Citations

BackgroundStudies have reported racial disparities in access to and use of multiple myeloma (MM) treatments between African American (AA) and White patients. Although AA patients demonstrate longer disease‐specific survival, this has not uniformly translated into improved survival over time. The association between race and treatment patterns and survival outcomes was analyzed using data from the Connect MM Registry.MethodsThe Connect MM Registry is a large US, multicenter, prospective observational cohort study of patients with newly diagnosed MM. Patients who received first‐line (1L) stem cell transplantation (SCT) or who did not receive SCT (non‐SCT or non–stem cell transplantation [NSCT]) were grouped by raceEffects of race and transplantation status on the use of triplet treatment were estimated using logistic regression.ResultsTreatment patterns in 1L (types and duration of induction, posttransplantation maintenance) were similar between AA and White patients. SCT rates in 1L (32% vs 36%) and triplet treatment use (AA: 44% for NSCT patients and 72% for SCT patients; and White: 48% for NSCT patients and 72% for SCT patients) during first induction were similar. No significant effect of race or transplantation status on 1L triplet treatment use was observed. Race was not found to be associated with survival outcomes among patients who underwent NSCT; however, AA patients who received SCT had significantly longer overall survival compared with White patients who underwent SCT (not reached vs 88.2 months; hazard ratio, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.35‐0.89 [P = .0141]).ConclusionsAA and White patients were found to have similar treatment patterns in the Connect MM Registry, suggesting that both groups had equal access to health care. In this real‐world setting, AA patients received standard‐of‐care treatment, which might have contributed to better MM‐specific survival compared with White patients.

8525 Background: RRMM patients (pts) triple-class exposed (to immunomodulatory drugs [IMiDs], proteasome inhibitors [PIs] and anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies [mAbs]) have limited treatment (tx) options. The ongoing phase II KarMMa study (NCT03361748) is examining idecabtagene vicleucel (ide-cel; bb2121), a BCMA targeted CAR T cell therapy, in RRMM pts with ≥3 prior regimens (IMiD, PI and CD38 mAb inclusive) who are refractory to their last tx per IMWG criteria. This study aimed to 1) assess tx patterns and outcomes in real world (RW) RRMM pts similar to the KarMMa population and; 2) compare outcomes with SoC in a synthetic cohort vs ide-cel in KarMMa. Methods: In this global, noninterventional, retrospective study (KarMMa-RW), pt-level data from clinical sites, registries and databases were collated into a single data model. RW pts meeting KarMMa eligibility criteria (eligible cohort; EC) were compared with KarMMa (N = 128) using trimmed stabilized inverse probability of tx weighted propensity scores (IPTW PS) for pts in both studies with Poisson regression for ORR and ≥VGPR, and Cox models with study as a term for PFS. All models were adjusted for unbalanced covariates. Results: Of 1949 RW pts, 1171 were refractory to last regimen (median age, 68 y; median no. of prior regimens, 5; triple-class refractory, 41%). Further selection for subsequent tx, organ function and no comorbidities yielded 190 EC pts who had > 90 distinct tx regimens. With a median follow-up of 11.3 mo (KarMMa) and 10.2 mo (EC) at data cutoff (Oct 30, 2019), ORR, ≥VGPR and PFS were significantly improved in KarMMa vs EC (Table). Conclusions: Results from the KarMMa-RW study confirm that there is no clear SoC for heavily pretreated RW RRMM pts and responses are suboptimal with currently available therapies. Ide-cel showed deep, durable responses and significantly improved PFS in RRMM pts, representing a potential new tx option in RRMM. Clinical trial information: tbd . [Table: see text]

8518 Background: Patients (pts) with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) and renal impairment (RI) are often excluded from clinical trials. Data are limited on the effects of induction treatment in these pts, who may also be ineligible for autologous stem cell transplant (SCT) due to severity of RI. This analysis investigated the impact of RVd induction on renal function in transplant eligible (TE) and noneligible (TNE) pts from the Connect MM Registry, a US, multicenter, prospective, observational study. Methods: Eligible pts were ≥ 18 y and had symptomatic MM diagnosed ≤ 2 mos prior to enrollment, as defined by the International Myeloma Working Group criteria. For this analysis, pts that received front-line RVd for ≥ 3 cycles were grouped per transplant eligibility and renal function at baseline (BL; creatinine clearance [CrCl] < 30, 30-50, > 50-80, and > 80). Pts with progressive disease at BL were excluded. Renal function at 3 mos was measured. Median unadjusted progression-free survival (PFS) was calculated from start of regimen in TE and TNE populations, with pts grouped by CrCl (≤ 60 or > 60) at BL. Results: As of 7/23/19, 421 TE and 212 TNE pts received RVd for ≥ 3 cycles. TE and TNE pts were grouped by BL CrCl of < 30 (20 and 16 pts), 30-50 (36 and 50 pts), > 50-80 (117 and 63 pts), and > 80 (248 and 83 pts). Renal function improvement was observed in all pts receiving RVd, including those with moderate (30-50 CrCl) and severe (< 30 CrCl) RI at BL (Table). In pts with > 60 CrCl and ≤ 60 CrCl at BL, median PFS in TE pts was 48.6 mos and 43.2 mos, respectively. In TNE pts, median PFS was 36.4 mos and 30.6 mos, respectively. Conclusions: The results from the Connect MM Registry indicate that pts with NDMM and RI (including moderate and severe) who receive front-line RVd for ≥ 3 cycles may see improvement in renal function at 3 mos, regardless of transplant eligibility. RVd therefore can potentially be used in pts with RI. This analysis provides real-world data that support further investigation of RVd treatment in pts with moderate or severe RI. Clinical trial information: NCT01081028 . [Table: see text]

8503 Background: Outcomes are poor in triple-class exposed RRMM patients (pts) who progress on immunomodulatory agents (IMiDs), proteasome inhibitors (PIs), and CD38 antibodies (mAbs). Ide-cel, a BCMA targeted CAR T cell therapy, showed promising tolerability and efficacy in RRMM pts in the phase I CRB-401 study ( NEJM2019;380:1726). We present primary efficacy and safety data from the pivotal phase II KarMMa trial of ide-cel in RRMM (NCT03361748). Methods: Enrolled pts had ≥3 prior regimens (including IMiD, PI, and CD38 mAb) and were refractory to their last regimen per IMWG criteria. After lymphodepletion (cyclophosphamide 300 mg/m2+ fludarabine 30 mg/m2 x 3), pts received 150─450 × 106 CAR+ T cells (target dose range). Endpoints included overall response rate (ORR; primary), complete response (CR) rate, duration of response (DoR), and PFS. Results: Of 140 pts enrolled, 128 received ide-cel. Median age was 61 y; median no. of prior regimens was 6; 84% were triple- and 26% were penta-refractory. Most pts (88%) had bridging therapy. At data cutoff (16 Oct 2019), median follow up was 11.3 mo. ORR was 73% and median PFS was 8.6 mo; both increased with higher dose (Table). All subgroups had an ORR ≥50%, including older and high-risk pts. Most common any-grade (Gr) toxicities were cytopenias (97%) and cytokine release syndrome (CRS; 84%). CRS was mainly Gr 1/2; 5 pts (5%) had Gr 3, 1 had Gr 4, and 1 had Gr 5 (at 300 × 106). Neurotoxicity developed in 23 pts (18%); 4 (3%) Gr 3 and 0 Gr ≥4. Median peak CAR+ T cell expansion occurred at 11 d. Expansion was higher in responders and parameters (AUC0−28d, Cmax) increased with higher dose, with exposure overlap across doses. Persistence was durable, with CAR+ T cells detected in 29/49 (59%) and 4/11 pts (36%) at 6 and 12 mo. Conclusions: Ide-cel demonstrated deep, durable responses in heavily pretreated RRMM pts. Efficacy and safety reflected prior reports and support a favorable ide-cel clinical benefit-risk profile across the target dose range. Clinical trial information: NCT03361748 . [Table: see text]

8032 Background: The impact of t(11;14) (16%–24% of MM pts) on prognosis is not fully understood. Consensus is lacking on the effects of induction treatment (tx) on outcomes with t(11;14). The Connect MM Registry (NCT01081028) is a large, US, multicenter, prospective observational cohort study of pts with NDMM designed to examine real-world diagnostic patterns, treatment (tx) patterns, clinical outcomes, and HRQoL pt-reported outcomes in pts with NDMM. The impact of t(11;14) on tx outcomes are reported. Methods: Analysis included data from pts from 250 community, academic, and government sites in cohort (C) 1 (9/2009–12/2011) and C2 (12/2012–4/2016), who completed first-line (1L; induction) tx and were tested for t(11;14) by FISH or cytogenetics. Primary end points (progression-free survival [PFS] and overall survival [OS]) were measured from start of 1L tx to earliest event (PFS, death or progression; OS, death), loss to follow-up, or data cutoff, adjusted for baseline (BL) risk factors. A sensitivity analysis excluding pts with concomitant cytogenetic abnormalities [del 17p, t(4;14), t(14;16), 1q+] was also performed. Results: By 1/2018, 3011 pts were enrolled; 2938 were treated. Of 1574 enrolled pts tested for t(11;14), 378 were t(11;14)+ and 1196 were t(11;14)−. More pts in C2 vs C1 were t(11;14)+ (60% vs 40%). BL characteristics were similar between groups. t(11;14) status did not affect PFS ( P= NS) or OS ( P= NS; Table). Pts in C1 and C2 received similar 1L txs (IMiD agent + proteasome inhibitor [PI], 30% vs 42%; PI only, 42% vs 43%; IMiD agent only, 17% vs 11%). Results were similar when pts with concomitant abnormalities were excluded. Conclusions: Results of this analysis suggest that t(11;14) does not affect PFS and OS outcomes in NDMM pts. Clinical trial information: NCT01081028. [Table: see text]

8014 Background: TCR-MM is defined as being refractory to immunomodulatory agents, proteasome inhibitors, and anti-CD38 mAbs, representing an urgent unmet medical need with a median OS of 3-5 months( Pick M et al, Eur J Haem 2018; Gandhi U et al, ASH 2018). Sd has shown a 26.2% overall response rate (ORR) in 122 patients (pts) with TCR-MM in the Phase 2b STORM study ( Chari A et al, ASH 2018). Here, we evaluate the OS of pts in the STORM study with Sd and in pts with bortezomib, carfilzomib, lenalidomide, pomalidomide, and daratumumab (“penta”)-exposed, TCR-MM from an observational cohort not receiving Sd. Methods: Data were drawn from STORM and a retrospective cohort from the nationally representative Flatiron Health Analytic Database (FHAD). All pts from both sources had penta-exposed TCR-MM. In order to align study populations, OS was evaluated in pts in STORM whose first therapy after their MM reached TCR status was Sd and in pts in the FHAD who received ≥1 therapy after their MM reached TCR status. The index date for this evaluation was the start date of treatment after their MM reached TCR status. A Cox proportional hazards regression model was performed to assess the survival impact of Sd. In STORM, ORR was assessed by an Independent Review Committee based on IMWG criteria. Results: In the FHAD, 69 pts with TCR-MM were identified. Characteristics of the two groups of pts were similar, except that pts in STORM were more heavily pretreated, had a higher frequency of high-risk MM, a longer time since initial diagnosis of MM, and higher baseline hemoglobin and platelet values. Among the 122 pts in STORM, 64 received Sd as their first therapy after their MM became TCR, and ORR was 32.8%. Among the 69 pts from FHAD, 37 received ≥1 therapy after their MM became TCR. Median OS (N = 64) was 10.4 months for pts receiving Sd in STORM and 5.2 months (N = 37) for pts not receiving Sd in FHAD (HR = 0.49, p = 0.0241). Conclusions: The prognosis of TCR-MM in the real-world population appears very poor. Within the limits of this analysis, median OS of pts receiving Sd as their first therapy after their MM becomes TCR is significantly better than those not receiving Sd, suggesting that Sd may be associated with an OS benefit in pts with TCR-MM. Clinical trial information: NCT02336815.

e21006 Background: Induction with novel biological agents has significantly improved progression free survival (PFS) of MM pts. However, role and timing of ASCT is unclear and there remains a need for a practical means to predict post-ASCT outcome. Our goal was to determine the prognostic value of FDG PET/CT (PET) after induction therapy (IT) in comparison with other prognostic factors and International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) response criteria. Methods: Prospective, multicenter study of 113 newly diagnosed MM pts undergoing IT+ASCT. IT was not controlled and consisted of 2 or 3 novel agent combinations. The tested variables to predict PFS are shown in table. Two PET scoring systems were used: Score1, positive>marrow uptake; Score2, positive>liver uptake. ROC analysis determined the SUV cut-off. Results: With a median follow-up of 29.5 mo 56 (49.6%) pts relapsed (median PFS: 24.3 mo). Results are displayed in table. Post-IT, when a "+" PET (Score2) was associated with less than a VGPR response, relapses occurred in 83% of pts vs. in only 30% when PET was "-" and pts were in CR or VGPR. Multivariate analysis revealed only ISS to be an independent predictor of PFS (p=0.014). Conclusions: Post-IT a "-" PET associated with CR+VGPR suggests a durable response. Qualitative PET evaluation using a more liberal threshold (liver) to define positivity can be used to accurately assess response in MM. These data failed to prove the post-IT IMWG and PET response to be independent prognosticators while ISS was a superior predictor. This may be attributed to inadequate sample size, nonuniform pre- and post-ASCT treatments, varying follow-up times. Further analyses with stratifying various prognostic indicators and therapy schemes in a larger population are underway to determine a definitive role for PET as a predictor of post-ASCT outcome. [Table: see text]

8035 Background: Patients (pts) with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RR MM) who are refractory or intolerant to both bortezomib (BTZ) and immunomodulators (IMiDs; thalidomide [Thal] or lenalidomide [Len]) (ie, “double-refractory/intolerant”), have few therapeutic options and a poor prognosis. Carfilzomib (CFZ), a next generation proteasome inhibitor (PI), has shown durable single-agent activity in clinical studies including 003-A1, an open-label, single-arm phase 2b trial in RR MM. The present analysis describes clinical activity in pts from 003-A1 with double-refractory/intolerant disease and in other groups of clinical interest including pts with disease refractory to all 5 approved classes of anti-MM tx (alkylators, anthracyclines, corticosteroids, IMiDs, and PIs) in clinical use (“refractory to all approved tx”). Methods: Pts from 003-A1 with double-refractory/intolerant disease were analyzed, as were pts with disease refractory to all approved tx. CFZ was given on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16 of 28-day cycles (C), (20 mg/m2 in C1; 27 mg/m2 in C2–12). Primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included duration of response (DOR), overall survival, and safety. Results: The study ORR was 22.9% with median DOR of 7.8 mo (N=266). 228 pts (86%) with double-refractory/intolerant disease had ORRs of 20.6% and a median DOR of 7.4 mo. Conclusions: Single-agent CFZ demonstrated clinically meaningful, durable responses in pts with double-refractory/intolerant MM or disease refractory to all 5 approved classes of tx. The ORRs across groups of clinical interest were generally consistent with results for the entire study population. These results are notable for a next-generation PI and demonstrate the activity of single-agent CFZ in pts with advanced stage MM. [Table: see text]

Introduction: Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy directed against B cell maturation antigen (BCMA) has shown promising results for the treatment of relapsed refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) in several phase 1 studies. Persistence of CAR T cells post infusion may be one determinant of duration of response. bb21217 is a next-generation anti-BCMA CAR T cell therapy based on investigational therapy idecabtagene vicleucel (bb2121) (Friedman 2018, Hum Gene Ther 29:585) that uses the same lentiviral CAR T design as bb2121, but adds the phosphoinositide 3-kinase inhibitor bb007 during ex vivo culture to enrich the drug product for memory-like T cells. Evidence suggests that CAR T cells with this phenotype may be more persistent and more potent than unselected CAR T cells. CRB-402 is a first-in-human study of bb21217 in patients with RRMM designed to assess safety, pharmacokinetics, efficacy and duration of effect. Methods: CRB-402 (NCT03274219) is an ongoing, multi-center phase 1 dose escalation trial of bb21217 planning to enroll 74 patients with RRMM who received ≥ 3 prior regimens, including a proteasome inhibitor and an immuno-modulatory agent, or are double-refractory to both classes. During dose escalation, enrollment is restricted to patients with ≥ 50% BCMA expression by IHC on malignant plasma cells. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells are collected via leukapheresis and sent to a central facility for transduction, expansion and release testing prior to being returned to the site for infusion. Patients undergo lymphodepletion with fludarabine (30 mg/m2) and cyclophosphamide (300 mg/m2) daily for 3 days, then receive bb21217 as a single infusion. Planned dose levels are 150, 450, 800, and 1,200 x 106 CAR+ T cells and intermediate dose levels are allowed. The primary outcome measure is incidence of adverse events (AEs), including dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs). Additional outcome measures are quality and duration of clinical response assessed according to the IMWG Uniform Response Criteria, evaluation of minimal residual disease (MRD), progression-free and overall survival, and quantification of CAR+ T cells in blood. Results: Asof April 20, 2019, 22 patients (median age 63 [min;max 42 to 74]) have received bb21217 (12 at 150, 6 at 300 and 4 at 450). Eleven had high tumor burden, defined as ≥ 50% bone marrow plasma cells pre-infusion. Patients had a median of 7 (min;max 4 to 17) prior lines of therapy and 18/22 had prior autologous stem cell transplant; 7/22 had high-risk cytogenetics. Of the 22 patients, 19 received prior daratumumab, 13 received prior Bort/Len/Car/Pom/Dara. Median follow-up after bb21217 infusion was 23 weeks (&lt;1 to 77 weeks). As of data cut-off, 13/22 patients developed cytokine release syndrome (CRS; 5 G1, 7 G2, 1 G3) and responded to supportive care, tocilizumab and/or corticosteroids. Five patients developed neurotoxicity [1 G1, 2 G2, 1 G3 (vertigo/dizziness), 1 G4 (encephalopathy, previously reported)]. For the 1 patient with G4 neurotoxicity, G3 CRS was also reported; both have resolved. A total of 18 patients were evaluable for response with ≥ 2 months of follow up or PD within 2 months. Fifteen (83%) patients demonstrated clinical response per IMWG criteria. Six of these subjects subsequently progressed. Nine patients remained in response, including 2 patients with ongoing response at months 15 and 18. MRD negative results at 10-5 nucleated cells or better were obtained by NGS in 10/10 evaluable responders at month 1. Overall, 6/8 patients evaluable at 6 months and 2/2 patients evaluable at 12 months had detectable CAR T cells in blood. Updated data from this study will be presented, including extended follow-up on the initial patients treated and early clinical and CAR T cell persistence data from at least 15 additional patients treated with up to 450 x 106 CAR+ T cells. Conclusions: The adverse events observed to date were manageable and consistent with known toxicities of CAR T therapies. Initial efficacy results with bb21217 CAR T therapy in heavily pretreated RRMM are encouraging, with 83% of patients demonstrating clinical response. Emerging data demonstrate long-term persistence of CAR T cells in long-term responders. Updated data to be presented will help determine whether treatment with bb21217 results in sustained CAR T cell persistence and durable clinical responses, and whether bb21217 is tolerated at higher doses. Disclosures Berdeja: AbbVie Inc, Amgen Inc, Acetylon Pharmaceuticals Inc, Bluebird Bio, Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Celgene Corporation, Constellation Pharma, Curis Inc, Genentech, Glenmark Pharmaceuticals, Janssen Biotech Inc, Kesios Therapeutics, Lilly, Novartis, Poseida: Research Funding; Poseida: Research Funding; Amgen Inc, BioClinica, Celgene Corporation, CRISPR Therapeutics, Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Janssen Biotech Inc, Karyopharm Therapeutics, Kite Pharma Inc, Prothena, Servier, Takeda Oncology: Consultancy. Alsina:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Speakers Bureau. Shah:Celgene, Janssen, Bluebird Bio, Sutro Biopharma: Research Funding; Poseida: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Nkarta: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kite: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Teneobio: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Indapta Therapeutics: Equity Ownership; Genentech, Seattle Genetics, Oncopeptides, Karoypharm, Surface Oncology, Precision biosciences GSK, Nektar, Amgen, Indapta Therapeutics, Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; University of California, San Francisco: Employment. Siegel:Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb Company: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Jagannath:Celgene: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Medicom: Speakers Bureau; Multiple Myeloma Research Foundation: Speakers Bureau; Merck: Consultancy. Madduri:Abbvie: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; undation Medicine: Consultancy. Kaufman:Janssen: Honoraria; Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University: Employment; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy. Munshi:Janssen: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Oncopep: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Adaptive: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy. Rosenblatt:BMS: Other: Advisory Board ; Parexel: Consultancy; Imaging Endpoint: Consultancy; Partner Tx: Other: Advisory Board; Dava Oncology: Other: Education; BMS: Research Funding; Amgen: Other: Advisory Board; Celgene: Research Funding; Merck: Other: Advisory Board. Turka:bluebird bio: Employment. Lam:bluebird bio: Employment. Massaro:bluebird bio: Employment. Campbell:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hege:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties; Mersana Therapuetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Arcus Biosciences: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Petrocca:bluebird bio: Employment. Raje:Amgen Inc.: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy.

Background: Multiple myeloma (MM) is common among the elderly, with 35% of patients (pts) diagnosed being aged ≥75 years (y). With increasing overall life expectancy, the incidence and prevalence of newly diagnosed and previously treated MM patients ≥80 y is expected to increase over time. Because elderly pts are often excluded from clinical trials, data focused on their treatment patterns and clinical outcomes are lacking. The Connect® MM Registry (NCT01081028) is a large, US, multicenter, prospective observational cohort study of pts with newly diagnosed MM (NDMM) designed to examine real-world diagnostic patterns, treatment patterns, clinical outcomes, and health-related quality of life patient-reported outcomes. This analysis reviews treatment patterns and outcomes in elderly pts from the Connect MM Registry. Methods: Pts enrolled in the Connect MM registry at 250 community, academic, and government sites were included in this analysis. Eligible pts were adults aged ≥18 y with symptomatic MM diagnosed ≤2 months before enrollment, as defined by International Myeloma Working Group criteria; no exclusion criteria were applied. For this analysis, pts were categorized into 4 age groups: <65, 65 to 74, 75 to 84, and ≥85 y. Pts were followed from time of enrollment to the earliest of disease progression (or death), loss to follow-up, or data cutoff date of February 7, 2019. Descriptive statistics were used for baseline characteristics and treatment regimens. Survival outcomes were analyzed using Cox regression. Time to progression (TTP) analysis excluded causes of death not related to MM. Results: Of 3011 pts enrolled (median age 67 y), 132 (4%) were aged ≥85 y, and 615 (20%) were aged 75-84 y at baseline. More pts aged ≥85 y had poor prognostic factors such as ISS stage III disease and reduced hemoglobin (<10 g/dL or >2 g/dL <LLN) compared with other age groups, although no notable differences between creatinine and calcium levels were observed across age groups (Table). A lower proportion of elderly pts (75-84 and ≥85 y) received triplet regimens as frontline therapy. More elderly pts received a single novel agent, whereas use of 2 novel agents was more common in younger pts (Table). The most common frontline regimens among elderly pts were bortezomib (V) + dexamethasone (D), followed by lenalidomide (R) + D, whereas those among younger pts included RVD, followed by VD and CyBorD (Table). No pt aged ≥85 y, and 4% of pts aged 75-84 y received high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplant (vs 61% in the <65 y and 37% in the 65-74 y age group). The most common maintenance therapy was RD in pts ≥85 y (although the use was low) and R alone in other age groups (Table). In the ≥85 y group, 27%, 10%, and 4% of pts entered 2L, 3L, and 4L treatments respectively, vs 43%, 23%, and 13% in the <65 y group. Progression-free survival was significantly shorter in the ≥85 y age group vs the 75-84 y age group (P=0.003), 65-74 y age group (P<0.001), and <65 y age group (P<0.001; Fig.1). TTP was significantly shorter in the ≥85 y group vs the <65 y group (P=0.020); however, TTP was similar among the 65-74 y, 75-84 y, and ≥85 y cohorts (Fig. 2). Overall survival was significantly shorter in the ≥85 y group vs the 75-84 y, 65-74 y, and <65 y groups (all P<0.001; Fig. 3). The mortality rate was lowest (46%) during first-line treatment (1L) in pts aged ≥85 y (mainly attributed to MM progression) and increased in 2L and 3L (47% and 54%, respectively); a similar trend was observed in the younger age groups. The main cause of death was MM progression (29% in the ≥85 y vs 16% in the <65 y group). Other notable causes of death in the ≥85 y group included cardiac failure (5% vs 2% in <65 y group) and pneumonia (5% vs 1% in <65 y group). Conclusions: In this analysis, elderly pts received similar types of frontline and maintenance regimens as younger pts, although proportions varied with decreased use of triplet regimens with age. Considering similarities in TTP across the 65-74 y, 75-84 y, and ≥85 y cohorts, these real-world data support active treatment and aggressive supportive care of elderly symptomatic pts, including with novel agents. Additionally, further clinical studies specific to elderly patients with MM should be explored. Disclosures Lee: Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline plc: Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Ailawadhi:Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Cellectar: Research Funding. Gasparetto:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations, or other expenses paid or reimbursed ; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations, or other expenses paid or reimbursed ; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations, or other expenses paid or reimbursed . Jagannath:AbbVie: Consultancy; Merck & Co.: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Rifkin:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Durie:Amgen, Celgene, Johnson & Johnson, and Takeda: Consultancy. Narang:Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Terebelo:Celgene: Honoraria; Jannsen: Speakers Bureau; Newland Medical Asociates: Employment. Toomey:Celgene: Consultancy. Hardin:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Wagner:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; American Cancer Society: Other: Section editor, Cancer journal. Omel:Celgene, Takeda, Janssen: Other: Patient Advisory Committees. Srinivasan:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Liu:TechData: Consultancy. Dhalla:Celgene: Employment. Agarwal:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Abonour:BMS: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding.