Citations

Abstract Abstract 2877 Poster Board II-853 Background and Objective: In newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) patients, treatment with lenalidomide plus high-dose dexamethasone (RD) was superior to high-dose dexamethasone in terms of both response rates and 1-year progression-free survival (PFS) (Zonder JA et al, Blood 2007;110:77). Preliminary results suggest that the combination lenalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone (Rd) compared to the RD regimen yields significantly better 2-year overall survival (OS) (Rajkumar SV et al, J Clin Oncol 2008;26:8504). The combination of melphalan, prednisone, and lenalidomide (MPR) has been investigated in a phase I/II study showing promising results (Palumbo A et al, J Clin Oncol 2007; 25:4459-4465). The goal of this case –control study was to compare the efficacy and the toxicity of the lenalidomide/dexamethasone (len/dex) combination vs MPR as primary therapy for newly diagnosed elderly MM patients, to determine the additive value of melphalan compared to a regimen of lenalidomide plus corticosteroid. Patients and methods: Data from 51 newly diagnosed MM patients enrolled in Italy in a phase I/II dose-escalating trial, from January to October 2005, with MPR, were analyzed. For comparison of their outcome, 37 patients were identified among newly diagnosed patients seen at the Mayo Clinic from March 2005 to December 2008 who received len/dex as primary therapy and were enrolled in phase II or III trials. Patients treated with MPR received 9 monthly cycles of oral melphalan (doses ranging from 0.18 to 0.25 mg/kg on days 1-4), prednisone (2 mg/kg on days 1-4) and lenalidomide (doses ranging from 5 to 10 mg/day on days 1-21). After 9 cycles, patients started maintenance with lenalidomide alone (10 mg, days 1-21) until relapse or progression. Patients treated with len/dex received oral lenalidomide (25 mg/day, days 1-21) plus dexamethasone, either at low-dose (n=17) (40 mg orally days 1, 8, 15, 22) or at high-dose (n=21) (40 mg orally on days 1-4, 9-12, and 17-20). Treatment was continued until progression, relapse or unacceptable toxicity, or could be stopped at the physician's discretion. Patients (n=13) were allowed to receive transplant if they wished and were deemed eligible. Outcome was analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. The Chi-square or the rank sum tests were used to compare variables. Time-to-event analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method and comparisons were determined by the log-rank test and the Cox proportional hazards model. Results: On intention-to-treat analysis, 15.7% versus 23.7% patients, respectively in the MPR and in the len/dex group, (p=0.342) achieved a complete response, and 43.2% vs 47.4%, (p=0.691) achieved at least a very good partial response. Time-to-progression (TTP) (median: 24.7 vs 27.5 in MPR and len/dex groups, respectively; HR 1.04; 95% CI 0.55-1.98; p=0.903), PFS (median: 24.7 vs 27.5 in MPR and len/dex groups, respectively; HR 1.03; 95% CI 0.55-1.92; p=0.926) and OS (2-year OS: 86.2% in MPR group vs 89.1% in len/dex, HR 0.86; 95% CI 0.38-1.98; p=0.730) were not significantly different between the 2 groups. No significant differences in TTP, PFS and OS were reported when MPR patients were compared with the subgroup of patients treated with low-dose dexamethasone plus lenalidomide. Similar results were found when the analysis was restricted to MPR patients and len/dex pair mates receiving lenalidomide plus low/dose dexamethasone, matched according to age and sex, and who did not received transplant. The toxicity profile was different in the two groups. Hematologic grade 3-4 toxicities were more common with MPR compared with len/dex, in particular neutropenia (66.7% vs 21.1%, p < 0.001) and thrombocytopenia (31.4% vs 2.6%, p < 0.001), respectively. Grade 3-4 gastrointestinal events (13.2% vs 2.0%, p= 0.080), thrombotic events (13.2 vs 5.9, p= 0.279) and fatigue (10.5% vs 3.9%, p= 0.395) were more common with len/dex compared with MPR. Conclusion: Results of this case-control study show that both MPR and Rd are efficacious regimens for elderly MM patients. Data need however to be carefully evaluated and randomized control trials are needed to confirm these results. Disclosures: Off Label Use: research drug in combination to standard of care. Kumar:celgene: Research Funding; millenium: Research Funding; bayer: Research Funding; novartis: Research Funding; genzyme: Research Funding. Dispenzieri:celgene: Research Funding. Gertz:celgene: Honoraria; genzyme: Honoraria; millenium: Honoraria; amgen: Honoraria. Lacy:celgene: Research Funding. Musto:celgene: Honoraria. Fonseca:medtronic: Consultancy; genzyme: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; amgen: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; otsuka: Consultancy. Petrucci:celgene: Honoraria; Janssen Cilag: Honoraria. Greipp:celgene: Research Funding. Boccadoro:jansen Cilag: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; pharmion: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Palumbo:Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria.

Abstract Abstract 2868 Poster Board II-844 Background and Objective: In newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM), the combination of lenalidomide plus high-dose dexamethasone (RD) is superior to high-dose dexamethasone (Zonder JA et al, Blood 2007;110:77). Preliminary results show that lenalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone (Rd) has better 2-year overall survival (OS) compared with RD (Rajkumar SV et al, J Clin Oncol 2008;26:8504). The addition of clarithromycin (Biaxin) to lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone (BiRd) has been investigated in a phase II study, demonstrating a high response rate and 2-year OS (Niesvizky R at al, Blood 2008;111:1101-1109). However, the additive value of clarithromycin is not known. No randomized trials have compared Rd versus BiRd, none are planned. The objective of this case–matched study was to compare the efficacy and the toxicity of BiRd vs Rd as initial therapy for newly diagnosed MM. Patients and methods: Data from 72 newly diagnosed MM patients treated at the New York Presbyterian Hospital–Cornell Medical Center, from December 2004 to December 2006, with BiRD, were analyzed. For comparison, an equal number of pair mates were selected among newly diagnosed patients seen at the Mayo Clinic who received Rd, from March 2005 to December 2008. Case matching was performed with respect to age, gender, and transplant status. Patients treated with BiRd received oral lenalidomide (25 mg/day, days 3-21 of cycle 1; days 1-21 of subsequent cycles); dexamethasone (40 mg days 1, 2, 3, 8, 15, 22 of cycle 1; days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of each subsequent cycle); clarithromycin (500 mg twice daily, from day 2 of cycle 1). Patients treated with Rd received oral lenalidomide (25 mg/day, days 1-21) plus low-dose dexamethasone (40 mg days 1, 8, 15, 22). In both groups patients were allowed to discontinue treatment to pursue transplant, but treatment until progression, relapse or unacceptable toxicity was permitted at the physician's discretion. Outcome was analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. The Chi-square or the rank sum tests were used to compare variables. Time-to-event analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method; comparisons were determined by the log-rank test and the Cox proportional hazards model. Results: Median duration of treatment was 11.8 months in the BiRd group vs 6 months in the Rd group. On intention-to-treat analysis, complete response was significantly higher with BiRd compared to Rd (45.8% vs 13.9%, respectively, p<0.001); similarly very good partial response (VGPR) or better was higher with BiRd (73.6% vs 33.3%, p<0.001). Rates of VGPR or better, after 6 months and 1 year of therapy, were significantly higher in BiRd patients. Both time-to-progression (TTP) (median 48.3 months vs 27.5 months; HR 0.51; 95% CI 0.25-1.06; p=0.071) and PFS (median 48.3 months vs 27.5 months, HR 0.50; 95% CI 0.25-0.98; p=0.044) were higher with BiRd. Median time to next treatment (TTNT) was not reached in BiRd group compared to 29.9 months in Rd patients (HR 0.37 95% CI 0.20-0.66, p<0.001). There was a trend toward better OS with BiRd, (3-year OS: 89.7% vs 73.0%), but the difference was not statistically significant (HR 0.48; 95% CI 0.17-1.37; p=0.170). Thirty-two patients in each group received transplant; median time to transplant was longer in BiRd group (13.5 vs 5.9 months). Results of survival, for patients who received transplant and patients who did not, were similar to those of the total population. On subset analysis, among patients presenting with International Staging System (ISS) stage I/II at diagnosis, TTP, PFS and TTNT were significantly longer in BiRd patients; no significant differences were found among patients with ISS stage III. Main grade 3-4 toxicities of BiRd were hematological, in particular thrombocytopenia (23.6% vs 8.3%, p=0.012); rate of neutropenia was similar between the 2 groups (19.4% vs 16.7%, p=0.665). Infections (16.7% vs 9.7%, p=0.218) and dermatological toxicity (12.5% vs 4.2%, p=0.129) were higher in patients who received Rd. Rate of venous thromboembolism was similar in the 2 groups (9.7% vs 12.5%, respectively in Rd and BiRd patients, p=0.596). Conclusion: Results of this case-control analysis suggest superiority of BiRd in terms of response rate and survival, compared with Rd, and suggest that there may be a significant additive value when clarithromycin is added to Rd. These data indicate the need for randomized prospective phase III studies to evaluate BiRd versus Rd in the treatment of MM. Disclosures: Off Label Use: research drug in combination to standard of care. Kumar:celgene: Research Funding; millenium: Research Funding; bayer: Research Funding; novartis: Research Funding; genzyme: Research Funding. Mark:celgene: Research Funding. Dispenzieri:celgene: Research Funding. Gertz:celgene: Honoraria; genzime: Honoraria; millenium: Honoraria; amgen: Honoraria. Leonard:celgene: Consultancy. Lacy:celgene: Research Funding. Witzig:celgene: Research Funding. Fonseca:medtronic: Consultancy; genzyme: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; amgen: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; otsuka: Consultancy. Greipp:celgene: Research Funding. Niesvizky:celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millenium: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Proteolix: Research Funding, data monitoring committee.

Abstract Abstract 2965 Background: Alkylating agents have been the mainstay of multiple myeloma (MM) therapy for decades and despite introduction of several new therapies, it continues to play a significant role in its management as part of various drug combinations. While melphalan has been the most commonly used alkylator in MM, recent studies have suggested significant activity for bendamustine, a bifunctional alkylator. The combination of lenalidomide and melphalan has been associated with high response rates in relapse and newly diagnosed MM. Based on these promising results we designed a trial to evaluate the maximally tolerated dose of lenalidomide and bendamustine when used in combination as well as the efficacy of the combination in relapsed disease. Patients and Methods: Patients with relapsed MM and measurable disease were enrolled on this phase 1/2 trial provided they had not more than 4 prior lines of therapy for MM, had adequate performance status and organ and hematological function. Patients refractory to lenalidomide were allowed to enroll. The primary objectives were to (i) to determine the MTD of bendamustine and lenalidomide in combination with dexamethasone in subjects with relapsed MM (phase 1) and (ii) to evaluate the confirmed response rate of bendamustine in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed MM (phase 2). Bendamustine (B) was administered on days 1 and 2 of a 28-day cycle at doses of 50–100 mg/m2. Lenalidomide (R) was given days 1–21 at doses of 15–25 mg daily. Dexamethasone (D) was administered at 40 mg weekly. Dose escalation was done using a 3+3 design and MTD was defined as one dose level below that resulted in >=2 DLTS among 6 patients. The primary end point for this trial was the proportion of patients with confirmed hematologic response (sCR, CR, VGPR, or PR) over the first 6 cycles of treatment. Results: A total of 72 patients were accrued to this study from March 2010 to May 2012: 21 patients in phase 1 and 51 in phase 2. The 6 patients from the MTD dose level of phase 1 were also included in phase 2. The median age of all 72 patients was 62.1 (range, 40–86) and 57% were male. Majority (75%) of patients had previously been exposed to lenalidomide and 69% had prior exposure to bortezomib. Median # of prior therapies was 3 (range, 1–5) and 74% of patients had a prior autologous stem cell transplant. Patients have received a median of 4 cycles (range, 1–25), with 27 patients still continuing on active treatment. Disease progression led to study discontinuation in 22 (49%) and adverse events were the reason for discontinuation in 14 (31%). In phase I, two DLTs (Grade (Gr) 2 neuropathy and Gr 4 neutropenia) were seen at the highest dose level (100 mg/m2 B, 25 mg R), and the MTD was determined as 75 mg/m2 of B given days 1 and 2 and 25 mg of R days 1–21, along with D 40 mg weekly. Overall patients, 12/21 (57%) had a PR or better. In phase 2, 17 (40%) confirmed responses (>=PR) were seen among the 43 patients evaluable for response (received at least 6 cycles of treatment or have gone off study prior to 6 cycles); including 9 (21%) VGPR and 8 (19%) PR. An additional 5 patients had a minor response. Over all dose levels, a gr 3 or higher adverse event at least possibly attributed to the study was seen in 75% of patients. The most common toxicities were all hematological (thrombocytopenia and leukopenia), and most common non-hematological toxicity was infection. Prolonged time to recovery of blood counts was seen in a few patients, but majority of patients were able to tolerate the regimen with adequate dose reductions. Conclusion: The recommended dose of the combination for further studies is bendamustine at 75 mg/m2 days 1 and 2, lenalidomide 25 mg daily on days 1–21 and dexamethasone days 1, 8, 15, 22; with cycles repeated every 28 days. The regimen is well tolerated with hematological toxicity being the most common and manageable with dose reductions. The regimen is effective with high response rates and durable responses seen. Updated results with response rates and time to event analyses will be available for the entire cohort at the time of meeting. Disclosures: Kumar: Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Cephalon: Research Funding; Genzyme: Research Funding. Krishnan:celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Zimmerman:Celgene: Honoraria; Millennium: Honoraria; Novartis: Expert Testimony, Expert Testimony Other. Vij:Teva: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Honoraria, Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 1858 Systemic light chain amyloidosis (AL amyloidosis) is a condition where clonal plasma cells produce misfolded insoluble immunoglobulin light chains that deposit in various organs causing progressive organ dysfunction. Chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) when eligible is the standard treatment options for patients with AL amyloidosis. There are several studies who report long term outcomes of patient post ASCT. However, there is a paucity of literature describing the outcomes of patients who have received ASCT but have relapsed. We performed a retrospective study to assess the outcomes and treatment regimens employed following relapse after ASCT. Between 1996 and 2009, 410 patients received ASCT at the Mayo Clinic as first line therapy. Of those 410 patients 42 patients died within 3 months of transplant, 64 patients died without documented relapse, 158 patients were alive without documented progression, and 146 patients had documented progression. Those 146 patients are the subject of our study. The median time to hematologic relapse was 2 years (range: 0.2–15.5 years). At relapse, 59 patients were treated with IMiD based therapy, 36 with alkylator based therapy, 24 with bortezomib, 15 with steroids, and 5 with second ASCT. The respective hematologic response rates were 58%, 33%, 50%, 53%, and 60%. The remaining six patients were not evaluable for response for one other following reasons: organ transplants; no further therapy; inevaluable disease. With a median post relapse follow up of 3.6 years, the median overall survival (OS) from the first post ASCT relapse was 4.6 years. The median post transplant follow up was 6.1 years, the median OS for these patients was 7.3 years from the time of transplant. These data provide novel information about outcomes after SCT relapse, which should be useful not only for patients and doctors but also for investigators designing studies for salvage therapies post-transplant. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract Abstract 3138 Background: Several recent reports have suggested that doxycycline can inhibit amyloid fibril formation in different in vitro and in vivo model systems. Doxycycline is the antibiotic of choice for infectious disease prophylaxis in patients with penicillin allergy, following autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation for various hematological malignancies. We examined the outcome of patients with light chain amyloidosis (AL) undergoing autologous stem cell transplantation to study the impact of doxycycline used as antibacterial prophylaxis. Patients and methods: We studied 455 patients who underwent autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) for AL between March 1996 and December 2011. We excluded 44 patients who died of transplant related complications or did not survive beyond 100 days after transplant. Patient records were reviewed to ascertain the prophylactic antibiotic used. Survival was estimated using Kaplan Meier method and the survival curves were compared using log-rank test. Cox proportional hazard model was used to estimate the prognostic impact of different variables. Results: The median age of the patients was 58 years (range, 26–74); 290 (67%) were male. The median estimated follow up for the entire cohort was 73 months (95% CI; 66, 79) and 314 (69%) were alive at last follow up. Doxycycline was used a prophylaxis in 106 (23%) of the patients, with most of the remaining receiving penicillin. The usual reason for using doxycycline was a history of penicillin allergy. Hematological response to transplant occurred in 377 (87%) patients, and there was no significant difference between patients receiving doxycycline prophylaxis compared with the rest. The median OS for the entire cohort was 161 months (95% CI; 101, NR). The median OS for those receiving doxycycline prophylaxis was not reached compared with 113 months for the rest (P=0.09). Looking specifically at those patients with a hematological response, the median OS was not reached for the doxycycline group compared with 161 months for the rest (P=0.04, figure). There was no difference in the OS between the groups among those with no hematological response. The impact of the prophylaxis was independent of the number of organs involved as well as organ response to SCT. Conclusions: The results of the current study appear to demonstrate a survival advantage for patients with AL who receives doxycycline prophylaxis, in the setting of hematological response from SCT. The results are consistent with the data regarding the effect of doxycycline on amyloid fibril formation. These initial findings should form the basis of clinical exploration of doxycycline as an adjunctive therapy in patients receiving other standard therapies for AL. Such a study can further clarify if use of doxycycline for longer duration can be of additional benefit. Disclosures: Kumar: Cephalon: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria; Genzyme: Research Funding.

Abstract Abstract 2973 Eukaryotic translation initiation Factor 5A (eIF5A) has been implicated in the regulation of apoptosis and is the only known protein to be modified by hypusination. Hypusinated eIF5A is the predominant form of eIF5A in cancer cells. However, in its unhypusinated form, eIF5A is pro-apoptotic. SNS01-T, designed to treat B-cell cancers, consists of two active components: a plasmid DNA expressing eIF5AK50R (human eIF5A containing a lysine to arginine substitution at position 50) which remains pro-apoptotic because it cannot be hypusinated, and an siRNA against an untranslated region of native eIF5A mRNA. When these two components are combined with linear polyethyleneimine (PEI), the nucleic acids are condensed into nanoparticles for protection from degradation in the blood and enhanced delivery to tissues. The eIF5AK50R transgene is under the control of the B29 promoter and enhancer, which restricts expression to B cells. The mode of action of SNS01-T is to use an eIF5A-specific siRNA to deplete the pool of hypusinated eIF5A in myeloma cells while simultaneously adding pro-apoptotic eIF5AK50R. In vitro cell studies and in vivo xenograft studies have demonstrated the efficacy of this approach. Eligible patients are enrolled sequentially into four cohorts of increasingly higher doses. Each cohort will receive SNS01-T by intravenous infusion twice weekly for 6 consecutive weeks and then be observed every 4 weeks during a 24-week follow-up period. Eligible patients must have been diagnosed with multiple myeloma according to IMWG criteria, have measurable disease, have relapsed disease after two or more prior treatment regimens, have a life expectancy of at least 3 months, and not be eligible to receive any other standard therapy known to extend life expectancy. The primary objective is to evaluate the safety and tolerability of multiple ascending doses of SNS01-T. Secondary objectives include pharmacokinetics, immunogenicity studies, proinflammatory cytokine quantitation, and therapeutic efficacy. The required number of 3 patients completed the dosing schedule in Cohort 1 from a total of 6 patients enrolled. Two of three patients had not progressed on treatment, based on standard response criteria including the monoclonal protein, and were considered stable at week 3 and week 6 the end of the dosing regimen. Three patients were withdrawn from the study by their physicians due to disease progression before completing treatment. One of the responding patients has continued to have stable disease at week 10, a month after the end of treatment with SNS01-T. The first group of patients received 0.0125 mg/kg, approximately 1 mg per patient by intravenous infusion. The planned dose levels for the second, third and fourth groups are 0.05, 0.2 and 0.375 mg/kg, respectively. The results to date of this first in man clinical trial indicate that SNS01-T was safely administered without dose-limiting toxicities in the first group of multiple myeloma patients. The MTD has not yet been reached. (Clinical Trials.gov Identifier: NCT01435720.) Disclosures: Hamadani: Celgene Corp: Speakers Bureau; American Cancer Society 116837-IRG-09–061–01: Research Funding; ASBMT & Millennium New Investigator Award: Research Funding; Conquer Cancer Foundation of ASCO: Research Funding. Barranco:Senesco Technologies: Employment. Thompson:Senesco Technologies Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Taylor:Senesco Technologies Inc.: stock options Other. Dondero:Senesco Technologies Inc.: Employment.

Abstract Background: Patients with monoclonal gammopathies typically have a single clone making a unique type of monoclonal protein, one heavy chain and one light chain. In a small proportion of patients, more than one (typically two) types of monoclonal protein can be seen and differ with respect to the heavy chain or light chain or both. There is limited information on the clinical course of patients with more than one monoclonal protein identified in their serum or urine. Objectives: We report outcomes of patients with more than one monoclonal protein at our institution over the past thirty years. Patients and Methods: We queried the existing clinical database to identify all patients with at least two different monoclonal protein types identified on serum or urine studies during the course of their disease. Retrospective chart review was performed on 551 patients, who had more than one type of monoclonal protein on electrophoresis and/or immunofixation. Results: Among the entire study cohort (N=551), 461 pts (84%) had a biclonal pattern, 7 (1%) had a triclonal pattern and the remaining 83 (15%) had a monoclonal pattern at the time of initial positive study. The median age at the time of initial diagnosis was 69.7 years (range; 32-93); 359 (65%) were male. Among these, 390 were diagnosed as MGUS/BGUS, 18 with SMM, 36 with MM, 20 with WM, and rest with another lymphoproliferative disorders. The median duration between the initial detection of monoclonal protein and the emergence of the biclonal protein was 40 months for the 83 patients, who were monoclonal initially. The distributions of the dominant monoclonal proteins were GK (30%), GL (21%), MK (22%), ML (9%), AK (9%), and AL (8%). The distributions of the second monoclonal proteins were GK (27%), GL (24%), MK (16%), ML (15%), AK (10%), and AL (7%). Overall, 20 patients with a MGUS/BGUS progressed to smoldering or symptomatic myeloma, while 12 patients with an initial diagnosis of SMM progressed to MM. The median estimated follow up for the MGUS/BGUS group and those with SMM were 6.5 years (95% CI; 5, 7) and 9.8 (95% CI; 4, 13), respectively. This translates to 20 progressions over 3822 person years of follow up for the MGUS/BGUS patient group and 12 progressions over 131 person years of follow up for the SMM group. The rate of progression was ~1% per year for patients with MGUS/BGUS and the median estimated time to progression was 2.6 years for the SMM group. (Figure). In majority of patients, the dominant M spike increased with the disease progression. Conclusion: Patients with biclonal gammopathies appear to have a similar rate of progression compared to what has been historically described for MGUS/ SMM population. For the patients who progressed and received treatment, both M proteins typically responded to therapy, and during relapse, the original dominant M protein typically reemerged as the dominant M protein. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Kumar: Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Array BioPharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi-Aventis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: The Takeda Oncology Co.: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Skyline Diagnostics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Abstract Background: Among patients with immunoglobulin light chain (AL) amyloidosis, there is little consensus on when reinstitution of chemotherapy should occur (Milani and Dispenzieri, International Society of Amyloidosis 2016). AL amyloidosis patients who are treated with high dose chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) are a relatively low-risk and homogenous population, making them an ideal group to study practice patterns. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study to evaluate the patterns of relapse or progression and the timing of re-initiation of therapy among 146 patients who were initially treated with ASCT at Mayo Clinic between 1996 and 2009 and who received second-line therapy between 7/9/1997 and 4/12/2012. Results: The median time from ASCT to second-line therapy was 23.6 months and the median follow up post ASCT was 57.5 months. The indications for second-line treatment were: 1) both hematologic and organ progression 24.7% (36 patients); 2) organ progression only 41.1% (60); 3) hematologic relapse only 34.2% (50). The median dFLC at the time of starting second-line therapy was 10.5 mg/dL (1.6 - 59.5 mg/dL), which was 44.9% (13.8-167.2%) of dFLC level at diagnosis. Increase in proteinuria by > 50% from nadir (that was also at least 1g/24 hours, i.e. renal progression) was present in 35.8%. Increase in NT proBNP by >30% from nadir and minimum of 300 pg/mL was present in 48.9% of patients. The respective 4 years overall survival rates from the time of ASCT were 87.8%, 63.9%, and 56.7% (p=0.0016) for patients who had hematologic relapse, organ progression only and both organ and hematologic progression. Comparisons of laboratory markers at diagnosis, nadir of post ASCT and initiation of second-line therapy are