Citations

Abstract Abstract 3469 Introduction: Stem cell transplantation is important in the management of multiple myeloma. In the United States, the standard of care is administration of growth factors to accelerate neutrophil recovery after stem cell transplant. The need for growth factors after transplant has not been investigated recently. Patients: We analyzed a cohort of 166 patients at our institution who underwent autologous transplant for multiple myeloma without receiving growth factors after transplant and compared them with 498 patients who received standard filgrastim beginning on posttransplant day 5. TABLE Results: A neutrophil count of 500/μL was achieved in a median of 12.5 days in patients receiving growth factor, compared with 13.5 days in those not receiving growth factor (P<.001) Fig 1. Platelet engraftment was identical (median, 14.5 days; P=.12) in both groups, despite a lower median number of CD34+ cells infused in patients who did not receive growth factors. Incidence of nonstaphylococcal bacteremia was identical in both groups. The median hospital stay was 3.5 days shorter in the group not receiving growth factor. Bacteremia impacted platelet but not neutrophil engraftment. Figure 2 Conclusion: It is feasible and reasonable to perform autologous stem cell transplant for multiple myeloma without administering growth factors. Estimated savings would be $4,600 for each transplanted patient. Growth factor administration is not required for a safe outcome and decreases the number and severity of some of the fluid-related complications after transplant such as acute respiratory distress syndrome, allergic reactions, alveolar hemorrhage, and rarely splenic rupture. Disclosures: Gertz: Celgene: Honoraria; Millenium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding. Dispenzieri:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Binding Site: Honoraria. Kumar:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Genzyme: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cephalon: Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 3557 Introduction: Autologous stem cell transplantation for patients with amyloidosis results in high reported hematologic and organ response rates compared with conventional chemotherapy. Patients: Four-hundred and thirty-four patients have undergone transplantation between March 8, 1996, and April 13, 2010 Table 1. Clinical parameters seen in patients with amyloid are given in Table 2. The overall day-100 mortality seen in this group of patients is 44 of 434 patients (10%). Results: The most important determinant of outcome is stage defined by BNP and troponin levels. Figure 1 demonstrates the survival for patients for all 3 cardiac stages. Troponin <.035; NT-proBNP <332. Stage 1 both low, Stage 3 both elevated. The survival of all patients based on whether they achieved a complete response, a partial response (>50%), or no response was analyzed. Median survival has not been reached for the complete response group, is 107 months for the partial response group, and is 32 months for the no response group (p<0.0001). Figure 2, divides the patients at the median dFLC level of 13.5 mg/dL demonstrating that for patients with a higher level of free light chain, the median survival is 87.6 months and has not been reached for those with a lower level of free light chain. A proportional hazards model for variables that impact on survival was done in all patients, and the only relevant predictor of outcome was stage (p<0.0001). When the same analysis was performed using a landmark of 6 months, the only predictor of outcome was stage (p=0.0005). When best response was incorporated into the landmark model, it was the strongest predictor of survival. The amyloid stage predicted survival (p= 0.0005), and the best response to therapy (p <0.0001). When the same analysis was performed in the entire group of 434, stage and best response each remained significant (p<0.0001). Discussion: There is a high response rate associated with high-dose therapy that was not observed in the melphalan and prednisone era. For eligible patients who can be transplanted safely, high-dose melphalan is an effective therapy for many patients with amyloidosis. Best response and stage at diagnosis are the best predictors of overall survival. Disclosures: Lacy: Celgene: Research Funding. Dispenzieri:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Binding Site: Honoraria. Kumar:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Genzyme: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cephalon: Research Funding.

