; the current cohort is receiving 3.95 mg/m2. No DLTs have been observed among 21 DLT-evaluable patients. Patients have received a median of 2 treatment cycles (range 1–11; mean 2.8). Four patients remain on treatment; discontinuation was mainly due to progressive disease (71%). All 28 patients are evaluable for toxicity; 26 (93%) experienced at least one AE, including 22 (79%) who experienced at least one drug-related AE. Drug-related AEs occurring in >20% of patients included fatigue (39%), thrombocytopenia (36%), nausea (32%), and diarrhea (29%). Two (7%) patients had drug-related peripheral neuropathy (PN, both grade 2); both had grade 1 PN at baseline. Ten (36%) patients experienced grade ≥3 AEs, 4 (14%) had AEs resulting in MLN9708 dose reductions, and 3 (11%) discontinued due to AEs. No on-study deaths have occurred. In 16 response-evaluable patients, one partial response has been seen, in a patient treated at 2.97 mg/m2 (who had three prior lines of therapy, thalidomide–dexamethasone, lenalidomide–dexamethasone –perifosine, and bortezomib–dexamethasone, to which the patient responded and relapsed); duration of response is 3.7 months, and the patient remains in response at cycle 8. A further five patients had a best response of stable disease, durable for up to 9.5 months. PK analyses showed that MLN9708 was rapidly absorbed, with MLN2238 Tmax of 0.5–2.0 hours and a terminal half-life after multiple dosing of approximately 7 days based on limited data (n=5). MLN2238 exposure appeared to increase proportionally with increasing MLN9708 dose over the range 0.8–2.97 mg/m2. Maximal 20S proteasome inhibition in blood was immediate and dose-dependent. Conclusions: Current data suggest that MLN9708 on a once-weekly schedule is generally well tolerated and has early signs of anti-tumor activity in this heavily pre-treated population with prior exposure to lenalidomide/thalidomide and bortezomib. To date, toxicity has been manageable, and no significant neuropathy signal has been observed. Updated data will be presented, with the MTD anticipated to be reached. Data from an analysis of candidate biomarkers of responsiveness to treatment with MLN9708 will also be presented. Disclosures: Kumar: Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding; Genzyme: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Off Label Use: Use of the investigational agent MLN9708, an oral proteasome inhibitor, in the treatment of relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma. Bensinger:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Array: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding. Reeder:Celgene: Institutional research funding; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Institutional research funding; Novartis: Institutional research funding. Zimmerman:Novartis: Expert witness; Celgene: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Berenson:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Medtronic: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Merck: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding. Berg:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Liu:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Gupta:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Di Bacco:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Hui:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Niesvizky:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding.