Citations

Abstract Introduction Maintenance therapy has been extensively explored as a strategy for prolonging the duration of disease control and potentially survival following ASCT. To date, only lenalidomide has been approved for this indication. However, lenalidomide maintenance is associated with the development of second primary malignancies and tolerability issues. PIs are a backbone of MM treatment, and bortezomib-based maintenance has shown promising activity post-ASCT, yet the benefit of PI-based maintenance has not been demonstrated in a phase 3 trial vs placebo. Moreover, the feasibility of bortezomib maintenance in routine clinical practice is limited due to tolerability and the need for regular parenteral administration. There is a need for an oral PI maintenance therapy that can be administered for a prolonged period, improve depth of response without cumulative or late-onset toxicity, and improve convenience for patients. Methods The phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter TOURMALINE-MM3 study (NCT02181413) compared weekly ixazomib vs placebo maintenance in NDMM patients who had at least a partial response (≥PR) to induction therapy with a PI and/or immunomodulatory drug (IMiD) followed by single ASCT. Patients were randomized (3:2) to receive ixazomib or matched placebo on days 1, 8, and 15 of 28-day cycles for up to 2 years or until progressive disease (PD) or unacceptable toxicity. Randomization was stratified by induction regimen (PI without IMiD vs IMiD without PI vs PI+IMiD), pre-induction ISS stage (I vs II or III), and post-ASCT response (complete response [CR] or very good partial response [VGPR] vs PR). Patients were ineligible if they had received post-ASCT consolidation or tandem ASCT. The ixazomib dose was 3.0 mg during cycles 1-4, increasing to 4 mg from cycle 5 if tolerated during cycles 1-4. The primary endpoint was PFS per independent review committee (IRC), who were blinded to treatment assignment. The key secondary endpoint was OS. Here, we report data from the final analysis for PFS (data cut-off: April 16, 2018). Results 656 patients were randomized (395 ixazomib; 261 placebo). Patient demographics were balanced between groups; overall median age was 57 years (range, 24-73), 37% vs 63% had ISS I vs II or III, 59%/11%/30% had received PI without IMiD / IMiD without PI / PI+IMiD induction therapy, 34%/45%/21% had achieved CR / VGPR / PR following induction/ASCT, and 18% had high-risk cytogenetics [del(17p), t(4;14), or t(14;16)]. After a median follow-up of 31 months with 54% of PFS events, there was a 28% reduction in the risk of progression/death, corresponding to a 39% improvement in PFS with ixazomib vs placebo (median 26.5 vs 21.3 months; hazard ratio [HR] 0.72; 95% CI: 0.582, 0.890; p=0.002; Figure). In a landmark analysis from ASCT, PFS was 30.7 vs 24.9 months (HR 0.684; 95% CI: 0.551, 0.848; p<0.001). Median PFS2 and OS have not yet been reached in either arm. Ixazomib maintenance led to higher rates of deepened response compared with placebo (relative risk 1.41; 95% CI: 1.10, 1.80; p=0.004). Conversion from documented MRD positivity at study entry to MRD negativity occurred at a higher rate with ixazomib compared with placebo (12% vs 7%). PFS benefit was seen broadly across subgroups, including ISS III (HR 0.661), PI-exposed (HR 0.750), PI-naïve (HR 0.497), and patients with high-risk cytogenetics (HR 0.625). Discontinuation due to AEs was low (7% ixazomib vs 5% placebo). With ixazomib vs placebo, 42% vs 26% of patients had grade ≥3 AEs; 27% vs 20% had serious AEs; and 1 patient vs 0 died on treatment. Common grade ≥3 AEs were infections (15% vs 8%) including pneumonia (6% vs 4%), gastrointestinal disorders (6% vs 1%), neutropenia (5% vs 3%), and thrombocytopenia (5% vs <1%). Peripheral neuropathy rates were 19% vs 15% (<1% vs 0 grade 3). Rate of second primary malignancies was 3% in both arms. Global Quality of Life scores (EORTC QLQ-C30) on ixazomib were similar to placebo. Conclusions This study demonstrated a 28% reduction in the risk of progression/death, corresponding to a 39% improvement in PFS with ixazomib maintenance, with deepening of responses and increased conversions to MRD negativity over control, as well as a favorable safety profile, including an absence of risk of second primary malignancies and low rates of peripheral neuropathy, supporting ixazomib as a valuable option for maintenance therapy in responding patients post-ASCT. Figure. Figure. Disclosures Dimopoulos: Janssen: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria. Gay:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen Takeda Celgene, Amgen, BMS, and Roche: Other: Advisor; Janssen, Amgen, Takeda, Celgene, BMS: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Schjesvold:Oncopeptides: Consultancy; Abbvie: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Adaptive: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Beksac:Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen Cilag: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Deva: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Hajek:Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Weisel:Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, and Takeda: Honoraria; Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Juno, Sanofi, and Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen, Celgene, Janssen, and Sanofi: Research Funding. Goldschmidt:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnology: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Chugai: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; ArtTempi: Honoraria; Mundipharma: Research Funding. Maisnar:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria. Moreau:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Chng:Merck: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodation, expenses; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodation, expenses; Aslan: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodation, expenses, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodation, expenses, Research Funding. Kaiser:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Other: Travel Support; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Other: Travel support; Chugai: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Zweegman:Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene Corp.: 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, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Mateos:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GSK: Consultancy, 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; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Consultancy, 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; GSK: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Spencer:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; STA: Honoraria. Iida:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Kyowa-Hakko Kirin: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; Chugai: Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Ono: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Toyama Chemical: Research Funding; MSD: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Teijin Pharma: Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy. Morgan:Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria. Teng:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA, a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited: Employment. Suryanarayan:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA, a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited: Employment. Skacel:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA, a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited: Employment; Department of Hematology, Charles University General Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic: Other: Affiliation. Dash:Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co.: Employment. Labotka:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA, a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited: Employment.

Abstract Background: Synthetic lethality (SL) is characterized by the chemical inhibition of multiple aberrant genes to differentially kill malignant cells. We investigated small-molecule combinations for SL through in vitro and in vivo screening and optimization studies (as in the granted patents in USA and China) and demonstrated the synergistic potential of best-in-class combinations of targeted agents, drug repositioning, immune modulation and low-dose combinations. We hypothesize that BTK and mTOR inhibition coupled with an IMID will target multiple key signaling pathways, improve differential apoptosis and target acquired drug resistance. DTRM-555, an optimized mechanism-based combination, consists of the clinically differentiated BTK inhibitor DTRMWXHS-12 (or DTRM-12), everolimus (EV) and pomalidomide (POM). In xenograft tumor models, DTRM-555 administered orally has demonstrated superior efficacy over monotherapy at very low dose combinations of the three agents (1/18 of DTRM-12, 1/6 of EV, and 1/6 of POM). DTRM-12 monotherapy has been safe and well tolerated in simultaneous phase Ia trials (US and China) with preliminary efficacy across 50 mg through 400 mg once daily (QD). Here we report the US clinical results of the oral combination therapies DTRM-505 (DTRM-12 plus EV) and DTRM-555 (DTRM-12 plus EV plus POM) for the first time (NCT02900716). Methods: The safety and anti-tumor activity of the oral doublet therapy DTRM-505 and the oral triplet therapy DTRM-555 are evaluated using a "3+3" study design. Enrollment was conducted concurrently with a phase Ia study of DTRM-12 monotherapy; with DTRM-505 opened for accrual when monotherapy DTRM-12 cleared the 200-mg dose level. Eligible patients are at least 18 years old, having ECOG performance status less than 2 with relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL), mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), follicular lymphoma (FL) or classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL). Study treatment is administered daily for 21 consecutive days over a 28-day cycle. The dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) period was defined during the first cycle of therapy, and treatment was continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Patients underwent tumor evaluations every 2 months and response was recorded using revised response criteria (IWCLL and Cheson 2014). Results: Between 9/2016 and 7/2018, 19 patients have been treated with DTRM-12 monotherapy in the USA (6 pts, 50-300 mg) and China (13 pts, 50-400 mg). Patients have tolerated up to 23+ cycles of DTRM-12 monotherapy. Seven patients, including DLBCL, CLL, MCL, FL and cHL, have been treated with oral doublet therapy DTRM-505 for 2 to 12 cycles. Three patients (2 DLBCL, 1 FL) have been treated with oral triplet therapy DTRM-555, including one patient transitioned from the doublet DTRM-505 under an exploratory arm. No patient has discontinued due to an adverse event (AE) and no DLT has occurred. Recurring AEs are mostly grade 1 or 2 and responses have been seen with DTRM-505 and DTRM-555 across diverse lymphoma histologies (See Tables). All patients evaluable for response demonstrated partial response to DTRM-505 and DTRM-555, with 2/7 (doublet) and 3/3 (triplet) patients remaining on therapy. Conclusion: The maximum tolerated dose has not been reached for DTRM-12 monotherapy and for the current fixed dose doublet and triplet combinations. Toxicities have been mild and repeated cycles of study treatment have been well tolerated without delays of subsequent treatment cycles. Enrollment continues for refractory lymphoma patients to demonstrate the safety and efficacy for the first-in-class oral triplet therapy DTRM-555. Disclosures Huntington: Janssen: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy. Schuster:Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Genentech: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; OncLive: Honoraria; Dava Oncology: Consultancy, Honoraria; Physician's Education Source, LLC: Honoraria; Nordic Nanovector: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. He:Zhejiang DTRM Biopharma Co. Ltd.: Other: Founder and CEO; Zhejiang DTRM Biopharma LLC: Other: Founder and CEO. Shen:Zhejiang DTRM Biopharma LLC: Other: Clinical Operations Director. Kennard:AbbVie, Gilead, Verastem: Consultancy. Dwivedy Nasta:Incyte: Research Funding; Takeda/Millenium: Research Funding; Debiopharm: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Rafael/WF: Research Funding; Aileron: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Merck: Other: DSMC; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Landsburg:Takeda: Consultancy; Curis: Consultancy, Research Funding. Porter:Novartis: Other: Advisory board, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Genentech: Other: Spouse employment; Kite Pharma: Other: Advisory board. Svoboda:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Kyowa: Consultancy; Regeneron: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; KITE: Consultancy. Song:Peking University Cancer Hospital (Beijing Cancer Hospital): Employment. Zhu:Beijing Cancer Hospital: Employment. Brander:Pharmacyclics, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Other: DSMB; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding; Teva: Consultancy, Honoraria; Acerta: Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding; DTRM: Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding; BeiGene: Other: Institutional research funding for non investigator initiated clinical trial, Research Funding. Ding:Merck: Research Funding. Mato:Pharmacyclics, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Regeneron: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Acerta: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Portola: Research Funding; Johnson & Johnson: Consultancy; Prime Oncology: Honoraria; Medscape: Honoraria.

Abstract Introduction: Multiple Myeloma (MM) is consistently preceded by pre-malignant asymptomatic monoclonal gammopathies (AMG). To date, our understanding of the pathogenesis of progression to MM remains incomplete. Genetic analyses of AMG cells compared to MM-derived plasma cells (PCs) have found few differences, suggesting that progression may be mediated in part by tumour-extrinsic mechanisms. To comprehensively examine the cellular and molecular complexities of MM pathogenesis, we performed an unbiased single cell RNA-sequencing (scRNA-seq) analysis of tumour cells as well as immune cells from the tumour microenvironment (TME) derived from transgenic mice transitioning from AMG to MM. Methods: We employed the Vk*MYC immune-competent mouse model of MM (C57BL/6/KaLwRij), which is a clinically and biologically faithful model of untreated disease that similarly progresses from AMG to MM with age. We established an age-based cohort of Vk*MYC mice to recapitulate a range of MM disease stages, generated single-cell suspensions from flushed bone marrow and subjected these cells to scRNA-seq profiling (10x Genomics). Results: Across 12 samples profiled to date, our scRNA-seq dataset contains 82,853 high-quality cells, expressing 17,922 genes. We employed dimensionality reduction and unsupervised graph-based clustering to visualize and group transcriptionally-similar cell populations, which revealed 42 clusters. Expression of known marker genes and computed correlation scores with bulk gene expression reference datasets enabled annotation of cell types, revealing both malignant cells and non-malignant immune cell populations. We first focused on single cell T/NK profiles in our data given the emerging utility of immune checkpoint inhibitors that target these populations. Although we did not observe numerical differences in the proportion of CD8+ T cells across disease stages, analysis of immune checkpoint receptor genes revealed increased expression of Pdcd1 (PD-1) and Lag3 in CD8+ T cells from mice with disease. Co-expression of LAG3 and PD-1 proteins was also confirmed using a Vk*MYC transplantable model, with a positive correlation between disease burden (%CD138+/B220- cells) and %PD1+LAG3+ CD8+ T cells by flow cytometry. Consistent with reports of PD-1 and LAG3 co-expression on non-functional exhausted T cells, CD8+ T cells from diseased mice demonstrated elevated T cell exhaustion scores in our scRNA-seq dataset. These observations suggest that T cell exhaustion may be mediated by multiple immune checkpoint receptors during disease evolution. Although combinatorial treatment with PD-1 and LAG3 antibodies failed to induce tumour regression in mice with established disease, the addition of cyclophosphamide (Cy) to these antibodies resulted in marked improvement in survival of the mice compared to Cy alone, presumably by promoting immunogenic cell death. Studies exploring the combination of LAG3 and PD-1 antibodies as a strategy to inhibit transition from AMG to MM in the Vk*MYC mice are ongoing and will be reported. We also performed subclustering analysis of 5,228 Sdc1+ (CD138) PCs in our scRNA-seq dataset revealing 11 distinct clusters, with evidence of inter- and intra-tumoural heterogeneity across all Vk*MYC mice. Differential gene expression analysis revealed a non-malignant PC (nPC) cluster as supported by lower Myc transgene and Ccnd2 expression. Moreover, this cluster was predominantly comprised of cells from age-matched control mice or mice with earlier disease. Single-cell chromosomal copy number analysis revealed loss of Chr5 in the majority of tumour cells from MM mice, but not in the nPC cluster. Loss of Chr5 was observed in tumor subclones from all AMG mice suggesting that it is an early and potentially unifying event in Vk*MYC mice during disease progression. Further, the data support the establishment of intratumoural heterogeneity early in disease evolution. Conclusions: Our approach of using scRNA-seq to characterize the pathogenesis of disease evolution in MM has enabled simultaneous measurement of intratumoural heterogeneity and immune cell phenotypes in the TME. In turn, this has provided insights into mechanisms that may contribute to transition from AMG to MM, including induction of T cell exhaustion and loss of mouse Chr5. Ongoing and future work aims to evaluate whether these mechanisms can be exploited therapeutically in pre-malignant AMG. Disclosures Sebag: Amgen Canada: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene Canada: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda Canada: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Pugh:Prosigna: Honoraria; N/A: Patents & Royalties: Hybrid-capture sequencing for determining immune cell clonality; N/A: Patents & Royalties: Combined hybrid-capture DNA sequencing for disease detection; Boehringer Ingelheim: Research Funding; Chrysalis Biomedical Advisors: Honoraria; Merck: Honoraria; DynaCare: Consultancy.

Abstract Background: Racial disparities in outcomes of cancer patients have been reported. Access to comprehensive cancer centers is associated with improved overall survival (OS) but racial/ethnic minorities may have a disparate access to such care. While the impact of treatment facility volume on outcomes has been evaluated, outcomes of centers with minority-predominant patient population have not been studied. We compared demographic profiles, facility level data and OS of patients treated at minority-predominant facilities to facilities that treated predominantly non-Hispanic Whites (NHW) with non-DLBCL. Methods: The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was used to identify all non-DLBCL patients diagnosed between 2004 and 2015. "Minority-treating facilities" were defined as facilities in the top decile by proportion for initial treatment of non-Hispanic African-Americans (NHAA), Hispanics and other races. We performed univariate and multivariate analyses to compare sociodemographic and clinical factors influencing outcomes between minority treating and non-minority treating facilities. A subgroup analysis stratified by race/ethnicity was also conducted to study the effect of treating facilities on the outcome of NHWs and minorities separately. Results: Of 1339 total facilities, 123 (9.1%) qualified as minority treating. Of 207,239 eligible patients in NCDB, 18,719 (9.03%) received treatment at the minority-treating facilities and of these, 11,190 (~60%) belonged to the minority races. Overall, 4.5% (6,988/156,664) NHWs and 30% (11,190/37,639) minorities received treatment at the minority-treating facilities. Several demographic and facility level characteristics were significantly different among the patients treated at minority-treating facilities as compared to non-minority treating facilities. Overall, significantly higher number of patients in minority-treating hospitals had lower income and education, had Medicaid coverage or lack of insurance. The OS of patients in minority treating facilities was significantly worse as compared to non-minority facilities (Figures). On multivariate analysis, patients who received treatment at minority-treating facilities were at 10% (HR=1.10, 95% CI: 1.06-1.14 p<0.001) higher risk of mortality as compared to those treated at the non-minority treating facilities. On multivariate analysis, NHAA (30% increased risk) and 'other races' (9% increased risk) were at significantly higher risk of mortality as compared to the NHW (Table 2). To study the effect of treatment at minority-treating facilities on OS among the patients of same race/ethnicity group, a multivariate analysis was also run separately for NHW and racial minorities. The NHWs who received treatment at minority-treating facilities were at 13% higher risk of death (HR=1.13, 95% CI: 1.08-1.19 p<0.001) as compared to NHWs who were treated at non-minority treating facilities. Similarly, the racial minorities who received treatment at minority treating facilities were at 8% higher risk of death (HR=1.08, 95% CI: 1.03-1.19 p=0.003) as compared to those who received treatment at the nonminority treating facilities. Conclusions:Outcomes of patients who received treatment at minority treating facilities was significantly worse than those at non-minority treating facilities. This was true for NHWs and racial minorities separately as well. Several demographic and facility level characteristics were significantly different in the two groups however OS remained worse after adjusting for them. Causes of poor outcomes at minority-treating facilities must be analyzed to mitigate them and improve outcomes for all. Figure. Figure. Disclosures Ailawadhi: Takeda: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding.

Abstract The targeted therapy ibrutinib inhibits B cell receptor signaling (BTK inhibitor) and has yielded high response rates and durable remissions in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). However, it is widely believed that the addition of immune therapies to targeted drugs will be required to activate anti-tumor immunity and work towards curative therapy. Identifying effective combinations of targeted drugs and/or standard chemotherapy with immunotherapy is a priority research area and particularly relevant for CLL, as patients' T cells have been shown to exhibit profound tolerance/exhaustion and notably, no activity was reported in a recent trial of anti-PD-1 immunotherapy for relapsed disease. Ibrutinib has shown beneficial immunomodulatory activity in CLL by inhibiting IL-2-inducible T cell kinase (ITK) as well BTK that is associated with increased effector CD4+and CD8+ T cell numbers and decreased expression of inhibitory checkpoint receptors such as PD-1 on patient T cells. Here we have performed comparative immune bioassays from a randomized phase III trial comparing ibrutinib-based therapy to traditional FCR chemoimmunotherapy to assess the effects of treatments on anti-tumor T cell function. Viable peripheral blood mononuclear cell samples were collected serially (baseline, 6 months and 12 months) from CLL patients on the randomized phase III E1912 trial of ibrutinib and rituximab versus FCR for previously untreated disease to allow longitudinal batched immune analysis. Cytotoxicity assays revealed that highly purified CD3+ T cells from the FCR treated patients at 6 and 12-month time-points did not change their activated killing function against autologous baseline CD19+ CLL tumor B cells (acting as target antigen-presenting cells pulsed with superantigen, sAg) compared to pre-treatment/baseline exhausted T cells (n=22). In contrast, patients treated with ibrutinib-based therapy had a significant increase in activated anti-tumor T cell killing function (P<.01, n=22) at both 6-month (66% increase) and 12-month (89% increase) time-points. Flow cytometric analysis of circulating immune subsets revealed that the percentage of PD-1 and PD-L1 positive cells among CD8+ and CD4+ T cells (particularly effector compartments) were reduced with ibrutinib-based therapy, whereas only a partial reduction was detected following FCR treatment. However, patients' T cells from both treatment arms responded normally to T cell receptor engagement by upregulating these checkpoint molecules. This led us to explore ex vivo treatment of highly purified CD3+ T cells and CD19+ CLL B cells from both treatment arms with anti-PD-L1 or anti-PD-1 immunotherapy prior to cytotoxicity assays. Our functional data revealed that the T cells from both FCR time-points (6 and 12-months) were not sensitive to either anti-PD-L1 (n=14) or anti-PD-1 (n=14) treatment. In contrast, ibrutinib-based treatment sensitized anti-tumor T function (23% increase in killing) following anti-PD-L1 treatment (n=14) at the 6-month time-point only (P<.01) but not with anti-PD-1. To investigate the mechanism underlying these effector function differences, we compared the ability of highly purified CD3+ T cells from each treatment arm (n=45) time-point to form F-actin immunological synapses with baseline autologous CLL tumor B cells. Quantitative confocal image analysis revealed that ibrutinib-based therapy significantly (P<.01) enhanced polarization of F-actin, tyrosine-phosphorylated proteins and granzyme B at immune synapses with tumor cells at both 6 and 12-month time-points, whereas FCR treated patient T cells failed to mobilize these lytic synapse molecules. Importantly, our assays have revealed that T cells from both FCR treatment time-points formed "non-polarized" immune synapses with tumor cells, in keeping with cytotoxic dysfunction and insensitivity to additional checkpoint immunotherapy. In contrast, our functional correlative bioassays have revealed that ibrutinib-based therapy can reactivate exhausted cytolytic T cell function and suggest to us, a potential therapeutic window for anti-PD-L1 immunotherapy at the earlier 6-month time-point. We believe this data supports the concept of incorporating functional bioassays to immune-monitoring assays associated to clinical trials that should aid knowledge-led design of future combination immunotherapy. Disclosures Kay: Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios Pharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Acerta: Research Funding; Cytomx Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Infinity Pharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmacyclics: 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; Morpho-sys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Tolero Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Shanafelt:Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding; Jansen: Research Funding. Ramsay:Celgene Corporation: Research Funding; Roche Glycart AG: Research Funding; MedImmune: Research Funding.

Abstract Background: The treatment of NHL has witnessed a paradigm shift over time, with targeted immunotherapy, stem cell transplant (SCT) among others. Historically, XRT was used quite frequently for the management of NHL but with advent of better systemic therapy, its utilization has changed. Trends and patterns of care for XRT use have never been formally reported. Methods: We identified patients with NHL diagnosis in the National Cancer Database (NCDB) between years 2004 and 2015. Demographic, clinical, facility level, initial treatment and outcome data were collected. The utilization of XRT in diffuse large B-cell (DLBCL) and non-DLBCL NHL were analyzed separately by univariate and multivariate analyses. To analyze the trends in the rates of XRT, we applied segmented linear regression to calculate the average annual percent change (AAPC) and 95% confidence Interval (CI) with a 'p' value. AAPC and CIs were calculated using the segmented package in R studio v1.1.49. Rest of the analyses was conducted using StataCorp version 15.1. Results: A total of 133,182 DLBCL and 204,933 non-DLBCL patients were identified. Among patients with DLBCL, 27,895 (20.9%) patients received RT. The rate of XRT declined from 25% in 2004 to 18.4% in 2015 with estimated AAPC of -0.59% (95%CI: -0.70- -0.49), p= 0.03 (Figure 1). In a subgroup analysis, a similar decline in the rate of XRT was evident across all the age groups, combined stages I and II vs stages III and IV and nodal vs extra nodal DLBCL (Table 1). Among non DLBCL, 33,369 (16.3%) patients received XRT. There was a statistically significant decline in the rate of XRT from 18.03% in 2004 to 16.3% in 2014 with an AAPC of -0.26 (95%CI: -0.38- -0.14) p <0.001 (Figure 1). On the subgroup analysis, the utilization of XRT declined across all the studied subgroups except among patients aged 80 years and above (Table 1). On multivariate analysis, several demographic, clinical and facility level factors were found to be significantly associated with XRT utilization in NHL (Table 2). In particular, older age groups, racial/ethnic minorities, advanced stages, higher Charlson comorbidity scores and diagnosis in the more recent calendar years were associated with lesser chances of receiving RT. Extranodal DLBCL had lower utilization while extranodal non-DLBCL had increased XRT utilization. Conclusion: There has been a significant decline in the utilization of XRT among patients with NHL (DLBCL and non-DLBCL) in the US since 2004, likely due to introduction of practice changing systemic therapeutics. There is still significant heterogeneity noted in practice patterns regarding utilization of XRT across the US. Having more standardized guidelines will help streamline delivery of evidence-based patient care. Disclosures Ailawadhi: Celgene: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding.

Abstract Background: CLL is the most common leukemia diagnosis in adults and its treatment has undergone significant change from chemotherapy, to immunotherapy and now targeted kinase inhibitors, leading to improved overall survival (OS). With improving survivorship, SPMs can occur but an in-depth analysis of risks and trends of SPMs in CLL survivors is lacking. We performed a population-based analysis to evaluate this. Methods: Patients in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database diagnosed with CLL between 1973-2015 were included. Due to variation in management techniques over time, the cohort was divided in four time periods: 1973-1982, 1983-1992, 1993-2002 and 2003-2015. We evaluated differences in risk for SPMs among CLL survivors compared to risk of individual malignancies expected in the general population during these time periods and studied the effect of demographics and time since CLL diagnosis. Results: Over a nearly 270,000 person-year follow up, 6,467 new SPMs were diagnosed with a standardized incidence ratio (SIR) of 1.2 (95% CI 1.17-1.23), which resulted in a 39 excess cancers per 10,000 population. The CLL survivors had a 20% overall increased risk of developing SPMs (excluding non-squamous skin cancer) compared to the general population. The risks for both solid (SIR 1.15 CI 95% 1.12-1.18) and hematological malignancies (SIR 1.61 95% CI 1.5-1.73) was higher than the expected in the general population. However, the risk for individual cancers was heterogeneous. The tumors associated with the highest risk were Hodgkin lymphoma (almost 8 times higher), Kaposi Sarcoma (4 times), non-epithelial skin cancers (4 times), salivary gland cancer (3 times) and acute lymphocytic leukemia (3 times). In contrast, tumors in the hepatobiliary system, female breast and female genital system were associated with a lower risk than the general population. The highest SIR across the study periods was observed in the younger population (ages 15-49). Although the risk increased in all ethnicities, it was statistically significant only in Caucasians. There was no gender-wise difference in SIR during any of the four time periods. A statistically significant increase in SIR was observed for both men and women from 1973-1982 to 2003-2015. This was mostly due to an increase in risk of hematological malignancies from 1.08 early in the study to 2.56 in the most recent study period. The SIR in solid tumors did not change significantly over time; in absolute terms, however, lung carcinoma contributed the most to the excess risk, followed by non-epithelial skin cancers and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. The risk of developing a SPM was higher for the CLL survivors during most of the latency periods, but it was statistically significant during the 2-5 months and 12-59 months after diagnosis. A multivariate analysis was conducted to evaluate the impact of period of diagnosis on the development of SPMs among these patients. After adjusting for gender, ethnicity, radiation therapy, chemotherapy, and age at diagnosis of CLL, patients diagnosed with CLL in the most recent time period were at 45% higher risk of developing SPMs as compared to the patient diagnosed during 1973-1982 (Hazard ratio(HR) =1.45 95%CI:1.34-1.6, p<0.001). Moreover increased HRs were also observed for 1983-1992 and 1993-2002 time periods (Fig. 1) Conclusions: With improving therapeutics for cancer treatment, survivorship is improving as well and the risk of SPMs needs to be better understood and addressed. This is truer for CLL, where majority of patients have a favorable survival. The risk of SPMs was 20% higher in CLL survivors than in the general population and was most prominent in the survivors aged 15-49 years at the time of CLL diagnosis. The risk of individual malignancies may be heterogenous but there has been an increase in risk of SPMs over time, mainly due to an increase of secondary hematological malignancies in recent years. Active survivorship plans and long-term surveillance for SPMs is crucial for improved outcomes of patients with a history of CLL. Disclosures Ailawadhi: Janssen: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding.

Abstract Introduction: The phase 3 A.R.R.O.W. study (NCT02412878) has shown a favorable benefit-risk profile of once-weekly carfilzomib (K) at 70 mg/m2 over twice-weekly K at 27mg/m2 plus dexamethasone (d) for the treatment of patients (pts) with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) (Moreau. Lancet Oncol. 2018;19:953-964). Once-weekly significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared with twice-weekly (median 11.2 vs 7.6 months [mos]; hazard ratio [HR]: 0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.54, 0.88; P=0.0014). Herein, we present a subgroup analysis of once-weekly vs twice-weekly Kd by previous therapy in pts with RRMM. Methods: 478 pts with RRMM, previously treated with 2 or 3 prior therapies including a proteasome inhibitor and an immunomodulatory agent were randomized 1:1 to receive either once-weekly (n=240) or twice-weekly (n=238) Kd. The once-weekly group received K (30-min intravenous infusion [IV]) on days (D) 1, 8, and 15 of all cycles (20 mg/m2 on D1 [cycle 1]; 70 mg/m2 thereafter). The twice-weekly group received K (10-min IV) on D1, 2, 8, 9, 15 and 16 (20 mg/m2 on D1 and 2 during cycle 1 and 27 mg/m2 thereafter). All pts received d at 40 mg/m2 on D1, 8, 15 (all cycles), and 22 (cycle 1-9 only). Treatment was given in 28-day cycles until disease progression or unacceptably toxicity. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). The study secondary endpoints were overall response rate (ORR), survival, safety, and pharmacokinetics. Results: Baseline characteristics were generally balanced. PFS, ORR, and safety outcomes by prior lines of therapy are shown in the Table; PFS curves by prior lines are shown in the Figure. With a median follow-up time of 12.6 mos in the once-weekly group and 12.0 mos in the twice-week group, PFS for pts with 2 prior lines (N=241) was 12.1 mos vs 7.6 mos (HR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.43, 0.86). Median PFS for pts with 3 prior lines (N=237) was 8.9 mos for once-weekly vs 7.9 mos for twice-weekly (HR: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.59, 1.15). ORRs for once- vs twice-weekly were 62.9% vs 40.8% (OR: 2.46; 95% CI: 1.47, 4.14) in pts with 2 prior lines and 62.9% vs 40.7% (OR: 2.47; 95% CI: 1.46, 4.17) in pts with 3 prior lines. In the 2 prior lines group, 9.5% vs 3.2% of pts had a complete response or better with once- vs twice-weekly Kd respectively. Complete responses or better in pts with 3 prior lines were obtained in 4.8% of pts receiving once-weekly and no pts with twice-weekly Kd. In A.R.R.O.W., 401 (83.9%) pts had prior lenalidomide (LEN) exposure. Median PFS for once- vs twice-weekly was 11.1 mos vs 7.4 mos (HR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.56, 0.94) for LEN exposed pts and NE (not estimable) vs 9.4 mos (HR: 0.63; 95% CI: 0.33, 1.21) for pts without prior LEN exposure. ORRs for once- vs twice-weekly were 62.3% vs 39.2% (OR: 2.57; 95% CI: 1.72, 3.84) in pts with prior LEN exposure, and 66.7% vs 47.7% (OR: 2.19; 95% CI: (0.86, 5.58) in pts without prior LEN exposure. Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) occurred in 59.1% vs 65.0% (once- vs twice-weekly) of pts with 2 prior lines of therapy, and 75.6% vs 58.0% (once- vs. twice-weekly) of pts with 3 prior lines of therapy. The incidence of Grade ≥3 AEs of interest by prior lines can be found in the Table. Grade ≥3 AEs occurred in 69.3% vs 60.2% (once- vs twice-weekly) of pts with prior LEN, and 57.6% vs 68.2% (once- vs. twice-weekly) of pts without prior LEN. Conclusions: Once-weekly Kd resulted in a favorable benefit-risk profile regardless of the number of prior lines. Although the median PFS was prolonged in both groups, pts with 2 prior lines achieved a greater benefit, underlining the need for using once-weekly Kd early to optimize outcomes for pts with RRMM. Safety profiles were consistent with previous findings and reports. Importantly, low incidences of heart failure were reported across all subgroups and no additional toxicities were found. As described for other K-based regimens, efficacy of K can be further enhanced by being used in earlier lines of therapy for pts with RRMM. This subgroup analysis further confirmed the positive results from A.R.R.O.W. of using once-weekly Kd at 70 mg/m2 regardless of prior therapies and should be considered an additional option to treat pts with RRMM. Disclosures Moreau: Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Stewart:Amgen Inc., Celgene, Roche, Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Amgen Inc., BMS, Celgene, Takeda, Roche, Seattle Genetics, Janssen, Ono: Consultancy. Lazzaro:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding. Dimopoulos:Janssen: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria. Cavo:AbbVie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Ailawadhi:Amgen: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy. Iskander:Amgen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Huang:Amgen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Zahlten-Kumeli:Amgen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Mateos:GSK: Consultancy, 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; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GSK: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Consultancy, 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.

Abstract Background: Clinical trials are fundamental to advance therapeutics systematically and improve patient outcomes. Despite this, enrollment on clinical trials remains dismal in the United States (US) and is a constant focus of healthcare policy. We studied distribution of clinical trials for B-cell malignancies over time across the US and unique clinical trial opportunities i.e. individual clinical trials for the given diagnosis at a site that patients may have access to participate. Methods: We abstracted data from clinicaltrials.gov for all trials that had non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) or multiple myeloma (MM) as an inclusion indication between 1999-2018. Clinical trial characteristics and distribution over US geographical divisions (West, Midwest, Northeast, and South) were studied, and differences were assessed by Chi-square test. Results: A total of 1930 trials were identified (NHL: 982, MM: 948), of which 483 were recruiting at the time of data abstraction (NHL: 250, MM: 233). Over the past 2 decades, 182691 patients were enrolled on the various trials (NHL: 81592, MM: 101099). Trials by phase of study included phase 1: 629, phase 1/2: 316, phase 2: 813, phase 2/3: 11 and phase 3: 161. Number of trials by phase separated by NHL and MM are shown in Figure 1. Of these, 197 trials were randomized (NHL: 67, MM: 130). Geographical distribution of trials by diagnosis type is shown in Figure 2. A total of 31806 unique trial opportunities were noted for MM and NHL, of which 9,513 were international and 22,293 were in the US, with a geographical distribution of 5080 in West, 8198 in Midwest, 3944 in Northeast, and 5071 in South. 4,883 of the unique trial opportunities were available at NCI/NCCN accredited sites and 17,410 were at non-NCI/NCCN sites in the US. Treatment characteristics of the trials included monoclonal antibodies in 1218, other targeted agents in 2641, stem cell transplant in 526, and other agents in 517 trials with several trials utilizing more than one of these therapeutic options. There was no statistically significant difference in the distribution of clinical trials by phase of study across various US geographical regions for MM (p=0.71), NHL (p=0.98) or combined MM+NHL (p=0.16). On the other hand, unique trial opportunities were significantly different by study phase and geographical distribution for MM, NHL or MM+NHL (all p<0.001) (Figure 3). Conclusions: Widespread access to clinical trials within a cancer diagnosis is imperative for generalizability of trial results. In a comprehensive, national analysis we noted that while it may appear that clinical trials are available across the US, sites where they are open are distributed unevenly, giving rise to a disparity in access to evidence-based therapeutic advancements for patients. Disclosures Ailawadhi: Janssen: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy. Sher:Affimed: Research Funding.

Abstract We have previously proposed the dysregulation of the D type cyclins by chromosome translocations to the IgH locus or by not fully characterized mechanisms in hyperdyploid patients as a unifying genetic event in the pathogenesis of Monoclonal Gammopathy of Uncertain Significance (MGUS) and multiple myeloma (MM). However, no experimental data are available to evaluate the direct consequences of cyclin Ds overexpression in plasma cells. Similarly, activating mutations of KRAS have been identified in 15% of MM patients, but never in MGUS, and have been proposed to contribute to the progression of MGUS to MM, but this hypothesis has never been experimentally validated. We evaluated the contribution of CyclinD1 and KRAS to the development and progression of monoclonal gammopathy (MG) that develops spontaneously in C57BL/6 mice. We aged a cohort of EuCCND1 mice, and lslKRASV12 mice crossed to three different CRE expressing mice: IgG1CRE, CD19CRE or Vk* CRE (KRAS/CRE). A cohort of Vk* MYC mice, Vk* MYC x EuCCND1 (MYC/CD1) and triple transgenic mice (CD1/KRAS/CRE) was also analyzed. Mice were bled every 10 weeks beginning at 30 weeks, and the presence of MG was evaluated by serum protein electrophoresis. The median Time To M-Spike (mTTS) detection was 97 weeks in C57Bl/6, 63w in EuCCND1, 54w in KRAS/CRE, 54w in Vk* MYC, 38w in CD1/KRAS/CRE and 36w in MYC/CD1 mice. This indicates that acceleration of the development of MG occurs in all these strain of mice. However, we noticed that the spontaneous MG in C57BL/6 wt, EuCCND1 or KRAS/CRE rarely progresses (as determined by detection of a M-spike >7 g/L), while in the other mouse strains it frequently progresses, with a mTTS >7 g/L around 65w. A clear progression of MGUS to MM was observed only in Vk* MYC mice, and was further accelerated in MYC/CD1 mice, which are characterized by extra-medullary disease and shorter overall survival. In conclusion, these data support our hypothesis that Cyclin Ds dysregulation in plasma cells is the initial transformation step leading to MGUS. Further oncogenic events, like activating mutations of KRAS are required to expand the monoclonal plasma cells. Among the oncogenes examined MYC provides the greatest acceleration of the MG in wildtype and EuCCND1 mice, and results in a disease with the malignant features of MM. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.