Abstract: Binary cardiac response assessment using cardiac biomarkers is prognostic in light chain amyloidosis. Previous studies suggested four-level cardiac responses using N-terminal prohormone of brain natiuretic peptide improves prognostic prediction. This study was designed to validate graded cardiac response criteria using N-terminal prohormone of brain natiuretic peptide/brain natiuretic peptide. PATIENTS AND METHODS This retrospective, multicenter study included patients with light chain amyloidosis who achieved at least a hematologic partial response (PR) and were evaluable for cardiac response. Four response criteria were tested on the basis of natriuretic peptide response depth: cardiac complete response (CarCR), cardiac very good partial response (CarVGPR), cardiac PR (CarPR), and cardiac no response (CarNR). Response was classified as best response and at fixed time points (6, 12, and 24 months from therapy initiation). The study primary outcome was overall survival. RESULTS 651 patients were included. Best CarCR, CarVGPR, CarPR, and CarNR were achieved in 16%, 26.4%, 22.9%, and 34.7% of patients, respectively. Patients in cardiac stage II were more likely to achieve CarCR than patients in cardiac stage IIIA and IIIB (22% v 13.5% v 3.2%; P 〈 .001). A deeper cardiac response was associated with a longer survival (5-year overall survival 93%, 79%, 65%, and 33% for CarCR, CarVGPR, CarPR, and CarNR, respectively; P 〈 .001). Fixed time-point analyses and time-varying covariates Cox regression analysis, to minimize survivorship bias, affirmed the independent survival advantage of deeper cardiac responses. Four-level response performed better than two-level response as early as 12 months from therapy initiation. CONCLUSION Graded cardiac response criteria allow better assessment of cardiac improvement compared with the traditional binary response system. The study re-emphasizes the importance of early diagnosis, which increases the likelihood of deep cardiac responses.

Abstract: Introduction: Binary cardiac response assessment using NT-proBNP is prognostic in light chain (AL) amyloidosis. Previous studies suggested that refining the criteria to multi-level cardiac responses improves prognostic prediction. We validate a graded cardiac response assessment tool in AL amyloidosis using NT-proBNP or BNP. Methods: In this retrospective, multicenter study AL amyloidosis patients who were diagnosed between 2010 and 2015, achieving at least a hematological partial response (PR) within 12 months of diagnosis and were evaluable for cardiac response (defined as baseline NT-proBNP & gt;650 pg/mL or BNP & gt;150 pg/mL) were included. The following response criteria were tested: cardiac complete response (carCR, nadir NT-proBNP≤350 pg/mL or BNP≤80 pg/mL); cardiac very good partial response (carVGPR, & gt;60% reduction in NT-proBNP/BNP); Cardiac PR (carPR 31-60% reduction); and cardiac non response (carNR, ≤30% reduction). Response was assessed at fixed time points (6, 12 and 24 months from therapy initiation) and at best response. The primary outcome was overall survival based on depth of cardiac response. Multivariate Cox proportional models were analyzed to determine independent prognostic factors for OS and time to cardiac progression using variables with p-value & lt;0.1 in a univariate analysis. Results: Six hundred and fifty-one patients were included. The median age was 64 years. Mayo 2004 cardiac stage II, IIIA and IIIB was present in 47.5%, 38% and 14.5% of patients, respectively (by definition, patients with Mayo stage I do not have cardiac amyloidosis evaluable for response). Seventy-six percent of patients received only one line of therapy within the initial 12 months of diagnosis. Bortezomib-based therapy was the most common (70.2% of patients) followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in 15.7% of patients. Hematological CR, hematological VGPR and hematological PR as best response was achieved in 38%, 39% and 23% of patients, respectively. Forty-three percent of the patients have died, with 36% of the patients dying within 5-years of diagnosis. The median follow-up of the surviving patients is 70 months (IQR 56-84). Cardiac response was evaluable using NT-proBNP in 494 patients (75.9%), BNP in 109 patients (16.7%) and both NT-proBNP and BNP in 48 patients (7.4%). The latter two were grouped together for further analysis. The median time to best cardiac response among responders was 12 months (IQR 7-21 months; 18 months for carCR, 11.5 months for carVGPR and 9.5 months for carPR). Cardiac response improved over time with a median percentage reduction in NT-proBNP/BNP compared to baseline of 15%, 37% and 54%, at 6, 12 and 24 months respectively. Cardiac responses at 6-, 12- and 24-months are depicted in Figure 1A. At best cardiac response, carCR, carVGPR, carPR and carNR were achieved in 16%, 26%, 23% and 35% of patients, respectively. Patients who achieved a carCR had lower cardiac stage at diagnosis compared to patients who achieved carVGPR or carPR (stage II 65% vs 47% vs 47%, respectively; P & lt;0.001). At least carPR at 6 and 12 months and at least carVGPR at 24-months was associated with better survival compared with a lower depth of response. At best cardiac response, deeper cardiac response was associated with a longer survival (5-year OS 93%, 80%, 62% and 35% for carCR, carVGPR, carPR and carNR, respectively; P & lt;0.001, Figure 1B). A 2-year landmark analysis (excluding early deaths not evaluable for cardiac response depth) confirmed improved survival with a deeper cardiac response (5-year OS 93%, 82%, 70% and 58%, P & lt;0.001; Figure 1C). These cardiac response criteria were independent predictors of survival and time to cardiac progression ( & gt;30% rise in NT-proBNP/BNP) in multivariate analysis that included age, type of first line therapy, light chain burden, cardiac stage, and hematological response. Conclusions: We validated the prognostic value of graded cardiac response. These response criteria allow better discrimination of patient populations and assessment of treatment effectiveness in an era of improved therapies for AL amyloidosis. The study emphasizes the importance of early diagnosis which increases the likelihood of deep and durable cardiac responses. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Dispenzieri: Oncopeptides: Consultancy; Pfizer: Research Funding; Sorrento Therapeutics: Consultancy; Takeda: Research Funding; Alnylam: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Palladini: Siemens: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Janssen Global Services: Honoraria, Other: advisory board fees. Schönland: Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Travel grants, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel grants; Sanofi: Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria; Prothena: Honoraria, Other: Travel grants. Hegenbart: Alnylam: Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Prothena: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Akcea: Honoraria. Kumar: Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Carsgen: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Tenebio: Research Funding; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche-Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Antengene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Oncopeptides: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; KITE: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Beigene: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Adaptive: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding. Kastritis: Genesis Pharma: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Dimopoulos: Beigene: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria. Liedtke: GlaxoSmithKline: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kite: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Honoraria; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Alnylam: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Caelum: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Clinical Trial Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kura Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Witteles: Eidos: Research Funding; Alnylam: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding. Sanchorawala: Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Proclara: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Caelum: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Regeneron: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Oncopeptide: Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria; Sorrento: Research Funding. Landau: Genzyme: Honoraria; Takeda: Research Funding; Takeda, Janssen, Caelum Biosciences, Celgene, Pfizer, Genzyme: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Cibeira: Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Akcea: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Gertz: Akcea Therapeutics, Ambry Genetics, Amgen Inc, Celgene Corporation, Janssen Biotech Inc, Karyopharm Therapeutics, Pfizer Inc (to Institution), Sanofi Genzyme: Honoraria; Akcea Therapeutics, Alnylam Pharmaceuticals Inc, Prothena: Consultancy; AbbVie Inc, Celgene Corporation: Other: Data Safetly & Monitoring; Ionis Pharmaceuticals: Other: Advisory Board; Aurora Biopharma: Other: Stock option.

Abstract: Amyloid light-chain (AL) amyloidosis is a rare, typically fatal disease characterized by the accumulation of misfolded immunoglobulin light chains (LCs). Birtamimab is an investigational humanized monoclonal antibody designed to neutralize toxic LC aggregates and deplete insoluble organ-deposited amyloid via macrophage-induced phagocytosis. VITAL was a phase 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial assessing the efficacy and safety of birtamimab + standard of care (SOC) in 260 newly diagnosed, treatment-naive patients with AL amyloidosis. Patients received 24 mg/kg IV birtamimab + SOC or placebo + SOC every 28 days. The primary composite end point was the time to all-cause mortality (ACM) or centrally adjudicated cardiac hospitalization ≥91 days after the first study drug infusion. The trial was terminated early after an interim futility analysis; there was no significant difference in the primary composite end point (hazard ratio [HR] , 0.826; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.574-1.189; log-rank P = .303). A post hoc analysis of patients with Mayo stage IV AL amyloidosis, those at the highest risk of early mortality, showed significant improvement in the time to ACM with birtamimab at month 9 (HR, 0.413; 95% CI, 0.191-0.895; log-rank P = .021). At month 9, 74% of patients with Mayo stage IV AL amyloidosis treated with birtamimab and 49% of those given placebo survived. Overall, the rates of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and serious TEAEs were generally similar between treatment arms. A confirmatory phase 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial of birtamimab in patients with Mayo stage IV AL amyloidosis (AFFIRM-AL; NCT04973137) is currently enrolling. The VITAL trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02312206.

Abstract: Introduction: Renal light chain (AL) amyloidosis typically manifests as proteinuria with or without renal failure and is associated with a risk of progression to renal replacement therapy (RRT). A significant reduction in circulating amyloidogenic light chain is needed to achieve a renal response. Current renal response criteria are binary defining a renal response as & gt;30% reduction in 24-h proteinuria without worsening estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). Several studies suggest that greater reduction in proteinuria following successful therapy improves renal and overall survival. Methods: AL amyloidosis patients diagnosed between 2010 to 2015, achieving at least hematological partial response (hemPR) to therapy and with renal involvement (defined as 24-h non-selective proteinuria & gt;0.5 g/24-h) were included. Four predefined renal response categories were formulated based on reduction level in pretreatment 24-h proteinuria in the absence of renal progression (≥25% decrease in eGFR): renal complete response (renCR, 24-h proteinuria ≤200 mg/24-h); renal very good partial response (renVGPR, & gt;60% reduction in 24-h proteinuria); renal partial response (renPR, 31-60% reduction in 24-proteinuria); and renal no response (renNR, 30% or less reduction). Renal response was assessed at landmark (6-, 12-, and 24 months from treatment initiation) and as best renal response. Graded renal responses were assessed as predictors for time from diagnosis to RRT and overall survival. Results: Seven hundred and thirty-seven patients were included. The median age was 63. The breakdown of renal stage was: I, 34%; II, 52%; and III, 14%. Eighty percent of patients received 1 line of therapy within 12 months of their diagnosis. Bortezomib-based therapy was given to 60% of the patients; 28% received autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) as their first line therapy. Hematological CR was achieved in 44% of patients, followed by hematological very good partial response (38%) and hemPR (18%). RRT was required during follow-up in 15% of patients (n=108) with a median time from diagnosis to RRT of 18 (IQR 6-43) months. Twenty-eight percent of the patients died. The median follow-up of the surviving patients was 69 months (IQR 56-86). Reduction in 24-h proteinuria from baseline improved over time with a median reduction of 34%, 50% and 71% at 6-month, 12-month, and 24-months, respectively. At best response, renCR, renVGPR, renPR and renNR were achieved in 27% (n=199), 34% (n=247), 15% (n=112) and 24% (n=179) of patients, respectively. The median time to best renal response among renal responders was 17 (IQR 8-31) months, longer for renCR (23 months, IQR 10-40) compared to renVGPR (16 months, IQR 9-27) or renPR (11 months, IQR 6-19). A renal response as early as 6 months after therapy initiation was able to predict time to RRT with an increase in RRT risk with lower level of renal response at that time point (5-year RRT risk 0%, 3%, 9% and 16% for renCR, renVGPR, renPR and renNR, respectively, P & lt;0.001, Figure 1A). Prediction of risk for RRT based on renal response depth improved at 12- and 24-months (Figure 1B-C) and at best renal response (Figure 1D). Overall survival discrimination based on renal response depth was noted as early as 12 months from therapy initiation and improved with time. Renal response criteria as best response were tested in a univariate analysis and multivariable proportional hazard models for time to RRT and OS. The graded renal response criteria demonstrated an independent prognostic role for time to RRT and OS. Along with renal stage, graded renal responses were the strongest predictors for time to RRT. Conclusions: We validated new graded renal response criteria based on reduction in 24-h proteinuria. These 4-level renal response criteria highlight the importance of achieving a deep renal response to improve renal and overall survival. These findings will allow clinicians to make decisions on therapy changes or augmentation based on response depth as early as 6-months, before irreversible renal failure develops. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Palladini: Janssen Global Services: Honoraria, Other: advisory board fees; Siemens: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria. Milani: Celgene: Other: Travel support; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria. Schönland: Sanofi: Research Funding; Prothena: Honoraria, Other: Travel grants; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Travel grants, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel grants; Pfizer: Honoraria. Hegenbart: Akcea: Honoraria; Alnylam: Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Prothena: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria. Dispenzieri: Oncopeptides: Consultancy; Alnylam: Research Funding; Sorrento Therapeutics: Consultancy; Pfizer: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Kumar: Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Consultancy; Carsgen: Research Funding; Beigene: Consultancy; Novartis: Research Funding; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche-Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; KITE: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Tenebio: Research Funding; Antengene: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Adaptive: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding. Kastritis: Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Genesis Pharma: Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Dimopoulos: Takeda: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Beigene: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria. Liedtke: Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kite: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kura Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Caelum: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Clinical Trial Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GlaxoSmithKline: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Honoraria; Alnylam: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Witteles: Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding; Alnylam: Honoraria, Research Funding; Eidos: Research Funding. Sanchorawala: Pfizer: Honoraria; Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Regeneron: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Proclara: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Oncopeptide: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Sorrento: Research Funding; Caelum: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Landau: Takeda, Janssen, Caelum Biosciences, Celgene, Pfizer, Genzyme: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Research Funding; Genzyme: Honoraria. Cibeira: Celgene: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Akcea: 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. Wechalekar: Caelum Biosciences: Other: Clinical Trial Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; Celgene: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Alexion, AstraZeneca Rare Disease: Consultancy. Gertz: Akcea Therapeutics, Alnylam Pharmaceuticals Inc, Prothena: Consultancy; Aurora Biopharma: Other: Stock option; Ionis Pharmaceuticals: Other: Advisory Board; AbbVie Inc, Celgene Corporation: Other: Data Safetly & Monitoring; Akcea Therapeutics, Ambry Genetics, Amgen Inc, Celgene Corporation, Janssen Biotech Inc, Karyopharm Therapeutics, Pfizer Inc (to Institution), Sanofi Genzyme: Honoraria.

Abstract: Background: Systemic AL amyloidosis is characterized by the deposition of insoluble amyloid fibrils produced by light chains synthesized by clonal CD38+ plasma cells. Combining daratumumab (DARA) with bortezomib, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone (VCd) has demonstrated significantly improved outcomes in patients with AL amyloidosis. The classification of hematologic complete response (CR) in this disease is evolving, and the absolute reduction of the involved free light chain (iFLC) and the difference between iFLC and uninvolved free light chain (dFLC) are being recognized as very meaningful endpoints. Here, we present results from the ANDROMEDA study (NCT03201965) to demonstrate the impact of achieving deep reductions of iFLC and dFLC on major organ deterioration progression-free survival (MOD-PFS), a novel, key secondary endpoint in this study. Methods: Key eligibility criteria included newly diagnosed AL amyloidosis with measurable hematologic disease (serum monoclonal protein ≥0.5 g/dL by protein electrophoresis or serum free light chain ≥5.0 mg/dL with an abnormal kappa:lambda ratio or dFLC ≥50 mg/L), ≥1 involved organ, cardiac stage I-IIIA, eGFR ≥20 mL/min, and absence of symptomatic multiple myeloma. Patients were randomized (1:1) to receive DARA-VCd or VCd alone. All patients received bortezomib (1.3 mg/m2 subcutaneous [SC] weekly), cyclophosphamide (300 mg/m2 oral [PO] or intravenous [IV] weekly), and dexamethasone (20-40 mg PO or IV weekly) for six 28-day cycles. DARA SC (1800 mg, co-formulated with recombinant human hyaluronidase PH20 in 15 mL) was administered by injection weekly in Cycles 1-2, every other week in Cycles 3-6, and every 4 weeks thereafter for up to 24 cycles. Disease evaluations occurred every 4 weeks (Cycles 1-6) and every 8 weeks (after Cycle 7) until major organ deterioration, death, end of study, or withdrawal. The primary endpoint was overall (ie, at any time) hematologic CR rate, defined here as normalization of FLC levels and ratio (FLCr) and negative serum and urine immunofixation, confirmed at a subsequent visit; normalization of uninvolved FLC level and FLCr wer e not required if iFLC & lt;upper limit of normal.1-2 The following criteria for deep hematological response were evaluated: iFLC ≤20 mg/L regardless of FLCr3 and dFLC & lt;10 regardless of FLCr.4 MOD-PFS is a composite endpoint defined as any one of the following events (whichever comes first): death; cardiac deterioration (requiring cardiac transplant, left ventricular assist device or intra-aortic balloon pump); end stage renal disease requiring hemodialysis or renal transplant; or hematologic progression per consensus guidelines.1 Analyses of deep hematological responses were performed on the intent-to-treat analysis set; patients without a baseline assessment or post-baseline assessment were considered non-responders. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize overall response rates. Kaplan-Meier curves were plotted for MOD-PFS by hematologic response status. Results: A total of 388 patients were randomized to receive DARA-VCd (n=195) or VCd alone (n=193). Baseline characteristics were well balanced between treatment groups. The median age was 64 years and 65% of patients had ≥2 organs involved. The proportions of patients with heart and kidney involvement were 71% and 59%, respectively, and the proportions of patients with cardiac stage I, II, and IIIA were 23%, 40%, and 37%, respectively. The median duration of treatment was 9.6 months for DARA-VCd and 5.3 months for VCd. Median follow-up was 11.4 months (range, 0.03-21.3+). The rates of deep hematological responses by all criteria strongly favored the DARA-VCd treatment arm (Table). MOD-PFS was longer in patients achieving deep hematological responses by all criteria (Figure). In addition, the corresponding MOD-PFS was similar regardless of the hematological response criteria used. Conclusions: Regardless of the criteria used, the addition of DARA to VCd increased the rates of deep hematologic responses in patients with newly diagnosed AL amyloidosis, which, in turn, was associated with prolonged MOD-PFS. These results support the benefit of DARA in this patient population. References 1. Comenzo RL, et al. Leukemia. 2012;26(11):2317-25 2. Sidana S, et al. Leukemia. 2019;34(5):1472-75 3. Muchtar E, et al. Leukemia. 2019;33(3):790-94 4. Manwani R, et al. Blood. 2019;134(25):2271-2280 Disclosures Comenzo: Amgen: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Prothena: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Unum: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Caleum: Consultancy. Kastritis:Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Genesis Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria. Palladini:Celgene: Other: Travel support; Jannsen Cilag: Honoraria, Other. Minnema:Celgene: Other: travel support, Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy; Servier: Consultancy. Wechalekar:Caelum: Other: Advisory; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Advisory; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel; Celgene: Honoraria. Jaccard:Celgene: Honoraria, Other: A.J. has served in a consulting or advisory role for Janssen and has received honoraria from, received research funding from, and had travel, accommodations, or other expenses paid for or reimbursed by Celgene., Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: A.J. has served in a consulting or advisory role for Janssen and has received honoraria from, received research funding from, and had travel, accommodations, or other expenses paid for or reimbursed by Janssen., Research Funding. Sanchorawala:Proclara: Other: advisory board; Abbvie: Other: advisory board; UpToDate: Patents & Royalties; Regeneron: Other: advisory board; Caleum: Other: advisory board; Janssen: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Prothena: Research Funding; Caelum: Research Funding; Oncopeptide: Research Funding. Lee:Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Gibbs:Janssen, BMS/Celgene, Amgen, Takeda, Pfizer, Caelum, Abbvie and Eidos: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Mollee:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS/Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Caelum: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Venner:Celgene, Amgen: Research Funding; Janssen, BMS/Celgene, Sanofi, Takeda, Amgen: Honoraria. Schönland:Janssen, Prothena, Takeda: Honoraria, Other: travel support to meetings, Research Funding. Suzuki:Takeda, Amgen, Janssen and Celgene: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene and Amgen: Research Funding; Takeda, Celgene, ONO, Amgen, Novartis, Sanofi, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AbbVie and Janssen: Honoraria. Kim:Amgen, BMS, Janssen, Sanofi, Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Cibeira:Janssen, Akcea Therapeutics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen, Celgene, Amgen: Honoraria, Other: Educational lectures. Beksac:Deva: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen & janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Valent:Amgen Inc.: Other: Teaching, Speakers Bureau; Takeda Pharmaceuticals: Other: Teaching, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Other: Teaching, Speakers Bureau. Wong:Fortis: Research Funding; GSK: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy; Janssen: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Rosenzweig:Janssen: Speakers Bureau. Bumma:Sanofi: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Speakers Bureau. Dimopoulos:BMS: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Personal fees; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Personal fees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Personal fees, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Personal fees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Personal fees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Tran:Janssen: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Qin:Janssen: Current Employment. Vasey:Janssen Research & Development: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Tromp:Janssen: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Weiss:Janssen: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Vermeulen:Janssen: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company.

