Abstract: The International Staging System (ISS) and the Revised International Staging System (R-ISS) are commonly used prognostic scores in multiple myeloma (MM). These methods have significant gaps, particularly among intermediate-risk groups. The aim of this study was to improve risk stratification in newly diagnosed MM patients using data from three different trials developed by the Spanish Myeloma Group. For this, we applied an unsupervised machine learning clusterization technique on a set of clinical, biochemical and cytogenetic variables, and we identified two novel clusters of patients with significantly different survival. The prognostic precision of this clusterization was superior to those of ISS and R-ISS scores, and appeared to be particularly useful to improve risk stratification among R-ISS 2 patients. Additionally, patients assigned to the low-risk cluster in the GEM05 over 65 years trial had a significant survival benefit when treated with VMP as compared with VTD. In conclusion, we describe a simple prognostic model for newly diagnosed MM whose predictions are independent of the ISS and R-ISS scores. Notably, the model is particularly useful in order to re-classify R-ISS score 2 patients in 2 different prognostic subgroups. The combination of ISS, R-ISS and unsupervised machine learning clusterization brings a promising approximation to improve MM risk stratification.

Abstract: Assessing measurable residual disease (MRD) has become standard with many tumors, but the clinical meaning of MRD in multiple myeloma (MM) remains uncertain, particularly when assessed by next-generation flow (NGF) cytometry. Thus, we aimed to determine the applicability and sensitivity of the flow MRD-negative criterion defined by the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG). PATIENTS AND METHODS In the PETHEMA/GEM2012MENOS65 trial, 458 patients with newly diagnosed MM had longitudinal assessment of MRD after six induction cycles with bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRD), autologous transplantation, and two consolidation courses with VRD. MRD was assessed in 1,100 bone marrow samples from 397 patients; the 61 patients without MRD data discontinued treatment during induction and were considered MRD positive for intent-to-treat analysis. The median limit of detection achieved by NGF was 2.9 × 10 −6 . Patients received maintenance (lenalidomide ± ixazomib) according to the companion PETHEMA/GEM2014MAIN trial. RESULTS Overall, 205 (45%) of 458 patients had undetectable MRD after consolidation, and only 14 of them (7%) have experienced progression thus far; seven of these 14 displayed extraosseous plasmacytomas at diagnosis and/or relapse. Using time-dependent analysis, patients with undetectable MRD had an 82% reduction in the risk of progression or death (hazard ratio, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.11 to 0.30; P 〈 .001) and an 88% reduction in the risk of death (hazard ratio, 0.12; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.29; P 〈 .001). Timing of undetectable MRD (after induction v intensification) had no impact on patient survival. Attaining undetectable MRD overcame poor prognostic features at diagnosis, including high-risk cytogenetics. By contrast, patients with Revised International Staging System III status and positive MRD had dismal progression-free and overall survivals (median, 14 and 17 months, respectively). Maintenance increased the rate of undetectable MRD by 17%. CONCLUSION The IMWG flow MRD-negative response criterion is highly applicable and sensitive to evaluate treatment efficacy in MM.

Abstract: Introduction : In patients (pts) with multiple myeloma (MM), next generation flow cytometry (NGF) and next generation sequencing have shown an increased capacity to identify the presence of disease and to anticipate patient's prognosis as compared to serum protein immunofixation (IFE). However, both methods rely on bone marrow (BM) samples and it is important to explore alternative techniques applicable in more accessible samples such as peripheral blood. Patients and Methods: Newly diagnosed MM pts enrolled in the PETHEMA/GEM2012MENOS65 trial received six cycles of induction with bortezomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone (VRD), intensification with high-dose therapy (melphalan or busulfan and melphalan) followed by autologous stem cell transplantation and consolidation with two more cycles of VRD. At the end of the treatment (post-consolidation), the M-protein (MP) was analyzed in serum by conventional IFE and by EXENT Quantitative Immunoprecipitation Mass Spectrometry using IgG/A/M, κ, λ, free κ and free λ isotypic beads; negative samples by EXENT were re-analyzed by liquid chromatography mass spectrometry (LC-MS). The presence of clonal plasma cells in BM samples was investigated by NGF following the Euroflow guidelines (sensitivity≥10 -5). Samples from the first 164 pts enrolled in the trial were analyzed in this study. Results : After consolidation, persistent disease was detected in 42 (26%) pts by IFE, in 56 (34%) by EXENT and in 72 (44%) by NGF. Surprisingly, the presence or absence of disease by IFE did not discriminate pts with different progression-free survival (PFS), but both EXENT and NGF segregated two cohorts with a significantly different PFS (p=0.0016 and p & lt;0.0001, respectively; fig1A and 1C). Importantly, we observed that among pts in complete response (IFE negative), EXENT and NGF also distinguished two groups with different PFS (p=0.002 and p=0.0001, respectively.) Analyzing the results obtained with EXENT and NGF, we found that 76% were concordant (44 EXENT +/NGF +, 80 EXENT -/NGF -) and 24% discordant (28 EXENT -/NGF + and 12 EXENT +/NGF -). When we compared pts´ PFS according the combined results of both methods (fig 1D), we learnt that the 3 comparisons reaching statistical significance were EXENT +/NGF + vs EXENT -/NGF - (p & lt;0.0001), EXENT +/NGF + vs EXENT +/NGF - (p=0.0394) and EXENT -/NGF - vs EXENT -/NGF + (p=0.0363). Considering NGF as a reference, the negative predictive value (NPV) of EXENT was 74% overall (96% in MRD levels ≥10 -4, p & lt;0.0001; 89% in & lt;10 -4 - ≥10 -5 p & lt;0.0001; and 84% in ≥10 -6 cases, p=0.0524). Samples deemed negative by EXENT were re-analyzed with LC-MS. In 63 of them (58%) the MP was identified using LC-MS and therefore a total of 119 samples (73%) were considered positive with EXENT & LC-MS. We first confirmed that EXENT & LC-MS segregated two cohorts with different PFS (fig 1B, p=0.0193) Then, as earlier, we analyzed the results obtained with EXENT & LC-MS and NGF, finding that 65% were concordant (67 EXENT & LC-MS +/NGF +, 40 EXENT & LC-MS -/NGF -) and 35% discordant (5 EXENT & LC-MS -/NGF + and 52 EXENT & LC +/NGF -). Again, we compared pts´ PFS according the combined results of both methods (fig 1E) learning now that only the comparisons EXENT & LC-MS +/NGF + vs EXENT & LC-MS -/NGF - (p=0.0006) and EXENT & LC-MS +/NGF + vsEXENT & LC-MS +/NGF - (p=0.0006) reached statistical significance. With these results, the NPV of EXENT & LC-MS was 89% overall (100% in MRD levels ≥10 -4 p & lt;0.0001; 100% in & lt;10 -4 - ≥10 -5 p & lt;0.0001; and 89% in ≥10 -6 cases p=0.0914). Finally, we observed that whereas among pts deemed EXENT +, NGF identified 2 cohorts with different PFS (a NGF -group of 12 pts displaying a longer PFS as compared with those NGF +; median PFS: 4 years vs not reached, p=0.039) among EXENT & LC-MS - cases (n=45) NGF was not able to show any added clinical value. Conclusions : The use of IFE post-consolidation in pts with MM, as opposed to EXENT and NGF, did not identify pts with different PFS. When referred to NGF, EXENT provided a similar clinical value and displayed a very high NPV, increased further with the addition of LC-MS; this could be utilised to avoid the performance of a BM aspiration after treatment in pts with undetectable disease. Regarding EXENT + and/or LC-MS + cases future quantitative and sequential studies could reveal whether are due to the long half-lives of the MP or represent quiescent low-level disease. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Puig: Amgen, Celgene, Janssen, Takeda and The Binding Site: Honoraria; Amgen, Celgene, Janssen, Takeda: Consultancy; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Celgene, Janssen, Amgen, Takeda: Research Funding. Paiva: Bristol-Myers Squibb-Celgene, Janssen, and Sanofi: Consultancy; Adaptive, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb-Celgene, Janssen, Kite Pharma, Sanofi and Takeda: Honoraria; Celgene, EngMab, Roche, Sanofi, Takeda: Research Funding. Cedena: Janssen, Celgene and Abbvie: Honoraria. Rosinol: Janssen, Celgene, Amgen and Takeda: Honoraria. Martínez-López: Roche, Novartis, Incyte, Astellas, BMS: Research Funding; Janssen, BMS, Novartis, Incyte, Roche, GSK, Pfizer: Consultancy. Oriol: Karyopharm: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncopeptides: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Sureda: Bluebird: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Support for attending meetings and/or travel, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Other: Support for attending meetings and/or travel; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Support for attending meetings and/or travel, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Mundipharma: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; MSD: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Moraleda: Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Educational Grants, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Educational Grants, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Educational Grants, Research Funding; Sandoz: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Educational Grants, Research Funding; ROCHE: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Educational Grants, Research Funding; MSD: Other: Educational Grants, Research Funding; Sanofi: Other: Educational Grants, Research Funding; Pfizer: Other: Educational Grants, Research Funding; NovoNordisk: Other: Educational Grants, Research Funding; Janssen: Other: Educational Grants, Research Funding; Celgene: Other: Educational Grants, Research Funding; Amgen: Other: Educational Grants, Research Funding. Bladé Creixenti: Janssen, Celgene, Takeda, Amgen and Oncopeptides: Honoraria. San-Miguel: AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Karyopharm, Merck Sharpe & Dohme, Novartis, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi, SecuraBio, and Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Mateos: Regeneron: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Honoraria; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncopeptides: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sea-Gen: 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; Celgene - Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: 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; Pfizer: 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; Bluebird bio: Honoraria; GSK: Honoraria; Oncopeptides: Honoraria.

Abstract: Background: Transplant-eligible MM patients are achieving unprecedented CR rates with frontline therapy. This urges the question about what other tests are informative upon a negative immunofixation (IFx-), as well as if patients with short duration CR continue having dismal survival with modern frontline plus salvage therapies and if so, how to predict risk of unsustained CR. Aim: To provide an optimal definition of unsustained CR and biomarkers to predict it in transplant-eligible MM patients treated with optimal therapy. Methods: A total of 262 patients enrolled in the PETHEMA/GEM2012MENOS65 trial and who were in CR after receiving six induction cycles of bortezomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone (VRD), autologous transplant and two consolidation cycles of VRD, were included in this study. Afterwards, patients were enrolled in the PETHEMA/GEM2014MAIN trial. Median follow-up of the series was 38 months after consolidation (53 months since diagnosis). Serum free light-chains (sFLC) were measured in 252 cases. MRD was assessment with next-generation flow (NGF) in 257 patients (median limit of detection of 2.8x10-6). FISH was performed in CD138-enriched plasma cells (PCs) from 223 patients at diagnosis [high-risk was defined by the presence of t(4;14), t(14;16) and/or del(17p)]. To understand the relationship between duration of CR and outcome, patients were segmented into 6-monht increments (range, 0 - 48 months) in time since response assessment after consolidation and loss of CR. Results: We first investigated what other tests commonly performed upon the achievement of IFx- were informative, particularly those employed to define stringent CR. The median percentage of PCs by morphology, at the time of IFx-, was 1.7% (range 0-5). Only 4 patients out of 266 (1.5%) with a negative immunofixation had & gt;5% BM PCs and therefore, were not classified as in CR. Almost one-fourth of patients in CR display an abnormal sFLC ratio (56/248, 23%), but their PFS was identical to that of cases with normal sFLC ratio (3 years-PFS rates of 70% vs 72%; P=.6). BM biopsies were not performed in this study to evaluate PC clonality by immunohistochemistry but we noted that in CR patients with persistent MRD, the median percentage of clonal and normal PCs among total PCs identified by NGF was of 3% and 97%, respectively. Thus, the median percentage of normal PCs is 24-fold greater than clonal PCs within the PC compartment, and therefore simple κ/λ ratios measured in ≥100 PCs are unable to detect such low-levels of residual disease. Indeed, persistent MRD was detectable by NGF in 73/252 (29%) CR patients at a median level of 0.03% (range 0.0002% - 0.59%), and resulted in significantly inferior PFS (3-year rates of 49% vs 83% in cases with persistent vs undetectable MRD, P & lt; .00001) and OS (3 years-PFS rates of 84% vs 95%; P=.001). Afterwards, we sought to identify the optimal landmark to define unsustained CR and to identify which biomarkers could identify patients at risk. A duration of CR of & lt;24 months emerged as optimal criteria to identify a numerically relevant subset of patients (39/262, 15%) with dismal OS (median of 48 months vs not reached in patients with duration of CR ≥24 months, P & lt; .00001). We then performed a logistic regression to identify biomarkers with independent value to predict unsustained CR. Elevated LDH levels (HR: 2.9 [1.1 - 8.0], P =.038) and & gt;20% PCs (HR: 2.8 [1.2 - 6.7], P =.020) at diagnosis together with persistent MRD (HR: 4.3 [1.9 - 9.6] , P & lt;.001) had independent value to predict unsustained CR in a multivariable analysis. Thus, a scoring system with the three parameters yielded significant stratification of patients in CR into favorable (no risk factors), intermediate (any risk factor) and dismal (all risk factors) PFS (3-year rates of 92%, 67% and 0%, respectively; P & lt;.0001; Figure 1) and OS (3-year rates of 99%, 90% and 83%, respectively; P=.001). Conclusions: This is the first study evaluating which baseline and response assessments are useful to stratify transplant-eligible patients with unsustained CR in the context of modern therapy; a simple model based on LDH levels and PC counts at diagnosis plus MRD status was identified and can be used broadly. These findings are clinically meaningful because patients with unsustained CR remain a high-risk population despite optimal therapy, and those at risk should be offered alternative treatment strategies before insurmountable disease progression occurs. Figure 1 Disclosures Paiva: SkylineDx: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Adaptive: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria; Kite: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Oriol:Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Sureda Balari:Roche: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead/Kite: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; Merck Sharpe and Dohme: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene/Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. de la Rubia:Janssen: Consultancy, Other: Expert Testimony; Amgen: Consultancy, Other: Expert Testimony; Celgene: Consultancy, Other: Expert Testimony; Ablynx/Sanofi: Consultancy, Other: Expert Testimony. Moraleda:Takeda: Consultancy, Other: Travel Expenses; Sandoz: Consultancy, Other: Travel Expenses; Novartis: Consultancy, Other: Travel Expenses; Gilead: Consultancy, Other: Travel Expenses; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding. Mateos:Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Regeneron: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: 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; 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; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncopeptides: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Adaptive: 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. San-Miguel:GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MSD: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Abstract: Infections remain a common complication in patients with multiple myeloma (MM) and are associated with morbidity and mortality. A risk score to predict the probability of early severe infection could help to identify the patients that would benefit from preventive measures. We undertook a post hoc analysis of infections in four clinical trials from the Spanish Myeloma Group, involving a total of 1347 patients (847 transplant candidates). Regarding the GEM2010  〉  65 trial, antibiotic prophylaxis was mandatory, so we excluded it from the final analysis. The incidence of severe infection episodes within the first 6 months was 13.8%, and majority of the patients experiencing the first episode before 4 months (11.1%). 1.2% of patients died because of infections within the first 6 months (1% before 4 months). Variables associated with increased risk of severe infection in the first 4 months included serum albumin ≤30 g/L, ECOG  〉  1, male sex, and non-IgA type MM. A simple risk score with these variables facilitated the identification of three risk groups with different probabilities of severe infection within the first 4 months: low-risk (score 0–2) 8.2%; intermediate-risk (score 3) 19.2%; and high-risk (score 4) 28.3%. Patients with intermediate/high risk could be candidates for prophylactic antibiotic therapies.

Abstract: Patients with multiple myeloma (MM) may show patchy bone marrow (BM) infiltration and extramedullary disease. Notwithstanding, quantification of plasma cells (PCs) continues to be performed in BM since the clinical translation of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) remains undefined. PATIENTS AND METHODS CTCs were measured in peripheral blood (PB) of 374 patients with newly diagnosed MM enrolled in the GEM2012MENOS65 and GEM2014MAIN trials. Treatment included bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone induction followed by autologous transplant, consolidation, and maintenance. Next-generation flow cytometry was used to evaluate CTCs in PB at diagnosis and measurable residual disease (MRD) in BM throughout treatment. RESULTS CTCs were detected in 92% (344 of 374) of patients with newly diagnosed MM. The correlation between the percentages of CTCs and BM PCs was modest. Increasing logarithmic percentages of CTCs were associated with inferior progression-free survival (PFS). A cutoff of 0.01% CTCs showed an independent prognostic value (hazard ratio: 2.02; 95% CI, 1.3 to 3.1; P = .001) in multivariable PFS analysis including the International Staging System, lactate dehydrogenase levels, and cytogenetics. The combination of the four prognostic factors significantly improved risk stratification. Outcomes according to the percentage of CTCs and depth of response to treatment showed that patients with undetectable CTCs had exceptional PFS regardless of complete remission and MRD status. In all other cases with detectable CTCs, only achieving MRD negativity (and not complete remission) demonstrated a statistically significant increase in PFS. CONCLUSION Evaluation of CTCs in PB outperformed quantification of BM PCs. The detection of ≥ 0.01% CTCs could be a new risk factor in novel staging systems for patients with transplant-eligible MM.

Abstract: Background: The broad use of immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs) and the breakthrough of novel immunotherapies in MM, urge the optimization of immune monitoring to help tailoring treatment based on better prediction of patients' response according to their immune status. For example, current T cells immune monitoring is of limited value because the phenotype of tumor-reactive T cells is uncertain. Aims: To characterize the MM immune microenvironment at the single-cell level and to identify clinically relevant subsets for effective immune monitoring. Methods: We used a semi-automated pipeline to unveil full cellular diversity based on unbiased clustering, in a large flow cytometry dataset of 86 newly-diagnosed MM patients enrolled in the PETHEMA/GEM2012MENOS65 clinical trial, including immune monitoring at diagnosis, after induction with bortezomib, lenalidomide, dexamethasone (VRD), autologous transplant and VRD consolidation. Immunophenotyping was performed using the first 8-color combination (CD19, CD27, CD38, CD45, CD56, CD81, CD117, CD138) of the next-generation flow (NGF) panel for MRD assessment. Results were then validated in additional 145 patients enrolled in the same trial. Deep characterization of T cells was performed using 17-color multidimensional flow cytometry (TIM3, CD160, TIGIT, CD57, CD8, PD1, CD45RA, CD56, BTLA, CD4, CD3, CD39, CD137, CTLA4, CCR7, CD16, CD27) and combined single-cell (sc) RNA/TCR sequencing (10xGenomics). Results: Simultaneous analysis of the entire dataset (n=333 files) unbiasedly identified 25 cell clusters (including 9 myeloid and 13 lymphocytes subsets) in the MM immune microenvironment. Afterwards, we correlated a total of 120 immune parameters derived from the cellular abundance of each cluster and specific cell ratios determined at all time points, with a total of 20 clinical parameters including the International Staging System (ISS) and FISH cytogenetics. Twelve variables had significant impact in progression-free survival (PFS) and the ratio between CD27- vs CD27+ T cells emerged as an independent prognostic factor (HR:0.09, p=0.04) together with the ISS in a Cox regression model. The 3-year PFS rates of patients with high vs low CD27-/CD27+ ratios were 94% vs 71% (p=0.02), respectively; these findings being confirmed in the validation dataset. Thus, we observed in the entire cohort (n=231) that a prognostic score including the CD27-/CD27+ T cell ratio (HR:0.21, p=0.013) and ISS (HR:1.41, p=0.015) outperformed each parameter alone (HR:0.06, p=0.007). To gain further insight into the biological significance of the CD27-/CD27+ T cell ratio, we performed scRNA/TCRseq in 44,969 lymphocytes from 9 MM patients. Downstream analysis unveiled that CD27- T cells were mostly CD8 and included senescent, effector and exhausted clusters. By contrast, CD27+ T cells were mainly CD4 and the remaining CD8 T cells had a predominant immune suppressive phenotype (ie. high GZMK, TIGIT, LAG3 and PD1 expression levels). Such T cell clustering was validated by 17-color multidimensional flow cytometry that confirmed the cellular distribution identified by scRNAseq, as well as higher reactivity for PD1, TIGIT, BTLA and TIM3 in CD27+ vs CD27- T cells. Simultaneous scTCRseq revealed a total of 90 different clonotypes (median of 12 per patient). Interestingly, most clonotypes where found in CD27- (74/90) as opposed to CD27+ T cells and, using the VDJB database, the CDR3 sequences of clonotypic effector/exhausted CD27- T cells were predicted to recognize MM-related epitopes such as MLANA, HM1.24 (CD319), TKT, or IMP2. In selected patients, we performed exome- and RNA-sequencing of tumor cells and analyzed their HLA profile. Using the T Cell Epitopes - MHC Binding Prediction tool from the IEDB Analysis Resource, we found expression of mutated genes (e.g. UBXN1, UPF2, GNB1L) predicted to bind MHC class I molecules on tumor cells and potentially recognized by autologous clonotypic CD27- T cells. Conclusion: We show for the first time that potential MM-reactive T cells are CD27-negative and that their abundance in the immune microenvironment of newly-diagnosed MM patients is prognostic, possibly due to their reactivation after treatment with IMiDs and autologous transplant. Because NGF is broadly used, these results are readily applicable for effective T cell immune monitoring. Disclosures Puig: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; The Binding Site: Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria. Rosinol Dachs:Janssen, Celgene, Amgen and Takeda: Honoraria. Oriol:Janssen: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Rios:Janssen: 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. Sureda:Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Support; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. De La Rubia:Takeda: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy; AMGEN: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy. Mateos:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Adaptive: Honoraria; EDO: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmamar: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GSK: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Lahuerta:Takeda, Amgen, Celgene and Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Bladé:Irctures: Honoraria; Janssen, Celgene, Amgen, Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. San-Miguel:Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, and Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria. Paiva:Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Roche, and Sanofi; unrestricted grants from Celgene, EngMab, Sanofi, and Takeda; and consultancy for Celgene, Janssen, and Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

Abstract: Granulocytic myeloid-derived suppressor cells (G-MDSCs) promote tumor growth and immunosuppression in multiple myeloma (MM). However, their phenotype is not well established for accurate monitoring or clinical translation. We aimed to provide the phenotypic profile of G-MDSCs based on their prognostic significance in MM, immunosuppressive potential, and molecular program. The preestablished phenotype of G-MDSCs was evaluated in bone marrow samples from controls and MM patients using multidimensional flow cytometry; surprisingly, we found that CD11b+CD14−CD15+CD33+HLADR− cells overlapped with common eosinophils and neutrophils, which were not expanded in MM patients. Therefore, we relied on automated clustering to unbiasedly identify all granulocytic subsets in the tumor microenvironment: basophils, eosinophils, and immature, intermediate, and mature neutrophils. In a series of 267 newly diagnosed MM patients (GEM2012MENOS65 trial), only the frequency of mature neutrophils at diagnosis was significantly associated with patient outcome, and a high mature neutrophil/T-cell ratio resulted in inferior progression-free survival (P & lt; .001). Upon fluorescence-activated cell sorting of each neutrophil subset, T-cell proliferation decreased in the presence of mature neutrophils (0.5-fold; P = .016), and the cytotoxic potential of T cells engaged by a BCMA×CD3-bispecific antibody increased notably with the depletion of mature neutrophils (fourfold; P = .0007). Most interestingly, RNA sequencing of the 3 subsets revealed that G-MDSC–related genes were specifically upregulated in mature neutrophils from MM patients vs controls because of differential chromatin accessibility. Taken together, our results establish a correlation between the clinical significance, immunosuppressive potential, and transcriptional network of well-defined neutrophil subsets, providing for the first time a set of optimal markers (CD11b/CD13/CD16) for accurate monitoring of G-MDSCs in MM.

Abstract: Introduction: Carfilzomib dosed at 56 mg/m2 twice a week in combination with dexamethasone (Kd) is a standard of care for RRMM after 1-3 prior lines (PL) based on the ENDEAVOR study. Later, the ARROW study showed Kd dosed at 70 mg/m2 weekly to be superior to Kd dosed at 27 mg/m2 twice a week on RRMM patients (pts) after 2-3 PL. On the other side, Cyclophosphamide is an alkylating agent that has been widely combined with proteasome inhibitors and immunomodulatory drugs in MM, improving their efficacy with a good safety profile. In this phase 2 randomized study, we have compared Kd plus cyclophosphamide (KCyd) with Kd in RRMM after 1-3PL, both with K dosed weekly at 70 mg/m2. Patients and methods: RRMM after 1-3 PL of therapy were included in the trial. Consistently with the ENDEAVOR population, previous therapy with proteasome inhibitors was allowed but refractory patients were excluded. Pts were randomized 1:1 to receive K at a dose of 70 mg/m2 iv on days 1, 8 and 15 plus dexamethasone at a dose of 20 mg PO the day on and the day after K plus/minus KCyd at a dose of 300 mg/m2 IV on days 1, 8 and 15 of each 28 days-cycle, as continuous treatment until progressive disease or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was PFS and key secondary endpoints included response rates, safety profile, and OS. Results: Between January 2018 and February 2020, 198 RRMM pts were included. 97 pts were randomized to KCyd and 101 to Kd. The baseline characteristics of the patients were well balanced between both groups. The median age was 70 years, and 70% and 28% of pts were older than 65 and 75. The median number of PL was one; 61% of pts had received 1 prior line. 94% and 92% of patients had been exposed to bortezomib in the KCyd and Kd and all of them were sensitive. 72% and 67% of patients had been exposed to IMiD's and 51% and 55% of them were IMiD's-refractory in the KCyd and Kd. Only 4 and 6 patients in KCyd and Kd, had received anti-CD38 antibodies being all refractory. After a median f/u of 15.6 months, median PFS was 20.7 m and 15.2 m in KCyd and Kd (p=0.2). In pts after 1PL, median PFS has not been reached in any arm (p=0.4) and in patients after 2-3PL, KCyd resulted in a median PFS of 20.7 vs 11m for Kd (p=0.4). Of note, in the IMiD-refractory population, the addition of Cy to Kd resulted in a significant benefit in terms of PFS: 26.2 months vs 7.7 months in the Kd arm (p=0.01). OS is immature with 23 and 25 events so far in KCyd and Kd, respectively. The ORR was 78% for KCyd and 73% for Kd: 20% of patients in both arms achieved at least complete response, 33% and 28% very good partial response, respectively, and 25% partial response in both arms. The MRD-ve rate was 4% and 5%. As far as toxicity is concerned, neutropenia was the only hematological adverse event more frequently reported in KCyd compared with Kd, of any grade (24% vs 11%) and grade 3-4 (13% vs 7%). This did not translate into more infections and the rate was comparable in both arms (5% G3-4 in both arms). Thrombocytopenia of any grade and grade 3-4 occurred in 14%/1% and 18%/10% in KCyd/Kd. Cardiovascular events of any grade occurred in 22% and 30% of patients in KCyd and Kd. Nine pts in KCyd developed G3-4 cardiovascular events, these included atrial fibrillation (1pt), cardiac failure (2 pts), myocardial infarct (2 pts), and hypertension (4 pts). In the Kd arm, 11 patients developed G3-4 cardiovascular events and consisted of hypertension in most of them (9 pts). Conclusion: Cyclophosphamide added to Kd 70 mg/m2 weekly in RRMM pts after 1-3 PL prolonged the PFS as compared to Kd particularly in the lenalidomide-refractory population. The administration of K at a dose of 70 mg/m2 weekly was safe and more convenient and overall, the toxicity profile was manageable in both arms. Disclosures Mateos: Abbvie/Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Regeneron: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria; PharmaMar-Zeltia: Consultancy; Sanofi: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncopeptides: 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; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Ocio:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Asofarma: Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; GSK: Consultancy; MDS: Honoraria; Secura-Bio: Consultancy; Oncopeptides: Consultancy. Sureda Balari:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; Merck Sharpe and Dohme: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene/Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead/Kite: Consultancy, Honoraria. Oriol:Celgene/Bristol-Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GlaxoSmithKline: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Rosinol Dachs:Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria. Blade Creixenti:Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. San-Miguel:Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Takeda, Sanofi, Roche, Abbvie, GlaxoSmithKline and Karyopharm: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.