Abstract Purpose: Shared decision-making (SDM) incorporates patients' individual preferences and values into treatment decisions in collaboration with their healthcare providers (HCPs). Patients with previously treated mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) have multiple available treatment options and are candidates for SDM. The objective of this project was to develop an informational, patient-centered decision aid that will enable patients, in collaboration with their HCP, to weigh available evidence along with patients' individual preferences and values. Methods: The evidence-based decision aid is designed to be accessed online in the physician's office or at home. The decision aid discusses and compares evidence about the risks and benefits of different treatment options available to previously treated MCL patients. To help patients understand what is important to them as they consider available treatment options, the decision aid includes simple questions that assess patients' values and preferences. The development and design process follows the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) model, including: 1) identification and description of the treatment decision for patients with previously treated MCL; 2) formation of a multidisciplinary advisory committee with four HCPs and one patient with MCL to advise on the development, evaluation, and implementation of the decision aid; 3) assessment of decisional needs through literature review and needs assessment interviews with five patients and five practicing HCPs to elicit their views on patients' information and decision support needs in previously treated MCL; 4) determination of online format designed for integration into clinical practice; 5) review and synthesis of clinical evidence relevant to the treatment decision and options for previously treated MCL; 6) development of the draft decision aid with five iterative cycles of feedback from HCPs and patients; 7) alpha testing with direct feedback from patients and HCPs; and, 8) beta testing in real life conditions, using patients and HCPs external to the development process, evaluating the usability of the decision aid, and assessing patient knowledge, expectations, values, treatment choice, decisional conflict and confidence in one's ability to make decisions. Results: Needs assessment interviews with patients showed that patients understand that their disease will relapse and apply previous treatment experiences to later treatment decisions. Through our interviews we found that patients look for information online, and feel that most information online about MCL is incorrect and/or outdated. In order of importance, patients identify efficacy, adverse effects, cost, and impact on daily life as their primary decision determinants. Patients like an online format and want to be involved in decision-making. In the HCPs' needs assessment interviews, HCPs stated that some patients may require significant education on treatment options due to the rapidly changing treatment landscape and long remission periods. In order of importance, HCPs feel patients choose treatment based on cost, efficacy, and impact on daily life. HCPs believe an online decision aid would work for this patient population and that patients want to be involved in treatment decision-making. Conclusion: A patient-friendly online decision aid with graphics and audio was developed for patients with previously treated MCL. Feedback from patients and HCPs has been integrated into the decision aid. Guided by a well-documented and systematic development process, this SDM tool can complement other methodologies in decision-making and has the potential to improve patient-physician communication, ensuring patients' preferences and values are incorporated at the point of care. Disclosures LeBlanc: Flatiron: Consultancy; Epi-Q: Consultancy; Boehringer Ingelheim: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Helsinn Therapeutics: Honoraria, Research Funding. Wolf:Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC: Consultancy. Neylon:Seattle Genetics: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Speakers Bureau. Caroselli:Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC: Research Funding. Deering:Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC: Research Funding. Schenkel:Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC: Employment.

Abstract Abstract 3211 Poster Board III-148 Although autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) has become standard of care for many patients with hematologic malignancies, many patients fail to collect a minimum number of CD34 + stem cells to support high dose chemotherapy and ASCT. Recently, plerixafor, a CXCR4 antagonist, was FDA approved for use in combination with G-CSF for autologous peripheral blood stem cell mobilization in patients with NHL or Multiple Myeloma. In February 2009, we commenced a risk adapted approach to the utilization of plerixafor. The study was restricted to patients mobilized with GCSF alone and patients undergoing chemotherapy primed PBSC mobilization were excluded. Peripheral blood stem cell mobilization was commenced with G-CSF at 10 mcg/kg/day. On day 4, a peripheral blood (PB) CD34 count was measured. For patients whose PB CD34 was ≥10/μL, apheresis was commenced the following morning. For patients whose