Search

Introduction Daratumumab is a CD38-targeting monoclonal antibody that has demonstrated clinical benefit for multiple myeloma. Daratumumab inhibition of CD38, which is expressed on immune cell populations and cardiomyocytes, could potentially affect cardiac function. This QTc substudy of the phase 2 CENTAURUS study investigated the potential effect of intravenous daratumumab monotherapy on QTc prolongation and other electrocardiogram (ECG) parameters, including concentration-QTc effect modeling. Methods Patients had intermediate- or high-risk smoldering multiple myeloma. Patients with QT interval corrected by Fridericia’s formula (QTcF) > 470 ms, QRS interval ≥ 110 ms, or PR interval ≥ 200 ms were excluded. Triplicate ECGs were collected at screening, Dose 1, and Dose 8. Analyses of on-treatment ECGs were conducted with a time-matched baseline (primary analysis). By time-point, pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PK/PD), and outlier analyses were conducted. Results Of 123 patients in CENTAURUS, 31 were enrolled in the QTc substudy. Daratumumab produced a small increase in heart rate (5–12 beats per minute) of unclear significance. There was a small but clinically insignificant effect on QTc, as measured by both time-matched time-point and PK/PD analyses. The primary analysis demonstrated a maximum mean increase in QTcF of 9.1 ms (90% 2-sided upper confidence interval [CI], 14.1 ms). The primary PK/PD analysis predicted a maximum QTcF increase of 8.5 ms (90% 2-sided upper CI, 13.5 ms). No patient had an abnormal U wave, a new QTcF > 500 ms, or > 60 ms change from baseline for QTcF. Conclusion Analysis of ECG intervals and concentration-QTc relationships showed a small but clinically insignificant effect of daratumumab. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02316106. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12325-020-01601-w.

Newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients treated with immunomodulatory drugs are at high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), but data are lacking from large prospective cohorts. We present thrombosis outcome data from Myeloma IX (n = 1936) and Myeloma XI (n = 4358) phase 3 randomized controlled trials for NDMM that treated transplant-eligible and transplant-ineligible patients before and after publication of thrombosis prevention guidelines. In Myeloma IX, transplant-eligible patients randomly assigned to cyclophosphamide, vincristine, doxorubicin, and dexamethasone (CVAD) induction had higher risk of VTE compared with patients treated with cyclophosphamide, thalidomide, and dexamethasone (CTD) (22.5% [n = 121 of 538] vs 16.1% [n = 89 of 554]; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR],1.46; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.11-1.93). For transplant-ineligible patients, those randomly assigned to attenuated CTD (CTDa) induction had a higher risk of VTE compared with those treated with melphalan and prednisolone (MP) (16.0% [n = 68 of 425] vs 4.1% [n = 17 of 419]; aHR, 4.25; 95% CI, 2.50-7.20). In Myeloma XI, there was no difference in risk of VTE (12.2% [n = 124 of 1014] vs 13.2% [n = 133 of 1008]; aHR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.72-1.18) or arterial thrombosis (1.2% [n = 12 of 1014] vs 1.5% [n = 15 of 1008]; aHR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.37-1.70) between transplant-eligible pathways for patients treated with cyclophosphamide, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (CRD) or CTD. For transplant-ineligible patients, there was no difference in VTEs between attenuated CRD (CRDa) and CTDa (10.4% [n = 95 of 916] vs 10.7% [n = 97 of 910]; aHR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.73-1.29). However, arterial risk was higher with CRDa than with CTDa (3.1% [n = 28 of 916] vs 1.6% [n = 15 of 910]; aHR, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.02-3.57). Thrombotic events occurred almost entirely within 6 months of treatment initiation. Thrombosis was not associated with inferior progression-free survival (PFS) or overall survival (OS), apart from inferior OS for patients with arterial events (aHR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.12-2.08) in Myeloma XI. The Myeloma XI trial protocol incorporated International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) thrombosis prevention recommendations and compared with Myeloma IX, more patients received thromboprophylaxis (80.5% vs 22.3%) with lower rates of VTE for identical regimens (CTD, 13.2% vs 16.1%; CTDa, 10.7% vs 16.0%). However, thrombosis remained frequent in spite of IMWG-guided thromboprophylaxis, suggesting that new approaches are needed.

Current guidelines for smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM) recommend active monitoring until the onset of multiple myeloma (MM) before initiating treatment or enrollment in a clinical trial. Earlier intervention may delay progression to MM. In CENTAURUS, 123 patients with intermediate-risk or high-risk SMM were randomly assigned to daratumumab 16 mg/kg intravenously on extended intense (intense), extended intermediate (intermediate), or short dosing schedules. At the prespecified primary analysis (15.8-month median follow-up), the complete response (CR) rates (co-primary endpoint) were 2.4%, 4.9%, and 0% for intense, intermediate, and short dosing, respectively; the co-primary endpoint of CR rate >15% was not met. Progressive disease (PD)/death rates (number of patients who progressed or died divided by total duration of progression-free survival [PFS] in patient-years; co-primary endpoint) for intense, intermediate, and short dosing were 0.055 (80% confidence interval [CI], 0.014–0.096), 0.102 (80% CI, 0.044–0.160), and 0.206 (80% CI, 0.118–0.295), respectively, translating to a median PFS ≥24 months in all arms (P < 0.0001, P < 0.0001 for all arms). Twenty-four–month PFS rates were 89.9% (90% CI, 78.5–95.4%), 82.0% (90% CI, 69.0–89.9%), and 75.3% (90% CI, 61.1–85.0%) for intense, intermediate, and short dosing, respectively. Pharmacokinetic analyses indicated that intense dosing maintained target-saturating trough concentrations in most patients throughout weekly, every-2-week, and every-4-week dosing periods. No new safety signals were observed. These data provide the basis for an ongoing phase 3 study of daratumumab in SMM.

This phase 2 study evaluated isatuximab as monotherapy or combined with dexamethasone in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Patients had RRMM refractory to an immunomodulatory drug (IMiD) and a proteasome inhibitor (PI) or had received ≥3 prior lines of therapy incorporating an IMiD and PI. Patients received isatuximab either as monotherapy (20 mg/kg on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 [once weekly] of cycle 1 followed by 20 mg/kg on days 1 and 15 of subsequent cycles; Isa group) or in combination with dexamethasone (40 mg/d [20 mg/d in patients aged ≥75 years] once weekly; Isa-dex group). Treated patients (N = 164) had received a median of 4 (range, 2-10) prior treatment lines. Patients received a median of 5 (1-24) and 7 (1-22) treatment cycles; at data cutoff, 13 (11.9%) of 109 and 15 (27.3%) of 55 patients remained on treatment in the Isa and Isa-dex arms, respectively. Overall response rate (primary efficacy end point) was 23.9% in the Isa arm and 43.6% in the Isa-dex arm (odds ratio, 0.405; 95% confidence interval, 0.192-0.859; P = .008). Median progression-free survival and overall survival were 4.9 and 18.9 months for Isa, and 10.2 and 17.3 months for Isa-dex. Infusion reactions (mostly grade 1/2) and hematologic abnormalities were the most common adverse events. There was a similar incidence of grade 3 or higher infections in both groups (22.0% and 21.8%). In conclusion, addition of dexamethasone to isatuximab increased response rates and survival outcomes with no detrimental effect on safety. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01084252.

Structural chromosomal changes including copy number aberrations (CNAs) are a major feature of multiple myeloma (MM), however their evolution in context of modern biological therapy is not well characterized. To investigate acquisition of CNAs and their prognostic relevance in context of first-line therapy, we profiled tumor diagnosis–relapse pairs from 178 NCRI Myeloma XI (ISRCTN49407852) trial patients using digital multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification. CNA profiles acquired at relapse differed substantially between MM subtypes: hyperdiploid (HRD) tumors evolved predominantly in branching pattern vs. linear pattern in t(4;14) vs. stable pattern in t(11;14). CNA acquisition also differed between subtypes based on CCND expression, with a marked enrichment of acquired del(17p) in CCND2 over CCND1 tumors. Acquired CNAs were not influenced by high-dose melphalan or lenalidomide maintenance randomization. A branching evolution pattern was significantly associated with inferior overall survival (OS; hazard ratio (HR) 2.61, P = 0.0048). As an individual lesion, acquisition of gain(1q) at relapse was associated with shorter OS, independent of other risk markers or time of relapse (HR = 2.00; P = 0.021). There is an increasing need for rational therapy sequencing in MM. Our data supports the value of repeat molecular profiling to characterize disease evolution and inform management of MM relapse.

IntroductionMultiple myeloma (MM) is a plasma cell tumour with over 5800 new cases each year in the UK. The introduction of biological therapies has improved outcomes for the majority of patients with MM, but in approximately 20% of patients the tumour is characterised by genetic changes which confer a significantly poorer prognosis, generally termed high-risk (HR) MM. It is important to diagnose these genetic changes early and identify more effective first-line treatment options for these patients.Methods and analysisThe Myeloma UK nine OPTIMUM trial (MUKnine) evaluates novel treatment strategies for patients with HRMM. Patients with suspected or newly diagnosed MM, fit for intensive therapy, are offered participation in a tumour genetic screening protocol (MUKnine a), with primary endpoint proportion of patients with molecular screening performed within 8 weeks. Patients identified as molecularly HR are invited into the phase II, single-arm, multicentre trial (MUKnine b) investigating an intensive treatment schedule comprising bortezomib, lenalidomide, daratumumab, low-dose cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone, with single high-dose melphalan and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) followed by combination consolidation and maintenance therapy. MUKnine b primary endpoints are minimal residual disease (MRD) at day 100 post-ASCT and progression-free survival. Secondary endpoints include response, safety and quality of life. The trial uses a Bayesian decision rule to determine if this treatment strategy is sufficiently active for further study. Patients identified as not having HR disease receive standard treatment and are followed up in a cohort study. Exploratory studies include longitudinal whole-body diffusion-weighted MRI for imaging MRD testing.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval London South East Research Ethics Committee (Ref: 17/LO/0022, 17/LO/0023). Results of studies will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.Trial registration numberISRCTN16847817, May 2017; Pre-results.

Background Sex differences in the incidence and outcomes of several cancers are well established. Multiple myeloma (MM) is a malignant plasma cell dyscrasia accounting for 2% of all new cancer cases in the UK. There is a clear sex disparity in MM incidence, with 57% of cases in males and 43% in females. The mechanisms behind this are not well understood and the impact of sex on patient outcomes has not been thoroughly explored. Patients and Methods We investigated the association of sex with baseline disease characteristics and outcome in 3894 patients recruited to the phase III UK NCRI Myeloma XI trial, in which treatment exposure to lenalidomide predominated. Results Females were significantly more likely to have the molecular lesions t(14;16) and del(17p) and were more likely to meet the cytogenetic classification of high-risk (HiR) or ultra-high-risk disease (UHiR). There was no difference in progression-free survival (PFS) or overall survival (OS) between the sexes in the overall population. Conclusion Our data suggest that the genetic lesions involved in the initiation and progression of MM may be different between the sexes. Although females were more likely to have the poor prognosis lesions t(14;16) and del(17p), and were more likely to be assessed as having HiR or UHiR disease, this was not associated with reduced PFS or OS. In female patients the trial treatment may have been able to overcome some of the adverse effects of high-risk cytogenetic lesions. MicroAbstract Multiple myeloma (MM) is more common in males compared to females but the reasons behind this are not well understood and the impact of sex on patient outcomes is unclear. This study demonstrates fundamental differences in genetic lesions underlying the biology of MM between males and females. However, we found that progression-free survival and overall survival were the same in both sexes.

Infection with the novel coronavirus SARS‐CoV‐2 virus resulting in an acute respiratory disease (COVID‐19 disease) is the cause of the current pneumonia pandemic, with a rapid rise in cases being reported in the European Union and UK (1, 2). The UK index case was identified on the 31st of January, 2020 and given the rapid spread and high mortality rate of COVID‐19, it is imperative to define the impact on patients with co‐existing medical conditions(3).

Second-generation immunomodulatory agents, such as lenalidomide, have a more favourable side-effect profile than the first-generation thalidomide, but their optimum combination and duration for patients with newly diagnosed transplant-ineligible myeloma (ND-TNE-MM) has not been defined. The most appropriate delivery and dosing regimens of these therapies for patients at advanced age and frailty status is also unclear. The Myeloma XI study compared cyclophosphamide, thalidomide and dexamethasone (CTDa) to cyclophosphamide, lenalidomide and dexamethasone (CRDa) as induction therapy, followed by a maintenance randomisation between ongoing therapy with lenalidomide or observation for patients with ND-TNE-MM. CRDa deepened response but did not improve progression-free (PFS) or overall survival (OS) compared to CTDa. However, analysis by age group highlighted significant differences in tolerability in older, frailer patients that may have limited treatment delivery and impacted outcome. Deeper responses and PFS and OS benefits with CRDa over CTDs were seen in patients aged ≤70 years, with an increase in toxicity and discontinuation observed in older patients. Our results highlight the importance of considering age and frailty in the approach to therapy for patients with ND-TNE-MM, highlighting the need for prospective validation of frailty adapted therapy approaches, which may improve outcomes by tailoring treatment to the individual.

The optimal way to use immunomodulatory drugs as components of induction and maintenance therapy for multiple myeloma is unresolved. We addressed this question in a large phase III randomized trial, Myeloma XI. Patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (n = 2042) were randomized to induction therapy with cyclophosphamide, thalidomide, and dexamethasone (CTD) or cyclophosphamide, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (CRD). Additional intensification therapy with cyclophosphamide, bortezomib and dexamethasone (CVD) was administered before ASCT to patients with a suboptimal response to induction therapy using a response-adapted approach. After receiving high-dose melphalan with autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT), eligible patients were further randomized to receive either lenalidomide alone or observation alone. Co-primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). The CRD regimen was associated with significantly longer PFS (median: 36 vs. 33 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75-0.96; P = 0.0116) and OS (3-year OS: 82.9% vs. 77.0%; HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.63-0.93; P = 0.0072) compared with CTD. The PFS and OS results favored CRD over CTD across all subgroups, including patients with International Staging System stage III disease (HR for PFS, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.58-0.93; HR for OS, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.56-1.09), high-risk cytogenetics (HR for PFS, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.43-0.84; HR for OS, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.42-1.15) and ultra high-risk cytogenetics (HR for PFS, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.41-1.11; HR for OS, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.34-1.25). Among patients randomized to lenalidomide maintenance (n = 451) or observation (n = 377), maintenance therapy improved PFS (median: 50 vs. 28 months; HR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.37-0.60; P < 0.0001). Optimal results for PFS and OS were achieved in the patients who received CRD induction and lenalidomide maintenance. The trial was registered with the EU Clinical Trials Register (EudraCT 2009-010956-93) and ISRCTN49407852.

Real-world data on regimens for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) represent an important component of therapeutic decision-making. This multi-centric, retrospective, observational study conducted by the treating physicians evaluated the effectiveness and safety of ixazomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (IRd) in 155 patients who received ixazomib via early access programs in Greece, the UK, and the Czech Republic. Median age was 68 years; 17% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≥ 2; median number of prior therapies was 1 (range 1–7); 91%, 47%, and 17% had received prior bortezomib, thalidomide, and lenalidomide, respectively. Median duration of exposure to ixazomib was 9.6 months. Overall response rate was 74%, including 35% very good partial response or better (16% complete response). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 27.6 months (27.6 and 19.9 months in patients with 1 or > 1 prior lines, respectively). IRd treatment for ≥ 6 months was associated with longer PFS (hazard ratio 0.06). Fourteen patients (9%) discontinued IRd due to adverse events/toxicity in the absence of disease progression. Peripheral neuropathy was reported in 35% of patients (3% grades 3–4). These findings support the results of the phase III TOURMALINE-MM1 trial in a broader real-world RRMM population.

Background: Successful vaccination against SARS-CoV2 is highly effective in preventing serious COVID-19 illness and is particularly recommended for at risk populations including patients with multiple myeloma (MM). However, there is uncertainty to which extent modern intensified therapies targeting plasma cell features might attenuate vaccination responses; some early vaccination recommendations for MM have proposed extended treatment breaks of several weeks to maximise vaccination success. Such an approach can be challenging in UHiR MM and pPCL, where maintaining treatment intensity is hallmark for preventing rapid relapse of the aggressive tumor. To address this uncertainty, we measured post-vaccination serological responses in patients treated uniformly with intensified Dara-VR consolidation and Dara-R maintenance post-ASCT for UHiR NDMM or pPCL in the UK OPTIMUM/MUKnine trial (NCT03188172). Methods: Between Sep 2017 and Jul 2019, 107 patients with UHiR NDMM or pPCL were recruited to OPTIMUM and received intensified post-ASCT consolidation with Dara-VR(d) for 18 cycles followed by maintenance with Dara-R until progression. In an exploratory analysis, centrally stored serum samples available for patients with a completed and documented vaccination history of two doses of an anti-SARS-CoV2 vaccine were analyzed for serological vaccine responses Total IgG/IgA/IgM Anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein was measured by ELISA (MK654; The Binding Site). As per UK national guidance and local availability, patients received two vaccine doses 12 weeks apart of either tozinameran (Pfizer/Biontech) or vaxzevria (AstraZeneca); serum taken at least 3 weeks after patients received their second dose was analyzed. Results were correlated with baseline characteristics and annotated with treatment and response data. Patient with available matched serological and vaccination status data at time of data cut-off (09 JUL 2021) were included. Collection of vaccination status data is ongoing and updated results comprising additional patients enrolled in OPTIMUM, as well as antigen levels, will be presented. Data will also comprise longitudinal antibody level measurements for patient with available sequential material. Results: Serological vaccine response data was available for 40 OPTIMUM patients with documented completed double vaccination status. Median patient age was 58.5 years (range 39-70) and clinical and molecular tumor features were similar to the overall trial safety population. All patients had received their second dose before June 2021. Of the 40 patients, 42.5% had received tozinameran and 57.5% vaxzevria. Baseline characteristics of the two groups were comparable. At time of second vaccine dose, 55% of patients were receiving Dara-VR consolidation treatment and 45% Dara-R maintenance. There was no recommendation to pause trial treatment for purposes of vaccination and no extended times off treatment for this reason were reported. Overall, 72.5% of patients had a positive vaccine antibody level as per manufacturer cut-point for high specificity evidence of antigen exposure (infection or vaccine). The response rate was nominally higher for vaxzevria (91.3%) than for tozinameran (47.1%), a dysbalance that will be further investigated with ongoing extension of the cohort. Of note, 90% of patients analyzed had reached a complete response (CR) of their MM prior to being vaccinated, and the majority of patients not in CR had a positive vaccine response. Response rates were nominally slightly higher in patients in receipt of Dara-R maintenance at time of second dose with 77.8% compared to Dara-VR consolidation with 68.2%. Conclusions: These results show a high serological response rate to COVID-19 vaccination in UHiR MM patients receiving intensified post-ASCT consolidation and maintenance therapy in remission. Findings suggest that continuation of intensified post-ASCT therapy for patients with aggressive tumors and a high risk of relapse are compatible with serological responses to commonly used COVID-19 vaccines. Disclosures Jenner: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy. Hall: BMS/Celgene: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding. Garg: University Hospital Leicester: Current Employment; Takeda Janssen Novartis Sanofi: Other: Travel Accommodations, Expenses; Amgen Janssen Novartis Sanofi Takeda: Honoraria. Jackson: J and J: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; celgene BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; oncopeptides: Consultancy; Sanofi: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Pratt: Binding Site: Consultancy; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy. Cook: Karyopharm: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy. Drayson: Abingdon Health: Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company. Kaiser: BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: Educational support, Research Funding; GSK: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy; Amgen: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Other: Educational support; AbbVie: Consultancy.

Background: Outcomes for patients with ultra-high risk (UHiR) newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) and patients with primary plasma cell leukemia (pPCL) remain unsatisfactory with current standard therapies. Traditional comparative trials randomising against a standard of care control arm are thus challenging for patients with UHiR NDMM or pPCL, and novel approaches to address their high unmet need are required. OPTIMUM/MUKnine (NCT03188172) is a 'digital comparator arm' trial for UHiR NDMM and pPCL patients with protocol defined outcome comparison against fully molecularly matched UHiR patients from the near-concurrent NCRI Myeloma XI/XI+ trial, the 'MyXI prior'. We report final analysis of the primary endpoint progression free survival (PFS) at 18 months for patients treated in OPTIMUM with Dara-CVRd induction, V-augmented ASCT and Dara-VRd consolidation, compared to the MyXI prior. Methods: Between Sep 2017 and Jul 2019, 472 patients from 39 UK hospitals with suspected NDMM or pPCL were screened. 107 patients with UHiR NDMM by central trial genetic (≥2 high risk lesions: t(4;14), t(14;16), t(14;20), gain(1q), del(1p), del(17p)) or gene expression SKY92 (SkylineDx) profiling, or with pPCL (circulating plasmablasts >20%) were identified and recruited to OPTIMUM. Patients received up to 6 cycles of Dara-CVRd induction, V-ASCT, followed by Dara-VRd consolidation 1 for 6 cycles (Cons1), Dara-VR consolidation 2 for 12 cycles and monthly Dara-R maintenance until progression. This is the final analysis of the primary trial endpoint progression-free survival (PFS) at 18 months comparing OPTIMUM with the MyXI prior of patients treated with CRd or carfilzomib-CRd (KCRd) induction, ASCT and R maintenance or observation, using a Bayesian framework. Secondary endpoints include PFS, OS, safety and quality of life. Results: At median follow-up of 27.1 months (95% CI 25.1-29.3), median PFS was not reached for OPTIMUM patients. PFS was superior at the pre-specified time point of 18 months for OPTIMUM patients with an estimate of 81.7% (95% CI: 74.2-89.1) versus 65.9% (95% CI: 57.3-74.4) for the MyXI prior (Figure 1). PFS at 18 months was consistently shorter for both CRd (64.5%; 95% CI: 53.8-75.3) and KCRd (68.3%; 95% CI: 54.0-82.5) treated patients compared with OPTIMUM. There was a 99.5% chance of superior PFS outcome with OPTIMUM therapy compared to the MyXI prior within the Bayesian framework; easily surpassing the 85% pre-specified threshold of sufficient evidence of activity. The difference between trial treatments increased over time: 6 month estimates were similar across all treatment arms with OPTIMUM 95.3% (95% CI: 91.3-99.3), MyXI KCRd 95.1% (95% CI: 88.5-100.0), MyXI CRd 93.5% (95% CI: 88.0-99.0), while 12 month estimates were similar for OPTIMUM with 87.5% (95% CI: 81.2-93.9) and MyXI KCRd 87.8% (77.8-97.8), but lower in CRd 81.7% (95% CI: 73.0-90.3). The majority (94%) of patients who started OPTIMUM Cons1 completed all 6 cycles of therapy. Most frequent grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) during Cons1 included thrombocytopenia (27.9%), neutropenia (21%) and infection (19.8%), however, grade 4 events were rare ( Conclusions: OPTIMUM demonstrated a clear PFS benefit at 18 months for intensified Dara combination therapy pre- and post-ASCT for UHiR NDMM and pPCL over the MyXI prior. Improvement of comparative benefit over time suggests particular efficacy of Dara-VRd in maintaining responses post ASCT, a key challenge in UHiR MM. This is, to our knowledge, the first prospective digital comparator trial for MM; central screening of an all-comer population combined with robust, detailed molecular matching maintained reliability and limited biases. These results demonstrate a novel framework for accelerated comparative evidence generation for patients with high unmet clinical need. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Kaiser: BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: Educational support, Research Funding; GSK: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy; Amgen: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Other: Educational support; AbbVie: Consultancy. Hall: Janssen: Research Funding; BMS/Celgene: Research Funding. Garg: University Hospital Leicester: Current Employment; Takeda Janssen Novartis Sanofi: Other: Travel Accommodations, Expenses; Amgen Janssen Novartis Sanofi Takeda: Honoraria. Jackson: J and J: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; celgene BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; oncopeptides: Consultancy; Sanofi: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Cook: BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy. Pratt: Binding Site: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy. Drayson: Abingdon Health: Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company. Jenner: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy.

Introduction: Molecular diagnostic testing for lymphoproliferative disorders (LPDs) includes detection of clonal immunoglobulin (IG) and/or T cell receptor (TCR) rearrangements, translocations, copy number alterations (CNA) and somatic mutations. To date, laboratories still rely on subjective and labour-intensive technologies, e.g. karyotyping/FISH to detect complex genomic alterations. Whole Genome Sequencing (WGS) can detect all genomic alterations, but factors such as cost, computation/storage, DNA requirements and poor detection of clinically relevant subclonal mutations limits the routine implementation of WGS in clinical diagnostics. We have developed "KaryoSequencing" (KS), a novel approach that combines targeted deep-sequencing, using a targeted hybridisation capture NGS panel, for rare mutation and translocation detection with shallow WGS (sWGS) for genome wide copy number analysis, in a single test. Methods: KS was validated using 138 clinical samples from patients with acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) (n=46), chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) (n=46) and plasma cell myeloma (PCM) (n=46) samples from 3 UK laboratories. Samples underwent library preparation and hybridisation using the EuroClonality-NDC assay. A KS library for each sample was prepared by combining the pre-capture and post-capture libraries at an optimised ratio to enable high coverage (>500 x) at regions covered by the targeted panel while providing 0.5-1x coverage genome-wide. Forty-six KS libraries were pooled and sequenced per NovaSeq 6000 run, using a 200-cycle SP flow cell and a 100bp paired-end strategy. For analysis of targeted regions, somatic mutation calling was performed using VarDict and structural variants (rearrangements and translocations) were detected using ARResT/Interrogate. For analysis of large chromosomal copy number variation using sWGS, a modified version of QDNASeq/ACE with a window size of 50kb was performed. For sWGS analysis, bioinformatic exclusion of all target capture regions and panel-specific off-target regions was performed using a panel of 48 DNA samples from healthy individuals ran on the same KS protocol. Results: Analysis of genome-wide copy number by sWGS was concordant in 477 of 503 (95%) evaluable FISH tests, including precise detection of hyper and hypo-diploidy and other complex karyotypes. The performance of the targeted deep-sequencing component of the KS approach was assessed to ensure comparable performance to previously validated results for the EuroClonality-NDC. The EuroClonality-NDC detected a clonal IG rearrangement in 46/46 (100%) CLL cases and in 42/46 (91.3%) PCM cases. Clonality was detected in 43/46 (93.5%) and 44/46 (95.7%) cases at an IG and TCR locus respectively in ALL, a disease entity known to exhibit cross-lineage rearrangements. Overall, 44 translocations were detected in the 138 samples by the EuroClonality-NDC. FISH results were available for 32 of the 44 translocations detected by NGS and were concordant in 29/32 (91%). In two PCM samples NGS and FISH reported a different translocation; in the ALL sample, the FISH pattern showed an additional copy but not a split signal. Across the entire cohort of 138 samples, KaryoSequencing detected 190 mutations with a variant allele frequency ranging from 4.0 - 97.6%. Of the detected mutations, 69/190 (36.3%) had a VAF Conclusions: KaryoSequencing demonstrated >95% sensitivity and specificity for detection of gross genome-wide copy number alterations while retaining the analytical performance for detection of rearrangements, translocations, and mutations for the lymphoid-specific targeted regions of the EuroClonality-NDC assay. KS is a cost-effective and high-throughput integrated alternative to current diagnostic strategies in haematological malignancies and can be implemented in routine clinical practice. Disclosures Jenner: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Gonzalez: Univ8 Genomics Ltd: Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company.

8001 Background: Patients with ultra high-risk (UHiR) newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) and patients with plasma cell leukemia (PCL) continue to have dismal outcomes and are underrepresented in clinical trials. Recently, improved responses with anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody combination therapy have been reported for NDMM patients. We report here outcomes for NDMM UHiR and PCL patients treated in the OPTIMUM/MUKnine (NCT03188172) trial with daratumumab, cyclophosphamide, bortezomib, lenalidomide, dexamethasone (Dara-CVRd) induction, augmented high-dose melphalan (HDMEL) and ASCT. With final analysis follow-up surpassed in Feb 2021, we report here early protocol defined endpoints from induction to day 100 post ASCT. Methods: Between Sep 2017 and Jul 2019, 107 patients with UHiR NDMM by central trial genetic (≥2 high risk lesions: t(4;14), t(14;16), t(14;20), gain(1q), del(1p), del(17p)) or gene expression SKY92 (SkylineDx) profiling, or with PCL (circulating plasmablasts > 20%) were included in OPTIMUM across 39 UK hospitals. Patients received up to 6 cycles of Dara-CVRd induction, HDMEL and ASCT augmented with bortezomib, followed by Dara-VR(d) consolidation for 18 cycles and Dara-R maintenance. Primary trial endpoints are minimal residual disease (MRD) status post ASCT and progression-free survival. Secondary endpoints include response, safety and quality of life. Data is complete but subject to further data cleaning prior to conference. Results: Median follow-up for the 107 patients in the safety population was 22.2 months (95% CI: 20.6 – 23.9). Two patients died during induction due to infection. Bone marrow aspirates suitable for MRD assessment by flow cytometry (10-5 sensitivity) were available for 81% of patients at end of induction and 78% at D100 post ASCT. Responses in the intention to treat population at end of induction were 94% ORR with 22% CR, 58% VGPR, 15% PR, 1% PD, 5% timepoint not reached (TNR; withdrew, became ineligible or died) and at D100 post ASCT 83% ORR with 47% CR, 32% VGPR, 5% PR, 7% PD, 10% TNR. MRD status was 41% MRDneg, 40% MRDpos and 19% not evaluable post induction and 64% MRDneg, 14% MRDpos and 22% not evaluable at D100 post ASCT. Responses at D100 post ASCT were lower in PCL with 22% CR, 22% VGPR, 22% PR, 22% PD, 12% TNR. Most frequent grade 3/4 AEs during induction were neutropenia (21%), thrombocytopenia (12%) and infection (12%). Grade 3 neuropathy rate was 3.7%. Conclusions: This is to our knowledge the first report on a trial for UHiR NDMM and PCL investigating Dara-CVRd induction and augmented ASCT. Response rates were high in this difficult-to-treat patient population, with toxicity comparable to other induction regimens. However, some early progressions highlight the need for innovative approaches to UHiR NDMM. Clinical trial information: NCT03188172.

BACKGROUND Lenalidomide (LEN), an established treatment (Tx) for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, is routinely administered until disease progression. Therefore, patients (pts) for whom LEN is no longer an option at first relapse, including LEN-refractory pts, are a clinically relevant and growing population. Tx of these pts remains challenging, as they have been poorly represented in phase 3 clinical trials. OPTIMISMM (NCT01734928), a phase 3 trial specifically designed to address this population, demonstrated significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) with pomalidomide (POM), bortezomib (BORT), and low-dose dexamethasone (PVd) compared with BORT and low-dose dexamethasone (Vd) in pts who received 1-3 prior regimens and were 100% LEN pretreated (70% LEN refractory) (Richardson PG, et al. Lancet Oncol. 2019;20:781-794). Here, we report the efficacy and safety of PVd in pts treated after 1 prior line of therapy (LOT) according to age, prior stem cell transplant (SCT), and in pts with high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities (HR CAs). METHODS Pts were randomized 1:1 to receive PVd or Vd in 21-day cycles. POM 4 mg/day was given on days 1-14 (PVd arm only); bortezomib (BORT) 1.3 mg/m2 was given on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 of cycles 1-8 and on days 1 and 8 of cycles 9+; and dexamethasone 20 mg/day (10 mg/day for pts aged > 75 yrs) was given on the days of and after BORT. Key eligibility criteria included ≥ 2 cycles of prior LEN, including LEN-refractory pts. The primary endpoint was PFS. RESULTS As of October 26, 2017, 226 of 559 pts enrolled in OPTIMISMM had 1 prior LOT; 100 pts were aged ≤ 65 yrs (49 PVd, 51 Vd) and 126 were aged > 65 yrs (62 PVd, 64 Vd). In pts aged ≤ 65 yrs (PVd vs Vd), the median age was 58.0 vs 59.0 yrs, 63.3% vs 47.1% were male, 55.1% vs 51.0% were LEN refractory, and 83.7% vs 72.5% had prior BORT. In pts aged > 65 yrs, the median age was 73.0 vs 71.5 yrs, 58.1% vs 51.6% were male, 59.7% vs 60.9% were LEN refractory, and 41.9% vs 46.9% had prior BORT. After 1 prior LOT, PVd vs Vd significantly improved PFS in pts aged ≤ 65 yrs (median, 22.0 vs 13.1 mos; P = .0305) and those > 65 yrs (median, 17.6 vs 9.9 mos; P = .0348) (Figure). The overall response rate (ORR) was significantly higher with PVd vs Vd across the age groups (Table). The rate of ≥ very good partial response (VGPR) was 65.3% vs 17.6% in pts aged ≤ 65 yrs and 58.1% vs 26.6% in pts aged > 65 yrs. Comparable PFS and ORR outcomes were noted for an age cutoff of ≤ 70 yrs (median PFS, 17.8 vs 13.1 mos with PVd [n = 71] vs Vd [n = 78]; ORR, 88.7% [≥ VGPR, 62.0%] vs 55.1% [≥ VGPR, 21.8%], respectively) vs > 70 yrs (median PFS, 16.5 vs 9.5 mos with PVd [n = 40] vs Vd [n = 37]; ORR, 92.5% [≥ VGPR, 60.0%] vs 54.1% [≥ VGPR, 24.3%], respectively). These PFS and ORR findings were similar to those reported in pts with and pts without prior SCT (Table). Median PFS was 22.0 mos with PVd vs 13.8 mos with Vd in pts with prior SCT (P = .0241) and 16.5 vs 9.5 mos, respectively, in pts without prior SCT (P = .0454). Pts with HR CAs (n = 32 [18 PVd, 14 Vd]), defined as having a del(17p), t(4;14), or t(14;16), had a median PFS of 14.7 mos with PVd and 9.9 mos with Vd. The most common grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) with PVd vs Vd were neutropenia (49.0% vs 6.3%), infections (30.6% vs 14.6%), and thrombocytopenia (26.5% vs 18.8%) in pts aged ≤ 65 yrs and neutropenia (25.8% vs 12.9%), infections (27.4% vs 16.1%), and thrombocytopenia (14.5% vs 22.6%) in pts aged > 65 yrs. CONCLUSIONS In pts with LEN-pretreated relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma at first relapse, PVd reduced the risk of progression or death by 50% in pts aged ≤ 65 yrs and by 43% in pts aged > 65 yrs vs Vd. Additionally, across age subgroups, second-line Tx with PVd vs Vd significantly improved ORR and led to deeper responses. Similar findings were observed in pts with and pts without prior SCT. PVd also benefited pts with HR CAs vs Vd. Overall, TEAEs with PVd were generally consistent with the known profiles of the constituent agents. These data in pts at first relapse continue to demonstrate that PVd is effective and safe as a second-line Tx following LEN, regardless of age, prior SCT status, and presence of HR CAs. Disclosures Dimopoulos: Sanofi Oncology: Research Funding. Weisel:GSK: Honoraria; Juno: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Adaptive Biotech: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Moreau:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria. Anderson:Amgen, Janssen, Takeda, Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. White:Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria. San-Miguel:Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, and Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria. Sonneveld:SkylineDx: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding. Jenner:Abbvie, Amgen, Celgene, Novartis, Janssen, Sanofi Genzyme, Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Dürig:Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support; Celgene: Consultancy, Other: Travel or accommodations, Speakers Bureau. Pavic:Celgene, Janssen, Takeda, Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Casal:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Srinivasan:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Nguyen:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Biyukov:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Peluso:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Richardson:Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Celgene: 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; Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. OffLabel Disclosure: Yes. The triplet combination is not currently approved in the US for the treatment of multiple myeloma.

Background Carfilzomib is a second-generation irreversible proteasome inhibitor that is efficacious in the treatment of myeloma and carries less risk of peripheral neuropathy than first-generation proteasome inhibitors, making it more amenable to combination therapy. Methods and findings The Myeloma XI+ trial recruited patients from 88 sites across the UK between 5 December 2013 and 20 April 2016. Patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma eligible for transplantation were randomly assigned to receive the combination carfilzomib, lenalidomide, dexamethasone, and cyclophosphamide (KRdc) or a triplet of lenalidomide, dexamethasone, and cyclophosphamide (Rdc) or thalidomide, dexamethasone, and cyclophosphamide (Tdc). All patients were planned to receive an autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) prior to a randomisation between lenalidomide maintenance and observation. Eligible patients were aged over 18 years and had symptomatic myeloma. The co-primary endpoints for the study were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for KRdc versus the Tdc/Rdc control group by intention to treat. PFS, response, and safety outcomes are reported following a planned interim analysis. The trial is registered (ISRCTN49407852) and has completed recruitment. In total, 1,056 patients (median age 61 years, range 33 to 75, 39.1% female) underwent induction randomisation to KRdc (n = 526) or control (Tdc/Rdc, n = 530). After a median follow-up of 34.5 months, KRdc was associated with a significantly longer PFS than the triplet control group (hazard ratio 0.63, 95% CI 0.51–0.76). The median PFS for patients receiving KRdc is not yet estimable, versus 36.2 months for the triplet control group (p < 0.001). Improved PFS was consistent across subgroups of patients including those with genetically high-risk disease. At the end of induction, the percentage of patients achieving at least a very good partial response was 82.3% in the KRdc group versus 58.9% in the control group (odds ratio 4.35, 95% CI 3.19–5.94, p < 0.001). Minimal residual disease negativity (cutoff 4 × 10−5 bone marrow leucocytes) was achieved in 55% of patients tested in the KRdc group at the end of induction, increasing to 75% of those tested after ASCT. The most common adverse events were haematological, with a low incidence of cardiac events. The trial continues to follow up patients to the co-primary endpoint of OS and for planned long-term follow-up analysis. Limitations of the study include a lack of blinding to treatment regimen and that the triplet control regimen did not include a proteasome inhibitor for all patients, which would be considered a current standard of care in many parts of the world. Conclusions The KRdc combination was well tolerated and was associated with both an increased percentage of patients achieving at least a very good partial response and a significant PFS benefit compared to immunomodulatory-agent-based triplet therapy. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov ISRCTN49407852., Graham Jackson and co-workers study a combination induction treatment including carfilzomib for patients with transplant-eligible myeloma., Author summary Why was this study done? Although outcomes for myeloma patients have improved over recent decades, many patients will eventually relapse, and finding new treatment regimens that keep patients in first remission for longer is imperative. Treatment combinations aim to target myeloma using different mechanisms of action. This aims to prevent resistant cells remaining and leading to relapse. Carfilzomib has been shown to be effective in the treatment of relapsed myeloma when given in combination with lenalidomide. We performed this study to compare the outcomes of newly diagnosed myeloma patients treated with the combination carfilzomib, lenalidomide, dexamethasone, and cyclophosphamide (KRdc) to those of patients treated with immunomodulatory-agent-based triplet control combinations. What did the researchers do and find? A total of 1,056 patients with newly diagnosed myeloma were randomised between KRdc and control. Patients receiving the quadruplet KRdc combination were more likely to achieve at least a very good partial response and had longer progression-free survival than patients receiving control treatments. Side effects were not significantly increased with the quadruplet combination compared to control. What do the findings mean? The results suggest that KRdc can elicit deep responses and long periods of progression-free survival with tolerable side effects in newly diagnosed myeloma patients. Further studies are needed to compare KRdc to combinations of other new agents for the treatment of newly diagnosed myeloma patients.

Background: Immunomodulatory (IMiD) compounds are effective therapies for multiple myeloma (MM) acting via modulation of the CUL4 E3-ubiquitin ligase cereblon. Based on their structure individual IMiD compounds have different substrate specificities altering both their efficacy and side effect profile. These mechanistic differences impact the optimum sequencing of these agents as induction and maintenance. Within the UK NCRI Myeloma XI trial we compared triplet induction regimens containing Lenalidomide (Len) or Thalidomide (Thal) and maintenance treatment with Len or observation. With extensive long term follow up data we have explored the interaction of the induction and maintenance use of Thal and Len before and after ASCT. Methods: Myeloma XI is a multicenter, randomized controlled trial for newly diagnosed MM, with pathways for transplant eligible (TE) and non-eligible patients. TE patients were randomized between Len or Thal plus cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone (CRD vs CTD) continued for a minimum of 4 cycles and to max. response. For patients with a suboptimal response there was a subsequent randomization to intensification with a proteasome inhibitor containing triplet or no further therapy prior to ASCT. A maintenance randomization at 3 months post ASCT compared Len till disease progression vs observation (Obs). Analyses by molecular risk strata were pre-specified in the protocol. Adverse cytogenetic abnormalities were defined as gain(1q), t(4;14), t(14;16), t(14;20), or del(17p): standard risk (SR, no adverse cytogenetic abnormalities), high risk (HiR, one adverse cytogenetic abnormality), or ultra-high risk (UHiR, two or more adverse cytogenetic abnormalities). Results: 2042 TE patients were randomized to CRD n=1021 and CTD n=1021. After a median follow up of 68 months (interquartile range 49-83) for the induction randomization, 1378 PFS and 728 OS primary endpoint events had occurred. Patients received a median (range) of 5 (1-18) cycles of CRD and 5 (1-13) cycles of CTD induction therapy. There were higher rates of haematological toxicity with CRD and peripheral neuropathy with CTD. CRD induction was associated with a significantly improved median PFS (hazard ratio (HR) 0.86, 95%CI 0.77, 0.96, CRD 36 months vs CTD 33 months, P=0.005, Figure 1A) and median OS (HR 0.81, 95%CI 0.70, 0.93, CRD 96 months vs CTD 85 months, P=0.004, Figure 1B). Responses were deeper with CRD (>=VGPR 65.3%, PR 24.5%) than CTD (>=VGPR 52.8%, PR 33.2%) and depth of response was associated with outcome. Significant heterogeneity in PFS outcome was identified between molecular risk groups with HiR and UHiR benefiting most from induction with CRD rather than CTD (SR HR 0.99 [95%CI 0.79, 1.24], HiR HR 0.58 [0.44, 0.78], UHiR HR 0.60 [0.38, 0.94], P.het 0.01). 897 TE patients were randomized to Len (n=496) and Obs (n=401). After a median follow up of 68 months (interquartile range 51-84) for the maintenance randomization, 527 PFS primary endpoint events had occurred. Lenalidomide was associated with a significant improvement in PFS compared to observation (median PFS Len 64 [54,76] vs Obs 32 [28,36], HR 0.52 [0.45,0.61], P Optimum outcomes were seen in those receiving Len as both induction and maintenance therapy (Figure 1C). Patients receiving CRD induction followed by Len maintenance (CRD-R) had a median PFS of 77 months [56, 86] compared to CTD-R 64 [49, 74], CRD-Obs 37 [33, 42] and CTD-Obs 44 [38, 51]. Conclusions: In this study the use of Len as both induction and maintenance was associated with the best outcomes irrespective of cytogenetic risk group. With long term follow up CRD induction for newly diagnosed transplant eligible myeloma patients was associated with both a PFS and OS benefit compared to CTD and was better tolerated. The PFS impact of CRD was particularly notable in patients with high and ultra-high risk disease. Lenalidomide maintenance was associated with significantly longer PFS than observation across all risk groups. on behalf of the NCRI Haematological Oncology Clinical Studies Group Disclosures Jackson: Celgene, Amgen, Roche, Janssen, Sanofi: Honoraria. Pawlyn:Amgen, Celgene, Janssen, Oncopeptides: Honoraria; Amgen, Celgene, Takeda: Consultancy; Amgen, Janssen, Celgene, Takeda: Other: Travel expenses. Cairns:Celgene, Amgen, Merck, Takeda: Other: Research Funding to Institution. Jones:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Kishore:Celgene, Takeda, Janssen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene, Jazz, Takeda: Other: Travel expenses. Garg:Janssen, Takeda, Novartis: Other: Travel expenses; Janssen: Honoraria; Novartis, Janssen: Research Funding. Lindsay:Celgene: Other: personal fees and non-financial support ; Takeda: Other: personal fees and non-financial support ; Amgen: Other: non-financial support. Russell:Jazz: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer Inc: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; DSI: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Astellas: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Jenner:Abbvie, Amgen, Celgene, Novartis, Janssen, Sanofi Genzyme, Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Cook:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Drayson:Abingdon Health: Consultancy, Equity Ownership. Owen:Janssen: Other: Travel expenses; Celgene, Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene, Janssen: Consultancy; Celgene: Research Funding. Gregory:Abbvie, Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen, Merck: Research Funding. Kaiser:Takeda, Janssen, Celgene, Amgen: Honoraria, Other: Travel Expenses; Celgene, Janssen: Research Funding; Abbvie, Celgene, Takeda, Janssen, Amgen, Abbvie, Karyopharm: Consultancy. Davies:Amgen, Celgene, Janssen, Oncopeptides, Roche, Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Consultant/Advisor; Janssen, Celgene: Other: Research Grant, Research Funding. Morgan:Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene Corporation, Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen, Janssen, Takeda, Celgene Corporation: Other: Travel expenses; Celgene Corporation, Janssen: Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: CTD/CRD induction therapy and Lenalidomide maintenance 10mg 21/28 days

Introduction: Systemic AL amyloidosis is a rare multisystem disease caused by an underlying plasma cell dyscrasia with amyloid fibril deposition causing progressive organ failure. Treatment of the underlying plasma cell disorder underpins the management of AL amyloidosis with bortezomib-based regimes as standard first line treatment. Thalidomide has activity in AL amyloidosis used in low doses in combination with cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone. Carfilzomib (Kyprolis), a second generation irreversible inhibitor of the proteasome, is licenced for treatment of relapsed refractory myeloma. This prospective phase 1 multicentre study was designed to define the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended dose (RD) of one weekly dose of carfilzomib in combination with a fixed dose of thalidomide and dexamethasone (KTD) in patients with relapsed refractory amyloidosis. Methods and Patients Patients were recruited for treatment with carfilzomib in escalating dose cohorts using a 3+3 dose escalation design at three planned dose levels (Table 1) - all participants received carfilzomib 20mg/m2 on cycle 1 day 1. The primary endpoint was to define the MTD, RD and assess the safety and tolerability of KTD. The key secondary endpoint was a preliminary assessment of the activity of KTD. Results A total of 10 patients were recruited (6 male, 4 female) with a median age of 64 years (30% >70 years). The mean time from AL amyloidosis diagnosis for Dose levels 0 and 1 was 7.8 years (SD ±3.87 yrs.) and 3.2 years (SD ± 1.80) respectively. All non-refractory patients had received at least two previous lines of therapy, with a maximum of four previous lines of therapy. The median creatinine was 77.0µmol/L, the median NT-proBNP was 53.3pmol/L and dFLC at the time of treatment was 77.0mg/L. Three evaluable patients were recruited to Dose Level 0 with no dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) observed. A further 3 evaluable patients were recruited to Dose Level 1 - one patient experienced a DLT (acute kidney injury). Hence, 3 further patients were recruited at this dose level. One participant had a serious adverse event (SAE) following day 1 dosing at 20mg/m2 - deemed not evaluable for DLT assessment as received no further treatment. Three further patients were recruited at Dose level 1 with no further DLT's. The data monitoring committee decided that it was not in the patients' best interest to proceed to Dose level 2, as significant evidence of activity at dose level 1 and concern about potential toxicity. As of June 2019, 7 participants have completed 3 cycles and 4 participants (40%) have completed 6 cycles. Responses were determined centrally according to amyloidosis consensus criteria 2005. The overall hematologic response rate at end of 3 cycles was 70%. This included: complete response - 1 (10%); very good partial response - 3 (30%) and partial response 3 (30%). Of the 3 participants at Dose level 1, 1 participant had a VGPR, 1 had PR and 1 had no response (discontinued at the end of cycle 2). One patient had no response by the end of cycle 2 (discontinued due to toxicity) and 2 patients with DLT's were not assessable for response. A total of 3 participants had SAE's: 1. At dose level 1, grade 3 acute kidney injury which was deemed to be DLT, which recovered with supportive care. 2. At dose level 1, pyrexia, hypotension and hypoxia requiring intensive care admission after day 1 dose of 20mg/m2. There was no clear evidence of infection and this was deemed to be a SAE due to carfilzomib (but not DLT). 3. At dose level 1, grade 3 abdominal pain deemed unrelated to study medication. There were 66 other grade 1 or 2 adverse events reported from 9 participants from the first 3 cycles. There were no SUSARs or deaths in the study reported to date. None of the patients had worsening cardiac function. Results here are preliminary with further endpoints and detail to be presented when all participants have completed therapy. Conclusion This study defined, in combination with thalidomide and dexamethasone, the recommended dose of carfilzomib was 45mg/m2 on days 1, 8 and 15. The MTD of carfilzomib was not reached. Three participants experienced a SAE and a number of participants had grade 1-2 AE's. At the end of 3 cycles, 70% of participants achieved a hematologic response with 40% VGPR or better which appears comparable to other studies in relapsed AL amyloidosis. KTD is a potentially effective regime that can be considered for further study in relapsed refractory systemic AL amyloidosis. Disclosures Garg: Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria. Hall:Celgene, Amgen, Janssen, Karyopharm: Other: Research funding to Institution. Jenner:Abbvie, Amgen, Celgene, Novartis, Janssen, Sanofi Genzyme, Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Kishore:Celgene, Jazz, Takeda: Other: Travel expenses; Celgene, Takeda, Janssen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Pitchford:Amgen: Other: Research funding to institution. Flanagan:Amgen, Celgene, Janssen, Karyopharm: Other: Research funding to Institution. Oughton:Amgen: Other: Research funding to institution. Brown:Amgen, Celgene, Janssen, Karyopharm: Other: Research funding to Institution. Wechalekar:Amgen: Research Funding; GSK: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria.

Background Transplant non-eligible (TNE) myeloma patients are a very heterogeneous group that is not well-defined on the basis of age alone, but rather by the interplay of age, physical function, cognitive function and comorbidity better defined as 'frailty'. The International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) has published a scoring system for myeloma patient frailty that predicts survival, adverse events and treatment tolerability using age, the Katz Activity of Daily Living (ADL), the Lawton Instrumental Activity of Daily Living (IADL), and the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). It has been proposed to be useful in determining the feasibility of treatment regimens and appropriate dose reductions but has not been validated prospectively. We hypothesize that by defining subgroups of patients based on the IMWG frailty score, and guiding up-front dose adjustments we can personalize therapy to improve treatment tolerability and therefore short-term outcomes, along with quality of life. In addition we plan to compare the use of single agent immunomodulatory (IMiD) based maintenance therapy with an IMiD and proteasome inhibitor maintenance doublet to try and improve long-term outcomes for patients. Study Design and Methods Myeloma XIV (NCT03720041) is a phase III, multi-center, randomized controlled trial to compare standard (reactive) and frailty-adjusted (adaptive) induction therapy delivery with the novel triplet ixazomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone (IRd), and to compare maintenance lenalidomide (R) to lenalidomide plus ixazomib (IR) in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma not suitable for a stem cell transplant. The trial outline is shown in Figure 1. All participants receive induction treatment with ixazomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone and are randomized (R1) on a 1:1 basis at trial entry to the use of frailty score-adjusted up-front dose reductions vs. standard up-front dosing followed by toxicity dependent reactive dose modifications during therapy. Following 12 cycles of induction treatment participants alive and progression-free undergo a second randomization (R2) on a 1:1 basis to maintenance treatment with lenalidomide plus placebo versus lenalidomide plus ixazomib. Participants and their treating physicians are blinded to maintenance allocation. The primary objectives of the study are to determine: Early treatment cessation (within 60 days of randomization) for standard versus frailty-adjusted up-front dosingProgression-free survival (PFS, from maintenance randomization) for lenalidomide + placebo (R) versus lenalidomide + ixazomib (IR) The secondary objectives of the study include determining: progression-free survival (PFS) for standard versus frailty-adjusted up-front dosing reductions, overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), treatment compliance and total amount of therapy delivered, toxicity & safety including the incidence of Second Primary Malignancies (SPMs), Quality of Life (QoL), cost-effectiveness of standard versus frailty-adjusted up-front dosing of IRd and cost-effectiveness of IR versus R. Exploratory analyses include the association of molecular subgroups with response, PFS and OS. Seven hundred and forty participants will be enrolled into the trial at R1 to give 80% power to demonstrate a difference in early cessation and ensure that at least 478 participants remain and are randomized at R2 (based on attrition rates in our previous study Myeloma XI). At R2 478 patients will give us 80% power to detect an eight month difference in PFS between R and IR. Disclosures Cairns: Celgene, Amgen, Merck, Takeda: Other: Research Funding to Institution. Pawlyn:Amgen, Janssen, Celgene, Takeda: Other: Travel expenses; Amgen, Celgene, Takeda: Consultancy; Amgen, Celgene, Janssen, Oncopeptides: Honoraria. Royle:Celgene, Amgen, Merck, Takeda: Other: Research Funding to Institution. Best:Celgene, Amgen, Merck, Takeda: Other: Research Funding to Institution. Bowcock:Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding. Boyd:Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Drayson:Abingdon Health: Consultancy, Equity Ownership. Henderson:Celgene, Amgen, Merck, Takeda: Other: Research Funding to Institution. Jenner:Abbvie, Amgen, Celgene, Novartis, Janssen, Sanofi Genzyme, Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Jones:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Kaiser:Takeda, Janssen, Celgene, Amgen: Honoraria, Other: Travel Expenses; Celgene, Janssen: Research Funding; Abbvie, Celgene, Takeda, Janssen, Amgen, Abbvie, Karyopharm: Consultancy. Kishore:Celgene, Takeda, Janssen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene, Jazz, Takeda: Other: Travel expenses. Mottram:Celgene, Amgen, Merck, Takeda: Other: Research Funding to Institution. Owen:Janssen: Other: Travel expenses; Celgene, Janssen: Consultancy; Celgene, Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Research Funding. Jackson:Celgene, Amgen, Roche, Janssen, Sanofi: Honoraria. Cook:Celgene, Janssen-Cilag, Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squib, GlycoMimetics, Seattle Genetics, Sanofi: Honoraria; Janssen, Takeda, Sanofi, Karyopharm, Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. OffLabel Disclosure: Frailty adjusted dosing. Ixazomib and lenalidomide combination as maintenance.

Background High-risk myeloma patients have unsatisfactory outcomes with current treatments and are in urgent need of improved diagnostic and therapeutic strategies. We have recently validated specific markers predicting high-risk disease in newly diagnosed MM (NDMM), in particular double-hit with presence of ≥2 consensus high-risk markers t(4;14), t(14;16), t(14;20), del(1p), gain(1q), del(17p) (Shah V, et al., Leukemia 2018) and diagnostic GEP SKY92 high risk signature (Sherborne A, et al., IMW 2017). Diagnostic tests for these markers were implemented in the UK multi-center OPTIMUM: MUK9 trial to prospectively stratify therapy for high-risk NDMM. Trial design OPTIMUM: MUK9 is a phase 2 trial for transplant eligible NDMM, consisting of two inter-related protocols: a molecular screening protocol (MUK9A) and an interventional trial (MUK9B) for high-risk MM identified in MUK9A. Patients with suspected or confirmed MM fit for intensive therapy enrolled in MUK9A have central molecular profiling at ICR, London, of CD138-selected BM MM cells for translocations, copy number aberrations (qRT-PCR; MLPA P425, MRC Holland) and SKY92 signature status (MMprofiler; SkylineDx). If clinically indicated SOC therapy (VTD, max. 2 cycles) can be given whilst central results are generated. Patients found to have high-risk MM by double-hit and/or SKY92 are offered enrolment into MUK9B. All other patients receive SOC (VTD, HD-MEL+ASCT) for which clinical data is collected. Patients diagnosed with plasma cell leukemia (PCL) can be enrolled directly in MUK9B. MUK9B treatment consists of quintuplet daratumumab, cyclophosphamide, bortezomib, lenalidomide, dexamethasone (Dara-CVRd) induction (up to 6 cycles), bortezomib-augmented single HD-MEL+ASCT, Dara-VRd consolidation 1 (6 cycles), Dara-VR consolidation 2 (12 cycles) and Dara-R maintenance (until PD). Dose adjustments are permitted in order to maximize tolerability of long-term therapy. Patient reported outcomes (PRO) are recorded at baseline and throughout treatment. Response and MRD are centrally assessed (Birmingham, Leeds). Primary endpoint for MUK9A is feasibility of central molecular testing within 56 days turnaround time, which we report on here. Primary endpoint of MUK9B is treatment efficacy, comparing MUK9B PFS to near-concurrent molecularly matched high-risk patient outcomes from UK NCRI Myeloma XI using a Bayesian design. Secondary endpoints include safety, PFS2, MRD and OS and study of molecular evolution in high-risk disease. Results The protocol recruited 29/Sep/17 - 31/Jul/19 at 39 UK sites, achieving the recruitment target of 105 high-risk patients treated on MUK9B ahead of projections. At the time of analysis (12/Jul/19), 430 patients with suspected or confirmed NDMM have been recruited to MUK9A across 39 UK NHS hospitals. Of these, 376 (87%) patients were confirmed to have symptomatic MM (60.9% male; median age 61y (range 29-79)) as per updated IMWG diagnostic criteria (2014), including 9 (2%) PCL patients, with the remainder diagnosed as SMM/MGUS (31; 7%) or other (14; 3%). For 371 of the 376 symptomatic MM patients BM was received by the central laboratory and was of sufficient quality for profiling in 331 (89%) patients. Repeat samples were requested for all others and a sufficient sample received for 20/45 (44%). Central results were successfully reported within the pre-specified 56 day interval for all patients (median 17 days; IQR 13-22). Of 346 patients with a reported result, 128 (37.0%) have high-risk MM, with molecular characteristics mirroring Myeloma XI patients (Figure 1). PCL patients show expected characteristics as listed in Table 1. Basic demographics were not different between high-risk vs. non-high-risk. 101 high-risk patients have or are planning to enter MUK9B, 10 pending decision; 17 high-risk patients did not enter MUK9B, the majority due to ineligibility. 92 patients have started Dara-CVRD therapy. There are currently no safety concerns, the majority of patients are completing induction successfully; 1 patient stopped induction therapy due to adverse events. Updated results will be presented. Discussion Our data demonstrate feasibility of multi-center molecular stratified trial delivery for high-risk NDMM patients. These early trial results strongly support accelerated trial strategies for MM patient groups with high unmet need and rational drug development specifically for high-risk MM. Disclosures Jenner: Abbvie, Amgen, Celgene, Novartis, Janssen, Sanofi Genzyme, Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Hall:Celgene, Amgen, Janssen, Karyopharm: Other: Research funding to Institution. Walker:Janssen, Celgene: Other: Research funding to Institution. Croft:Celgene: Other: Travel expenses. Jackson:Celgene, Amgen, Roche, Janssen, Sanofi: Honoraria. Flanagan:Amgen, Celgene, Janssen, Karyopharm: Other: Research funding to Institution. Drayson:Abingdon Health: Consultancy, Equity Ownership. Owen:Celgene, Janssen: Consultancy; Celgene: Research Funding; Janssen: Other: Travel expenses; Celgene, Janssen: Honoraria. Pratt:Binding Site, Amgen, Takeda, Janssen, Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel support. Cook:Celgene, Janssen-Cilag, Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen, Takeda, Sanofi, Karyopharm, Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squib, GlycoMimetics, Seattle Genetics, Sanofi: Honoraria. Brown:Amgen, Celgene, Janssen, Karyopharm: Other: Research funding to Institution. Kaiser:Celgene, Janssen: Research Funding; Abbvie, Celgene, Takeda, Janssen, Amgen, Abbvie, Karyopharm: Consultancy; Takeda, Janssen, Celgene, Amgen: Honoraria, Other: Travel Expenses.

Background Outcome varies considerably in newly diagnosed myeloma (NDMM), in particular in transplant eligible (TE) patients, ranging from a few years to decades. Autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) remains the overall aim following induction therapy even with the advent of novel agents. Greater availability of novel treatments allows for complex combination induction and potentially maintenance therapies. Possible long-term unintended effects and affordability will likely make rational treatment stratification for populations in most need desirable, in particular for public health care systems. We report here an extended outcome analysis of 1,064 genetically and clinically characterised patients from the transplant treatment pathway of the NCRI Myeloma XI trial. Patients In Myeloma XI patients were randomised to induction therapy with CTD (cyclophosphamide, thalidomide and dexamethasone) or CRD (cyclophosphamide, lenalidomide and dexamethasone) and +/- CVD (cyclophosphamide, bortezomib, dexamethasone) intensification in patients with Genetic results for the high-risk markers t(4;14), t(14;16), t(14;20), gain(1q) and del(17p) were determined for all patients with sufficient material centrally by qRT-PCR and MLPA (MRC Holland). For a sub-set of patients with insufficient central material, local cytogenetic (FISH) reports were centrally reviewed and only those with a valid result for all risk markers included in this analysis. Differences in PFS, PFS2 and OS were assessed and compared using the log-rank test. Results Patient outcome was analysed by combining information on genetic risk defined as standard risk (SR) (no adverse lesions), high-risk (HR) (single adverse lesion: t(4;14), t(14;16), t(14;20), gain(1q) or del(17p)) or ultra-high risk (UHR) (≥2 adverse lesions) and International Staging System (ISS) 1 vs. ≥2. Genetic information was available for all 1064 patients. Baseline clinical characteristics (age, sex, race) were similar between groups, but 47.7% of UHR+ISS≥2 had an IgA paraprotein compared to 27.4% average across all groups. After a median follow up of 68 months (interquartile range 49-83) we found that the two most contrasting risk categories, UHR+ISS2/3 (10.1% patients) and SR+ISS1 (17.3%) were associated with the expected extreme clinical outcomes, with median PFS of 20 months vs. 50 months (P Across all genetic risk groups, fewer patients with ISS≥2 vs. those with ISS1 completed intention-to-treat HD-MEL and ASCT. For example, 65.4% of UHR+ISS≥2 completed ASCT vs. 76.1% of SR+ISS1 patients. The main reasons for patients not proceeding to ASCT were 'clinician decision/patient unfit' (43.5%), 'disease progression/death' (26.1%) or 'patient decision' (13%) for UHR+ISS≥2 patients, with fewer 'progression/death' (15%) and a more 'patient decision' in SR+ISS1. Across all groups, more patients were able to undergo ASCT following KCRD induction as opposed to CTD or CRD. This improvement was most notable in the UHR+ISS≥2 group: 82.4% KCRD vs. 58.9% CTD and 67.6% CRD. Differences in outcomes by risk group were comparable between PFS1 and PFS2. However, for UHR+ISS≥2, median PFS2 was 35 months and OS 43 months (delta=8 months), indicating limited efficacy of current treatments beyond 2nd line for this group. The difference between PFS2 and OS was markedly higher for HR+ISS≥2, with PFS2 52 months and OS 68 months. Conclusion Our results indicate the urgent need for improved treatment approaches for ultra-high risk patients, in particular those with UHR+ISS≥2. Our analysis demonstrates that fewer of these patients reach important therapeutic milestones such as ASCT if not effectively treated during induction. These patients are likely to derive the biggest benefit from early stratification and novel treatment approaches, as our data indicate that these patients obtain modest benefit from therapies beyond 2nd line. Disclosures Kaiser: Takeda, Janssen, Celgene, Amgen: Honoraria, Other: Travel Expenses; Celgene, Janssen: Research Funding; Abbvie, Celgene, Takeda, Janssen, Amgen, Abbvie, Karyopharm: Consultancy. Jenner:Abbvie, Amgen, Celgene, Novartis, Janssen, Sanofi Genzyme, Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Cairns:Celgene, Amgen, Merck, Takeda: Other: Research Funding to Institution. Pawlyn:Amgen, Celgene, Takeda: Consultancy; Amgen, Janssen, Celgene, Takeda: Other: Travel expenses; Amgen, Celgene, Janssen, Oncopeptides: Honoraria. Paterson:Celgene, Amgen, Merck, Takeda: Other: Research funding to institution. Mottram:Celgene, Amgen, Merck, Takeda: Other: Research Funding to Institution. Davies:Amgen, Celgene, Janssen, Oncopeptides, Roche, Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Consultant/Advisor; Janssen, Celgene: Other: Research Grant, Research Funding. Drayson:Abingdon Health: Consultancy, Equity Ownership. Owen:Janssen: Other: Travel expenses; Celgene, Janssen: Consultancy; Celgene, Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Research Funding. Morgan:Celgene Corporation, Janssen: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene Corporation, Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen, Janssen, Takeda, Celgene Corporation: Other: Travel expenses. Cook:Celgene, Janssen-Cilag, Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen, Takeda, Sanofi, Karyopharm, Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squib, GlycoMimetics, Seattle Genetics, Sanofi: Honoraria. Jackson:Celgene, Amgen, Roche, Janssen, Sanofi: Honoraria.

BACKGROUND As lenalidomide (LEN) becomes increasingly established as a standard of care in the treatment (Tx) of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM), patients (pts) for whom LEN is no longer a Tx option, including those who have become refractory to LEN, represent a clinical reality. These pts represent the largest population with MM at first relapse in the United States and a growing population globally. To date, they have been poorly studied and remain difficult to treat. Previous trials have demonstrated a clinical benefit with pomalidomide (POM) therapy in LEN-refractory pts with relapsed or refractory MM (RRMM), including those who were heavily pretreated (median of 5 prior regimens) (San Miguel et al. Lancet Oncol 2013; Richardson et al. Blood 2014; Dimopoulos et al. Blood 2016). These studies led to the approval of POM + low-dose dexamethasone (LoDEX) in RRMM. The pomalidomide, bortezomib, and low-dose dexamethasone (PVd) regimen has shown promising activity in early-phase clinical trials in LEN-refractory pts. In the phase 3 OPTIMISMM trial, PVd showed significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) and a manageable safety profile compared with bortezomib and low-dose dexamethasone (Vd) in intent-to-treat population of pts who received 1-3 prior regimens and were 100% LEN pretreated; 70% of pts were LEN refractory (Richardson et al. ASCO 2018 abstract 8001). Here, we present efficacy and safety results in LEN-refractory and -nonrefractory pts treated at first relapse. METHODS Pts were randomized 1:1 to receive PVd or Vd in 21-day cycles: POM 4 mg/day on days 1-14 (PVd arm only); bortezomib (BORT) 1.3 mg/m2 on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 of cycles 1-8 and on days 1 and 8 of cycles 9+; and DEX 20 mg/day (10 mg/day if aged > 75 yrs) on the days of and after BORT. Key eligibility criteria included ≥ 2 cycles of prior LEN therapy, including LEN-refractory pts. BORT-exposed pts were eligible to enroll, provided they did not have progressive disease during therapy or within 60 days of the last dose of a BORT-containing regimen with BORT dosed at 1.3 mg/m2 twice weekly. The primary endpoint was PFS. RESULTS Out of 559 pts enrolled patients, 226 were treated in the second line (2L), data cut off October 26, 2017: 111 with PVd and 115 with Vd. Median follow-up for 2L pts was 16.4 mos. Among 2L pts, 129 (57.1%) were LEN refractory (64 PVd; 65 Vd) and 97 (42.9%) were LEN nonrefractory (47 PVd; 50 Vd). In LEN-refractory pts (PVd vs Vd) median age was 68.0 vs 69.0 yrs, 57.8% vs 58.5% were male, and 56.3% vs 47.7% had prior BORT. In LEN-nonrefractory pts, median age was 66.0 vs 65.5 yrs, 63.8% vs 38% were male, and 66.0% vs 72.0% had prior BORT. Other key baseline characteristics were similar between Tx arms and subgroups. Median PFS was 17.8 mos with PVd vs 9.5 mos with Vd in LEN-refractory (HR 0.55; 95% CI, 0.33-0.94; Figure 1A) and 22.0 vs 12.0 mos in LEN-nonrefractory pts (HR 0.54; 95% CI, 0.29-1.01; Figure 1B). Response outcomes are shown in Figure 2. ORR was 85.9% with PVd vs 50.8% with Vd in LEN-refractory pts (P < .001) and 95.7% vs 60.0% in LEN-nonrefractory pts (P < .001). In 2L LEN-refractory pts, the most common grade 3 or 4 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) with PVd vs Vd were neutropenia (35.9% vs 12.9%), thrombocytopenia (17.2% vs 22.6%), and anemia (17.2% vs 8.1%). Grade 3 or 4 infections occurred in 29.7% vs 21.0% of pts. In 2L LEN-nonrefractory pts, the most common grade 3 or 4 TEAEs were neutropenia (36.2% vs 6.3%) and thrombocytopenia (23.4% vs 18.8%). Grade 3 or 4 infections occurred in 27.7% vs 8.3% of pts. In 2L LEN-refractory pts, median Tx duration of PVd vs Vd was 9.7 vs 6.1 mos. In 2L LEN-nonrefractory pts, median Tx duration of Pvd vs Vd was 13.6 vs 6.6 mos. CONCLUSIONS To date, OPTIMISMM is the only phase 3 trial to address Tx of pts with RRMM following LEN exposure in early lines and the first to report data in LEN-refractory pts after first relapse. PVd reduced the risk of progression and death by 45% and 46% vs Vd in LEN-refractory and -nonrefractory pts, respectively. Further, in both subgroups, 2L Tx with PVd significantly improved ORR and led to deeper responses compared with Vd. AEs with PVd therapy were generally consistent with the known AEs of POM, BORT, and DEX. These data further demonstrate that PVd is effective and tolerable in pts for whom LEN is no longer a Tx option, including LEN-refractory pts, supporting its use as 2L therapy in RRMM. Disclosures Dimopoulos: Celgene: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria. Weisel:Amgen, Celgene, Janssen, and Sanofi: Research Funding; 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. Moreau: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; Abbvie: 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; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Anderson:Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Speakers Bureau. White:Amgen: 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; 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. San-Miguel:Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria. Sonneveld:Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding. Jenner:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Chugai: 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, Other: travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Dürig:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Pavic:AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Salomo:Cilag: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy. Yu:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Nguyen:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Bensmaine:Celgene: Equity Ownership. Peluso:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Zaki:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Richardson:BMS: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: 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; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: 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; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

This randomized, phase III, open-label, multicenter study compared carfilzomib monotherapy against low-dose corticosteroids and optional cyclophosphamide in relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma patients were randomized (1: 1) to receive carfilzomib (10-min intravenous infusion; 20 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 2 of cycle 1; 27 mg/m(2) thereafter) or a control regimen of low-dose corticosteroids (84 mg of dexamethasone or equivalent corticosteroid) with optional cyclophosphamide (1400 mg) for 28-day cycles. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Three-hundred and fifteen patients were randomized to carfilzomib (n = 157) or control (n = 158). Both groups had a median of five prior regimens. In the control group, 95% of patients received cyclophosphamide. Median OS was 10.2 (95% confidence interval (CI) 8.4-14.4) vs 10.0 months (95% CI 7.7-12.0) with carfilzomib vs control (hazard ratio = 0.975; 95% CI 0.760-1.249; P = 0.4172). Progression-free survival was similar between groups; overall response rate was higher with carfilzomib (19.1 vs 11.4%). The most common grade >= 3 adverse events were anemia (25.5 vs 30.7%), thrombocytopenia (24.2 vs 22.2%) and neutropenia (7.6 vs 12.4%) with carfilzomib vs control. Median OS for single-agent carfilzomib was similar to that for an active doublet control regimen in heavily pretreated RRMM patients.

Introduction: Multiple myeloma (MM) evolves from precursor disorders such as monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) and SMM (Landgren O, et al. Blood 2009. 113[22]:5412-5417). Currently, there are no approved therapies for SMM, and guidelines recommend close monitoring of SMM patients (pts) and initiating treatment only upon progression to MM. However, therapeutic intervention at the SMM stage, especially in pts at higher risk of progression to MM, may yield clinical benefit and prevent the development of MM-associated complications. DARA is a CD38-targeting IgG1κ monoclonal antibody with on-tumor and immunomodulatory mechanisms of action. Based on the demonstrated efficacy and favorable safety profile of DARA monotherapy in pts with relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM; Usmani SZ, et al. Blood 2016. 128[1]:37-44), we hypothesized that DARA could delay progression from SMM to MM. A prespecified primary analysis (15.8-month median follow-up) of the phase 2 CENTAURUS study (NCT02316106) revealed that DARA monotherapy was active and well tolerated in pts with intermediate- or high-risk SMM (Hofmeister CC, et al. ASH 2017. Abstract 510). Here, we present updated data from CENTAURUS based on 10 months of additional follow-up. Methods: Eligible pts had had a confirmed diagnosis of high-risk or intermediate-risk SMM for Results: A total of 123 pts were randomized (41 pts per arm). The median (range) age was 61.0 (31-81) years, and the median (range) time from initial SMM diagnosis to randomization was 6.83 (0.40-56.0) months. In total, 73% of pts were of IgG subtype. Median treatment duration was 25.8 months in both the Long and Int arms and 1.6 months in the Short arm (Table 1). In the Long, Int, and Short arms, 17%, 22%, and 5% of pts, respectively, discontinued treatment; reasons included PD (7%, 10%, and 0%, respectively), adverse events (AEs; 7%, 2%, and 5%, respectively), refusal of further treatment (5% in Int), withdrawal of consent (2% each in Long and Int), and death (2% in Int). At a median (range) follow-up of 25.9 (0-33.2) months, overall response and ≥CR rates were higher in the Long and Int arms than in the Short arm (Table 2); in the combined Long and Int arms, the ≥CR rate was 7%. Median PFS based on SLiM-CRAB criteria was not reached in any arm; 24-month PFS rates were 90% (Long), 82% (Int), and 75% (Short; Figure 1A). PD/death rates indicate a median PFS of ≥24 months in all arms (Table 2). Median PFS based on BOD criteria was reached in the short arm only (14.8 months); 24-month PFS rates were 78% (Long), 70% (Int), and 27% (Short; Figure 1B). Safety results are summarized in Table 1. In all arms, no hematologic treatment-emergent AE was observed in ≥10% of pts, and the rates of grade 3/4 infections were ≤5%. Deaths occurred in 1 pt (2%) in the Int arm (due to heart failure not related to DARA) and 1 pt (2%) in the Short arm (due to PD); no deaths were observed in the Long arm. No deaths occurred within 30 days of the last DARA dose. Conclusions: After median follow-up of 25.9 months, a more pronounced BOD PFS benefit was observed in the Long and Int arms compared with the Short arm. The safety profile of DARA monotherapy in SMM remains consistent with other single-agent DARA studies, and no new safety signals were observed with longer follow-up. Because dose intensity was associated with efficacy in SMM pts, an extended, dose-intensive schedule was selected for an ongoing phase 3 study of DARA monotherapy versus active monitoring in SMM (AQUILA). Disclosures Landgren: Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, 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; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Cavo: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; Adaptive Biotechnologies: 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, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; 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; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Chari:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Array Biopharma: Research Funding; The Binding Site: Consultancy. Cohen:Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding. 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. Voorhees:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: served on an IRC; BMS: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Oncopeptides: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: served on an IRC; Novartis: Consultancy, Other: served on an IRC; TeneoBio: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen Inc.: Speakers Bureau. Estell:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Sandhu:Bioverativ: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria. Jenner:Amgen: 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, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Williams:Takeda: Honoraria, Other: travel support, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: travel support, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: travel support, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria. van de Donk:Janssen Pharmceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Beksac:Amgen,Janssen-Cilag,Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Goldschmidt:Chugai: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Mundipharma: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnology: Consultancy; ArtTempi: Honoraria. Moreau:Janssen: 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; Celgene: 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. Kuppens:Janssen Research & Development: Employment. Bandekar:Janssen Research & Development: Employment. Neff:Janssen Research & Development: Employment. Cortoos:Janssen Research & Development: Employment. Clemens:Janssen Research & Development, LLC: Employment. Qi:Janssen: Employment. Adams:Janssen Pharmaceutical R&D: Employment. Hofmeister:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Adaptive biotechnologies: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Myeloma patients who become refractory to immunomodulatory agents (IMiDs) and bortezomib have poor survival, with limited therapeutic options. Pomalidomide has shown improved survival and good tolerability in this patient cohort in clinical trials, but real world data are scarce. We retrospectively analysed all patients treated with pomalidomide at five UK centres between 2013 and 2016. Of 85 patients identified, 70 had sufficient information for response assessments. Median age was 66 years [40-89], 96·5% were refractory to IMiDs, 72·9% were refractory to both an IMiD and bortezomib and 92·9% were refractory to their last treatment. Of 45 patients with fluorescence in situ hybridization results 64% had adverse risk, 19 patients (22·4%) had an estimated glomerular filtration rate

To obtain a comprehensive genomic profile of presenting multiple myeloma cases we performed high-resolution single nucleotide polymorphism mapping array analysis in 114 samples alongside 258 samples analyzed by U133 Plus 2.0 expression array (Affymetrix). We examined DNA copy number alterations and loss of heterozygosity (LOH) to define the spectrum of minimally deleted regions in which relevant genes of interest can be found. The most frequent deletions are located at 1p (30%), 6q (33%), 8p (25%), 12p (15%), 13q (59%), 14q (39%), 16q (35%), 17p (7%), 20 (12%), and 22 (18%). In addition, copy number-neutral LOH, or uniparental disomy, was also prevalent on 1q (8%), 16q (9%), and X (20%), and was associated with regions of gain and loss. Based on fluorescence in situ hybridization and expression quartile analysis, genes of prognostic importance were found to be located at 1p (FAF1, CDKN2C), 1q (ANP32E), and 17p (TP53). In addition, we identified common homozygously deleted genes that have functions relevant to myeloma biology. Taken together, these analyses indicate that the crucial pathways in myeloma pathogenesis include the nuclear factor-κB pathway, apoptosis, cell-cycle regulation, Wnt signaling, and histone modifications. This study was registered at http://isrctn.org as ISRCTN68454111.

We report the results of a Phase I/II dose escalation study to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of cyclophosphamide when combined with lenalidomide and dexamethasone in relapsed/refractory myeloma. Thirty-one patients were enrolled in cohorts of 3, at five dose levels of cyclophosphamide to a maximum of 700 mg on days 1 and 8 of a 28-d cycle. Patients received lenalidomide 25 mg days 1-21 and dexamethasone 20 mg orally days 1-4 and 8-11. The MTD was 600 mg cyclophosphamide, days 1 and 8. Grade 3/4 haematological complications occurred in 26% of patients, grade 3/4 infection in 3% (both at 700 mg cyclophosphamide), with thromboembolic complications in 6% of patients. Overall complete response (CR) rate was 29%, very good partial response rate 7% and partial response rate 45% giving an overall response rate of 81%. After 21 months median follow-up, projected 2-year progression-free survival was 56%, with 80% overall survival at 30 months. Ten further patients were treated at MTD with a 40% CR rate. No dose reductions for any study drugs or deaths occurred during cycles 1-9. Lenalidomide, cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone is a safe, effective combination in relapsed myeloma inducing a high response rate, warranting further investigation in phase III trials.

Purpose: Deletions of chromosome 1 have been described in 7% to 40% of cases of myeloma with inconsistent clinical consequences. CDKN2C at 1p32.3 has been identified in myeloma cell lines as the potential target of the deletion. We tested the clinical impact of 1p deletion and used high-resolution techniques to define the role of CDKN2C in primary patient material. Experimental Design: We analyzed 515 cases of monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS), smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM), and newly diagnosed multiple myeloma using fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) for deletions of CDKN2C. In 78 myeloma cases, we carried out Affymetrix single nucleotide polymorphism mapping and U133 Plus 2.0 expression arrays. In addition, we did mutation, methylation, and Western blotting analysis. Results: By FISH we identified deletion of 1p32.3 (CDKN2C) in 3 of 66 MGUS (4.5%), 4 of 39 SMM (10.3%), and 55 of 369 multiple myeloma cases (15%). We examined the impact of copy number change at CDKN2C on overall survival (OS), and found that the cases with either hemizygous or homozygous deletion of CDKN2C had a worse OS compared with cases that were intact at this region (22 months versus 38 months; P = 0.003). Using gene mapping we identified three homozygous deletions at 1p32.3, containing CDKN2C, all of which lacked expression of CDKN2C. Cases with homozygous deletions of CDKN2C were the most proliferative myelomas, defined by an expression-based proliferation index, consistent with its biological function as a cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor. Conclusions: Our results suggest that deletions of CDKN2C are important in the progression and clinical outcome of myeloma.

A retrospective case-matched study was conducted to compare the oral regimen CTD (cyclophosphamide - thalidomide - dexamethasone) and infusional CVAMP (cyclophosphamide - vincristine - doxorubicin - methylprednisolone) as induction therapy followed by autologous peripheral blood stem-cell transplantation (PBSCT) for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients. The response rate after three cycles of treatment was statistically higher with CTD (n = 27) compared to CVAMP (n = 27) (89% vs. 56%, P = 0.016). Toxicity studies showed more neutropenia (grade 3/4) (4% vs. 60%, P = 0.0002) with CVAMP and more thrombotic episodes with CTD (11% vs. 4%). CTD may emerge as the superior induction regimen prior to PBSCT, in terms of high efficacy and better tolerability.

8009 Background: Immunomodulatory (IMiD) agents are effective therapies for multiple myeloma (MM), with Lenalidomide (Len) having fewer side effects than Thalidomide (Thal), enabling long-term treatment. The optimum IMiD induction and maintenance regimen are unknown. We therefore compared triplet induction regimens of Len vs Thal and examined the role of maintenance Len vs observation, enabling us to explore the interaction of Len induction with Len maintenance. Methods: Myeloma XI is a multicenter, randomized controlled trial for newly diagnosed MM, with pathways for transplant eligible (TE) and non-eligible patients. For TE patients the induction question compared Len or Thal plus cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone (CRD vs CTD) continued for a minimum of 4 cycles and to max. response. For patients with a suboptimal response there was a subsequent randomization to a proteasome inhibitor containing triplet or no further therapy prior to ASCT. A maintenance randomization at 3 months post ASCT compared Len till disease progression vs observation. 2042 TE patients underwent the induction randomization (CRD 1021, CTD 1021). After a median follow up of 36.3 months, 965 PFS and 415 OS primary endpoint events had occurred. Secondary endpoints included response and toxicity. Results: In TE patients, CRD induction was associated with deeper responses than CTD: ≥VGPR CRD 60% vs CTD 53%. This was associated with a significantly improved median PFS (HR 0.85, 95%CI 0.75, 0.96, CRD 35.9 months vs CTD 32.9, p=0.0116) and 3 year OS: 82.9% vs 77.0% (HR 0.77, 95%CI 0.63, 0.93, p=0.0072). Maintenance therapy with Len was associated with a significantly longer median PFS compared to observation (HR 0.47, 95%CI 0.38, 0.60) across all subgroups including patients with high-risk disease. Exploratory analysis across the TE pathway suggested that CRD induction with Len maintenance was optimum: 60 month PFS CRD-R 50.2%, CTD-R 39.1%, CRD-obs 18.5%, CTD-obs 23.4%. Conclusions: CRD was associated with deeper responses than CTD, and with a PFS and OS benefit. The best outcomes were associated with Len induction plus Len maintenance. Our findings support continuing Len therapy through induction until disease progression. Clinical trial information: NCT01554852.

Introduction. The outlook for myeloma patients who relapse after or become refractory to bortezomib and IMiDs is poor, with limited therapeutic options and a median survival (OS) of 9 months. In the phase 3 MM-003 study, pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone resulted in a significant PFS (median 4 vs 1.9 months) and OS (median 13.1 vs 8.1 months) benefit, compared to high-dose dexamethasone. Information on real-world outcomes of pomalidomide therapy is limited. We carried out a retrospective analysis of patients receiving pomalidomide in the UK, to compare outcomes and tolerability with published clinical trial data, and focus on high risk subgroups. Methods. All patients treated with pomalidomide at 5 major UK centres between August 2013 and March 2016 were identified from chemotherapy records, and clinical data including toxicity and survival from patient records. Disease response and adverse FISH were defined as per IMWG. Survival was estimated using Kaplan-Meier, and correlations made using log-rank methods. Key subgroups: eGFR Results. A total of 85 patients were identified. Of these, 70 (82%) had measurable disease (IMWG criteria) and received ≥1 cycle so were included in response analyses. Baseline patient characteristics are reported in Table 1. 96.5% of patients were refractory to one or more IMiDs, and 72.9% were refractory to both IMiDs and bortezomib. 92.9% were refractory to their last treatment. The median dose of pomalidomide was 4mg (2-4). Grade 3-4 non-haematological toxicities occurred in 42.4%: pneumonia (16.5%), neutropenic sepsis (8.2%), and acute kidney injury (7.1%), were most common. Grade 3-4 neutropenia occurred in 38% and thrombocytopenia in 24%. Seven patients died on treatment, 6 during the first cycle (2 PD and sepsis, 2 neutropenic sepsis, 1 PD and AKI, 2 pneumonia). In the 70 patients assessable for response, ORR was 52.9% (5.7% VGPR, 47.1% PR, 38.6% SD). Median duration of response (DoR) was 4 months. With median follow-up of 13 months, median PFS was 5 months (95%CI 3.6-6.4), and median OS 13 months (95%CI 10.8-15.2). Patients with renal failure (eGFR 65yrs had similar outcomes to younger patients,(ORR 54.1 vs 51.5%, median PFS and OS comparable between groups). Rates of toxicity were also not influenced by renal impairment, adverse genetics, or older age. The most important predictors of PFS and OS were depth and durability of response. PFS was 6 months for patients achieving PR, 4 months for SD and 1 month for PD, while OS was 18 months in patients achieving PR, 13 months for SD and 3 months for PD. For patients with DoR >4 months, PFS was 11 months and OS 23 months. In contrast, in patients whose DoR was < 4 months or who did not respond, OS was 9 months. Conclusions. Our real-world data on the characteristics and outcomes of patients receiving pomalidomide for relapsed/refractory myeloma in the UK reflect results of published clinical trials. The ORR of 52.9% in our cohort is higher than in MM-003 and MM-010, but PFS (5 months) and OS (13 months) were remarkably similar. Rates of haematological toxicity and infections are low, confirming the good tolerability of pomalidomide in this patient group. Depth and sustainability of response were important predictors of survival: achievement of PR was associated with improved PFS and OS, while patients who achieved SD still derived a survival benefit. Patients who maintained a response for at least 4 months had an estimated survival of nearly 2 years. No difference in response, survival or tolerability was seen in key subgroups, including those with moderate renal impairment, adverse cytogenetics and older age. Our findings confirm the efficacy of pomalidomide in these heavily pre-treated patients and add to the evidence for the benefit of pomalidomide in high risk patient groups. Table Patient characteristics and comparison with MM003 trial Table. Patient characteristics and comparison with MM003 trial Figure 1 PFS and OS for the edited group of 70 patients Figure 1. PFS and OS for the edited group of 70 patients Disclosures Maciocia: Autolus: Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties: TRBC1 and 2 Targeting for the Diagnosis and Treatment of T-cell Malignancies. Ramasamy:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Jenner:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel support; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel support; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel support, Research Funding. Schey:Celgene, Takeda: Honoraria; Celgene, Johnson & Johnson: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy. Yong:Autolus Ltd: Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties: APRIL based chimeric antigen receptor; Janssen: Research Funding.

Introduction With a multifactorial mechanism of action and excellent PFS associated with prolonged exposure, lenalidomide (len) is an attractive candidate for maintenance therapy. Len exerts its action by interaction with cereblon (CRBN) which forms a ubiquitin ligase complex with cullin-4A (CUL4), damaged DNA binding protein 1 (DDB1) and regulator of cullins 1 (ROC1). Downstream effects are mediated via Ikaros, Aiolos, MYC, IRF4, basigin (BSG) and solute carrier family 16 member 1 (SLC16A1). The impact of selective pressure on MM clonal architecture and mutational load has not been assessed. Although not a DNA damaging agent there is an apparent effect of maintenance len increasing the risk of second cancers and a suggestion that it could select for aggressive clones in high risk disease. We addressed the hypothesis that len may increase the rate of mutation at relapse by performing whole exome sequencing (WES) on 70 paired presentation/relapse samples from patients enrolled to the Myeloma XI trial (MXI), 35 of whom received maintenance Len and 35 not. Methods WES was performed to a median depth of 125x on 70 presentation/relapse pairs from patients enrolled to the MXI trial. MXI is a phase III study comparing thalidomide, len and bortezomib induction combinations and len vs observation maintenance treatment in both transplant eligible (TE) and transplant non-eligible (TNE) NDMM patients. We selected patients who had completed induction +/- ASCT and been randomised to receive maintenance therapy with len or observation. All patients had disease progression determined by IMWG criteria at the time of the relapse sample. Of the 70 patients, 30 were enrolled in the TE pathway and 40 in the TNE pathway. The median time to relapse following maintenance randomisation was 323 days (296 len vs 325 observation). 35 patients (50%) achieved a CR as their best response, 26 (37%) a VGPR and 9 (13%) a PR. The median age was 66 and 69 for those receiving len and those being observed respectively. High risk disease status was confirmed in 33 (47%) patients at presentation (≥ 1of t(4;14), t(14;16), t(14;20), +1q, -17p, -1p). Results The median number of non-silent mutations (NSM) found at presentation and relapse was 37 and 41 respectively (p=0.25). In patients receiving len maintenance the median number of NSM at presentation was 37 vs 34 at relapse (p=0.69). In those being observed the median number of NSM at presentation was 42 vs 52 at relapse (p=0.21). Mutations in genes important in myeloma pathogenesis seen in more than one patient at presentation included KRAS (16), NRAS (14), DIS3 (6), HIST1H1E (2), RB1 (2), EGR1 (2), TP53 (2) and FAM46C (2). These were seen in a total of 37 (53%) patients. One patient had both an NRAS and KRAS mutation. At relapse 7 patients lost mutations (NRAS (3), KRAS (3), DIS3 (1)) and 6 patients gained mutations (KRAS (2), NRAS (2), TP53 (1), FAM46C(1)). Paired presentation/relapse copy number (CN) data (MLPA) was available for 38 patients (54%). At relapse there was evidence of a change in CN status with 5 (13%) patients gaining CN changes associated with high risk (gain 1q (4), del 17p (1). Six patients (9%) were found to have mutations in genes associated with len action; CRBN (1), IRF4 (1), DDB1 (2), SLC16A1 (2). No mutations were found in Ikaros, Aiolos, ROC1, CUL4 or BSG. The CRBN mutation was found at relapse only, in a patient who had achieved a CR and undergone 232 days of len maintenance. The IRF4 mutation was seen at presentation and relapse in a patient who achieved CR and received 754 days of len prior to relapse. Both patients with DDB1 mutations received len induction, ASCT, achieved CR and were randomised to observation. In one patient the mutation was seen at presentation and relapse whilst in the other only at relapse. Both patients with mutations in SLC16A1 were treated with len induction and ASCT to CR. In one patient, randomised to observation the mutation was seen at both time points and they relapsed after 156 days. The other, with the mutation present at presentation only was randomised to len maintenance and relapsed after 256 days. Conclusions This is the largest study comparing the genetics of presentation/relapse myeloma in a len treated population. Overall, the number of mutations at presentation vs relapse remained stable. We show that len does not affect the mutational load at relapse but may select for mutations conferring len resistance although at present further analysis is required to confirm this. Disclosures Jones: Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Pawlyn:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel Support; Takeda Oncology: Consultancy. Cook:Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Glycomimetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Jenner:Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel support; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel support. Drayson:Abingdon Health: Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Davies:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria. Kaiser:BMS: Consultancy, Other: Travel Support; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Other: Travel Support; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Chugai: Consultancy. Jackson:Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; MSD: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Morgan:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol Meyers: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Research Funding; Univ of AR for Medical Sciences: Employment.

Introduction: Histone deacetylase inhibitors (HDACis) have demonstrated clinical efficacy in multiple myeloma, particularly in combination with proteasome inhibitors. CHR-3996 is a class 1 selective HDACi with potent anti-myeloma activity in vitro. Aminopeptidase inhibitors act downstream of the proteasome and prevent breakdown of proteasome generated peptides into amino acids. Synergistic cytotoxicity was observed in vitro when CHR-3996 was combined with the aminopeptidase inhibitor, tosedostat through rapid activation of NFkB followed by increased expression of the repressors IκBα, A20, CYLD, BIRC3. The MUK-three study was designed to translate these pre-clinical findings into a phase 1 clinical trial. This dose escalation study aimed to determine the maximum tolerated dose, safety and preliminary activity of CHR-3996 administered in combination with Tosedostat for patients with relapsed, refractory MM. Here we present the final study results. Methods: MUK-three was an open label multi-centre UK Phase I/IIa trial for patients with relapsed and relapsed/ refractory myeloma who had failed conventional treatments. Patients were permitted to meet the haematological entry criteria using growth factor and/or blood product support. During dose escalation subjects received CHR-3996 (20-40mg days1-28) and Tosedostat (0-60mg days 1-28) (Table 1) every 28 day cycle until disease progression or withdrawal. Dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) were evaluated during cycle 1 and dose escalation followed the 3+3 design. Responses were assessed using modified IMWG uniform response criteria, with the primary endpoint for the expansion phase of stable disease (SD) rate after 4 cycles of therapy. Toxicity was graded by CTCAE V4.0. Results: The trial was open to recruitment from July 2012 to December 2015. 20 patients were treated during dose escalation, including 8 at the recommended dose (RD) and 12 at dose levels (DL) 1-3. Only 1 DLT was observed at DL3 (grade 4 thrombocytopenia); however, this DL was deemed not tolerable due to the high incidence of low grade gastrointestinal toxicities. Hence the RD was determined as DL3b, CHR-3996 20mg and Tosedostat 60mg. A further 2 patients were treated at RD during dose expansion to make the required 10 patients for the protocol defined initial analysis at which point the trial closed. At the RD (n=10) median age was 63 years (range 47-73). 80% of patients had received at least 4 prior lines of therapy (median 4, range 2-9); 50% were ISS II, 30% ISS III; 4/6 patients with evaluable FISH data had 1q gain. The median time from diagnosis to treatment for the overall population was 85.3 months (27.5-198.8). The median number of cycles received was 2.5 (range 2-8) and 2 patients remain on treatment with 8 stopped due to disease progression. The 2 patients ongoing (received 5 & 9 prior lines) had their schedule adjusted to a 5 day a week dosing to further improve tolerability. Both had a clinical response (1MR, 1PR) and remained progression free at 6 months. 3/10 patients had SD after 4 cycles, the overall response rate (≥PR) was 1/10(10%) and the clinical benefit rate (≥MR) 2/10 (20%). Overall outcomes were: PR 10%, MR 10%, and SD 30%. Median time to maximum response was 1.84 months (95% CI [1.09, 8.65]). Toxicities at the RD were manageable, 30% of patients required a dose reduction. 22 serious adverse events were reported in 16 patients across all doses, mainly infections (10/22, 45.5%). The commonest grade 3-4 toxicities reported for all 22 patients were: platelet count decrease (12, 54.5%), white blood cell decreased (6, 27.2%), diarrhoea (5, 22.7%). The most frequent grade 1-2 toxicities were fatigue (15, 68.2%), nausea (14, 63.3 %), anorexia (14, 63.6%), anaemia (13, 59.1%). 1 patient withdrew due to toxicity, and there were no treatment related deaths. Conclusions: This study demonstrated that the novel combination of CHR-3996 and tosedostat was safe and tolerable in multiply relapsed, refractory myeloma patients many of which had poor bone marrow function. The recommended dose of the combination was 20mg and 60mg, respectively. Following further adjustment to an intermittent 5 day/ week dosing schedule, treatment was well tolerated and clinical benefit observed. This suggests that further evaluation of this novel combination is warranted. Acknowledgments: This trial was part of the Myeloma UK Clinical Trial Network, ISRCTN: 24989786. Disclosures Williams: Novartis: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Travel support, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Travel support, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel support, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Yong:Autolus Ltd: Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties: APRIL based chimeric antigen receptor; Janssen: Research Funding. Cook:Takeda Oncology: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Glycomimetics: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Jenner:Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel support; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel support; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Morgan:Univ of AR for Medical Sciences: Employment; Bristol Meyers: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Davies:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria.

Background: Maximising response in myeloma (MM) patients with effective induction regimens prior to autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) improves progression-free and overall survival. Triplet regimens combining an immunomodulatory agent (IMiD) and/or proteasome inhibitor (PI) are standard of care, however a more personalised approach is achieved by sequential triplet combinations based on an individual's response. Alternatively, quadruplet regimens may be more effective and new generation PIs such as carfilzomib, with less off-target activity, provide the opportunity to investigate this whilst minimising the risk of increased toxicity. The UK NCRI Myeloma XI trial is a large, phase III study aiming to answer these questions in transplant eligible (TE) patients comparing the quadruplet carfilzomib, cyclophosphamide, lenalidomide and dexamethasone to the sequential strategy of triplet IMiD combinations (with thalidomide or lenalidomide) followed by additional PI triplet therapy for those with a suboptimal response ( Methods: In 2013, the TE pathway was amended to include KCRD: carfilzomib 36mg/m2 IV d1-2,8-9,15-16 (20mg/m2 #1d1-2), cyclophosphamide (cyclo) 500mg PO d1,8, lenalidomide (len) 25mg PO d1-21, dexamethasone (dex) 40mg PO d1-4,8-9,15-16). Patients are randomised to this up-front quadruplet or the sequential strategy of CRD: cyclo 500mg PO d1,8, len 25mg PO d1-21 PO daily, dex 40mg PO d1-4, 12-15 or CTD: cyclo 500mg PO d1,8,15 thalidomide 100-200mg PO daily, dex 40mg PO d1-4,12-15 given to max. response - patients with VGPR/CR proceed straight to ASCT, PR/MR are randomised to sequential CVD: cyclo 500mg d1,8,15, bortezomib 1.3mg/m2 IV/SC d1,4,8,11, dex 20mg PO d1,2,4,5,8,9,11,12 or nothing and SD/PD all receive sequential CVD. All treatments are given to max. response prior to ASCT, after which there is a maintenance randomisation. Patients: 1512 patients entered the TE pathway prior to amendment (756 CRD, 756 CTD). Of these, 201 patients with a suboptimal initial response went on to receive CVD, 142 following randomisation (initial response PR/MR) and 59 with NC/PD. 788 (of target n=1036) patients have been randomised post-amendment to date (394 KCRD, 197 CRD, 197 CTD). Results: TE patients receiving treatment prior to the amendment had response rates ≥VGPR: CRD 58% vs CTD 52%. For patients receiving the sequential triplet CVD due to a suboptimal response this was upgraded to ≥VGPR in 49% of those with initial MR/PR, 27% with NC/PD. This suggests the overall ≥VGPR rate to this treatment approach prior to ASCT would be approx. 75%. This now needs to be compared to the alternative approach of an upfront quadruplet. Comparing patients contemporaneously randomised to initial induction the patients receiving KCRD have completed a median 4 cycles (range 1-7), CRD 5 (range 1-10) and CTD 6 (range 1-9). Dose modifications have been required in 62% of patients receiving KCRD (56% to carfilzomib, 42% to lenalidomide) 44% CRD (40% to lenalidomide) and 65% CTD (59% to thalidomide). Data for study drug related toxicity in patients who have completed at least one cycle of initial induction are shown in table 1. Serious adverse events suspected to be due to trial medications have occurred in 37% on KCRD, 32% CRD and 35% CTD. Updated toxicity and preliminary response analysis on 23/09/15 will be presented at the meeting. This will include a response comparison at the end of initial induction regimen i.e. KCRD vs CRD vs CTD for an anticipated 700 contemporaneous patients who will have completed treatment. Updated response to the sequencing approach (with 250 patients having received sequential CVD) will also be presented and compared. Conclusions: In our study KCRD, an outpatient delivered 4-drug regimen combining second generation IMiD and PI drugs, is well-tolerated in TE NDMM patients, comparable to 3-drug regimens. Data will be presented at the meeting to compare the response rates achieved with the different regimens and treatment approaches. On behalf of the NCRI Haemato-oncology CSG Table 1. Comparative toxicities KCRD n=261 CRD n=143 CTD n=142 % (no. of patients) Peripheral neuropathy Sensory Gr II-IV 1.9 (5) 1.4 (2) 8.5 (12) Motor Gr II-IV 3.1 (8) 1 (1) 5.6 (8) VTE all grades 4.2 (11) 4.9 (7) 5.6 (8) Anaemia Gr III-IV 9.2 (24) 4.2 (6) 5.6 (8) Neutropenia Gr III-IV 14.9 (39) 16.1 (22) 13.3 (19) Thrombocytopenia Gr III-IV 8.4 (22) 1.4 (2) 1.4 (2) Infusion reaction Gr III-IV 0.4 (1) - - Disclosures Pawlyn: Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Travel support; The Institute of Cancer Research: Employment. Off Label Use: Carfilzomib as induction treatment for myeloma Lenalidomide and vorinostat as maintenance treatments for myeloma. Davies:University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences: Employment; Celgene: Honoraria; Onyx-Amgen: Honoraria; Takeda-Milenium: Honoraria. Jones:Celgene: Other: Travel support, Research Funding. Kaiser:Janssen: Honoraria; Chugai: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; BristolMyerSquibb: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Jenner:Takeda: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria. Cook:Jazz Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Chugai: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Russell:Therakos: Other: shares. Owen:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria. Gregory:Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Jackson:Celgene: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria. Morgan:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda-Millennium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; CancerNet: Honoraria; Weisman Institute: Honoraria; MMRF: Honoraria; MMRF: Honoraria; University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences: Employment; Weisman Institute: Honoraria; CancerNet: Honoraria.

Introduction: Bortezomib (Velcade) and dexamethasone is a standard combination for relapsed myeloma. Both in vitro data and initial clinical trials signalled the efficacy of the combination of intravenous bortezomib and the oral histone deacetylase inhibitor vorinostat. Although the randomised phase 3 VANTAGE 088 trial identified an improvement in progression free survival with the combination of bortezomib and vorinostat compared to bortezomib monotherapy in relapsed myeloma, 50% of patients in the vorinostat group had at least one dose reduction compared with 25% in the placebo group, with potential impact on clinical outcomes. Subcutaneous bortezomib has now become the standard route of administration because of lower rates of peripheral neuropathy. MUK four is a single arm phase 2 multi-centre UK trial to evaluate the toxicity profile and efficacy of an alternative dosing schedule of vorinostat in combination with subcutaneous bortezomib and oral dexamethasone. We report the final analysis of toxicity and response data. Methods: Patients with relapsed myeloma treated with 1-3 prior lines of therapy received up to 8 cycles of V2 D (bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2 subcutaneously days 1, 4, 8 and 11, vorinostat 400 mg orally days 1-4, 8-11 and 15-18 and dexamethasone 20 mg orally days 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11 and 12 of a 21 day cycle). Following completion of a minimum of 3 cycles of V2 D, participants received maintenance vorinostat (400 mg days 1-4 and 15-18 of a 28 day cycle) until disease progression, intolerance or participant withdrawal. Responses were assessed using the modified IMWG response criteria and toxicities graded using CTCAE v4.0. Results: Between August 2013 and November 2014, 16 participants were recruited to MUK four. Median age was 69.5 years (range 50.0-78.0) and median lines of prior treatment was 1 (1-3). Prior treatment included thalidomide-based combinations in 13/16 (81.3%), bortezomib-based in 7/16 (43.8%) and lenalidomide-based in 2/16 (12.5%). 9/16 (56.3%) participants had received prior high dose melphalan ASCT. Median time from diagnosis was 38.6 months (9.3-120.4). At analysis in June 2015 8/16 (50%) participants continued on maintenance vorinostat. All 16 patients were evaluable for response within the first 8 cycles of V2 D. Overall response rate was 81.3% (13/16, 95% CI [55.4-96.0]) consisting of CR in 4/16 (25.0%), VGPR 2/16 (12.5%) and PR in 7/16 (43.8%). The remaining 3/16 (18.8%) achieved MR giving a clinical benefit response rate of 16/16 (100%). Participants received a median of 6 cycles of initial treatment with 6/16 (37.5%) receiving all 8 cycles. Treatment was discontinued in 4/8 (50%) because of disease progression, in 2/8 (25%) because of toxicity and in 2/8 (25%) for clinician discretion. Overall 12/16 (75%) participants experienced a dose reduction of either vorinostat or bortezomib or terminated treatment early as a result of toxicity. 11/16 (68.8%) reduced vorinostat and 10/16 (62.5%) reduced bortezomib. The most frequent grade 2 toxicities during the first 8 cycles were fatigue in 8/16 (50%), anaemia in 7/16 (43.8%), diarrhoea in 5/16 (31.3%), nausea in 4/16 (25.0%) and peripheral neuropathy in 4/16 (25.0%). The most frequent grade 3-4 toxicities encountered during the first 8 cycles were thrombocytopenia in 8/16 (50%), anaemia in 1/16 (6.3%), diarrhoea in 1/16 (6.3%) and fatigue in 1/16 (6.3%). During maintenance vorinostat only 1 participant experienced an adverse reaction above grade 2 (grade 3 neutropenia). Conclusion: Bortezomib, vorinostat and dexamethasone is a highly effective combination in relapsed myeloma with good response rates. Maintenance vorinostat is well tolerated. Although toxicity and dose reductions are observed with combination therapy, this study demonstrates that the combination of proteasome inhibitor, HDAC inhibitor and dexamethasone offers promise. Further data on PFS will be presented. Disclosures Jenner: Amgen: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria. Off Label Use: Vorinostat for treatment of myeloma. Pawlyn:Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Travel support; The Institute of Cancer Research: Employment. Williams:Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Davies:Array-Biopharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda-Millennium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences: Employment; Onyx-Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Purpose: Myeloma is a clonal malignancy of plasma cells. Poor-prognosis risk is currently identified by clinical and cytogenetic features. However, these indicators do not capture all prognostic information. Gene expression analysis can be used to identify poor-prognosis patients and this can be improved by combination with information about DNA-level changes. Experimental Design: Using single nucleotide polymorphism–based gene mapping in combination with global gene expression analysis, we have identified homozygous deletions in genes and networks that are relevant to myeloma pathogenesis and outcome. Results: We identified 170 genes with homozygous deletions and corresponding loss of expression. Deletion within the “cell death” network was overrepresented and cases with these deletions had impaired overall survival. From further analysis of these events, we have generated an expression-based signature associated with shorter survival in 258 patients and confirmed this signature in data from two independent groups totaling 800 patients. We defined a gene expression signature of 97 cell death genes that reflects prognosis and confirmed this in two independent data sets. Conclusions: We developed a simple 6-gene expression signature from the 97-gene signature that can be used to identify poor-prognosis myeloma in the clinical environment. This signature could form the basis of future trials aimed at improving the outcome of poor-prognosis myeloma. Clin Cancer Res; 16(6); 1856–64

Blastoid morphology is a rare presenting feature of myeloma which is frequently seen in patients with extramedullary myeloma and is associated with poor clinical outcome. Cell cycle active agents can be effective as treatment for aggressive myeloma and their activity enhanced by using them in combination with the anti-angiogenic agent thalidomide. DT-PACE is an example of such a regimen which we have used to treat 26 relapsed and or refractory patients with extramedullary/blastoid myeloma. The overall response rate (complete response/PR) was 59%, but despite these initial good responses, patients had a short progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). A subgroup of patients who proceeded to autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) have a trend towards a better PFS and OS when compared with the group receiving chemotherapy alone (PFS = 10 vs. 3 months P = 0.273 and OS 10 vs. 7 months P = 0.235). Interestingly of the group who received ASCT consolidation three patients remain alive beyond 18 months. In conclusion, the clinical outcome of this group of cases is poor even when treated with the intensive regimen DT-PACE; however, a subgroup can do well if DT-PACE is consolidated by ASCT.

Multiple myeloma is characterized by genomic alterations frequently involving gains and losses of chromosomes. Single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP)-based mapping arrays allow the identification of copy number changes at the sub-megabase level and the identification of loss of heterozygosity (LOH) due to monosomy and uniparental disomy (UPD). We have found that SNP-based mapping array data and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) copy number data correlated well, making the technique robust as a tool to investigate myeloma genomics. The most frequently identified alterations are located at 1p, 1q, 6q, 8p, 13, and 16q. LOH is found in these large regions and also in smaller regions throughout the genome with a median size of 1 Mb. We have identified that UPD is prevalent in myeloma and occurs through a number of mechanisms including mitotic nondisjunction and mitotic recombination. For the first time in myeloma, integration of mapping and expression data has allowed us to reduce the complexity of standard gene expression data and identify candidate genes important in both the transition from normal to monoclonal gammopathy of unknown significance (MGUS) to myeloma and in different subgroups within myeloma. We have documented these genes, providing a focus for further studies to identify and characterize those that are key in the pathogenesis of myeloma.

Aim: To compare K with low-dose corticosteroids and optional Cy in RRMM (NCT01302392). Methods: Pts were randomized 1:1 to receive K or an active control of low-dose corticosteroids and optional Cy. Pts received K (10-min IV infusion) on Day (D) 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16 of a 28-D cycle (20 mg/m2 on D 1 and 2 of Cycle 1; 27 mg/m2 thereafter) or 84 mg of dexamethasone (or equivalent corticosteroid) with optional Cy (maximum 1400 mg) per 28-D cycle. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) with 80% power to detect a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.7 (median OS assumptions: K, 8.6 months [mo]; control: 6 mo). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR) and safety. Results: Data are presented for the K group followed by the control group. Between Sept 2010 and Oct 2012, 315 pts (278 from Europe) were randomized (K: 157 pts; control: 158 pts). Baseline characteristics were balanced between the groups. Median age was 65.0 yrs (range: 32–85). Pts received 5 (median) prior regimens in each group; median time since diagnosis was 6.0 yrs and 5.4 yrs. Median treatment duration was 16.3 weeks and 10.7 weeks; 92% of pts in the control group received Cy. Median relative dose intensity (actual dose/planned dose) was 99.9% in each group. The study did not meet the primary endpoint for OS (HR = 0.975; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.760–1.249; P = 0.4172). Median OS was 10.2 mo (95% CI: 8.4–14.4) and 10.0 mo (95% CI: 7.7–12.0). Median (range) follow-up for OS was 27.8 mo (0.1–42.5) and 29.8 mo (0.0–44.8). Median PFS was 3.7 mo (95% CI: 2.8–4.2) and 3.3 mo (95% CI: 2.2–5.2). The ORR was 19.1% (95% CI: 13.3–26.1) and 11.4% (95% CI: 6.9–17.4). Treatment discontinuation due to an adverse event (AE) occurred in 14.6% and 20.3% of pts; 10.2% and 12.4% of pts died on study due to an AE. Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent AEs (≥5%) included anemia (25.5% vs 30.7%), thrombocytopenia (24.2% vs 22.2%), neutropenia (7.6% vs 12.4%), acute renal failure (7.6% vs 3.3%), pneumonia (6.4% vs 12.4%), and renal failure (5.1% vs 1.3%). Conclusions: Median OS for single-agent K (10.2 mo) was similar to the active control arm (10 mo) in these heavily pretreated pts with RRMM. Disclosure: H. Ludwig: Research funding: Celgene, Janssen-Cilag, Mundipharma; Advisory Board: Celgene, Bristol-Meyers, Janssen-Cilag, Onyx; M.T. Petrucci: Consultancy and honoraria for Janssen-Cilag, Celgene, and Bristol-Myers Squibb; A. Palumbo: Consultancy -Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Janssen, Millenium, Onyx;Honoraria -Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Janssen, Millenium, Onyx; L. Rosinol: honoraria from Janssen and Celgene; A. Nagler: Research funding from Onyx; M.A. Dimopoulos: Honoraria from Onyx V. Maisnar: Consultancy - Celgene; Honoraria directly received from an entity - Celgene, Janssen, Amgen;Membership on an entity's board of directors, speakers bureau,or its advisory committees - Celgene K. Rajangam: employee of Onyx; J.F. San Miguel: He has participated in several compensated advisory boards for Millennium, Onyx, Celgene, Novartis, Janssen; R. Hajek: consultancy–Celgene,Merck; Honoraria - Celgene, Janssen, Merck. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

The combination of bortezomib (velcade), pulsed dexamethasone and weekly cyclophosphamide (CVD) in relapsed/refractory myeloma patients induces high overall (75%) and complete (31%) response rates compared to velcade/dexamethasone (overall 47%, CR 5%) and velcade alone (overall 27%, CR 0%). The toxicity profiles including thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, and neuropathy were comparable between the groups.

Background: The optimal therapy for patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma remains controversial. Lenalidomide, an oral immunomodulatory drug, has been shown to be an effective treatment in this setting, with in-vitro laboratory data suggesting that its effect is synergistic with a number of established chemotherapeutic agents. The primary objective of this study was to determine the maximum tolerated dose and toxicity of cyclophosphamide when used in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone for patients with relapsed/refractory myeloma. The secondary objective was to determine clinical response rates. Methods: Cyclophosphamide was given at increasing doses from 300 mg po in cohort 1, up to the maximum planned dose of 700 mg po in cohort 5 on days 1 and 8 of a 28 day cycle, in combination with dexamethasone (20mg po, daily on days 1–4 and 8–11) and Lenalidomide (25mg po, daily on days 1–21). Maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was established as one dose level below that at which 2 or more patients suffered dose limiting toxicity (DLT). DLT was defined as Grade 4 haematological toxicity or febrile neutropenia occurring during cycle 1 of treatment, or Grade 3/4 non-haematological toxicity during cycle 1, or a failure to start cycle 2 within 7 days of scheduled day due to toxicity. Once the MTD had been established, a further ten patients were enrolled at that dose. Safety assessments were performed weekly during cycle 1, and at the end of every cycle thereafter. Response data was collected on day 28 of each cycle. Results: Toxicity The most commonly observed adverse events were; neutropenia (grade 1–3), cramps (grade 1–2), somnolence (grade 1–2), constipation/diarrhoea (grade 1–2), minor infections (grade 1–2), and musculoskeletal aches and pains (grade 1). The most common reason for dosing delays and dose reductions was grade 3 neutropenia. Maximum tolerated dose No patients receiving doses of 300 to 600mg cyclophosphamide have experienced dose limiting toxicity during the first month of treatment. 2 patients receiving 700mg qualified as having dose limiting toxicity (One patient with febrile neutropenia, pneumonia and syncope (all grade 3)), and another with grade 4 pancytopenia). The maximum tolerated dose of cyclophosphamide in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone has therefore been established at 600mg daily on days 1 and 8 of a 28 day cycle. Response: A total of 31 patients were enrolled into the study. Median age at enrolment was 57 years (range 42–79). Median ISS at trial entry was 1 (range 1–3). Median time since last therapy was 7 months (range 1–84). To date, 36% of patients have achieved CR or VGPR, and 81% PR or better. Responses were assessed at the end of each cycle. 25 of the 31 patients have so far achieved PR or better. Of these 25 patients, 76% had achieved their maximum response by cycle 3 day 28. Patients had received 1–6 prior lines of therapy (median 3). 28/31 patients had previously received thalidomide, 20 had received autologous stem cell transplant, and 8 received velcade. 7 patients had received all 3 and, of these, 1 achieved SD, 3 PR, and 3 CR. This suggests that lenalidomide in combination with cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone is an effective therapy for heavily pre-treated patients. Conclusion: 600mg cyclophosphamide on days 1 and 8 of a 28 day cycle is well tolerated in combination with Lenalidomide and dexamethasone. The combination is a highly effective therapy for relapsed/refractory myeloma. The majority of patients achieved a maximal response during the first 4 courses of treatment. CRD is also an effective treatment for patients who have received extensive prior chemotherapy. Whether patients need to continue treatment to nine cycles remains to be tested. Figure Figure

The immunoglobulin production of myeloma plasma cells means they are dependent on the unfolded protein response process (UPR), which controls protein production and ensures its proper translation and folding. Knockout mouse studies have highlighted the importance of IRE1, a transducer of the UPR signal and XBP1 its downstream target, in B cell development. Gene expression studies show that XBP1 is highly expressed in myeloma plasma cells and it is consistently deregulated in clinical samples. XBP1s, the active moiety, is a known myeloma survival factor and IgVH-XBP1s transgenic mice develop myeloma. In this work we demonstrate that XBP1s levels correlate with survival of myeloma patients and that targeting it with small molecules may be a useful therapeutic strategy. We have re-sequenced IRE1 and determined the gene expression levels of IRE1, total XBP1, XBP1 unspliced (XBP1u), and XBP1 spliced (XBP1s) in a large series of myeloma patients (n=260), and correlated biological findings with clinical characteristics and patient outcome. To quantitatively assess the expression of XBP1s and XBP1u variants, we have designed a novel real time PCR method (Lux Technology, Invitrogen) capable of determining the ratio of these transcripts within a sample. These results show that total IRE1 and XBP1 are highly expressed in all patients. In addition all patients expressed higher levels of XBP1s, the active transcription factor which is anti-apoptotic, compared to the inactive precursor XBP1u. We correlated XBP1s/u gene expression levels with clinical parameters in 159 newly diagnosed patients. This group of patients contained 68 females and 91 males with a median age of 64 years (range 39–89), B2M median = 7.45mg/mL (range 1.1–30mg/mL), haemoglobin median = 10.2g/dL (range 5.7–14.7g/dL) and ISS status stage 1 = 21%, stage 2 = 36%, and stage 3 = 36%. The XBP1s/u ratio demonstrated a statistically significant effect on overall survival (OS) in patients with high B2M (B2M >5), with a cut-off ratio of 2.8 for the XBP1s/u expression (assigned using the quartile method). In this group of patients those with higher XBP1s/u have shorter survival (28 months) compared to those with lower XBP1s/u (not reached, 50+ months). (p = 0.033). The cause for the high and variable XBP1s levels is uncertain but could be mediated by IRE activity. Sequence analysis of the kinase and endoribonuclease domain of IRE1 identified 3/50 patients with an inactivating mutation in the endoribonuclease domain (G923V): patients with this mutation had a lower ratio of XBP1s to XBP1u and a longer survival. In conclusion, this study is the first to demonstrate the clinical significance of high XBP1s levels in myeloma and shows that patients with high levels of XBP1s have a shorter overall survival. Coupled with our previous study highlighting the critical role of the UPR in myeloma and the report of the XBP1s transgenic mouse model, the importance of the IRE1-XBP1 axis myeloma is now established, and its role as a therapeutic target needs to be explored.

Multiple Myeloma (MM) is a malignancy depicted by clonal expansion of plasma cells in the bone marrow. There are two broad genetic subtypes of multiple myeloma as defined as hyperdiploid multiple myeloma (H-MM), characterized by trisomies of chromosomes 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 15, 19, and 21, and nonhyperdiploid multiple myeloma (NH-MM) associated with primary translocations involving the immunoglobulin heavy chain (IgH). These two subtypes of multiple myeloma have two different molecular pathogenesis given that characteristic changes of each have been already observed. In order to contribute to the understanding of this malignancy and to unveil the different molecular pathogenesis, our interest is focused on Human Multiple Myeloma Cell lines (HMCLs), as a model, and a broad but specific group of enzymatic proteins: the Kinases. Kinase hyperactivity or lack of it often results in disregulation of cellular pathways involved in proliferation and survival. In our study, we describe the patterns of genetic lesions and molecular pathogenesis of 11 HMCLs with Single Nucleotide Polymorphism (SNP)-based mapping arrays from Affymetrix Human Mapping 500K array set. This technique allows the examination and identification of copy number changes, bi-allelic deletions and the identification of loss of heterozygosity (LOH) due to loss and uniparental disomy, as well as gene localization and identification. The 11 HMCLs utilized are characterized for their structural alterations and not by hyperdiploidy. In addition, so as to fulfill the selection criteria, a minimum of 3 cell lines must present the alterations cited below. The most frequently identified alterations were located as follows: Previously described gains were observed in 1q, 7q, 8, 11q, 18, 19, and 20q; but also found at 4q. The bi-allelic deletions were ascertained on 3p. Similarly, we identified the regions of hemizygotic deletions on 1, 2q, 6q, 8q, 9p, 11q, 12, 13q, 14q, 17p, and 20p. In addition, described regions of homozygotic deletions were detected on 1p, 6q, 8p, 13q, 16q, and 22q, and furthermore located on 2q, 3, 4q, 9, 10q, 12p, and 20p. Finally, the uniparental disomies (UPDs) obtained were traced on 1q, 4q, 8q, 10q, and 22q. These identified alterations are affecting a series of enzymatic genes belonging to targeted pathways. Within the chromosomes 1, 10, 11, 14, and 16 we have localized kinases that are part of the PI3K/AKT pathway, which affect to a number of intracellular and extracellular myeloma growth cytokines. In the chromosomes 1, 6, 12, and 19 we identified a series of Cyclin-Dependent Kinases that are critical regulators of cell cycle progression and RNA transcription, since they regulate and control the cyclins, cell cycle regulatory proteins, which can provoke dysregulation and abnormally accelerated cell cycle progression. And finally on chromosomes 1, 2, 14, 21, and 22 we observed certain Aurora and related kinases, as another family of the cell cycle regulators and often aberrantly activated in human tumor cells, they facilitate transit from G2 through cytokinesis. These mutated kinases may be potential targets for therapeutics. Our data demonstrates the genomic complexity of multiple myeloma enhancing our understanding of the molecular pathogenesis of the disease and the importance of the HMCLs as a model.

Defining biologically relevant prognostic indices in myeloma is a challenge. The International Staging System (ISS) is important but based on simple clinical data. Cytogenetics, in particular switch translocations and 17p-, are more important biologically, being based on underlying genetic changes. However, these changes do not capture all of the important biological data and so signatures based on global expression analysis have been developed to address these shortcomings. Most signatures to date have been based on expression features correlated with outcome rather than using structural genetic change to define biologically relevant expression features and, as such, although predictive, they may be acting as “bystander” markers rather than being pathologically important themselves. We have used homozygous deletions (HD) to define relevant genes and gene signatures predictive of outcome in a large homogeneously treated set of myeloma patients.