ALBERT

Description: Background:Novel insights into the biology of myeloma cells have led to the identification of relevant prognosis factors.Cytogenetic abnormalities (CA) has become one of the most important prognostic factors, and the presence of t(4;14), t(14;16) or del(17p) are associated with poor prognosis. Although there are some reports indicating that 1q gains may be considered as a poor-risk feature, the information is not uniform. Furthermore, there are important controversies about whether or not novel agents-based combinations are able to overcome the poor prognosis of CA. In the relapse setting, the combinations including proteasome inhibitors and immunomodulatory drugs have shown to improve, and some of them to overcome, the outcome of patients with high-risk CA. Here we report a preplanned analysis, in a series of elderly newly diagnosed myeloma patients included in the Spanish GEM2010 trial and receiving VMP and Rd, in a sequential or alternating approach, in order to evaluate the influence of CA by FISH on the response rate and outcome. Patients and methods: 242 pts were randomized to receive a sequential scheme consisting of 9 cycles of VMP followed by 9 cycles of Rd or the same regimens in an alternating approach (one cycle of VMP alternating with one Rd, up to 18 cycles. VMP included the IV administration of weekly bortezomib (except in the first cycle that was given twice weekly) at 1.3 mg/m2 in combination with oral melphalan 9 mg/m2 and prednisone 60 mg/m2once daily on days 1-4. Rd treatment consisted on lenalidomide 25 mg daily on days 1-21 plus dexamethasone 40 mg weekly. FISH analysis for t(4;14), t(14;16), del(17p) and 1q gains was performed at diagnosis according to standard procedures using purified plasma cells. Results: In 174 out of the 233 patients evaluable for efficacy and safety, FISH analysis at diagnosis were available and two groups were identified: high-risk group (n= 32 patients with t(4;14) and/or t(14;16) and/or del(17p)) and standard-risk group (n=142 patients without high-risk CA). The rates of CA was similar in both treatment arms. Response Rates (RR) were no different in the high-risk vs standard-risk groups, both in the sequential (74% vs 79% RR and 42% vs 39% CR) and alternating arms (69% vs 86% RR and 39% vs 38% CR). After a median follow-up of 51 months, high-risk patients showed shorter PFS as compared to standard risk in the alternating arm (24 versus 33 months, p=0.03) and this also translated into a significantly shorter OS (38.4m vs not reached, p=0.002). However, in the sequential arm, high-risk and standard-risk patients showed similar PFS (29.5 months vs 31.5 months, p=0.9) and OS (46m vs 63m, p=0.1). This beneficial effect observed in the sequential arm applied to both t(4;14) or del(17p). As far as 1q gains is concerned, 151 patients had 1q information and 76 of them had 1q gains (50.3%), defined as the presence of more than 3 copies in at least 10% of plasma cells. The rate of 1q gains was well balanced in both sequential and alternating arms. The ORR was similar in patients with or without 1q gains (83% vs 80%) as well as the CR rate (45% vs 31%), and no differences were observed between sequential and alternating arms. Patients with or without 1q gains had a similar PFS (36 months vs 29 months) and 4-years OS (63% vs 68%) in the whole series and no differences were observed between the sequential and alternating arms. This effect has been observed in patients with 1q gains as isolated CA and the outcome was slightly but not significantly worse when 1q gains were present plus either t(4;14) and/or del17p. Conclusions: The total therapy approach including VMP and Rd administered in a sequential approach is able to overcome the poor prognosis of the presence of high-risk CA in elderly patients with newly diagnosed MM. The presence of 1q gains has no impact in the PFS and OS of elderly patients treated with VMP and Rd. Disclosures Mateos: Janssen, Celgene, Amgen, Takeda, BMS: Honoraria. Martínez-López:Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Oriol:Celgene: 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; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Paiva:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; EngMab: Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria; Binding Site: Research Funding.

Description: Introduction: Disease control at five years would be a desirable endpoint for elderly multiple myeloma (MM) patients; however, the percentage of cases reaching this objective as well as the biomarkers to predict it, are not well defined. Objective and design: In order to gain further insight about long-term disease control (〉5 years progression-free) in elderly MM we have analyzed a homogeneous population of 435 newly-diagnosed transplant-ineligible (TNE) patients enrolled in two consecutive Spanish clinical trials (GEM2005MAS65, GEM2010MAS65), that included both proteasome inhibitors and immunomodulatory drugs. Results: Amongst the 435 patients included in this post-hoc study, only 18.8% remained alive and progression-free after five years of initiating treatment. Noteworthy, in these patients the overall survival (OS) rate at 10-years was 69.4%, as compared to 11.4% for those patients progressing during the first five years (p〈 0.001). Baseline variables significantly associated with long-term progression free survival in the univariate analysis were younger age, ISS 1, R-ISS 1, hemoglobin ≥ 12g/dl, normal LDH, and standard-risk cytogenetic abnormalities and the presence of a monoclonal gammopathy of unknown significance (MGUS)-like immunophenotypic profile in the bone marrow. Complete responses (CR) and minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity were also associated with long-term progression free survival. In the multivariate analysis, an hemoglobin level ≥12g/dl (OR 2.61; 95% CI 1.47 - 4.61, p=0.001) and a MGUS-like immunophenotypic profile in the bone marrow (OR 3.33; 95% CI 1.30 - 8.54, p=0.002) were the two baseline variables significantly and independently associated with a higher probability of long-term disease-free survival. When the depth of response (including MRD) was included in the logistic regression model, Hb level ≥12g/dl (OR 2.18; p=0.010) and the MGUS-like signature (OR 4.99, p

Description: Background VMP and Rd are two of the most efficient and widely accepted regimens in the treatment of elderly newly diagnosed MM patients. In order to further improve the outcome of elderly patients, one possibility would be to use regimens including all these drugs simultaneously, but this may result into high toxicity. Alternatively, the use of these regimens (VMP and Rd) in a sequential or alternating scheme could improve the treatment of elderly patients. We hypothesized the alternating scheme would minimize the emergence of resistant clones, and would reduce the cumulative toxicity. In order to test this hypothesis we decided to compare VMP and RD in a sequential vs an alternating scheme. Patients and methods 241 patients were randomized to receive a sequential scheme consisting on 9 cycles of VMP followed by 9 cycles of Rd or the same regimens in an alternating approach (one cycle of VMP alternating with one Rd (half of the patients started by VMP and half by Rd) up to 18 cycles). VMP included the iv administration of bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2 twice weekly for 1 six-weeks cycle, followed by once weekly for 8 four-weeks cycles in combination with oral melphalan 9 mg/m2 and prednisone 60 mg/m2 once daily on days 1–4 of each cycle. Rd treatment consisted on lenalidomide 25 mg daily on days 1-21 plus dexamethasone 40 mg weekly. Results 121 patients were allocated to receive the sequential scheme and 120 the alternating regimen. Both arms were well balanced according to the baseline characteristics. 52% patients in the sequential arm and 55% in the alternating and had high risk cytogenetic abnormalities (t(4;14), t(14;16), del17p or 1q gains). After 9 cycles of treatment, in the sequential arm, 35 out of 66 (54%) achieved at least VGPR vs 51 out of 65 patients (78%) in the alternating arm (p=0.002), including sCR/CR rate of 28% vs 38% in the sequential and alternating arms, respectively (p=NS). Seven patients in each arm achieved immunophenotypic CR. Moreover, while four patients progressed in the sequential arm under treatment with VMP, no patients in the alternating scheme developed disease progression during the first 9 cycles, After a median follow up of 12 months, there was a trend for shorter TTP in the sequential as compared with the alternating scheme (18 m-TTP of 83% vs 89% (p=NS)). In terms of OS, 83% of patients in the sequential arm were alive at 18 m versus 93% in the alternating (p=NS). Patients who achieved sCR/CR had a significantly longer 18 m-TTP as compared with patients who didn’t achieve it in both sequential (100% vs 71%; p=0.006) and alternating arms (100% vs 79%; p=0.006) and this translated into a significant benefit in OS. No differences were observed in overall response rates and CR rates in standard and high risk patients. The 18 m-TTP was similar in standard and high risk groups in both sequential (86% vs 81%) and alternating arms (84% vs 94%), noting that 94% of patients receiving the alternating scheme were progression-free at 18 months. Regarding hematologic toxicity, the frequency of G3-4 neutropenia was slightly lower in the sequential than in the alternating arm (16% and 23%) and the same trend was observed for G3-4 thrombocytopenia (16% vs 20%). Concerning non-hematologic toxicity, 5% and 4% of the patients in the sequential and alternating arms developed G3-4 infections, respectively; the rate of G3-4 skin rash was 4% in the sequential and 3% in the alternating arm; 4% of patients in the sequential arm developed G3-4 peripheral neuropathy and 3% in the sequential arm. The rate of grade 3-4 thrombotic events was 2% in both arms. Nevertheless, the detailed evaluation of the toxicity will be done at the completion of the trial when all patients will have received the same amount of drugs in either a sequential or an alternating scheme (at the present time, 42 patients in the sequential arm were not yet at risk for the development of lenalidomide-related side effects). Conclusions The administration of melphalan, bortezomib, lenalidomide and steroids in elderly MM patients in a sequential or alternating scheme is feasible. Although longer follow-up is necessary, the alternating scheme may be superior in terms of response rate and outcome, as result of the early exposure of the plasma cell to different agents. Toxicity profile is acceptable. Aparently both schemes of therapy seems to overcome the poor prognosis of high risk cytogenetic. Disclosures: Mateos: Janssen, Celgene: Honoraria. Off Label Use: Lenalidomide plus dexamethasone is not approved for newly diagnosed MM patients. Ocio:Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Array Biopharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding. San Miguel:Janssen, Celgene: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Description: Introduction: Myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) are characterized by bone marrow dysplasia and ineffective hematopoiesis. Zhou et al. showed that transforming growth factor-beta (TGF-β) signaling was constitutively activated in MDS CD34+ cells and that this over-activation and subsequent myelosuppression was based on reduced expression of SMAD7, the natural inhibitor of TGF-β, in MDS CD34+ cells (Zhou L et al. Cancer Res 2011;71:955-963). Galunisertib specifically inhibited the kinase activity of the TGF-β receptor type I (TGF-βRI) also known as ALK5 and its downstream signaling pathway theoretically replaced the SMAD7 function. Galunisertib reversed hematopoietic suppression in human MDS bone marrow assays, and in a murine model of TGF-β derived bone marrow failure. Based on these preclinical studies that demonstrate hematological improvement (HI) in MDS models following galunisertib treatment, a single-arm phase 2 part of a phase 2/3 proof-of-concept study in very low-, low-, and intermediate-risk patients with MDS was conducted. Methods: The primary objective of this study was to estimate the HI rate based on International Working Group (IWG) 2006 criteria in patients with very low-, low-, and intermediate-risk MDS by Revised International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS-R), treated with galunisertib. Eligible patients were treated with galunisertib 300 mg/day (150 mg BID) orally for 14 days, followed by 14 days off, constituting a cycle of 28 days. Eligibility criteria permitted any prior therapy, all of which were required to be discontinued at least 28 days prior to initiation of galunisertib. Supportive therapies including ongoing transfusions were allowed. Eligibility criteria included confirmed diagnosis of MDS, anemia with hemoglobin ≤10.0 g/dL, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) ≤2. Safety was assessed and summarized using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE v4.0). Descriptive statistics were used to report baseline characteristics and response rates. Results: In this phase 2 study, 41 patients received galunisertib orally (N=39, 150 mg BID and N=2, 80 mg BID for PK comparison). Patients were 62% males. The median age was 71 years (range: 52-84), the majority of patients were classified as refractory cytopenia with multilineage dysplasia (66.7%) or refractory anemia with ringed sideroblasts (20.5%) based on WHO MDS classification. ECOG PS was 0/1 in 53.8%/46.2% of patients. Sixty-two percent of the patients received ≥6 cycles of treatment. Among the 39 patients receiving 150 mg BID, a total of 15 (38%) patients discontinued from the study within 6 cycles; one due to AE and 9 due to patient/physician decision. The most common possibly related any grade treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) included fatigue (20.5%), diarrhea (15.4%), pyrexia (10.3%), vomiting (10.3%), anemia (7.7%), nausea (7.7%), urinary tract infection (7.7%), neutrophil count decreased (5.1%), and platelet count decreased (5.1%); 12 (30.8%) patients had grade 3/4 TEAEs, 4 (10.3%) were drug-related. One of the 39 patients was protocol ineligible and was removed from the efficacy analysis. Among the 38 evaluable patients in the ITT population, 14 of whom required fewer than 4 units of transfusion per 8 weeks, 10/38 (26%) patients achieved HI, defined as at least a continuous 8-week response with at least a 4-unit reduction in transfusion requirement from baseline or hemoglobin increase by at least 1.5 g/dL per 8-week period. Of these 10 patients, 4 became transfusion-independent, and 5 had transfusion reduction. In a subgroup of 24/38 patients who had a transfusion requirement of at least 4 units every 8 weeks at baseline, 9 (38%) of these patients achieved a transfusion reduction of at least 4 units. No apparent correlation between cytogenetics or MDS subtype including ringed sideroblasts and response was identified; however, only 14 patients had abnormal cytogenetics. No platelet or neutrophil responses were observed. Conclusion: Galunisertib is well tolerated in this MDS population where this ALK5 inhibitor was investigated for the first time. Patients most commonly discontinued from study treatment due to patient/physician decision and not for toxicity. The clinical endpoint of HI was observed in 26% of the ITT population, and no specific response sub-group was identified. Disclosures Valcarcel: GSK: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; NOVARTIS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AMGEN: Honoraria, 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. Platzbecker:Boehringer: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding. Santini:celgene, Janssen, Novartis, Onconova: Honoraria, Research Funding. Díez-Campelo:Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Research Funding. Schlenk:Boehringer-Ingelheim: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding; Arog: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Teva: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Gaidano:MorphoSys; Roche; Novartis; GlaxoSmithKline; Amgen; Janssen; Karyopharm: Honoraria, Other: Advisory boards; Celgene: Research Funding. Perez de Oteyza:Eli Lilly and Company: Research Funding. Cleverly:Eli Lilly and Company: Employment, Equity Ownership. Chiang:Eli Lilly and Copany: Employment. Lahn:Eli Lilly and Company: Other: Former employee. Desiaih:Eli Lilly and Company: Employment. Guba:Eli Lilly and Company: Employment, Equity Ownership. List:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding. Komrokji:Pharmacylics: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Description: Background: survival of young patients with high IPI DLBCL treated with RCHOP chemotherapy needs to be improved. In this poor risk population the combination of RCHOP with new drugs is an attractive approach, along with performing an early evaluation with PET/CT after 2 to 4 cycles and change induction therapy if a complete response is not achieved. Bortezomib has been combined with RCHOP [1]. We present preliminary data of patients treated in a clinical trial comparing 6 cycles of RCHOP vs 6 cycles of BRCAP, a modified RCHOP regimen changing vincristine by bortezomib at a dose of 1.3 mg/m2 sc days 1, 8, and 15 of every 21 days cycle (NCT01848132). Methods: patients younger than 70 yrs diagnosed of DLBCL with aIPI 2-3 or aIPI 1 with elevated beta2microglobulin were eligible. The main objective was to evaluate the proportion of patients who survives free of event at 2 years. Central pathology review was performed in all cases, and samples were classified as GC vs non-GC subtypes by IHC (Hans algorithm). PET/CTs were performed at diagnosis, after 2, 4 and 6 cycles (PET2, PET4 , and PET6), and were reviewed by at least 3 experts of a central panel at real time. Response was analyzed following the visual method with the Deauville scale, and for PET2 and PET4 the semiquantitative method was used. Patients with persistent disease after 4 cycles were considered a failure of therapy and were dropped out from the trial. Results: data from the first 76 patients were analyzed. Diagnosis of DLBCL was confirmed in all except 3 pts, 36 pts were treated in the experimental arm and 37 in the control arm. Median age was 58.2 yo (range 23-70), 37 (50.7%) were males. Characteristics at diagnosis were: non-GC subtype 18/46 (39.1%), C-myc expression 35/43 (81.4%), bcl2 expression 43/49 (87.7%), double expression cmyc/bcl2 30/42 (71%), stage III-IV 64 (87.6%), ≥2 extranodal locations 27 (42.2%), ECOG 2-3 24 (33%), elevated LDH 43 (62.3%), elevated beta 2 microglobulin 47 (75.8%), aIPI 2: 42 (57.5%), aIPI 3: 21 (28.8%). Among 160 cycles of BRCAP chemotherapy, 5 (3.1%) on day 8, and 22 (13.7%) on day 15, were given without bortezomib due to a neutrophil count below 0.5 /L. The most common toxicities are shown in table 1 without significant differences between both arms. Twenty-one (32.8%) out of 64 patients had a positive PET2. Fifteen (26.8%) out of 56 patients who have finished the 4 cycles had a positive PET4 according to central review and were withdrawn of the trial. Table 1. Episodes of treatment-related adverse events Control arm: RCHOP n=166 Experimental arm: BRCAP n=160 Any grade Grade 3-4 Any grade Grade 3-4 Anemia 6 0 22 9 ( 5.6%) Neutropenia 31 26 (15.6%) 47 37 (23.1%) Thrombocytopenia 9 4 ( 2.4%) 16 5 ( 3.1%) Febrile neutropenia - 6 ( 3.6%) - 10 ( 6.2%) Fever 8 1 ( 0.6%) 8 0 Infection 4 1 ( 0.6%) 7 1 ( 0.6%) Nausea/vomiting 12 0 19 0 Peripheral neuropathy 7 1 ( 0.6%) 7 1 ( 0.6%) Diarrhea 4 0 8 0 Constipation 7 0 4 0 Hepatotoxicity 6 0 6 0 Conclusions: BRCAP regimen with bortezomib sc d1, 8, and 15 is feasible. Its main toxicity is hematological, and some patients cannot receive some doses of bortezomib due to neutropenia. Grade 3-4 non-hematological toxicity is rare, including peripheral neuropathy, and do not differ from RCHOP toxicity. 