Abstract: The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2)‐associated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) is primarily manifested as a respiratory tract infection, but may affect and cause complications in multiple organ systems (cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, kidneys, haematopoietic and immune systems), while no proven specific therapy exists. The challenges associated with COVID‐19 are even greater for patients with light chain (AL) amyloidosis, a rare multisystemic disease affecting the heart, kidneys, liver, gastrointestinal and nervous system. Patients with AL amyloidosis may need to receive chemotherapy, which probably increases infection risk. Management of COVID‐19 may be particularly challenging in patients with AL amyloidosis, who often present with cardiac dysfunction, nephrotic syndrome, neuropathy, low blood pressure and gastrointestinal symptoms. In addition, patients with AL amyloidosis may be more susceptible to toxicities of drugs used to manage COVID‐19. Access to health care may be difficult or limited, diagnosis of AL amyloidosis may be delayed with detrimental consequences and treatment administration may need modification. Both patients and treating physicians need to adapt in a new reality.

Abstract: TPS8076 Background: Light chain (AL) amyloidosis is a progressive and typically fatal disorder caused by misfolded AL protein produced by plasma cells. Birtamimab is a monoclonal antibody designed to neutralize circulating soluble and deposited insoluble amyloid, thus promoting phagocytic clearance. In 2018, the phase 3 VITAL study in newly diagnosed, treatment-naive patients was terminated based on futility analysis of the primary endpoint (time to all-cause mortality [ACM] or time to cardiac hospitalization 〉 90 days after first study drug infusion); the final hazard ratio (HR) numerically favored birtamimab + standard of care (SOC) over placebo + SOC (0.835 [95% CI: 0.5799, 1.2011]; p = 0.330). Post-hoc analysis of ACM over 9 months revealed a substantial survival benefit (HR = 0.413 [95% CI: 0.191, 0.895] ; p = 0.025) in patients at high risk for early death (Mayo Stage IV). Post-hoc analyses of secondary endpoints in this subgroup indicated meaningful improvements in health-related quality of life (assessed with 36-Item Short Form Health Survey version 2; SF-36v2) and 6-minute walk test (6MWT) distance with birtamimab + SOC (p 〈 0.05) at 9 months. Methods: The phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled AFFIRM-AL study (NCT04973137) will enroll up to 150 Mayo Stage IV patients with newly diagnosed, untreated AL amyloidosis. Patients will be randomized (2:1) to 24 mg/kg intravenous birtamimab or placebo every 28 days. Both arms will receive concomitant chemotherapy with a first-line bortezomib-containing regimen, with or without daratumumab (D), at the discretion of the investigator. Patients will be stratified at randomization based on their 6MWT distance ( 〈 300 vs ≥300 meters) and initiation of D. The primary efficacy endpoint is time to ACM. Secondary endpoints are change from baseline to month 9 in the physical component summary of the SF-36v2 and 6MWT distance. This trial is powered at a significance level of 0.1 under a Special Protocol Assessment (SPA) with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Given the 〉 50% relative risk reduction for ACM observed in the post-hoc analysis of VITAL for patients with Mayo Stage IV disease, the AFFIRM-AL study is designed to confirm this effect of birtamimab. Approximately 130 global sites are planned; site initiation and patient randomization are underway. Conclusion: Treatments that improve survival in AL amyloidosis are needed, particularly for patients with advanced cardiac involvement, as median overall survival for those with Mayo Stage IV disease is ̃6–9 months. The AFFIRM-AL study is designed to confirm the survival benefit observed in the VITAL study in patients with Mayo Stage IV AL amyloidosis. Clinical trial information: NCT04973137.