Citations

Abstract Introduction: Prognosis of AL amyloidosis has improved in recent years; however for many patients prognosis remains poor. We aimed to define patient-, disease- and treatment characteristics which are associated with long-term survival. Method: A retrospective chart review of all patients with biopsy-proven systemic AL amyloidosis, who were seen within 90 days of the confirmed diagnosis. Long-term survival was defined as 5-year and 10-year survival from the time of diagnosis. For 5-year survival we selected patients seen between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2012 (allowing a minimum of 5-year follow-up, n=1331) and for 10-year survival we screened patients seen between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2007 (allowing a minimum of 10-year follow-up; n=779). Treatment allocation was defined as the first regimen given, irrespective of subsequent treatment modifications. Results: Of the screening population, 498 patients survived ≥5 years from diagnosis (37% of the 5-year screening cohort) and 168 patients survived 10 years or more (22% of the 10-year screening cohort). Five-year survivors and 10-year survivors as compared to their counterparts were (Table): younger, higher proportion of women, more likely to have single organ involvement, less heart/liver/nerve involvement and more kidney involvement. Long-term survivors also had lower bone marrow plasma cell percentage at the time of diagnosis and lower tumor burden measured by the difference between involved to uninvolved light chain (dFLC). Similarly, long-term survivors had lower Mayo stages and higher systolic blood pressure. No difference in light chain isotype was observed between long-term survivors to long term non-survivors. Long-term survivors were less likely to be seen within 30 days of diagnosis compared to their counterparts (52% among 5-year survivors vs 67% among 5-year non-survivor; P<0.001). FISH abnormalities (data available for 555/1331 patients, 42%) were comparable between groups with regard to t(11;14) (50% among 5-year survival compared to 50% among 5-year non-survivors; P=0.93) and 13q abnormalities (34% vs 36%, respectively; P=0.53). However, trisomies were less frequently encountered in the 5-year survivor group (20% vs 29%, respectively; P=0.01), and far less common among 10-year survivors (11% vs 26%, respectively; P=0.04). Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) was more likely to be associated with long-term survival. Of all patients who underwent ASCT, 74% survived more than 5 years and 49% survived more than 10 years. In comparison, among the standard-intensity therapies, 5-year survival rates for melphalan-dexamethasone, bortezomib-based regimens, immunomodulatory drug-based regimens and single agent dexamethasone/ melphalan-prednisone were 29%, 28%, 30% and 10%, respectively. The corresponding 10-year survival rates were 15%, 20%, 20% and 5%, respectively. Conclusions: Long-term AL survivors have distinct favorable baseline characteristics (including those introduced by referral bias) and ASCT as their initial therapy. Identification of these patients, especially the Mayo 2004 stage III and the Mayo 2012 stage III-IV patients who unexpectedly survived 10 years, will allow for further study and insights. Disclosures Gertz: Teva: Consultancy; Prothena: Honoraria; Alnylam: Honoraria; celgene: Consultancy; Ionis: Honoraria; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; Research to Practice: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; janssen: Consultancy; Apellis: Consultancy; Medscape: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria; annexon: Consultancy. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding. Dingli:Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.. Kapoor:Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Russell:Vyriad: Equity Ownership. Kumar:KITE: 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; Novartis: Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck: 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; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Research Funding; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Dispenzieri:Celgene, Takeda, Prothena, Jannsen, Pfizer, Alnylam, GSK: Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction: Outcomes in multiple myeloma have significantly improved in recent times owing to the availability of newer more effective therapies. Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) has been used for over three decades to treat multiple myeloma. We aimed to evaluate the outcome of patients receiving ASCT at our institution between 1990 and 2015. Patients and Methods: A total of 2025 patients received ASCT at Mayo Clinic Rochester between 1st January 1990 and 31st December 2015. The patients were divided in to three cohorts of approximately equal time period, Cohort 1 (1990-1999, n=144), Cohort 2 (2000-2009, n=909) and Cohort 3 (2010-2015, n=972). Outcomes of interest were early mortality, progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Disease characteristics were documented from time of diagnosis and PFS and OS were calculated from date of ASCT unless otherwise stated. Results: Median age for the whole cohort was 60 years (range 24-77) and increased over time (55 Cohort 1 vs 59 Cohort 2 vs 61 Cohort 3, p<0.0001). The proportion of males (60% for whole cohort) was not significantly different between the 3 time periods. Almost all patients (99%, n=2018) received chemotherapy prior to transplantation (median lines of therapy 1, range 0-6). The number of patients receiving >1 line of therapy prior to transplantation decreased over time (67% Cohort 1 vs 27% Cohort 2 vs 34% Cohort 3, p<0.0001). The use of novel agents was congruous with their availability and increased over time (0% Cohort 1 vs 59% Cohort 2 vs 100% Cohort 3, p<0.000). After a median follow up of 84 months (95% CI, 78-91 months), median PFS and OS for the whole cohort were 24 and 66 months respectively. Both PFS and OS improved significantly over time (median PFS: 12 months Cohort 1vs 18 months Cohort 2 vs 33 months Cohort 3, p<0.0001; median OS: 26 months Cohort 1vs 63 months Cohort 2 vs 83 months Cohort 3, p<0.0001), Figure 1. The improvement in PFS and OS over the 3 time periods was seen in patients receiving early (≤ 12 months from diagnosis) and delayed (>12 months) ASCT, Table 2. OS from diagnosis was no different for early versus delayed transplant in Cohort 1 and Cohort 2 (Cohort 1: median OS 57 months for early vs 56 months for delayed, p=0.24 and Cohort 2: median OS 81 months for early vs 82 months for delayed, p=0.70) and showed a trend towards a marginal benefit for delayed transplant in Cohort 3 (median OS 105 months for early vs 109 months for delayed, p=0.046).Treatment related mortality (100 days post transplant) improved over time (7.6% Cohort 1 vs 1.8% Cohort 2 vs 0.7% Cohort 3, p<0.0001), Figure 2A. Mortality within 12 months of ASCT also improved over time (24% Cohort 1vs 8% Cohort 2 vs 6% Cohort 3, p<0.0001). A landmark analysis of OS from 12 months post ASCT continued to reveal improved survival over time(median OS 26 months Cohort 1vs 63 months Cohort 2 vs 83 month Cohort 3, p<0.0001), Figure 2B. Conclusion: ASCT remains an important therapeutic option for eligible patients with multiple myeloma. There has been a marked improvement over time in PFS and OS and reduction in treatment related mortality and early mortality in myeloma patients receiving ASCT. This is likely to reflect the addition of novel agents to induction regimens and improved post transplant therapies. Despite these improvements myeloma remains incurable with patients continuing to relapse and die many years after ASCT. Disclosures Dispenzieri: Celgene, Takeda, Prothena, Jannsen, Pfizer, Alnylam, GSK: Research Funding. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding. Dingli:Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.. Kapoor:Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Kumar:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: 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; KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Gertz:Research to Practice: Consultancy; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria; celgene: Consultancy; annexon: Consultancy; janssen: Consultancy; Alnylam: Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy; Ionis: Honoraria; Teva: Consultancy; Apellis: Consultancy; Medscape: Consultancy; Prothena: Honoraria.

Abstract Introduction Lenalidomide is an immunomodulatory drug that is active in newly diagnosed as well as relapsed multiple myeloma (MM). The goal of this study is to describe patients with newly diagnosed MM remaining on lenalidomide for more than 3 years (long term responders) as well as patients that after discontinuing lenalidomide were able to maintain disease control while only on observation (LenO group). Methods We retrospectively reviewed 283 patients with newly diagnosed MM that were treated with lenalidomide between January 2003 and January 2011. We excluded patients that underwent early autologous stem cell transplant (n=102) or had less than 3 years of follow-up (n=6), leaving 175 patients for the current analysis. Results Long term responders Thirty-three patients (19%) received lenalidomide for more than 3 years. When compared to patients receiving lenalidomide for less than 3 years, at baseline, long term responders were more likely to have standard risk disease (64% versus 44%, p=0.03) and less likely to have high risk disease (18% versus 4%, p=0.04). They were more likely to have achieved a deeper response (VGPR versus PR, p<0.001) and had a longer median time to best response (6 versus 4 months, p<0.001). When considering the 12 patients who received lenalidomide for more than 5 years, this group was more likely to have achieved a deeper response (CR versus PR, p<0.0001) and had a longer median time to achieving best response (9 versus 4 months, p<0.0001) than those 163 patients who remained on lenalidomide for fewer than 5 years. Observation group Thirty-three patients (19%) discontinued lenalidomide for reasons other than progression and were observed without receiving further treatment (LenO group). Prior to moving to observation, five patients had received lenalidomide for more than three years. Indications for stopping in the LenO group included: prolonged disease stability (n= 20); and toxicity (n=13). The only differences in baseline characteristics between the LenO group and patients that were not observed off any treatment was depth of response, with 61% (n=20) of LenO in VGPR or better versus 23% (n=23) in the remainder, p=0.0003. Median PFS from the time of discontinuing lenalidomide was significantly longer in those patients who took lenalidomide for more than 1 year (n=24) when compared to patients taking it for less than one year (n=9) (median PFS off therapy was 38.5 months versus, 14.9 months log rank 0.08; Wilcoxon p<0.05), figure 1a; PFS for those treated for 1-2 years (n=11) as compared to 2 years or greater (n= 13) were comparable to each other (data not shown). Among those taking lenalidomide for at least a year, PFS from time of discontinuing lenalidomide was superior in patients who had achieved a VGPR/CR (n=20) as compared to those who achieved only a PR (n=13) (Median 48.4 months versus 14.8 months, log-rank p<0.05; Wilcoxon p=0.01), figure 1b. Conclusion Approximately one out of five patients with newly diagnosed MM can achieve responses lasting more than three years while on treatment with lenalidomide. Patients with standard risk FISH and those achieving at least VGPR are more likely be long-term responders. Furthermore, long-term responders were more likely to be slow responders. We also demonstrate that suspension of lenalidomide therapy after 1 year among those patients achieving a VGPR or better can result in long-term disease control and can be considered as a therapeutic strategy. Disclosures: Kumar: Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding. Gertz:Celgene: Honoraria. Lacy:Celgene: Honoraria. Dispenzieri:Celgene: Research dollars Other.

Abstract Background: The introduction of several novel agents has led to an improvement in response rates and survival outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Despite significant therapeutic advances a subset of patients with multiple myeloma do not achieve a deep response to first-line treatment and biomarkers are needed to identify those at risk. Methods: We studied 472 patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were treated in clinical practice (n = 280, training cohort) or on prospective clinical trials (n = 192, validation cohort) at Mayo Clinic between 12/2003 and 12/2015. All patients had measurable disease (M-spike ≥ 1.0 g/dL) and received treatment with novel agents. Serum M-spike and free light chains (FLC) were measured before and after the first treatment cycle. The outcome of interest was the best response to first-line treatment (evaluated using the International Myeloma Working Group Uniform Response Criteria). Failure to achieve a deep response was defined as not achieving a very good partial response or better. The serum parameters of interest were the relative decrease in M-spike and absolute free light chain difference (ΔFLC). The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to compare the serum parameters before and after the first treatment cycle. Logistic regression models were used to assess the associations between the change in serum parameters after the first treatment cycle and best response to first-line treatment. P-values below 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Results: The median age at diagnosis in the training and the validation cohort were 67 (32 - 94) and 66 years (41 - 86), respectively. One hundred eighty one (65%) and 103 patients (54%) were male, respectively. The three most common regimens in the training cohort were lenalidomide + dexamethasone, lenalidomide + cyclophosphamide + dexamethasone, and bortezomib + lenalidomide + dexamethasone. In the validation cohort, the three most common regimens were carfilzomib + thalidomide + cyclophosphamide, lenalidomide + cyclophosphamide + dexamethasone, and ixazomib + cyclophosphamide + dexamethasone. In the two cohorts, the median baseline M-spike decreased from 3.1 g/dL (1.0 - 10.0) to 1.7 g/dL (0.0 - 6.6) and 3.2 g/dL (1.0 - 8.5) to 1.4 g/dL (0.0 - 4.5) after the first treatment cycle, respectively (p < 0.001 for both comparisons). The median baseline ΔFLC decreased from 31.1 mg/dL (0.0 - 2269.7) to 5.4 mg/dL (0.0 - 785.8) and from 23.3 mg/dL (0.1 - 3579.6) to 4.3 mg/dL (0.0 - 1139.3) after the first treatment cycle, respectively (p < 0.001 for both comparisons). M-spike reduction < 50% during the first treatment cycle was associated with failure to achieve a deep response: OR 4.54 (95% CI 2.72 - 7.58, p < 0.001) in the training cohort and OR 6.68 (95% CI 3.42 - 13.03, p < 0.001) in the validation cohort. Patients with reduction in M-spike < 10% during the first treatment cycle experienced failure to achieve a deep response in 86% (25/29) and 100% (10/10), respectively. ΔFLC reduction < 50% during the first treatment cycle was associated with treatment failure to achieve a deep response: OR 4.83 (95% CI 2.83 - 8.25, p < 0.001) in the training cohort and OR 5.09 (95% CI 2.37 - 10.92, p < 0.001) in the validation cohort. Patients with reduction in ΔFLC < 10% during the first treatment cycle experienced failure to achieve a deep response in 83% (34/41) and 91% (19/21), respectively. Conclusions: Early changes in M-spike and ΔFLC are strong predictors of response to treatment. We established and prospectively validated two readily available biomarkers that can identify patients at risk for treatment failure and may inform treatment decisions in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Disclosures Lacy: Celgene: Research Funding. Gertz:Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; janssen: Consultancy; Teva: Consultancy; Alnylam: Honoraria; Research to Practice: Consultancy; Apellis: Consultancy; Medscape: Consultancy; annexon: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; Prothena: Honoraria; Ionis: Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy; spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria. Dispenzieri:Celgene, Takeda, Prothena, Jannsen, Pfizer, Alnylam, GSK: Research Funding. Russell:Vyriad: Equity Ownership. Kapoor:Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Kumar:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Abstract Background: Hereditary transthyretin amyloidosis (hATTR) is a rare, progressive, and fatal disease caused by the buildup of transthyretin-derived amyloid protein in major organs, predominantly affecting the peripheral nerves and heart. Inotersen, a second-generation antisense oligonucleotide targeting TTR mRNA, has shown efficacy and safety in patients with hATTR in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study, NEURO-TTR (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01737398; Benson NEJM 2018). Patients with hATTR amyloidosis who completed the NEURO-TTR study were eligible to receive inotersen for up to 5 years in a phase 3 open-label extension study (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02175004). Methods: In NEURO-TTR, patients were randomized 2:1 to receive inotersen (300-mg weekly subcutaneous doses) or placebo. In the open-label extension, patients continued inotersen (inotersen-inotersen) or switched from placebo to inotersen (placebo-inotersen). Evaluations included modified Neuropathy Impairment Score +7 neurophysiologic tests composite score (mNIS+7; higher scores indicate worse neuropathy), Norfolk Quality of Life-Diabetic Neuropathy questionnaire total score (Norfolk QoL-DN; higher scores indicate worse QoL), and adverse events (AEs). Cardiomyopathy (CM) was defined by a diagnosis of hATTR-CM at trial entry or by an interventricular wall thickness of 13 mm or more on transthoracic echocardiography at baseline, as ascertained by a central reader, or no known history of persistent hypertension (systolic blood pressure, ≥150 mm Hg) within 12 months before screening. Results : In the placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 NEURO-TTR study, 112/172 patients were randomized and received inotersen. At baseline, patients were predominantly white (91.9%) males (68.6%) with a mean age of 59.2 years. A total of 67.4% had stage I (ambulatory) and 32.6% had stage II (ambulatory with assistance) disease. Inotersen-treated patients who had stage II disease had a longer duration of disease from diagnosis (40.9 vs 24.8 months, respectively) and from onset (72.6 vs 63.2 months, respectively) of hATTR polyneuropathy symptoms compared with placebo-treated patients who had stage II disease, indicating more advanced disease. A higher proportion of inotersen-treated patients had CM at baseline (67% vs 55%, respectively), and more severe CM, measured by higher NT-proBNP levels and longer duration of disease from hATTR-CM symptom onset, compared with placebo-treated patients. In the phase 3 open-label extension study as of Sept 15, 2017, 134 of 135 patients enrolled received ≥1 dose of inotersen. The mean age was 60.4 years and most patients were male (69.4%). Extended dosing with inotersen up to 27 months continued to improve mNIS+7 and Norfolk QoL-DN in the open-label extension compared to placebo-treated patients at week 66 in the double-blind NEURO-TTR study; mean changes from open-label extension baseline to open-label extension week 52 in the inotersen-inotersen group were 5.1 points for mNIS+7 (vs 25.5 for placebo-treated patients in the double-blind NEURO-TTR study) and 3.9 points for Norfolk QoL-DN (vs 10.7 for placebo-treated patients in the double-blind NEURO-TTR study). Initiation of inotersen in placebo-treated patients (placebo-inotersen) resulted in improvement in mNIS+7 and Norfolk QoL-DN by week 26. Few patients discontinued treatment because of AEs (inotersen-inotersen, 9%; placebo-inotersen, 4%). The rate of treatment-related serious AEs was low in both treatment groups (2% each). There was no evidence of increased risk for grade 4 thrombocytopenia or severe renal events with increased duration of exposure. We will present 2-year follow-up results from the open-label extension study. Conclusions: Results of the open-label extension show continued benefit, measured by mNIS+7 and Norfolk QoL-DN, and confirmed that earlier initiation of treatment is important for optimal clinical outcomes. No new safety concerns were identified. Results from the longer-term follow-up for the open-label extension will further elucidate how inotersen may benefit patients with hATTR amyloidosis. Disclosures Brannagan: Alnylam: Honoraria, Other: Investigator, Speakers Bureau; Ionis: Other: Investigator. Wang:Ionis: Other: Investigator, Speakers Bureau. Coelho:Prothena: Consultancy, Honoraria; Ionis: Consultancy, Other: Investigator; Alnylam: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Investigator; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Investigator. Waddington Cruz:Ionis: Honoraria; Genzyme/Sanofi: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria. Polydefkis:Pfizer: Honoraria; Alnylam: Honoraria. Dyck:Ionis: Consultancy; Alnylam: Consultancy. Plante-Bordeneuve:Alnylam: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy, Other: reimbursement for travel and meeting; Ionis: Other: reimbursement for travel and meeting. Berk:Ionis: Honoraria, Other: Investigator; Alnylam: Honoraria, Other: Investigator; Pfizer: Other: Investigator. Barroso:Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Thaos registry, Speakers Bureau; Alnylam: Honoraria, Other: Investigator. Conceição:Alnylam: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Hughes:Ionis: Employment. Kwoh:Ionis: Employment. Jung:Ionis: Employment. Guthrie:Akcea: Employment. Pollock:Akcea: Employment. Benson:Ionis: Other: Investigator, Research Funding. Gertz:janssen: Consultancy; Teva: Consultancy; spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria; Alnylam: Honoraria; Ionis: Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy; annexon: Consultancy; Prothena: Honoraria; Research to Practice: Consultancy; Apellis: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Medscape: Consultancy; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy.

Abstract Background: It is well known that the staging stratification at diagnosis predicts survival in immunoglobulin light chain (AL) amyloidosis, but there is a paucity of literature delineating the prognostic value of these systems at the time of 2nd-line therapy. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study to evaluate the prognostic value of AL staging among 563 patients with staging data, who initiated a 2nd-line therapy between 2000 and 2015. Both the Revised Mayo 2012 staging system and the European revision of the Mayo 2004 staging system were used. Results: The median time from initial treatment to 2nd-line therapy was 11.6 months. Median follow-up from institution of 2nd-line therapy was 54.1 months. The 1st-line therapy for patients was autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) in 216 (38%) patients; and 2) non-ASCT therapies in 347 patients. Both staging systems were prognostic with a risk ratio of 9.4 (95%CI: 6.0, 15.1; p<0.0001) between stage IIIb and I, and of 12.2(8.1, 18.5; p<0.0001) between IV and I. At the time of 2nd-line therapy the staging systems' predictive values were independent of what the patients' 1st-line therapies had been despite the fact that the median time from initial treatment to 2nd-line therapy was 19.4 months in ASCT group and 8.0 months in non-ASCT group. Among the patients receiving 2nd-line therapy after ASCT, the 5-year overall survival (OS) from 2nd-line therapy for those with ≤ stage II versus >stage II was 65% and 31% (Mayo 2004) and 70% and 23% (Mayo 2012). The respective numbers for patients relapsing from a non-ASCT therapy were 57% and 26% (Mayo 2004) and 60% and 23% (Mayo 2012). Conclusions: This study indicates that the Mayo staging systems work well at the time of instituting 2nd-line therapy and is independent of whether 1st-line therapy was ASCT based. Figure. Figure. Disclosures Gertz: annexon: Consultancy; Medscape: Consultancy; Apellis: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; Prothena: Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria; Ionis: Honoraria; Research to Practice: Consultancy; Teva: Consultancy; janssen: Consultancy; Alnylam: Honoraria. Kumar:KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: 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; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding. Dingli:Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding. Kapoor:Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Russell:Vyriad: Equity Ownership. Dispenzieri:Celgene, Takeda, Prothena, Jannsen, Pfizer, Alnylam, GSK: Research Funding.

Abstract The use of soluble cardiac biomarkers such as NT-proBNP and troponin has revolutionized prognostication for patients with AL amyloidosis and led to their use in the Mayo 2004 and 2012 staging systems. Novel soluble markers with different phenotypic targets may further improve this approach. Soluble ST2 (sST2), which is the circulating form of the IL-33 receptor, has been shown to be a marker of cardiac remodelling and fibrosis, is predictive of mortality in patients with congestive heart failure, and is predictive of risk of GVHD and GVHD mortality. Samples of blood of patients with AL amyloidosis collected and frozen at -20C under a biobank IRB protocol were retrieved and sST2 measured. Patients were eligible for present study if they had a research sample collected within 90 days of their AL amyloidosis diagnosis. We have validated that values do not change significantly with storage at -20C over a 90 day period. Concentrations of sST2 were determined using a novel high-sensitivity sandwich immunoassay (Presagew ST2; Critical Diagnostics, San Diego, CA, USA). The sST2 assay had within-run and total coefficients of variation of <7.5% and 13.0% across its measurement range. Samples from 273 consecutive patients meeting diagnostic criteria for AL amyloidosis seen at our institution from 1/9/2010 to 12/22/2011 were evaluated. Median age was 63. 58% were male. One hundred and thirty have died over 33.9 months. Correlation between sST2 and the other biomarkers was modest with correlation coefficients of 0.48 and 0.20 for NT-proBNP and Troponin T, respectively. Patients with sST2 above and below the median of 27.2 ng/mL (6.3-596) had significant differences in 2 year overall survival: 71.2% to 39% (figure). In multivariate modeling sST2’s prognostic value was independent of the Mayo 2004 and the Mayo 2012 cardiac biomarker staging systems, the latter of which also includes prognostic information relating to plasma cell burden. In these multivariate models, sST2 median had a RR of 2.4, (95%CI 1.6, 3.6 p<0.001) with the Mayo 2004 Staging system (RR of 2.9, 95%CI 2.1, 4.1p<0.001); and sST2 median had a RR of 2.2 (95%CI 1.5, 3.4, p<0.001) with the Mayo 2012 staging system (RR 1.9, 95%CI 1.6, 2.3, p<0.001). A larger cohort including patients with longer follow up will be presented at the meeting as will gender specific cut off values and a comparison of our values with those previously used to prognosticate in patients with heart failure. sST2 appears to be a novel powerful prognostic factor for patients with AL amyloidosis. Because sST2 functions as a decoy receptor, which neutralizes the benefits of IL-33, it may play a role in the deleterious phenotype seen in patients with AL, i.e. myocardial hypertrophy and reduction of contractility. Disclosures: Saenger: Critical Diagnostics : Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding. Jaffe:Critical Diagnostics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy.

Abstract Background: Hereditary transthyretin amyloidosis (hATTR) is a rare, systemic, progressive, and fatal condition in which misfolded proteins, mainly produced in the liver, deposit in muscle and organ tissues leading to symptoms of peripheral neuropathy, and possible cardiomyopathy and autonomic neuropathy. Primary results from the NEUTO-TTR trial indicated that patients with hATTR amyloidosis who received 65 weeks of treatment with inotersen had better preservation of quality of life (QOL), as measured by the Norfolk QOL-Diabetic Neuropathy (DN) Questionnaire total score and the physical component summary score of the SF-36v2® Health Survey (SF-36v2), than did patients who received placebo. Whether the benefits of inotersen on domains of QOL differ across subgroups of patients has not been previously addressed. Objective: To examine the efficacy of inotersen for preserving QOL in subgroups of patients with hATTR amyloidosis, defined by time of disease onset (early or late) and ambulatory stage (Stage 1 or Stage 2). Methods: Data come from the NEURO-TTR trial, a multicenter, multinational, double-blind trial (NCT01737398) of 172 adults with hATTR amyloidosis with polyneuropathy who received 65 weeks of treatment with either the investigational drug inotersen, which is an antisense oligonucleotide, or matching placebo. The Norfolk QOL-DN and SF-36v2 were administered to patients at baseline, week 35, and week 66. The Norfolk QOL-DN is a 35-item measure which captures neuropathic-related QOL, representing five domains: activities of daily living, autonomic neuropathy, large fiber neuropathy/physical functioning, small fiber neuropathy, and neuropathic symptoms. The SF-36v2 is a 36-item measure which captures generic health-related QOL, representing eight domains: physical functioning, role limitations due to physical health (role-physical), bodily pain, general health, vitality, social functioning, role limitations due to emotional health (role-emotional), and mental health. Patient subgroups were defined by: (1) patients' time of symptom onset: whether symptoms first occurred early (at or before age 50) or late (after age 50) in life; and (2) patients' disease severity, as defined by ambulatory disability - Stage 1 (walking without assistance) or Stage 2 (walking with assistance, such as a cane or walker). Mixed-effects repeated-measures models tested treatment differences (inotersen vs. placebo) in changes of mean Norfolk QOL-DN and SF-36v2 domain scores from baseline to week 66 for each patient subgroup. Results: Inotersen was more effective than placebo for preserving QOL in patients with early onset of symptoms: treatment differences in scores were statistically significant (p<0.05) for four of the five Norfolk QOL-DN domains (all except small fiber neuropathy) and for all eight SF-36v2 domains. In patients with late onset of symptoms: statistically significant treatment differences in scores were observed for no Norfolk QOL-DN domains and only one of eight SF-36v2 domains (physical functioning). Inotersen was more effective than placebo for preserving QOL in patients with Stage 1 severity, treatment differences were statistically significant for three of the five Norfolk QOL-DN domains (all except autonomic neuropathy and small fiber neuropathy) and for five of eight SF-36v2 domains (all except general health, vitality, and mental health). In patients with Stage 2 severity, significant treatment differences in scores were observed for only one Norfolk QOL-DN domain (activities of daily living) and no SF-36v2 domains. Conclusion: Following 66 weeks of treatment, inotersen was more effective than placebo for preserving QOL in patients with hATTR amyloidosis who had early onset of symptoms or who were in Stage 1 of disease severity. Preserving QOL in patients with early onset is critical, as many of these patients are likely to be in the work force, raising children, and leading active lives. The benefits seen for patients in Stage 1 disease severity point to the crucial importance of early diagnosis and treatment, as there may be a window in which treatment can preserve QOL in patients with hATTR amyloidosis prior to the late progressive stages. Disclosures Yarlas: Optum: Employment; Akcea: Research Funding. Merlini:Pfizer: Consultancy; Millenium: Consultancy; Akcea: Consultancy; Prothena: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Ionis: Consultancy. White:Optum: Employment; Akcea: Research Funding. Sikora Kessler:Optum: Employment; Akcea: Research Funding. Lovley:Optum: Employment; Akcea: Research Funding. Guthrie:Akcea: Employment, Other: Stock Ownership. Pollock:Akcea: Employment. Gertz:Apellis: Consultancy; Research to Practice: Consultancy; Teva: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; Ionis: Honoraria; annexon: Consultancy; Alnylam: Honoraria; Medscape: Consultancy; Prothena: Honoraria; janssen: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria.