1.Ruan J et al, JCO 2011;29:690-7 Disclosures Sancho: CELLTRION, Inc.: Research Funding. Lopez-Guillermo:Roche, Celgene, Mundipharma, Gilead, Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Description: Background and objectives Protocols for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) 1st line patients are centered on the combination of Cytarabine and an anthracycline; Idarubicin (IDA), Daunorubicin (DNR), or Mitoxantrone (MIT). Patients may be treated with IDA, DNR, or MIT depending on the country of residence, because multiple clinical trials have not found significant differences among them. A new Personalized Medicine (PM) test developed by Vivia Biotech based on pharmacological responses in patient samples (ex vivo) is uncovering individual responses to these treatments. Our objective is to explore whether a significant % of individual patients may respond differently to IDA vs DNR vs MIT treatments, in spite that of their “on average” similar response shown by clinical trials. Patients and Methods Multicenter, prospective, non-interventional study of the PETHEMA group for treatment of AML. Bone Marrow (BM) samples were collected at diagnosis for 160 AML patients. Samples were incubated for 48 hours in 96-well plates, each well containing different drugs or drug combinations, each at 8 different concentrations, enabling calculation of dose response curves for each single drug (CYT, IDA, DNR, MIT) and combination used in treatments (CYT-IDA, CYT-DNR, CYT-MIT). Drug response was evaluated as depletion of AML malignant cells in each well after 48 hours incubations. Annexin V-FITC was used to quantify the ability of the drugs to induce apoptosis. Malignant cells were identified with monoclonal antibodies and light scatter properties. 1) We use the whole bone marrow sample, retaining the erythrocyte population and serum proteins, during the entire incubation period; and after 48 h leukocytes are isolated prior to evaluation by flow cytometry. 2) We have pioneered development of a proprietary automated flow cytometry platform called ExviTech. 3) Pharmacological responses are calculated using pharmacokinetic population models. Results Figure left panel shows dose responses for both IDA (red) and DNR (blue) in 125 AML patient samples. Although their average curves (thick red & blue) are similar, the interpatient variability of either drug is quite large. We hypothesized that some patients could show very differential sensitivities to both drugs, as illustrated by the green arrow where a patient sample is resistant to DNR (right shifted dose response curve) but sensitive to IDA (left shifted dose response curve). To identify these cases Figure right panel shows a comparison of the potency IDA vs DNR. Potency is represented by their EC50 (concentration that kills 50% of the cells). Most dots tend to line up, but red dots represent patient samples with a difference in potency between these drugs 〉30%. Repeating this exercise for IDA-MIT and DNR-MIT to cover all alternatives among the 3 anthracyclines identifies 40% of patients samples with 〉30% different potency among IDA-DNR-MIT. Repeating this exercise with the combination treatments CYT-IDA, CYT-DNR, CYT-MIT increases to 58% the population of patients whose samples have a differential sensitivity to these anthracyclines. A fraction of this 57% of patients may benefit in if treatment selection among these 3 treatments were to be aided by this ex vivo testing sensitivities. To identify which fraction would benefit we would need a trial specifically designed. Conclusions This preliminary results show that Vivia's PM test seems able to identify a subset of AML patients who's ex vivo pharmacological response to anthracycline drugs is significantly different. Because this ex vivo test accurately predicts the clinical response to CYT-IDA, if these selective anthracycline ex vivo responses translate to clinical responses, a fraction of this 57% subpopulation could benefit significantly from receiving 1st or 2nd line treatments based on either IDA, DNR, MIT, and their combinations. Hence this approach stands for European integration of treatment protocols, based on ex vivo individual responses data rather than nationality. Disclosures: Primo: Vivia Biotech: Employment. Hernandez-Campo:Vivia Biotech: Employment. Rojas:Vivia Biotech: Employment. Bennett:Vivia Biotech: Employment. Liebana:Vivia Biotech: Employment. Lopez:Vivia Biotech: Employment. Ballesteros:Vivia Biotech: Equity Ownership.

Description: Background and objectives Complete remission (CR) after induction therapy is the first treatment goal in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients. The aim of this study is to determine the ability of the Vivia’s novel ex vivo drug sensitivity platform Exvitech analyzing leukemic cell death to predict the CR rates after induction chemotherapy with cytarabine (Ara-C) and idarubicin (Ida) in 1st line AML. Patients and Methods This non-interventional and prospective study included samples from adult patients over 18 years of age diagnosed with de novo AML in Spanish centers from the PETHEMA group. Marrow samples were collected at diagnosis, sent to the Vivia laboratories, and incubated for 48 hours in whole samples in well plates containing Ara-C, Ida, or the combination Ara-C+Ida, each at 8 different concentrations to calculate dose responses. Annexin V-FITC was used to quantify the drug-induced apoptosis. Pharmacological responses are calculated using pharmacokinetic population models. Induction response was assessed according to the Cheson criteria (2003). Patients attaining a CR/CRi were classified as responders. The remaining patients were considered as resistant. Patients dying during induction response assessment were non-evaluable. The correlation was modeled using a generalized additive model with a logit link and a binomial distribution for residuals. Kernel density estimates were then used to plot empirical probability density functions for both groups. Their separation was quantified as the area under the ROC curve and a cut point was selected using the Youden’s criteria to optimize the classification probabilities (sensitivity, specificity). 95% confidence intervals for sampling errors were calculated for all these quantifiers. Results 125 patient samples were used to calculate the dose response curves for Ara-C alone, Ida alone, and the synergism of the Ara-C plus Ida combination. For clinical correlation we used 64 patients with a median age of 55 years (range 31 to 72). Dose responses for Ara-C alone are shown in Figure 1.A; note that for many samples there is a significant number (〉20%) of resistant cells to Ara-C (bracket). This is a strong clinical predictor of resistance because in the patient the drug will never be present at these high doses for 48 h. The second variable that is a good predictor of response is the synergism between these 2 drugs. The generalized additive model identified an algebraic combination of these 2 variables that yielded the best marker to separate both groups of patients. The probability density functions had minimal overlap. The area under the corresponding ROC curve was 0.965 (0.928, 1.000), and the classification probabilities for the optimal cut point (set at 0.414 for the marker), expressed as percentages, were 85% (62.1% to 96.8%) and 86.4% (72.6% to 94.8%) for sensitivity and specificity, respectively. Results are shown in Figure 1.B; Forty-four patients (68.8%) achieved CR after Ida+Ara-C, and the remaining 20 (31.3%) were resistant. Correlations of the PM test are shown in Figure 1.B. Seventeen of the 20 (85%) patients who fail to achieve CR were predicted as resistance in the ex vivo test. Thirty-eight of the 44 patients (86.4%) who achieved CR showed good ex vivo sensitivity to Ida+Ara-C predicting for CR. When the ex vivo test predicted a patient as sensitive it was correct in 38/39 cases (93%), and when it predicted resistant it was correct 17/23 cases (74%). Overall, 45 patients (86%) had an accurate prediction of their response to treatment. Conclusions This study shows that this novel ex vivo pharmacological profile test is able to predict the clinical response to Ida+Ara-C induction. We are increasing the number of patients in this ongoing study, and we are planning a PM Test-adapted Clinical Trial. Disclosures: Martínez: Vivia Biotech: Employment. Ortega:Vivia Biotech: Employment. Primo:Vivia Biotech: Employment. Hernandez-Campo:Vivia Biotech: Employment. Rojas:Vivia Biotech: Employment. Bennett:Vivia Biotech: Employment. Liebana:Vivia Biotech: Employment. Lopez:Vivia Biotech: Employment. Ballesteros:Vivia Biotech: Equity Ownership.

Description: Background: MM usually affects elderly patients and although novel agents-based combinations have substantially improved MM outcome, it is possible that this benefit would be particularly relevant for the "youngest-elderly" patients (65-80y). According to the frailty score published by IMWG, the chronological age ≥80 years identifies itself a frail patient population with poor outcome and we have here evaluated the efficacy, safety and outcome of patients included in the GEM2010 trial according to the age to identify the group of patients who benefit most of this total therapy approach. Patients and methods: 242 patients were randomized to receive a sequential scheme consisting on 9 cycles of VMP followed by 9 cycles of Rd or the same regimens in an alternating approach (one cycle of VMP alternating with one Rd, up to 18 cycles. VMP included the iv administration of weekly bortezomib (except in the first cycle that was given twice weekly) at 1.3 mg/m2 in combination with oral melphalan 9 mg/m2 and prednisone 60 mg/m2 once daily on days 1-4. Rd treatment consisted on lenalidomide 25 mg daily on days 1-21 plus dexamethasone 40 mg weekly. Results: 233 pts were evaluable for safety and efficacy (118 in the sequential and 115 in the alternating arm). One hundred and fifteen patients (49%) were between 65-75 years, 69 patients (30%) were aged between 75-80 years and 49 patients (21%) were older than 80 years. The allocation in both sequential and alternating arms was well balanced. There were not significant differences in the baseline characteristics of the three subgroups of patients. The ORR was similar in both patients aged 65-75 and 75-80 (80% and 83%), but significantly lower in patients older than 80 years (68%) (p=0.007). The CR rate was also almost identical in patients between 65-75 (45%) and 75-80 (49%), but significantly lower in those aged over 80 years (10%) (p

Description: Background To aid in the identification of effective treatments for individual patients, ex vivo assays for detecting cell death inducible by drugs for hematological malignancies have been in development for over 20 years. We have developed a novel approach incorporating 4 key innovations; incubating drugs in whole bone marrow sample without isolating leukocytes, using flow cytometry enables identification of the malignant cells selectively, an automated flow cytometry-based platform (ExviTech) decreases errors and enables full pharmacological characterization, and analyzing the data using pharmacodynamic population models. Aim The purpose of this study is to derive the ex vivo pharmacological profiles across the AML patient population of single drugs and combination treatments as a tool for individualized treatment selection. Patients and Methods Bone-marrow samples from 160 patients diagnosed with AML were sent to Vivia from 24 hospitals across Spain within 24 hrs. The plates were incubated for 48-hours prior to analysis with ExviTech, The percentage of leukemic cell death was determined via labeling with monoclonal antibodies and AnnexinV-FITC. A survival index is computed for each drug, the lower the survival index, the more effective the drug. Dose-response curves of cytarabine, idarubicin, daunorubicine, etoposide, mitoxantrone, fludarabine, clofarabine, and 6-thioguanine were measured in 160 patient samples. The added benefit of combining these drugs into 12 combination treatments was assessed by measuring their synergy in each individual patient. In 39 patients treated with CYT IDA we had clinical data of response, and then we performed a blinded interpretation of this in vitro test by an expert hematologist, to predict the clinical response based in this test result. Results There was a large range of interpatient variability in the response to a single drug and even larger in the synergism between drugs. The Population Pharmacological Profiles for an individual patient is shown on the figure below. The relative drug potency in terms of their percentile ranking within the population is shown in the left panel from 0 (weakest) to 100 (most potent). Green lines represent the individual patient potency relative to the population ranking, with confidence intervals. Third column lists when a drug leaves a significant % of leukemic cells alive, potential resistant clones. The panel on the right side shows the synergism of the drug combinations treatments shown as box-plots at 10-25-75-90% to highlight their distribution. The synergism value for an individual patient in each combination is shown in green, with confidence interval as parallel dotted green lines. This representation of the Pharmacological Profile of an individual patient sample quickly identifies extreme values, when a drug or combination is very sensitive (rightward shift green lines, green boxes) or very resistant (leftward shift green lines, red boxes). This patient showed average sensitivities for most drugs though highly resistant to Clofarabine (red box) that leaves 45% alive. However this patient showed lack of synergism in multiple treatments (right, red boxes). CYT and IDA show average potencies but lack of synergism, suggesting CYT-DAU might be a more efficient treatment. These representations lead to clear guidelines in 〉90% samples, and based on hematologist's interpretation of these guidelines show a clinical correlation with clinical responses to CYT-IDA of 84%. Conclusion We have developed an improved a methodology to measure the pharmacological activity of drugs and drug combinations in AML patient samples as well as modeling their pharmacological behavior. This information may be useful in selecting the optimal treatment for the individual patient, especially relapse/refractory patients in need of therapeutic alternatives. By testing the drugs used in the treatment protocols for AML directly on patient samples, a pharmacological based model has been developed to infer drug resistance or sensitivity, patient by patient. Disclosures: Ballesteros: Vivia Biotech: Equity Ownership. Primo:Vivia Biotech: Employment. Hernandez-Campo:Vivia Biotech: Employment. Rojas:Vivia Biotech: Employment. Liebana:Vivia Biotech: Employment. Lopez:Vivia Biotech: Employment. Iñaki:Vivia Biotech: Consultancy. Bennett:Vivia Biotech: Employment.

Description: Background: Survival of DLBCL patients with high IPI treated with RCHOP immunochemotherapy is poor. In this population, the combination of RCHOP with new drugs is an attractive approach, along with performing an evaluation with PET/CT after 2 to 4 cycles to change the therapy if an early complete response is not achieved. Methods : We performed a clinical trial comparing 6 cycles of RCHOP vs 6 cycles of BRCAP, a modified RCHOP regimen changing vincristine by bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2 sc days 1, 8, and 15 of a 21-day cycle. Pre-phase therapy was permitted for patients who could not wait the results of the screening procedures to start therapy due to the aggressiveness of the disease. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01848132). Patients younger than 71 yrs diagnosed with DLBCL and an age-adjusted IPI (aaIPI) 2-3 or aaIPI 1 with increased beta2microglobulin were eligible. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who survives free of event at 2 years. Centralized anatomopathology review was performed in all cases; samples were classified as germinal center B-cell-like (GCB) vs non-GCB subtypes by immunohistochemistry according to the Hans algorithm. PET/CTs were performed baseline, after 2, 4 and 6 cycles (PET2, PET4, and PET6), and were reviewed at real time by at least 3 experts of a central panel. Response at the end of therapy was analyzed following the visual method with the Deauville scale, and response after PET2 and PET4 was evaluated using the semiquantitative method. Persistent disease at PET4 was considered as failure of therapy and these patients were removed from trial treatment. EFS was calculated from diagnosis until event defined as death from any cause, relapse, progression or need of salvage therapy (defined as PET4 or PET6 positive). Overall survival (OS) was calculated from diagnosis until death for any cause. We present here a preliminary analysis of results. Results: One hundred and twenty-one patients were included; data on 113 are presented (diagnosis not confirmed in 6, data missing in 2). Median age was 57.1 yrs (range 23-70), 57 (50.4%) were males. Characteristics at diagnosis were: non-GCB subtype 32/87 (36.8%), immunohistochemical co-expression of myc/bcl2 56/82 (77.8%), stage III-IV 107 (94.7%), ≥2 extranodal locations 55/76 (72.5%), ECOG 2-3 36 (32.1%), increased LDH 88 (77.9%), increased beta 2 microglobulin 73 (64.6%), aaIPI 3: 32 (28.3%). No differences were found between treatment arms. Fifty-five patients were treated in the experimental arm (EA) and 58 in the control arm (CA). Twenty-eight (28.3%) out of 99 patients required of pre-phase treatment. The mean relative dose intensity for bortezomib was 88.3%. Data about the most frequent toxicity are shown in table 1. Twenty-nine (30.2%) out of 96 patients who have finished 4 cycles had a positive PET4 according to central review and were withdrawn to receive salvage therapy. Complete remission (CR) at the end of therapy (PET4-/PET6-) was observed in 44 (45.8%) patients. After a median follow-up of 9 months, estimated 12-mo EFS was 36.6%, and 12-mo OS was 82.9% in the whole series. Data of the subgroup analysis according the immunohistochemistry subtypes by Hans algorithm are show in table 2. Conclusions: In the present preliminary analysis, no significant differences were found between RCHOP and BRCAP in terms of CR and EFS in this very high-risk population of young DLBCL patients. However, in the subgroup analysis of patients with non-GCB disease, we found a significantly better CR rate in patients treated with BRCAP. A longer follow-up is needed to evaluate the real impact of this therapy on survival. Disclosures González-Barca: Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Honoraria; Servier: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Honoraria. Martín:Sevier: 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; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Sancho:Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celltrion, Inc: Research Funding; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. López-Jiménez:Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Velgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: 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; MSD: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MundiPharma: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. López-Guillermo:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MundiPharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Ramírez:Bristol-Myers-Squibb: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Conde:Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Honoraria; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.