PB CD34 was <10/μL, it was measured again on day 5; if ≥10/μL then apheresis was commenced the following morning. If PB CD34 was <10/μL on day 5, plerixafor (0.24 mg/kg sc) was administered on the evening of day 5 and apheresis was commenced the following day (Group A). In addition, during apheresis, for patients whose collection yield was < 0.5 × 106 CD34/kg, in the absence of instrument failure or problems with the collection procedure, plerixafor was added (Group B). Morning administration of G-CSF and evening dosing of plerixafor continued daily until apheresis was complete. From February to July 2009, 174 mobilization attempts occurred; 27 with chemotherapy and 147 with cytokines alone. The 147 pts who underwent mobilization with cytokines alone are presented here. The underlying diagnosis was as follows: Myeloma 61 pts, NHL 54 pts, Amyloid 17 pts, Hodgkin 10 pts, POEMS 4 pts and 1 pt with a solid tumor. For the entire group the median number of CD34 cells collected was 5.5 × 106 CD34/kg (range 0.1-17). The median number of apheresis was 3 (range 1-12). 67 patients (46%) received plerixafor; 37 patients started plerixafor during mobilization (Group A) and 30 patients during collections due to a poor yield (Group B). 12 pts of the 37 received plerixafor on day 4 because of prior mobilization failure or high risk of mobilization failure and are included in Group A. Table 1 outlines the details of mobilization and collection by groups. By disease category, of the 61 patients with MM, 28 (46%) received plerixafor (8 Group A and 20 Group B). Median apheresis in all the MM pts was 2 (range 1-12) with a total of 6.8 × 106 CD34/kg (2.2-16.7). In the 54 NHL pts, 32 (59%) received plerixafor (24 Group A and 8 Group B). Median apheresis for all pts with NHL was 3 (range 1-7) with a total of 4.6 × 106 CD34/kg (range 0-11.4). Overall, only 7 of 147 (5%) mobilization attempts failed to achieve a minimum of 2 × 106 CD34/kg. This compares to a 22% failure rate prior to institution of this risk adapted approach. In conclusion, implementing this risk adapted approach allows poor mobilizers to be identified promptly and for plerixafor to be initiated during mobilization and collection, thereby reducing the number of mobilization failures. In patients who predictably would not have successful collection based on a PB CD34 <10/μL, addition of plerixafor results in a majority of patients achieving an adequate collection. This risk adapted approach may be more cost effective than reattempting mobilization after a prior failure or utilizing combination G-CSF and plerixafor for upfront mobilization. Table 1. Mobilization and Collection data. All patients N=147 Group A1 N=37 Group B2 N=30 No Plerixafor N=80 PB CD34 day 4 Median 11 0 7 19 Range 0-331 0-7 0-32 0-331 PB CD34 day 5 Median 10 4.5 12 15 Range 0-51 2-9 11-23 9-51 Apheresis Yield Median 5.5 4.4 6.0 6.2 Range 0.1-17 3.1-12.7 3.0-12.2 2-17 Number of Apheresis Median 3 3 5 2 Range 1-12 1-7 4-12 1-8 Days of Plerixafor Median n/a 3 2 n/a Rang 1-7 1-8 1 Group A – Plerixafor initiated prior to apheresis 2 Group B – Plerixafor initiated during apheresis Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Abstract 2142 Poster Board II-119 High-dose chemotherapy in conjunction with autologous SCT is the preferred treatment of relapsed Hodgkin disease and non-Hodgkin lymphoma and newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Failure to achieve optimal stem cell mobilization results in multiple subsequent attempts, which consumes large amounts of growth factors and potentially requires antibiotics and transfusions. We retrospectively reviewed the natural history of stem cell mobilization attempts at our institution from 2001 through 2007 to determine the frequency of suboptimal mobilization in patients with hematologic malignancy undergoing autologous transplant and analyzed the subsequent resource utilization in patients with initially failed attempts. Of 1,775 patients undergoing mobilization during the study period, stem cell collection (defined by the number of CD34+ cells/kg) was “ optimal” (≥5×106) in 53%, “low” (≥2 to 5×106) in 25%,“ poor” (<2×106) in 10%, and “failed” (<10 CD34+ cells/mL) in 12%. In the 47% of collections that were less than optimal, increased resource consumption included increased use of growth factors and antibiotics, subsequent chemotherapy mobilization, increased transfusional support, more apheresis procedures, and more frequent hospitalization. Other costs often omitted include the need for hospitalization, which was seen in 5% to 11% of the patients in our study. Parenteral antibiotics were needed when fever developed in 7% of patients with Hodgkin disease, 4% with non-Hodgkin lymphoma, and 24% with multiple myeloma who underwent mobilization using a chemotherapy pulse. When stem cell mobilization was not immediately optimal, subsequent attempts to mobilize failed completely in 3 of 42 patients (7%) with Hodgkin disease (3% of the original Hodgkin disease cohort), 56 of 157 (36%) with multiple myeloma (6% of the original myeloma cohort), and 50 of 328 (15%) with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (7% of the original non-Hodgkin lymphoma cohort). These usually unappreciated costs of stem cell mobilization failure highlight the need for more effective mobilization strategies. Disclosures: Gertz: genzyme: Research Funding.

Abstract Background: Lenalidomide (Revlimid®), an immunomodulatory drug (IMiD®), was recently approved in the US for treatment of relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma and myelodysplastic syndromes associated with a deletion 5q[31] cytogenetic abnormality. Lenalidomide also has demonstrated activity in chronic lymphocytic leukemia and cutaneous T-cell lymphoma while thalidomide, a less potent IMiD®, has activity in non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL) as both monotherapy and in combination with rituximab. Aim: To assess the safety and efficacy of lenalidomide monotherapy in subjects with relapsed/refractory indolent NHL. Methods: Subjects with relapsed/refractory indolent NHL following at least 1 prior treatment regimen with measurable disease are eligible. Subjects receive 25 mg lenalidomide orally once daily on Days 1–21 every 28 days and continue therapy for 52 weeks as tolerated or until disease progression. Response and progression are evaluated using the IWLRC methodology. Results: As of July 25, 2006, 23 subjects of a planned 40 have enrolled and received drug. Fifteen subjects are currently evaluable for tumor response. The median age of the 15 response-evaluable subjects is 64 (54–82) and 5 are female. Histology is small lymphocytic lymphoma [SLL] (n=8), follicular center lymphoma grades 1,2 [FL] (n=5) and nodal marginal B-cell lymphoma [NML] (n=2). Median time from diagnosis to lenalidomide monotherapy is 7.6 (3–14) years and median number of prior treatment regimens per subject is 3 (1–17). Two subjects (13%) exhibited an objective partial response (PR) at four months. Both responses, one FL and one NML, occurred in subjects with substantial tumor burden of 61.8 cm2 and 80.3 cm2, respectively. The 4-month time-to-response for these indolent NHL subjects is longer than the 2-month median time-to-response in aggressive NHL subjects (n=7) following lenalidomide monotherapy. Seven patients had stable disease (SD) for a tumor control rate (TCR) of 60% and 6 had progressive disease (PD). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 9 (39%) subjects. These were predominantly Grade 3 hematological events (neutropenia, thrombocytopenia) with only 3 subjects (13%) experiencing a Grade 4 adverse reaction (all neutropenia). Conclusion: Early results of lenalidomide monotherapy in indolent NHL show evidence of activity with a safety profile similar to that established previously in other hematological malignancies.

Abstract Background: Acute graft versus host disease (aGVHD) is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality following allogenic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). Corticosteroids are the first line treatment although <50% of patients with severe aGVHD (grades III-IV) achieve durable remissions. Monoclonal antibodies (mAb) are often used as second line agents for steroid refractory aGVHD (SR-aGVHD) (Patriarca et. al.; 2004). However, data regarding their tolerability and efficacy is retrospective and limited. We carried out this study to assess the clinical outcomes related to mAb therapy (Infliximab and Tocilizumab) for SR-aGVHD. Methods: Patients with SR-aGVHD that received therapy with either Infliximab or Tocilizumab between January 2003 and May 2016 were retrospectively identified. Clinical grading of aGVHD was per the Glucksberg criteria (Glucksberg et. al.; 1974). SR-aGVHD was defined as any grade progression within 3 days or failure to achieve at least one grade improvement within 7 days of initiation of systemic steroids. Infliximab and Tocilizumab were administered intravenously at 10mg/kg and 8mg/kg weekly for a total of 4 doses, respectively. Clinical response was evaluated at 4 weeks and 12 weeks post mAb treatment. Complete response (CR) was defined as sustained resolution of all clinical signs of aGVHD; partial response (PR) was defined as overall improvement of 1 or more grades; no response (NR) was defined as neither improvement nor worsening of the overall aGVHD grade. Overall response (OR) was defined as either CR or PR. Overall survival (OS) was calculated from the first day of mAb treatment until death or last available follow up. Results: Forty-three patients (median age 54, range 29-74 years; male 67%) with severe SR- aGVHD were included in the study. Of these, 35 (81%) received Infliximab for a median of 4 (range 1-6) cycles and 8 (19%) received Tocilizumab for a median of 3 (range 1-4) cycles. Both groups were comparable with regards to age, gender, conditioning regimen, graft source, degree of HLA match, ABO blood group, CMV incompatibility, and GVHD prophylaxis regimens. Only differences seen were a higher proportion of unrelated donor (p = 0.004) and cord blood HCT (p = 0.031) in the Tocilizumab group. Twenty (57%) of 35 patients treated with Infliximab and 6 (75%) of 8 patients treated with Tocilizumab had an overall aGVHD grade of IV prior to initiation of mAb therapy (p = 0.44). Organ specific distribution and severity of aGVHD are described in table 1. At 4 weeks post mAb therapy, 17 (40%) patients had an OR, 7 (16%) had no response, and 19 (44%) had died. Twenty-six (60%) patients died at 12 weeks, with OR and no response observed in 9 (21%) and 8 (19%) patients, respectively (table 2). Overall response for Tocilizumab versus Infliximab was comparable at 4 weeks (38% vs. 40%; p = 1.0) and at 12 weeks (38% vs. 17%; p = 0.33). Outcomes per aGVHD grade and gastrointestinal-specific stage at 4 weeks and 12 weeks are shown in figures 1-A and 1-B, with organ specific responses shown in figures 1-C and 1-D, respectively. The estimated median OS was 41 (range 4-3837) days for patients treated with Infliximab and 60 (range 10-756) days for those treated with Tocilizumab (p = 0.48). Disease relapse occurred in 5 (11%) patients treated with Infliximab and in none (0%) treated with Tocilizumab (p = 0.56). Thirty-four (79%) patients had infectious complications during and up to one month after mAb therapy. These included 31 (72%) patients with bacterial blood stream infection and 10 (23%) with invasive fungal infections. Overall, infectious complications were comparable (Infliximab - 83% vs. Tocilizumab - 63%; p = 0.33). CMV reactivation occurred in 11 (31%) and in 2 (25%) patients who were treated with Infliximab and Tocilizumab, respectively (p = 1.0). Given the retrospective nature of the study and the concomitant presence of aGVHD, it was difficult to attribute and grade gastrointestinal and hepatobiliary side effects. Conclusions: The use of anti-inflammatory monoclonal antibody therapy in patients with steroid refractory acute GVHD is associated with significant infectious complications (~80%) and poor response rates (~20% at 12 weeks). Current data, limited by a small sample size, does not show any advantages of using Tocilizumab over Infliximab or vice versa. Prospective clinical trials addressing this question are needed. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), the primary cause of non-relapse mortality (NRM) following allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, does not always respond to treatment with high dose systemic corticosteroids. We have recently shown that a combination of three biomarkers (TNFR1, ST2, and REG3α) measured at onset of GVHD can predict day 28 response to treatment and 6-month NRM (Levine, Lancet Haem, 2015). Our goal in the current study was to determine if the same biomarker-based Ann Arbor GVHD algorithm can alsopredict treatment response andmortality whenapplied after one week of systemic corticosteroid treatment. The study population consisted of 378 patients (pts) with acute GVHD from 11 centers in the Mount Sinai Acute GVHD International Consortium. All pts were treated with systemic steroids and provided a plasma or serum sample obtained after one week of treatment (±3 days). The median starting dose of systemic steroids for Grade II-IV GVHD was 2.0 mg/kg/day and for Grade I was 1.0 mg/kg/day, after which treatment varied. Patients were divided into test (n=236) and validation (n=142) cohorts. We applied the Ann Arbor GVHD algorithm to concentrations of TNFR1, ST2, and REG3α measured after one week of treatment to generate a predicted probability of 6-month NRM, which we term the treatment score (TS). We employed unsupervised k-medoidclustering to partition TS values from the test cohort into two groups (high and low). This unbiased approach identified a high score group made up of 25% of pts (n=58) in the test cohort. We observed that the day 28 response rate (complete, CR + partial, PR) was significantly lower in pts with high scores compared to low scores in the test cohort (24% vs 65%, p<0.0001) (Fig 1A). Analysis of the validation cohort using the same TS definitions showed similar differences in response rates (22% vs 61%, p<0.0001) (Fig 1B). Further, nearly four times as many pts with high scores in both cohorts died within 6 months from non-relapse causes compared to pts with low scores (test: 57% vs 17%, p<0.0001; validation: 57% vs 14%, p<0.0001) (Fig 1C/D). As expected, the majority of non-relapse deaths in pts treated for GVHD were directly attributable to GVHD (test: 95%; validation: 89%). Relapse rates for high and low score pts were similar (data not shown), and thus pts with a high TS experienced significantly worse overall survival in both cohorts (test: 37% vs 72%, p<0.0001; validation: 38% vs 79%, p<0.0001) (Fig 1E/F). Approximately half of the pts in each cohort (test: 48%; validation: 44%) responded (CR+PR) to the first week of steroids and these ptshad significantly lower 6-month NRM than non-responders (NR) (test: 17% vs 36%, p=0.0002; validation: 13% vs 36%, p=0.0014). Yet the TS continued to stratify mortality risk independently of clinical response. In the test cohort, pts with a high score comprised 16% of all early responders and experienced more than twice the NRM of early responders with a low score (33% vs 13%, p=0.022) (Fig 2A). Conversely, test cohort pts who did not respond by day 7, but had a low score, fared much better than non-responders with a high score (NRM 21% vs 68%, p<0.0001) (Fig 2B). Two thirds of early non-responders comprised this more favorable group. These highly significant results reproduced in the independent validation cohort in similar proportions (CR+PR: 45% vs 6%, p=0.0003; NR: 61% vs 22%, p=0.0001) (Fig 2C/D). Finally, a subset analysis revealed that pts classified as NR after one week of steroids due to isolated, yet persistent, grade I skin GVHD (24/378, 6%) overwhelmingly had low treatment scores (22/24, 92%) and experienced rates of NRM (9%) comparable to responders with low scores, thus forming a distinct, albeit small, subset of pts with non-responsive GVHD that fares particularly well (Fig 3). In conclusion, a treatment score based on three GVHD biomarkers measured after one week of steroids stratifies pts into two groups with distinct risks for treatment failure and 6-month NRM. It is particularly noteworthy that the TS identifies two subsets of pts with steroid refractory (SR) GVHD who have highly different outcomes (Fig 2B/D). The much larger group, approximately two thirds of all SR pts, may not need the same degree of treatment escalation as is traditional for clinical non-response, and thus overtreatment might be avoided. Because the TSis measured at a common decision making time point, it may prove useful to guide risk-adapted therapy. Disclosures Mielke: Novartis: Consultancy; MSD: Consultancy, Other: Travel grants; Celgene: Other: Travel grants, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Other: Travel grants; JAZZ Pharma: Speakers Bureau. Kroeger:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding. Chen:Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Jagasia:Therakos: Consultancy. Kitko:Therakos: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Ferrara:Viracor: Patents & Royalties: GVHD biomarker patent. Levine:Viracor: Patents & Royalties: GVHD biomarker patent.

Abstract Hematological malignancies such as multiple myeloma (MM) have an increased reliance on the ubiquitin proteasome system (UPS) presumably as a consequence of their high protein synthetic and secretory burden. Chemical agents that target the proteasome, such as bortezomib and carfilzomib, have been successful in treating multiple myeloma; however patients treated with these drugs ultimately relapse. The AAA-ATPase p97/VCP (p97) facilitates ATP-dependent extraction and degradation of ubiquitinated proteins destined for proteasomal elimination. In addition to ubiquitin-dependent protein degradation, p97 is also closely involved in other aspects of protein homeostasis, including endoplasmic reticulum-associated degradation (ERAD) and autophagy. Pharmacologic inhibition of p97 provides a compelling therapeutic approach for hematological malignancies that rely on tight regulation of protein homeostasis as a component of their survival. CB-5083 is a novel small molecule inhibitor of p97 ATPase activity with nanomolar enzymatic and cellular potency. Treatment of cancer cells with CB-5083 causes a dramatic increase in poly-ubiquitinated proteins as well as an accumulation of substrates of the UPS and ERAD. CB-5083 causes a profound induction of the unfolded protein response (UPR) with consequent activation of the DR5 death receptor, caspase 8, caspase 3/7 and ultimately cell death. Induction of the UPR occurs to a greater magnitude with CB-5083 when compared to the proteasome inhibitor, bortezomib, suggesting the potential for increased efficacy in cancers with sensitivity to UPR-mediated cell death. In addition, activation of apoptosis and cell death occur more rapidly with CB-5083 than with bortezomib. Sequencing of cell lines made resistant to CB-5083 reveals missense mutations mapping to the D2 ATPase site in p97, supporting on-target association with cytotoxicity. In an expanded panel of MM cell lines there is no correlation between the cytotoxic sensitivity to CB-5083 and the cytotoxic sensitivity to proteasome inhibitors, suggesting differential mechanisms of cytotoxicity and potential activity of CB-5083 in proteasome inhibitor resistant settings. Compared to myeloma cell lines, CB-5083 has reduced cytotoxic potency in immortalized stromal cell lines and in patient-derived CD138-negative bone marrow mononuclear cells. Furthermore, unlike the reduced potency demonstrated by carfilzomib in the context of MM cell-bone marrow stromal cell (BMSC) interactions, the cyto-reductive potential of CB-5083 is unaffected in co-cultures of MM cells with patient-derived BMSCs or immortalized BMSCs from healthy donors. In vivo, CB-5083 is orally bioavailable, shows a pharmacodynamic effect in tumor tissue (as measured by poly-ubiquitin accumulation) and demonstrates robust anti-tumor activity across several MM models. CB-5083 treatment of mice bearing subcutaneous xenografts leads to tumor stasis and regression in RPMI8226 and AMO1 MM models, respectively. In advanced models of disseminated, ortho-metastatic disease, intermittent oral administration of CB-5083 demonstrates significant inhibition of myeloma burden and improves survival, with an overall efficacy profile that compares favorably to that of clinically approved proteasome inhibitors. Furthermore, in the Vk*Myc genetically engineered mouse model of MM, treatment with CB-5083 results in a significant reduction in M-spike by 55%. Combination treatment of mice bearing the RPMI8226 subcutaneous xenograft model with CB-5083, dexamethasone and lenalidomide results in tumor regression. Taken together, these data demonstrate that CB-5083 is a potent and selective inhibitor of the p97 ATPase with robust activity in vitro and in vivo in numerous MM models and strongly support clinical evaluation. Based on these observations, a phase 1 dose-escalation trial has recently been initiated and is currently underway in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. Disclosures Anderson: Cleave Biosciences: Employment. Le Moigne:Cleave Biosciences: Employment. Djakovic:Cleave Biosciences: Employment. Rice:Cleave Biosciences: Employment. Wong:Cleave Biosciences: Employment. Kumar:Cleave Biosciences: Employment. Valle:Cleave Biosciences: Employment. Menon:Cleave Biosciences: Employment. Kiss von Soly:Cleave Biosciences: Employment. Wang:Cleave Biosciences: Employment. Yao:Cleave Biosciences: Employment. Soriano:Cleave Biosciences: Employment. Bergsagel:ONYX: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Novartis: Research Funding. Yakes:Cleave Biosciences: Employment. Zhou:Cleave Biosciences: Employment. Wustrow:Cleave Biosciences: Employment. Rolfe:Cleave Biosciences: Employment.

Abstract No laboratory test can predict non-relapse mortality (NRM) after hematopoietic cellular transplantation (HCT) prior to the onset graft-versus-host disease (GVHD). Recently, we have shown that a signature of three GVHD plasma biomarkers (TNFR1, ST2, and REG3α) can predict response to GVHD therapy and NRM at the onset of clinical GVHD (Levine, Lancet Haem, 2015). Our goal in the current study was to identify a blood biomarker signature that could predict lethal GVHD and six-month NRM well in advance of the onset of GVHD symptoms. Patient samples on day +7 after HCT were obtained from 1,287 patients from 11 HCT centers in the Mount Sinai Acute GVHD International Consortium (MAGIC). Samples from two large centers (n = 929) were combined and randomly assigned to a training set (n = 620) and test set (n = 309). 358 patients from nine others centers constituted an independent validation set. The overall cumulative incidences of 6-month NRM were 11%, 12%, and 13% for the training, test, and validation sets respectively. The incidence of lethal GVHD, defined as death without preceding relapse while under steroid treatment for acute GVHD, were 18%, 24%, and 14% in the same groups, respectively. The median day of GVHD onset was 28 days in the training set and 29 days in the test and validation sets. We measured four GVHD related biomarkers [ST2, REG3α, TNFR1, and IL2Rα] in all samples and used the training set alone to develop competing risks regression models that used all 13 possible combinations of one to four biomarkers to predict 6-month NRM. The best algorithm, which we rigorously confirmed through Monte Carlo cross-validation of 75 different combinations of training sets, included ST2 and REG3α. No combination of one, three, or four biomarkers was superior to the combination of these two biomarkers. The day 7 algorithm identified high risk (HR) and low risk (LR) groups with 6-month NRMs of 28% and 7%, respectively (p<0.001) (Fig 1A). The relapse rates did not differ between risk groups so that overall survival (OS) was 60% for HR and 84% for LR (p<0.001) (Fig 1B). When applied to the test set (Fig 1C/D), the algorithm identified 54/309 (17%) of the patients as HR with an NRM of 33% vs 7% for LR patients (p<0.001) and 6-month OS of 57% and 81% for HR and LR patients, respectively (p<0.001). In the independent validation set (Fig 1 E/F), the algorithm identified 72/358 (20%) of the patients as HR with an NRM of 26% vs 10% for LR patients (p<0.001) and OS of 68% and 85% for HR and LR patients, respectively (p<0.001). High risk patients were three times more likely to die from GVHD than LR patients in each cohort (p<0.001) (Fig 2). The GI tract is the GVHD target organ that is most resistant to treatment and represents a major cause of NRM, and we observed twice as much severe GI GVHD (stage 3 or 4) in HR patients as in LR patients (p<0.001, data not shown). The algorithm successfully separated HR and LR strata for 6 month NRM in several groups with differing risks for GVHD and NRM, including donor type, degree. of HLA-match, age group, and conditioning regimen intensity (Fig 3). In conclusion, we have developed a blood biomarker algorithm that predicts the development of lethal GVHD seven days after HCT, which performed successfully in large multicenter validation sets. The GVH reaction is already in progress by day +7, even though clinical symptoms may not occur until days or weeks later. We speculate that the blood biomarker concentrations at this early time point reflect subclinical GI pathology, a notion that is reinforced by the fact that ST2 and REG3α, the two biomarkers in the algorithm, are closely associated with GI GVHD. The algorithm identified HR and LR strata in several patient groups with different overall risk for lethal GVHD (donor, HLA match, conditioning regimen intensity, age). This day +7 algorithm should prove useful in clinical BMT research by identifying patients at high risk for lethal GVHD who might benefit from aggressive preemptive treatment strategies. Disclosures Chen: Novartis: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Jagasia:Therakos: Consultancy. Kitko:Therakos: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Kroeger:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding. Levine:Viracor: Patents & Royalties: GVHD biomarkers patent. Ferrara:Viracor: Patents & Royalties: GVHD biomarkers patent.