Abstract Background Multiple myeloma (MM) is a heterogeneous disease with variable responses to different therapeutic regimens and wide spectrum of survival. Much of the heterogeneity in the outcomes appear to be related to the underlying primary genetic abnormality, which in the majority of patients consist of either translocations involving the heavy chain region on chromosome 14 (IgH translocation) or trisomies of odd numbered chromosomes. We hypothesized that the response to lenalidomide (Len) therapy would vary significantly based on the underlying molecular subtype of myeloma. Methods We examined a cohort of 518 patients with available FISH results, who had been exposed to Len-based regimens. Medical records were reviewed and data regarding the best response and time to next therapy following treatment with Len-based regimen was obtained. Data from the first use of Len was collected. Len was given in combination with dexamethasone (Dex) with or without alkylators in combination. Patients who received a combination of IMiD and bortezomib as their first exposure to Len were excluded. Patients were grouped according to whether FISH showed a trisomy or an IgH translocation. Results The median age was 62 (28-91), and the median estimated follow up from diagnosis was 52 months (95% CI; 50, 54) with 359 (69%) alive at the time of analysis. An IgH translocation was seen in 129 (30%) of patients and a trisomy in 268 (62%) of patients. IgH translocations included t(11;14) in 92 (18%), t(4;14) in 45 (9%), t(14;16) in 21 (4%); 34 (8%) had both translocations and trisomies. For the current analysis, we included only patients with either a translocation or trisomy (n=397) excluding those with neither or both of the abnormalities. The median time to start of Len from diagnosis was 0 months (range, 0-64). A PR or better was seen in 80% of patients with trisomy compared with 63% of the patients with translocation (p<0.001); and the response rate was similar among the different translocation types. The median TTNT was 28 months among trisomy pts compared with 17 months for translocated patients (p<0.001, figure). The median TTNT was similar across the different types of translocations (Figure). Among this group, 134 patients proceeded to an autologous SCT after Len induction. Among these patients, no difference was seen in terms of TTNT (29 months for patients with translocation vs. 28 months for those with trisomy (p=0.8). Finally, the TTNT was no different if Len was used with Dex or as part of an alkylator combination. Conclusion The current data supports the hypothesis that the underlying primary genetic abnormality can affect the response to a particular therapy. In this study response to Len was significantly higher in myeloma with trisomy compared with IgH translocated myeloma. Although the routine use of combinations of a proteasome inhibitor plus Len in frontline therapy in all patients with myeloma may overcome the lower response rate in IgH translocated patients, in most countries such a regimen is not approved or economically feasible. Based on our study, newly diagnosed patients with evidence of trisomy on FISH could be considered for a Len-based regimen such as lenalidomide-low dose dexamethasone. Additional studies should examine if use of bortezomib in patients with IgH translocation will lead to better outcomes compared with Len based therapies. Disclosures: Lacy: Celgene Corporation: Research Funding. Gertz:Celgene: Honoraria. Dispenzieri:Celgene, Millenium, Jansenn, Pfizer: Research Funding. Kumar:Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: The Takeda Oncology Company: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Genzyme: Research Funding.

AbstractThe median survival in primary systemic (AL) amyloidosis is less than 18 months. No published series of patients with AL amyloidosis have reported survival of more than 10 years. The records of all Mayo Clinic patients with a diagnosis of AL amyloidosis between January 1, 1966 and March 1, 1987 were reviewed. Patients with secondary amyloidosis, familial amyloidosis, senile systemic amyloidosis, and localized amyloidosis were excluded. During the 21 years of the study, 841 patients with AL amyloidosis were seen. Of these, 29 were excluded because the diagnosis was made at autopsy, and 2 others were excluded because no follow-up data were available. Actuarial survival for the 810 patients was 51% at 1 year, 16% at 5 years, and 4.7% at 10 years. Thirty patients survived for 10 years or more after the histologic diagnosis of AL amyloidosis; all received alkylating-agent therapy. In 14 patients, the monoclonal protein disappeared from the serum or urine. Of 10 patients with nephrotic syndrome, 4 had an objective response. Congestive heart failure, older age, creatinine value of 2 mg/dL or more, bone marrow plasma cell value of 20% or more, platelet count of 500 × 109/L or less, and the presence of peripheral neuropathy were underrepresented in the 10-year survivors and are unfavorable prognostic features. Five percent of patients with AL amyloidosis survived for 10 years or more.