listed in the table. Conclusions: Our study investigated the patterns of relapse / progression following upfront ASCT. This provides some insights on practice patterns of when physicians re-initiate therapy. Table Table. Disclosures Gertz: NCI Frederick: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Med Learning Group: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Research to Practice: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Research Funding; Prothena Therapeutics: Research Funding; GSK: Honoraria; Sandoz Inc: Honoraria; Ionis: Research Funding; Alnylam Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Annexon Biosciences: Research Funding. Kumar:Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Array BioPharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Noxxon Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Glycomimetics: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy; Skyline: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kesios: Consultancy. Kapoor:Celgene: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Dispenzieri:Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Alnylam: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Jannsen: Research Funding; pfizer: Research Funding; GSK: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction High dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is an effective therapy for eligible patients with newly diagnosed systemic AL amyloidosis. Dose attenuated melphalan is used in patients with older age, renal dysfunction, and multi-organ involvement in an effort to limit treatment related mortality. Reducing the dose of melphalan compromises response rates and survival outcomes, but this is often contributed to frailty of these patients. The revised Mayo staging (MS) system improves risk stratification and helps develop risk-adapted therapies. We analyzed the outcomes of ASCT following standard [(200 mg/m2); SD group] versus risk adapted [(140-160 mg/m2); RD group] melphalan conditioning, in the context of the factors typically leading to dose modification. Methods Three hundred and twenty nine patients with newly diagnosed systemic AL amyloidosis who underwent conditioning with melphalan followed by ASCT at Mayo Clinic between 2006 and 2015 were identified using existing databases. The clinical and laboratory data, treatment and follow - up details were collected by chart review and analyzed retrospectively. Overall survival(OS) was defined as the time from start of initial therapy until death from any cause or last follow up. Progression free survival(PFS) was defined as the time to relapse or progression requiring change or reinstitution of treatment or death from any cause. The OS and PFS curves were estimated using Kaplan-Meier method while log rank test was used to estimate their difference. Multivariate survival analysis was performed using the Cox proportional hazards model. Results Among the 329 patients, 240 patients were in SD group and 89 patients were in RD group (1 patient received 120 mg/ m2, 2 received 160 mg/m2 and the rest received 140 mg / m2). In the SD group, median age was 58.5 years (25.6 - 72.3); 59.6% were males; 38.7% / 61.7 %/ 7.5% had cardiac / renal /hepatic involvement; and 47.1% / 35.7% / 8.8% / 8.4% had MS I/II/III/IV. In the RD group, median age was 60.8 years (40 - 73.7); 62.9% were males; 66.3% / 71.9 %/ 11.2% had cardiac / renal /hepatic involvement; and 26.2% / 32.5% / 21.2% / 20% had MS I/II/III/IV. The response rates for patients in the SD group [complete response (CR) - 53.7%, very good partial response (VGPR) - 19.6%, partial response (PR) - 12.5%, no response (NR) - 1.2%, progressive disease (PD) - 1.6%] were significantly higher than patients in the RD group (CR - 34.8%, VGPR - 20.2%, PR - 15.7%, NR - 10.1%, PD - 1.1%) (85.8 vs 70.7%; p < 0.002). The PFS and OS for both the groups according to Mayo stage are presented in Figure 1. Multivariate survival analysis for PFS and OS was performed using age (≤ vs > 70 years), serum creatinine (≤ vs > 2 mg/dL), number of major organs involved (heart, kidney, liver, gastrointestinal tract and autonomic neuropathy), MS (1 vs 2 vs 3 and 4) and dose of melphalan (SD vs RD). The dose of melphalan (p=0.0002), MS (p=0.03) and the number of organs involved (p=0.04) were significant for PFS while the dose of melphalan (p=0.0001) and the MS (p = 0.004) were significant for OS. Conclusion Reducing the dose of melphalan during conditioning for frontline ASCT in systemic AL amyloidosis renders more patients eligible for transplant but compromises on the response rates. There is no impact on PFS and OS in Mayo stage I patients. However the OS as well as PFS in Mayo stage II, III and IV were significantly lower in RD group as compared to SD group. These results suggest a suboptimal outcome with use of reduced dose melphalan, even after accounting for the pother prognostic factors, suggesting that high dose therapy should potentially be limited to those eligible to receive the full dose conditioning. Disclosures Dispenzieri: Jannsen: Research Funding; pfizer: Research Funding; GSK: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Alnylam: Research Funding; Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Kapoor:Takeda: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Kumar:Skyline: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy; AbbVie: Research Funding; Array BioPharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Glycomimetics: Consultancy; Kesios: Consultancy; Noxxon Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction Immunoglobulin light chain amyloidosis (AL Amyloidosis) is a monoclonal plasma cell proliferative disorder that is characterized by tissue deposits of misfolded insoluble κ or λ light chain derived amyloid fibrils, leading to organ dysfunction. The prognosis of patients depends on the number and severity of organ involvement, especially cardiac involvement. Autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT), if eligible, alkylator (melphalan) and novel drugs like proteasome inhibitors (PI) and immunomodulators (IMiD) have improved the overall survival (OS) during the past decades. But still, nearly half of the patients die within a year of diagnosis. We analyzed the factors predicting early relapse / progression or death (within 12 months) after first line therapy for systemic AL amyloidosis. Methods Clinical and laboratory data of all consecutive patients with systemic AL amyloidosis seen at Mayo Clinic within 90 days of their diagnosis, between 2006 and 2015, was collected by chart review and analyzed retrospectively. Patients who died within 3 months of starting the first line treatment were excluded from analysis. Early relapse (ER) was defined as relapse / progression requiring treatment change / re-institution or death within 12 months of starting first line treatment. Patients in the cohort with ER were compared with patients with a follow up of more than 12 months who had a relapse / progression beyond 12 months or had continuing response at the time of analysis. Categorical variables were analyzed using chi - square and Fisher's exact test and continuous variables using Kruskal- Wallis test and Wilcoxon rank sum test. Multivariate analysis was done using logistic regression model. Results Seven hundred and eighty six patients with newly diagnosed systemic AL amyloidosis met the study criteria and were included in the analysis. Among these, 230 (29.3%) patients had ER within 12 months of starting initial therapy while 556 (70.7%) patients either relapsed after 1 year or had continuing response at the time of analysis. Baseline demographics, organ involvement and type of first line therapy are presented in Table1. The median estimated follow up for the entire cohort from start of initial therapy was 62.9 months (95% CI; 59.9, 67.3). The variables included in the univariate and multivariate analyses for factors predicting ER were age at diagnosis (≤ vs > 70 years ), revised mayo stage (I and II vs III and IV), bone marrow plasma cell percentage (BMPC; ≤ 10% vs > 10%), presence of any chromosomal abnormalities, trisomies or IgH translocations by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), multiorgan involvement [(>1 vs 1) (heart, liver, kidney, gastrointestinal tract, autonomic neuropathy), incorporation of ASCT in initial therapy. In univariate analysis, mayo stage (p<0.0001), multiorgan involvement (p=0.0008) and inclusion of ASCT as part of initial therapy (p<0.0001) were significantly associated with ER, while age (p=0.06), BMPC(p=0.9), FISH abnormalities (p=0.2) were not. However, in multivariate analysis, only mayo stage (III + IV vs I + II; p=0.01) and non-inclusion of ASCT in first line treatment (p=0.0001) were significantly predictive of ER. Conclusions Despite the introduction of ASCT and novel drugs, the early mortality in systemic AL amyloidosis remains high. This study demonstrates that patients with ER are older with higher prevalence of cardiac involvement and multiorgan involvement and higher Mayo stage (III and IV). Incorporation of ASCT as part of the initial therapy was associated with reduced early relapse, but it is difficult to separate the influence of the eligibility for ASCT from the effect of ASCT itself. This will help us in characterizing these patients to better understand their mechanisms of resistance to therapy and gives an insight to the type of initial therapy that benefits them. Disclosures Dispenzieri: GSK: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jannsen: Research Funding; Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Alnylam: Research Funding; pfizer: Research Funding. Kapoor:Takeda: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Kumar:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kesios: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Noxxon Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Glycomimetics: Consultancy; Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Array BioPharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Skyline: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding.