ALBERT

Description: Abstract 201 Background: Pomalidomide at doses of 2 or 4 mg/d has demonstrated excellent activity in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma (MM). Between November 2007 and March 2012, we opened 6 sequential phase 2 trials and treated 345 patients with relapsed MM with pomalidomide at differing doses with weekly dexamethasone (Pom/dex). Results of 164 of these patients have been previously published. Here we describe long term follow up of these patients as well as results of an additional 181 patients with relapsed MM treated with the Pom/dex regimen. Methods: The six cohorts consisted of: Cohort 1 (N=60): relapsed MM with 1–3 prior regimens, 2 mg dose; Cohort 2 (N=34): lenalidomide (LEN) refractory, 2 mg dose; Cohort 3 (N=35): BZ)/LEN refractory, 2 mg dose; Cohort 4 (N=35): BZ/LEN refractory, 4 mg dose; Cohort 5 (N=60) LEN refractory, 1–3 prior regimens, 4 mg dose; and Cohort 6 (N=120) LEN refractory, 4 mg dose. Pomalidomide was given orally 2 mg daily or 4mg daily on days 1–28(cohorts 1–5) or 1–21 (cohort 6) of a 28-day cycle with oral dexamethasone given 40 mg daily on days 1, 8, 15 and 22. Response was assessed by the International Myeloma Working Group Uniform Response criteria. All patients received aspirin 325 mg daily for deep venous thrombosis (VTE) prophylaxis or full dose anticoagulation. Results: A total of 345 patients were enrolled across all 6 cohorts. One patient was ineligible and excluded from analysis. The median age was 64 years (32–88). The median time since diagnosis was 53 months. The median number of prior therapies was 3 (1–14). 147 (44%) had high-risk molecular markers by mSMART criteria. Prior therapies consisted of thalidomide 52%, lenalidomide 87%, bortezomib 75%, autologous stem cell transplant 70% and allogeneic transplant 3%. The median follow-up is 10.4 months (5.4–34 months). Sixty-seven percent are alive and 32% remain progression free. 46 patients are continuing to receive treatment. The most common toxicities (grade 3 or higher) were neutropenia (31%), anemia (16%), thrombocytopenia (12%), pneumonia (8%) and fatigue (8%). VTE was seen in 10 patients (3%). Outcomes are shown in Table 1. Across all 6 cohorts confirmed responses of partial response (PR) or better were seen in 34%. The response rate in all patients with mSMART high risk status was 30.6%. Responses and duration of response (DOR) in those with high risk molecular markers include: 17p– 19 of 56 (34%) DOR 8.2 months; t(4;14) 6 of 24 (25%) and DOR 4.8 months; t(14;16) 7 of 11(64%) and DOR 9.5 months; deletion 13 by cytogenetics 13 of 37 (35%) with DOR 8.2 months. In a multivariate analysis, only LDH 〉 ULN, number of prior regimens, and prior BZ therapy were predictive of a shorter TTP and factors associated with a poor OS following initiation of pomalidomide therapy included B2M 〉 5.5, LDH 〉 ULN,number of prior regimens, and prior BZ therapy. Conclusions: Pom/dex is active and well tolerated even in heavily pretreated patients and those with high risk molecular markers. Remissions are durable. Response rates and toxicity are similar between the 2 mg and 4 mg doses. Disclosures: Lacy: Celgene: Research Funding. Stewart:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Reeder:Celgene: Mayo Clinic receives funding from Celgene to support clinical trials Other, Research Funding.

Description: Key Points High WBC is an independent predictor of early HD in APL.

Description: Abstract 863 Background: Patients with MM who have progressed after multiple novel agents have limited treatment options. Pomalidomide (CC4047) is the newest immunomodulatory (IMiD) agent. Pom/dex using a dose of 2 mg/day has demonstrated response rates (≥PR) of 63% in relapsed MM (Lacy, JCO 2009, 27:5008-5014) and 32% in a lenalidomide-refractory cohort (Lacy, Leukemia, in press). The maximum tolerated dose has been determined to be 4 mg/day for 21 of 28 days (Richardson, ASH, 2009), We opened two sequential phase II trials using the Pom/dex regimen at differing doses to study the efficacy of this regimen in patients who have failed both lenalidomide and bortezomib. Methods: Patients refractory to both lenalidomide and bortezomib therapy; defined as relapsing on or within 60 days of stopping each regimen, were enrolled. Pomalidomide was given orally 2 mg daily (Cohort A) or 4mg daily (Cohort B) on days 1–28 of a 28-day cycle with oral dexamethasone given 40 mg daily on days 1, 8, 15 and 22. Response was assessed by the International Myeloma Working Group Uniform Response criteria. All patients received aspirin 325 mg daily for DVT prophylaxis. Results: 35 patients with relapsed and resistant/refractory to both lenalidomide and bortezomib were enrolled in each cohort. The median age was 62 years (range, 39–77) in Cohort A and 61 (range, 45–77) years in Cohort B. The median time from diagnosis to enrollment was 57 months for Cohort A (range 12–249) and 72 months(range, 13–183) for Cohort B. 15 patients had high risk molecular markers in Cohort A and 16 in Cohort B. The median number of prior regimens was 6 in both groups. The median (range) duration on treatment was 5(1-13) and 2(0-6) cycles in cohorts A and B respectively. Toxicity at least possibly attributed to drug consisted primarily of myelosuppression: grade 3/4 neutropenia (37% Cohort A vs. 55% Cohort B); grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia (11% Cohort A vs. 13% Cohort B); and grade 3/4 anemia (9% Cohort A vs. 16% Cohort B). Grade 3/4 non-hematologic toxicities occurred in 23% Cohort A vs. 13% Cohort B. Grade 1 or 2 fatigue was the most common non-hematologic toxicity seen in 43% Cohort A vs. 52% Cohort B. Grade 1 or 2 neuropathy occurred in 17% Cohort A vs. 16% Cohort B. Other non-hematologic toxicities occurring in

Description: Abstract 636 Cellular vaccine may offer additional benefit as consolidative therapy after autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) for multiple myeloma (MM). We have reported previously from two phase II studies the survival of MM patients who received APC8020 (autologous antigen presenting cell vaccine) after ASCT (Lacy, AJH '09, (84): 799; Lin, ASH annual meeting 2010, abstract 1958). To determine if there was an outcome advantage for additional consolidative vaccine therapy after ASCT, we performed this matched case control analysis comparing the survival of patients who received ASCT only (control) at Mayo Clinic to those who received APC8020 after ASCT in the same time period. Forty-three study patients accrued between July 1998 and March 2002 were eligible for matching. To reduce bias from disease risks and transplant-related mortality, control patients were required to be alive and progression free six months after transplant and have a M-spike value of 〈 2g/dL at 4 mos (1st study) or 9 mos (2nd study) after transplant, similar to post-ASCT patients who were enrolled in the two APC8020 studies. A total of 111 control patients were eligible for matching. Control patients were matched to study patients by age (+/− 5 yrs), ISS (International Staging System) stage, and plasma cell labeling index (PLCI, either 〉= 3 or 〈 3). A matched control was not identified for one study patient. Of the remaining 42 study patients, all had at least one matched control patient. Thirty-two patients had 2 matched controls. Cox proportional hazards analysis showed that there was no statistically significant difference in time to progression between the study and control patients (HR 1.54, 95% CI 0.92 – 2.58, p = 0.1). However the overall survival is significantly improved among the study patients (HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.30 – 0.99, p = 0.05). This analysis is the only known report of long-term follow-up of the largest group of MM patients treated with APC8020 vaccine. While many current prognostic tests were not available at the time of the initial vaccine studies, the control patients in this analysis were matched by known disease risks that are still in use today. The survival advantage in study patients remained statistically significant compared to matched controls. Interestingly, the time to progression is unchanged between study and control patients. This is similar to other reports of vaccine therapy such as in sipuleucel-T (Provenge™) in prostate cancer where an overall survival benefit is seen without change in progression-free survival. A larger, randomized phase III study is needed to confirm the encouraging survival benefit of this treatment modality in MM. Further insight into the mechanisms of action of APC8020 is needed to improve our understanding of the role of this therapy in the context of current practice of MM maintenance therapies. Disclosures: Sims: Dendreon Corporation: Employment.

Description: Background: The plasma cell labeling index (LI), a slide-based measure of the percentage of bone marrow plasma cells in the S-phase of cell cycle, is a powerful prognostic tool in multiple myeloma (MM). A high LI is a marker of poor outcome, and is a useful adjunct to cytogenetics and fluorescent in-situ hybridization to risk-stratify MM patients. It has been shown to provide additional prognostic information in International Staging System (ISS) stages 1 and 2 patients treated with conventional chemotherapy ± autologous stem cell transplantation. However, the impact of a high LI is not known in patients receiving novel agents that have been integrated into the current treatment paradigm of newly diagnosed MM. The objective of this study was to determine the value of LI in patients treated with thalidomide-dexamethasone (Thal/Dex) or lenalidomide-dexamethasone (Len/Dex). Patients and Methods : Data from 125 newly diagnosed MM patients enrolled in clinical trials with either thalidomide (200mg/d) plus dexamethasone (Thal-Dex; n=50), or lenalidomide (25 mg/d on days 1–21 of a 4-week cycle) plus dexamethasone (Len-Dex; n=75) as initial therapy, were utilized. Patients within both the studies were categorized into 2 LI groups based on baseline LI: high (≥1%) vs. low (

Description: Background: Dexamethasone (dex) is an integral part of various anti-myeloma regimens both in the frontline and relapsed/refractory (RR) setting. Several clinical trials have shown that dex adds to the efficacy of novel therapeutic agents for multiple myeloma (MM). Yet, a substantial number of patients are intolerant to even the standard of care low-dose dex (40 mg weekly), especially in heavily pre-treated RRMM, possibly due to cumulative steroid toxicities and thus, require dex dose adjustments. There is a concern of compromising the efficacy of anti-MM regimens by adjusting the dex dose lower. We describe the frequency of dex dose adjustment, characteristics of patients who required it and its effect on patient outcomes in a large prospective clinical trial of pomalidomide (pom) and dex in RRMM (MC0789). Methods: We utilized data from the Pom-dex trial (MC0789), which treated RRMM patients in different cohorts of pom (2 vs. 4 mg; 21 vs 28 days cycle) with fixed dose dex (40 mg orally weekly). Patients were divided into 2 subgroups, with any dose adjustment/elimination of dex vs. not. Continuous and categorical variables were compared between the two groups using two-sample t-test/Wilcoxon rank sum test or Chi-squared test, respectively. Logistic regression and Cox regression models were used to find the univariate and stepwise multivariate predictors of response to treatment and overall mortality, respectively. Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate overall survival (OS) at 1, 3, and 5 years. All statistical tests were two-sided with the alpha level set at 0.05 for statistical significance. Results: Results from the MC0789 clinical trial have been reported previously. Almost half of all treated patients in this trial had dex dose adjusted (n=175/343; 51%). The median number of cycles for the first dose adjustment in this group was 3 (range 1-62), with 46.5% of patients (n=82) having multiple dose adjustments and majority (58.3%, n=102) within the first 3 cycles of treatment. Patients in the dose adjustment group were significantly older (mean 65 vs 60 years; p=0.0001). Males, Whites and patients diagnosed before 2006 or with normal cytogenetics also had a higher incidence of dex dose adjustment, though this was not statistically significant. Patients with dex dose adjustment had a longer duration of treatment (mean 339 days) as compared to the non-adjusted cohort (mean 123.65 days) (95% CI 160.13, 270.58; p

Description: Abstract 1958 Vaccines may offer additional benefit as consolidation therapy after plateau phase or autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) for multiple myeloma (MM). We have reported previously the results of another phase II trial showing that using APC8020 (Mylovenge™) after ASCT improved the overall survival (OS 5.3 yrs, 95% CI 4.0 yrs – NA) compared to ASCT alone (3.4 yrs, 95% CI 2.7 – 4.6 yrs; p = 0.02; Lacy, AJH (84): 799). We now report the results from a randomized, phase II trial using the same vaccine plus adjuvant cytokines in MM patients in plateau phase after either chemotherapy or ASCT. Twenty patients were enrolled between 2001 and 2003 and were randomized to receive APC8020 and adjuvant cytokine of either interferon-g (IFNg, arm A, n = 10) or interleukin-2 (IL2, arm B, n = 10). Each cycle of treatment included five days of daily subcutaneous injections of either IFNg (106 IU, arm A) or IL2 (200 mg, arm B) followed by APC8020 injection. Each patient received a cycle of treatment every 2 weeks for 4 cycles. One patient in each arm was in plateau phase post-chemotherapy. Time from diagnosis to treatment was 11.9 mos for the patient in arm A and 16.2 mos for arm B. Time to progression (TTP) was 3.7 and 68 months respectively the patient in arm A and B. Both patients were alive at five years. For the 9 post-ASCT patients in each arm, no statistically significant differences were seen in the baseline characteristics between the 2 arms. The median time from diagnosis to treatment was 15.4 months. No grade 4 or 5 adverse events (AEs) were reported. Two patients in each arm had grade 3 AE, including lymphopenia, thrombocytopenia, hemorrhage, infection, and fatigue. One patient in arm B had grade 3 autoimmune disorder that was deemed possibly related to study treatment. The most common AEs were grade 1 fatigue (n = 7) and anemia (n = 5) in arm A and grade 1 anemia (n = 7) and injection site reaction (n = 5) in arm B. The median TTP was 9.3 months (95% CI: 3.9 – 19.3 months) for arm A and 6.6 months for arm B (95% CI: 6.3 – 29.6 months) with no statistically significant difference between the two arms (p = 0.89). The median OS had not been reached for either arm; the 5-year OS rate was 67% and 56% for arms A and B respectively (p = 1.0). Interestingly, similar to our previous study where TTP was not different while OS was improved with vaccine, when we compared the clinical outcome for all patients in this vaccine trial to that of 78 matched control patients who only received ASCT during the same time frame, we did not see significant improvement in TTP (Figure 1). However, the 5-year overall survival for all patients in this trial is significantly improved at 71% (95%CI: 51–96%) compared to ASCT control patients (41%, 95% CI: 31 – 54%; p = 0.03; Figure 1). This trial suggests improved OS with vaccine plus cytokine. It is possible that modulation of patients’ immunity may help them live longer with multiple myeloma. Further investigation is needed to compare the approach in this trial with dendritic cell vaccine alone to better understand optimal strategy for vaccine therapy in MM. Figure 1. Kaplan-Meier curves for time to progression and overall survival Figure 1. Kaplan-Meier curves for time to progression and overall survival Disclosures: Dispenzieri: Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Binding Site: Honoraria. Kumar:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Genzyme: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cephalon: Research Funding. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding.

Description: Background: Ixazomib is an experimental, orally bioavailable, proteasome inhibitor that has demonstrated anti-tumor activity in relapsed multiple myeloma (MM). In the dose escalation studies, ixazomib was tolerated up to a dose of 5.5 mg given every week as a single agent, while a dose of 4 mg was utilized in the combination studies with lenalidomide. We undertook this study to examine the efficacy and tolerability of the two doses of ixazomib in combination with dexamethasone in patients with relapsed MM. Patients and methods: This was a randomized phase 2 study of two doses of ixazomib (4mg; Arm A or 5.5 mg; Arm B) given weekly for three weeks with a week off along with weekly dexamethasone (40 mg) in patients with relapsed MM, who are proteasome inhibitor na•ve (including bortezomib) or have received less than 6 cycles of therapy with bortezomib and had a PR or better with no progression at the time of discontinuation. The primary objective was to determine the confirmed overall response rate (〉=PR); secondary objectives included progression free and overall survival. A total of 71 patients were accrued from February 2013 to April 2015; one patient was ineligible. Results: Baseline characteristics were similar in the two arms; median age across the study was 70 years (46-84); 53% were male. Median number of prior therapies was 4 (range 2-6); 90% of the patients had prior IMiDs, 70% had prior transplant and 29% had prior bortezomib. At a median follow up of 10 months, 17 (49%) and 19 (54%) of patients had disease progression in arms A and B respectively with 12 (34%) patients in each arm still continuing on treatment. All patients in each arm were evaluable for response; the overall response rates were 31% in arm A (95%CI: 17-49) and 51% (95%CI: 34-69) in Arm B. The depth of response, event free survival and overall survival are outlined in Table 1. Among the patients with no prior bortezomib exposure the response rates were 38% for Arm A and 52% for Arm B. The treatment was well tolerated with 2 patients in each arm discontinuing treatment for adverse events; there were no on study deaths. A grade 3 or higher AE that was at least possibly related to treatment was seen in 21% and 54% in Arms A and B respectively; with 15% and 37% hematologic and 6% and 29% non-hematologic AEs. The most common attributable toxicities encountered included fatigue, thrombocytopenia, diarrhea and nausea with more grade 3 toxicities among Arm B. Peripheral neuropathy, possibly related to ixazomib, was seen in 55% (only grade 1 or 2) in arm A and 43% (2 patients with grade 3) in Arm B. Toxicities led to dose reduction of ixazomib in 17% and 43% of patients in Arm A and B respectively; the median number of cycles administered were 5 (1-24) and 5 (1-22) respectively. Conclusions: Ixazomib in combination with dexamethasone was well tolerated with significant anti-myeloma activity in this group of patients with relapsed MM. Deep responses including stringent CR were observed. The higher dose of ixazomib appears to be associated with a higher response rate but with higher rate of adverse events requiring dose reductions. Table 1. Treatment outcome in all patients Arm B (4 mg) (N=35) Arm C (5.5 mg) (N=35) Response Rate 31% (95%CI: 17-49) 51% (95%CI: 34-69)  No. of Responders 11 18   sCR 0 1   CR 1 0   VGPR 7 8   PR 3 9   MR 5 1 Median Overall Survival1 NA NA  6 Months 100% 100% Median Event Free Survival1,2 8.4 mos (95%CI: 4.3-13.2) 8.2 mos (95%CI: 3.8-16.3) %Event Free at 6 Months 60% (95%CI: 45-81) 60% (95%CI: 45-81) Median Duration of Response1 16.7 mos (95%CI: 9.3-22.0) 16.3 mos (95%CI: 7.0-20.1) Median Time to Response 1.1 mos (range: 0.8-3.6) 1.0 mos (range: 0.8-7.5) CI: confidence interval; mo: month; NA: not attained 1Kaplan Meier 2Event-free survival time is defined as the time from registration to the first of disease progression, death due to any cause, or subsequent treatment for multiple myeloma. Disclosures Kumar: Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Skyline: Consultancy, Honoraria; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy.

Description: Background: Pomalidomide has demonstrated excellent activity in patients with relapsed, lenalidomide refractory, multiple myeloma (MM). Between November 2007 and March 2012, we enrolled 285 patients with relapsed MM on 5 sequential phase 2 trials; patients received pomalidomide at 2mg or 4 mg daily with weekly dexamethasone (Pom/dex). The approved dose of pomalidomide is 4 mg for 21 of 28 days. We wished to compare efficacy, tolerability and long-term outcomes between cohorts treated with 2 mg or 4mg daily continuously and 4mg daily for 21/28 days. Methods: After excluding two ineligible patients, 283 patients with lenalidomide refractory, relapsed MM from 5 sequential cohorts were analyzed. These patients were divided into 3 groups: Group1 received Pom 2mg for 28/28 day cycle (N= 69), Group 2 received Pom 4 mg for 28/28 day cycle (N= 95) and Group 3 received Pom 4mg for 21/28 day cycle (N= 119). All patients received oral dexamethasone given 40 mg daily on days 1, 8, 15, and 22. Response was assessed by the IMWG Uniform Response criteria. All patients received aspirin 325 mg daily for DVT prophylaxis or full dose anticoagulation. Results: The median age was 63 years (32-85); 35% were female. The median time from diagnosis was 53 months and the median number of prior regimens was 4. 127 (46%) had high-risk molecular markers. Prior therapies (% received) included lenalidomide (100%), thalidomide (46%), bortezomib (78%), autologous stem cell transplant (71%), and allogeneic transplant (4%). The median follow-up is 16.4 months (3.2-64.4). Forty eight percent are alive and 26% remain progression free; 15 patients are continuing to receive treatment. Frequency of AEs by groups are shown in Table 1. The most notable difference is grade 3+ neutropenia seen in 39% of group 1 and 56% and 57% of groups 2 and 3. Confirmed responses of PR or better were seen in 29% (group1), 35% (group2) and 24% (group3). Median duration of response (DOR) was 14.1 months (group1), 14.5 months (group2) and 10.2 months (group3). Median PFS was 5.5 months (group1), 6.9 months (group2) and 4.3 months (group3). Although the dose level cohorts were sequential rather than randomized, we compared OS between the dose levels in an exploratory manner. There was no significant difference in OS between dose levels (p=0.26). Median overall survival (OS) was 16.6 months (group1), 21.9 months (group2) and 16.0 months (group3). Conclusions: Pom/dex is active and well tolerated even in heavily pretreated patients Responses are durable. Response rates and overall toxicity are similar between the 2 mg and 4 mg doses. Neutropenia is more common in those receiving doses of 4mg daily or for 21/28 days compared to those receiving 2 mg daily. Table 1. All Grades Grade 3+ 2mg 28 Day 4mg 28 Day 4mg 21 Day 2mg 28 Day 4mg 28 Day 4mg 21 Day Anemia 68% 58% 74% 14% 15% 27% Lymphopenia 22% 51% 11% 16% 32% 8% Neutropenia 71% 82% 77% 39% 57% 56% Thrombocytopenia 51% 61% 63% 10% 9% 23% Leukopenia 59% 77% 72% 26% 38% 39% Pneumonia 7% 11% 12% 6% 7% 11% Fatigue 51% 65% 60% 9% 5% 8% Neuropathy 28% 32% 28% 0% 3% 0% Elevated Blood Glucose 10% 21% 8% 4% 6% 3% Pneumonitis 3% 2% 3% 3% 1% 1% VTE (Thrombosis) 3% 3% 3% 1% 3% 3% Secondary Malignancy 0% 2% 1% 0% 2% 1% Figure1. Kaplan Meier Overall Survival Curves Figure1. Kaplan Meier Overall Survival Curves Disclosures Lacy: Celgene: Research Funding. Fonseca:Medtronic, Otsuka, Celgene, Genzyme, BMS, Lilly, Onyx, Binding Site, Millennium, AMGEN: Consultancy, patent for the prognostication of MM based on genetic categorization of the disease. He also has sponsored research from Cylene and Onyx Other, Research Funding. Bergsagel:Novartis: Research Funding; Constellation Pharmaceutical: Research Funding; OncoEthix: Research Funding; MundiPharma: Research Funding. Stewart:Novartis: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Array BioPharma: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co.: Research Funding. Reeder:Millennium, Celgene, Novartis: Research Funding. Mikhael:Onyx: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding.

Description: Purpose: Recent studies have demonstrated differential outcomes for adolescents and young adults (AYAs) vs. children treated for acute myeloid leukemia. Here we analyze outcomes by age group for APL patients treated on the North American Intergroup Study C9710. Methods: Patient characteristics and outcomes were compared between children (