ALBERT

Description: Background: Extramedullary disease (EMD), strictly defined as an infiltrate of clonal plasma cells at an anatomic site distant from the bone marrow or adjacent soft tissue in a patient with underlying multiple myeloma, is an uncommon manifestation of multiple myeloma. Comparatively little is known about this disease entity, with no large case series published in the last decade. Patients and Methods: 663 consecutive patients with multiple myeloma who underwent autologous or allogeneic stem cell transplantation at a single, large, academic medical center in the United States from January 2005 to December 2011 were assessed for the presence or absence of EMD, as well as baseline demographic and biochemical characteristics, treatment regimens, and response to therapy. Results: A cohort of 55 patients with biopsy-proven EMD was identified, comprising 8.3% of the total study population. Among the patients with EMD, 13 (23.6%) were found to have EMD at the time of initial presentation, while the remainder developed EMD during the course of their illness. Patients with EMD received a median of 5 different treatment regimens during the course of their illness, most commonly with combinations of dexamethasone, thalidomide, lenalidomide, and bortezomib, as well as autologous hemotopoietic stem cell transplantation. Patients had received a median of 3 lines of therapy prior to experiencing an extramedullary relapse. Patients with EMD had markedly elevated maximum serum LDH levels (median 613.5 units/L) and low minimum hemoglobin levels (median 7.8 g/dL). Common cytogenetic abnormalities included deletion 13q, deletion 11q, t(11;14), and deletion 17p. Available immunohistochemical data suggest that EMD specimens had frequent expression of CXCR4, CD44, and CD56. The median overall survival data of these patients was 3.2 years (range, 0.9-9.5) and the median time from diagnosis of EMD to death was 0.5 years (range, 0.002-3.2). Conclusions: This report describes a large series of multiple myeloma patients with EMD who were treated in the era of stem cell transplant at a single academic medical center. Further studies to examine the molecular characteristics of extramedullary multiple myeloma are necessary to better define this entity and characterize therapeutic options that can prolong survival in this otherwise very vulnerable population. Disclosures Ghobrial: Millennium/Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Onyx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Laubach:Novartis: Research Funding; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Schlossman:Millennium: Consultancy. Mitsiades:Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Research Funding; Johnson & Johnson: Research Funding; DFCI: patent submission on stromal co-culture technologies Patents & Royalties.

Description: Key Points Benefit from panobinostat-dexamethasone-bortezomib was greatest in patients who received ≥2 prior regimens including bortezomib and IMiDs.

Description: Abstract 990 Introduction: This study aimed to determine activity and safety of weekly bortezomib (Takeda Inc) and temsirolimus (Pfizer Inc) in patients with relapsed/refractory Multiple Myeloma (MM). Methods: Eligibility criteria included: 1) patients with relapsed or relapsed/refractory MM with any prior lines of therapy including bortezomib, 2) no chemotherapy within 3 weeks, or biological/novel therapy within 2 weeks. Primary endpoint was the percent of patients with at least a minimal response (MR). Results: Twenty patients were enrolled on the phase I study and 43 on the phase II study. The MTD was determined at 1.6 mg/m2 bortezomib Days 1, 8, 15, and 22 every 35 days in combination with 25 mg IV temsirolimus Days 1, 8, 15, 22, and 29 every 35 days. Twenty % were stage III by ISS staging system in the phase I, and 21% in the phase II. The overall response rate of MR or better in the Phase II study was 20/43 (47%, 95%CI: 33,60), with 5% CR, 9% VGPR, 19% PR and 14% MR. Progression without any response occurred in just 1 patient (3%). One patient had an unconfirmed PR, but was included in the stable disease category. An additional 3 (6%) patients were unevaluable in the phase II trial because they did not complete their first cycle of therapy and had no follow up laboratory results for response. If these patients are excluded, the ORR including MR improves to 50% (95% CI: 36,64). The overall response rate in the phase I study was 20% with responses occurring in all the stages of the dose escalation. If three patients who were unevaluable in the phase I trial are excluded, then the response rate of evaluable phase I patients is 24% (95% CI: 9,46). Response was also evaluated by whether patients were bortezomib-refractory or not. These were defined as progressing while on therapy or progressing within 60 days of completing bortezomib therapy. Fifty-one patients had received bortezomib as part of prior treatment. Of these patients, 32 were refractory to bortezomib therapy immediately prior to study entry, and an additional 2 pts were refractory at prior time points. Responses observed among the 32 patients refractory to their most recent bortezomib therapy include 3 PR and 3 MR (ORR: 19%, 95% CI: 9,34). Another 21 patients had SD, 2 PD and 3 patients were unevaluable. Of the evaluable patients, the ORR was 6/29 (21%). Responses observed among the 19 patients who were not refractory to their last bortezomib treatment include 2 VGPR, 5 PR and 3 MR with 6 patients with SD, 0 PD and 3 unevaluable. The ORR among the evaluable patients who received bortezomib but were not refractory was 62%. Median time to response of MR or better (min, max) among all patients was 1.7 months (0.5,14.2) and among phase II patients 1.3 months (0.5,8.0). Median duration of MR or better (min, max) among all patients is 5.2 months (0.5,15.8) and among phase II patients is 4.6 months (0.5,10.8). Median duration of PR or better response (min, max) among all patients is 6.0 months (1.8,15.8) and among phase II patients is 5.2 months (1.8,10.8). The median time to progression for all patients in the phase I and II studies was 7.3 months (95% CI: 5.7 –17.2) and the median progression free survival was 6.4 months (95% CI: 4.8–7.4). The median overall survival in all phase I and II patients was 11.4 months (95%CI: 8.6-undetermined). Three deaths occurred during therapy in the phase I and II studies, 1 of septic shock, 1 with H1N1 infection, and 1 with cardiac amyloid and ventricular arrhythmia. The most common G1-4 toxicities that occurred in 〉 25% of patients included cytopenias, hypertrigyceridemia and diarrhea. Grade 3 and 4 thrombocytopenia occurred in 48% of patients in the phase I and II studies, G3 and 4 neutropenia occurred in 36%, and anemia in 26% of phase I and II patients. G3 and 4 hypertriglyceridemia occurred in 5% and diarrhea in 9%. Peripheral neuropathy (PN) was rare with no G3 or 4 neuropathy reported. Overall, there was 34% grade 1 and 2 PN seen. Conclusions: The combination of weekly bortezomib and temsirolimus showed an encouraging response rate in heavily pretreated patients with relapsed or refractory MM, with an overall response rate in evaluable patients as part of the phase II portion of the trial of 50%, and a 21% ORR including MR or better in evaluable bortezomib refractory patients. Cytopenias were the most common toxicities, specifically thrombocytopenia, as well as GI toxicity, with side effects proving manageable. Significant PN was rare in this study. Disclosures: Ghobrial: Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Vij:Novartis: Honoraria; Eisai: Speakers Bureau. Munshi:Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Jakubowiak:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Centocor Ortho Biotech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Exelixis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Anderson:Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Richardson:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millenium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Description: Background: Bortezomib (VELCADE®, Bz) is approved for the treatment of patients (pts) with multiple myeloma (MM). Lenalidomide (Revlimid®, Len) plus dexamethasone (Dex) is approved for the treatment of relapsed MM pts following ≥1 prior therapy. Len/Bz±Dex is active and well tolerated in relapsed/refractory MM, and Len/Dex and Bz/Dex are active in front-line MM. The aims of this phase l/ll study were to determine the maximum tolerated dose of Len/Bz/Dex (RVD) and to assess safety and efficacy in previously untreated MM pts. Methods: Pts received Len 15–25 mg on days 1–14, Bz 1.0–1.3 mg/m2 on days 1, 4, 8, 11, and Dex 40/20 mg (cycles 1–4/5–8) on days 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, 12, for up to eight 21-day cycles, initially at four planned dose levels (Len/Bz: 15/1.0, 15/1.3, 20/1.3, 25/1.3). Dose-escalation proceeded (three-pt cohorts) depending on dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs; Grade (G) ≥3 non-hematologic toxicity; G4 thrombocytopenia with platelets 1 occasion despite transfusion support; G4 neutropenia for 〉5 days and/or resulting in neutropenic fever; inability to receive cycle 2/day 1 dose due to drug-related toxicity). Based on safety data, dose level 4M (Len/Bz 25/1.3) was added with a reduced Dex (20/10 mg) starting dose. Pts with G≥2 peripheral neuropathy (PNY) were excluded. Responses were assessed by modified European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) and Uniform Criteria. Pts with at least partial response (≥PR) could proceed to autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) after ≥4 cycles. Results: 68 pts have been enrolled to date: 33 in phase l, including 17 pts at the maximum planned dose (MPD, dose level 4M) and 35 in phase ll (at MPD). Data are available for 66 pts (median age 58 yrs, 55% men, 67% IgG MM, 50% with ISS stage II/III). Pts have received a median of 10 cycles; 46 have completed all 8 cycles, 39 have discontinued/completed therapy. Two DLTs of G3 hyperglycemia due to high-dose Dex were seen at dose level 4. Dose reductions in cycle 2 and beyond have occurred in overall/dose levels 1–4 for: Len 16/8 pts, Bz 23/8 pts, and Dex 19/15 pts. Toxicities to date have been manageable, including all G3/4 hematological toxicities (3–15%), G3 hypophosphatemia (8%) and deep vein thrombosis/pulmonary embolism (5%, with daily aspirin), with no G4 PNY, and no treatment-related mortality. The overall response rate (ORR; ≥ PR) is 98%, including 71% ≥ VGPR and 36% CR/nCR; at MPD, ORR is 100%. Efficacy was independent of baseline cytogenetics or ISS stage (Table). ORR and ≥ VGPR rates were similar regardless of the absence or presence of deletion 13q or translocation 4;14; ORR rates ranged from 86% to 100% and ≥ VGPR rates ranged from 57% to 75%. Pts from all three ISS categories achieved ORR ranging from 97% to 100% and ≥ VGPR ranging from 51% to 80%; of note, the 10 pts with ISS stage III disease had an ORR of 100% and ≥ VGPR rate of 80%. Median stem cell collection in 21/23 pts was 6.2 × 106 CD34+ cells/kg after a median of 6 cycles of therapy; 15 pts have proceeded to ASCT, with the transplant course in each case reported as unremarkable. Two of 23 pts (9%) have had difficulty with mobilization. After a median follow-up of 8 months, median time to progression, progression-free survival, and overall survival have not been reached. Conclusions: RVD produces high quality responses and is well tolerated in newly diagnosed MM pts, regardless of their cytogenetic status or ISS stage. MPD has been reached at Len 25 mg, Bz 1.3 mg/m2, and Dex 20 mg, with phase ll enrollment now complete and 100% ORR reported at the MPD. Stem cell mobilization has been successful in almost all pts, with transplant course in pts otherwise unremarkable. Updated efficacy and ASCT data will be presented at the meeting. Responses by cytogenetic status (normal, abnormal [deletion 13q or t(4;14)]), and ISS stage Normal Abnormal No Del 13q With Del 13q No t(4;14) With t(4;14) * pts with available data n* (63) 39 24 52 7 49 10 ≥ PR 100% 96% 100% 86% 98% 100% P 0.381 0.119 1.00 ≥ VGPR 69% 79% 75% 57% 73% 70% P 0.560 0.375 1.00 ISS I ISS II ISS III n* (64) 33 21 10 ≥ PR 97% 100% 100% P 0.385 ≥ VGPR 51% 57% 80% P 0.421

Description: Abstract 3051 Background: Lenalidomide (Revlimid®, Len) plus dexamethasone (Dex) is approved for the treatment of relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (MM) patients following ≥1 prior therapy. RAD001, an mTOR inhibitor has been studied as a single agent in MM, and although well tolerated, did not have single agent activity. Informed by our previous studies demonstrating synergistic anti-MM activity of mTOR inhibitors when combined with Len, we studied this combination to evaluate its safety and activity as a non-steroid containing oral regimen in advanced MM. Methods: Patients with relapsed and refractory MM were assigned to Len and RAD001 to be taken for 21 days of a 28 day cycle (NCT00729638) in a standard 3+3 design. Patients were allowed to continue therapy until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity and were required to receive concomitant anti-thrombotic (aspirin 81 or 325 mg/day) therapy. Peripheral blood and bone marrow samples were collected before and after treatment for pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic studies. Results: Twenty-eight patients were registered on the trial between December 2008-December 2009. Two patients were inevaluable because of either rapidly progressive disease or failure to meet eligibility criteria on day 1. Data on 26 patients are therefore available. Pts had received a median of 4 prior lines of treatment.14 pts had received Len previously of which 11 pts had relapsed disease and 3 pts had relapsed/refractory disease. Both cohort 1 (Len: 10mg/day and RAD001: 5mg/every other day ×21 days of 28 day cycle) and 2 (Len: 15mg/day and RAD001: 5mg daily ×21 days of 28 day cycle) required expansion because of grade 3 neutropenia and grade 4 thrombocytopenia. Dose limiting toxicities included grade 4 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia in 2/3 patients in cohort 3 (Len: 20mg and RAD001: 5 mg × 21 days). The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was therefore declared at 15 mg of len and 5mg of RAD001 for 21 days with a 7 day rest period. Most common (≥10%) Grade 1/2 events included nausea, fatigue, dyspnea, diarrhea, constipation, neuropathy and muscle cramps, all of which proved manageable with supportive care. One patient developed RAD related non-infectious pneumonitis requiring therapy discontinuation. Grade 3/4 adverse events (≥ 5%) included thrombocytopenia (11%) and neutropenia (22%). Nineteen patients completed 2 cycles and were evaluable for response. Median follow up is currently 8.7 months and median PFS is 4.3 months, with 12 patients receiving treatment at MTD. Overall response rate was 68% (13/19) (90% CI: [30-76%]) including CR(1) PR(2), MR(8) and SD(2). Four patients continue on the combination at 13, 14, 15 and 17 months respectively. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic data including immunohistochemistry for phosphorylated AKT, cytokine profiles, T cell subsets and transcription profile on MM cell pre and post treatment as well as correlation of response with pharmacodynamic studies will be presented. Conclusions: The combination of Len plus RAD001 is a well tolerated regimen with predictable hematological toxicities. Promising responses were noted in this heavily pretreated patient population with advanced MM. This combination thus provides an oral steroid free combination treatment strategy which warrants future evaluation in phase II studies. Disclosures: Richardson: Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millenium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Ghobrial:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Adams:Novartis: Employment. Makrides:Celgene: Employment. Munshi:Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Anderson:Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Raje:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy; Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; Acetylon: Research Funding; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Off Label Use: Lenalidomide and RAD 001 for treatment of relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma.

Description: Atiprimod (N-N-diethl-8, 8-dipropyl-2-azaspiro [4,5] decane-2-propanamine) is an orally bioavailable cationic amphilic compound that inhibited STAT 3 activation in MM cells. It effectively blocked the signaling pathway of interleukin-6, resulting in activation of caspase 3 and apoptosis (Amit-Vazina et al, Br J Cancer, 2005). Atiprimod has also induced cytotoxicity in dexamethasone, doxorubicin, and melphalan resistant MM cell lines (Hamasaki et al, Blood, 2005). Based on these encouraging in vitro data, we initiated a multi-center, phase I trial of atiprimod for patients (pts) with refractory or relapsed MM who had 2 prior lines of therapy and serum creatinine less than 2 mg/dl. Primary objectives were to evaluate the safety of atiprimod in MM pts and to identify the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). Each cycle of treatment consisted of 14 consecutive days of oral atiprimod followed by 14 consecutive days without treatment. A standard phase I dose escalation was used to determine MTD with atiprimod dose levels at 30 mg, 60 mg, 90 mg, 120 mg, and 180 mg. To date, 14 pts from 4 centers have been enrolled with evaluable data in 12 patients. Median age was 60 (range 44–64); median prior lines of therapy were 4 (range 3–7); median duration from initial treatment to registration to this trial was 36 months (range 19–76). Cohorts of 3 patients have been treated at 30, 60, 90,120 mg/day and 2 patients have been enrolled at the 180 mg/day level; no cohorts have been expanded because of dose-limiting toxicity. Median number of cycles received by MM pts was 2 (range 1–5). Common Grade 1 toxicity events included diarrhea, liver enzyme elevation and dyspepsia. There were two Grade 2 toxicity events with 1 neutropenia at the 90 mg/day level and 1 diarrhea at the 120 mg/day level. One pt had Grade 3 transaminase elevation (peak AST 402, ALT 469 units/L, bilirubin 0.5 mg/dl) during the second cycle that resolved on its own during the 14 day period off treatment. Two patients with rapidly rising serum M proteins prior to enrollment had a transient but clear reduction of their M proteins (30% and 80%) after the first 14 days of atiprimod. Two pts at higher dose levels noted subjective improvement in their bone pain. Atiprimod was generally well tolerated in this heavily treated group of MM pts. The MTD has not been reached. Although there has been no response to date, clinical activity is not expected until higher dose levels are evaluated (240 mg/day, 300 mg/day, and 360 mg/day). After the MTD has been established, the study of atiprimod combinations should be considered based on the in vitro assessment of synergy with other active agents.

Description: Previous studies have shown that the multiple myeloma (MM) cell line and MM patient cells express high-affinity vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) receptor-1 or Fms-like tyrosine kinase-1 (Flt-1) but not VEGF receptor-2 or Flk-1/kinase insert domain-containing receptor (Flk-1/KDR) and that VEGF triggers MM cell proliferation through a mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK)-dependent pathway and migration through a protein kinase C (PKC)-dependent pathway. The present study evaluates the efficacy of the small molecule tyrosine-kinase inhibitor GW654652, which inhibits all 3 VEGF receptors with similar potency. We show that GW654652 acts directly on MM cells and in the bone marrow microenvironment. Specifically, GW654652 (1-10 μg/mL) inhibits, in a dose-dependent fashion, VEGF-triggered migrational activity and cell proliferation of MM cell lines that are sensitive and resistant to conventional therapy. As expected from our previous studies of VEGF-induced signaling and sequelae in MM cells, GW654652 blocked VEGF-induced Flt-1 phosphorylation and downstream activation of AKT-1 and MAPK-signaling cascades. Importantly, GW654652 also inhibits interleukin-6 and VEGF secretion and proliferation of MM cells induced by tumor cell binding to bone marrow (BM) stromal cells. The activity of a pan-VEGF receptor inhibitor against MM cells in the BM milieu, coupled with its lack of major toxicity in preclinical mouse models, provides the framework for clinical trials of this drug class to improve patient outcome in MM. (Blood. 2004;103:3474-3479)

Description: Introduction: Panobinostat is a potent pan-deacetylase inhibitor (pan-DACi) that targets key aberrations in multiple myeloma (MM) cell biology, including epigenetics and protein metabolism. In the phase 3 clinical trial PANORAMA 1, panobinostat in combination with bortezomib and dexamethasone (PAN-BTZ-Dex) led to a statistically significant and clinically relevant increase in progression-free survival of approximately 4 months compared with that with placebo plus bortezomib and dexamethasone (Pbo-BTZ-Dex). Further analyses of patient outcomes by prior treatment demonstrated that the magnitude of PFS benefit was greatest among patients who received at least 2 prior regimens, including bortezomib and an immunomodulatory drug (IMiD; PAN-BTZ-Dex [n = 73]: 12.5 months [95% CI, 7.3-14.0 months]; Pbo-BTZ-Dex [n = 74]: 4.7 months (95% CI, 3.7-6.1 mo; HR 0.47 [95% CI, 0.32-0.72]). These data supported the regulatory approvals of PAN-BTZ-Dex for the treatment of patients with multiple myeloma who received at least 2 prior regimens, including bortezomib and an IMiD. Here we present the final analysis of overall survival (OS) for the entire patient population and among patients who received at least 2 prior regimens, including bortezomib and an IMiD. Methods: The study design for the PANORAMA 1 trial was described previously (San-Miguel. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15:1195-206). The key secondary endpoint was OS. As of June 29, 2015, the 415 events required to conduct the final analysis of OS had been observed. Kaplan-Meier estimation was utilized for OS analyses for the entire population (N = 768), the pre-specified subgroup of patients who received prior bortezomib and IMiD (n = 193), and patients who received at least 2 prior regimens including bortezomib and an IMiD (n = 147). Results: The median OS of patients who received PAN-BTZ-Dex in the overall population was 40.3 months (95% CI, 35.0-44.8 months) vs 35.8 months (95% CI, 29.0-40.6 months) for the Pbo-BTZ-Dex arm with HR 0.94 [95% CI, 0.78-1.14], P = .5435 (Fig 1A). The percentage of patients in each arm who received post-study therapy was 37.7% in the PAN-BTZ-Dex arm and 48.8% in the Pbo-BTZ-Dex arm. The median OS of patients who received at least 2 prior lines, including bortezomib and an IMiD, was 25.5 months (95% CI, 19.6-34.3 months) in the PAN-BTZ-Dex arm vs 19.5 months (95% CI, 14.1-32.5 months) in the Pbo-BTZ-Dex arm (Fig. 1B). The proportion of patients in this subgroup who received post-study therapy was 35.6% in the PAN-BTZ-Dex arm and 66.2% in the Pbo-BTZ-Dex arm. Conclusion: For the overall PANORAMA 1 study population, patients in the PAN-BTZ-Dex arm demonstrated an increase in median OS of 4.5 months vs patients in the Pbo-BTZ-Dex arm, but this result was not statistically significant (P = .5435). Median OS was also slightly longer for the PAN-BTZ-Dex arm among the more heavily pretreated subgroup of patients who received at least 2 prior regimens, including bortezomib and an IMiD. A higher percentage of patients on the Pbo-BTZ-Dex arm received post-study therapy vs the PAN-BTZ-Dex arm, which may have confounded the OS results. In summary, PAN-BTZ-Dex demonstrates statistically significant increases in PFS vs Pbo-BTZ-Dex in patients with relapsed or relapsed and refractory MM; however, this did not translate to a statistically significant increase in OS. Future trials will plan to focus on further optimization of dose and schedule of panobinostat and bortezomib to improve outcome, as well as novel combinations with other agents, including IMiDs and next-generation proteasome inhibitors. Figure 2. Figure 2. Disclosures Beksac: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: 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; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Dimopoulos:Janssen: Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Onyx: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Genesis: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria. Jedrzejczak:Onconova: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Siritanaratkul:Pfizer: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Janssen-Cilag: Research Funding. Schlossman:Millennium: Consultancy. Hou:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Moreau:Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Lonial:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding. Sopala:Novartis Pharma: Employment, Equity Ownership. Bengoudifa:Novartis: Employment. Corrado:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Richardson:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Johnson & Johnson: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.