Abstract: Abstract 131 Introduction. Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) after cytoreductive induction is considered standard of care for younger patients (pts) with multiple myeloma (MM). The previous standard of induction, the Vincristin-Adriamycin-Dexamethasone (VAD) combination, achieves inferior results compared with induction regimens which combine the proteasome inhibitor Velcade (V = Bortezomib) with Dexamethasone (D)(=VD) and a cytostatic drug such as Doxorubicin (PAD = VD plus Doxorubicin). Velcade-based induction therapy was shown to translate into better myeloma control after high dose melphalan and to lead to prolonged progression-free survival. In order to find a more efficacious and safer drug combination for induction therapy in MM, we tested the combination of Velcade with Cyclophosphamide and Dexamethasone (VCD). Methods. This trial was designed as an open, prospective, multi-center, uncontrolled, combined phase II/III study. As previously reported (Kropff M et al., Ann Hematol 2009), in the first 30 pts the optimal dose of iv Cyclophosphamide in combination with V and D was defined as 900 mg/m2 on d1. Between 03/2006 and 03/2009 we enrolled an additional 370 pts up to 60 years of age with untreated MM to receive three 3-week cycles of induction treatment with V 1.3 mg/m2 iv d1,4,8,11; D 40 mg/d orally d1,2,4,5,8,9,11,12; and C 900mg/m2 iv d1 before scheduled high dose melphalan and ASCT. The primary endpoint of the study is response rate on day 63 after 3 cycles of VCD according to EBMT and IMWG criteria. Results. Final data from 400 pts from 39 German centers will be presented at the meeting. In the currently evaluable 300 pts (mean age 52.3 years; 1.7% stage I, 21.3% stage II, 77.0% stage III) molecular cytogenetic analysis showed a prevalence of 13q- in 38%, of t[4;14] in 13% and of 17p- in 12% of pts (no changes in 35%). All 300 pts (88.3% of whom completed three cycles) were included in the intent-to-treat analysis. Overall response rate (ORR = CR+PR) was 84%, with 10% CR and 74% PR, 5.7% MR, 7.3% NC and 2.3% PD. The negative prognostic impact of 13q- or t[4;14] was abrogated (ORR normal 87.3%, 13q- 83.7%, t[4;14] 90.0%), the unfavorable influence of p53 loss in the 17p- subgroup was still detectable (ORR 69.2%) but this did not reach statistical significance. VGPR rates will be reported at the meeting. Serious adverse events were documented in 78/300 (26.0%) patients. Death rate was remarkably low (1.3%, of which one was not related to the trial medication). 155/300 (52%) of pts experienced grade 3/4 non-serious AEs and of these leucopenia (93/300 pts= 31%), thrombocytopenia (7%), neutropenia (6%), anaemia (5%) were the most frequent events. 80 AEs grade 3 or 4 and 45 SAEs were of infectious origin and occurred in 47/300 pts. 80/130 SAEs (61.5%) were at least possibly related to Velcade. 101/300 pts (34%) developed episodes of peripheral neuropathy. PNP was grade 1 in 62/300 pt (20.7%), grade 2 in 31/300 pt (10.3%) and grade 3 in 7/300 pts (2.3%). Conclusion. This analysis demonstrates that proteasome inhibition by Velcade in combination with Dexamethasone and iv Cyclophosphamide (VCD) is an induction regimen for newly diagnosed MM which is highly effective in a short period of time, has a rather low toxicity profile and is feasible for administration in an outpatient setting. Based on these characteristics, VCD qualifies to become a new standard for MM induction therapy. Disclosures: Einsele: OrthioBiotech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Off Label Use: Bortezomib is licensed as monotherapy for use in relapsed/refractory MM and in combination with melphalan/Prednisone in the first-line treatment of MM pts ineligible for HD-MEL and ASCT. . Liebisch:OrthoBiotech: Consultancy, Honoraria. Langer:OrthoBiotech: Consultancy. Kropff:OrthoBiotech: Consultancy, Honoraria. Kröger:OrthoBiotech: Honoraria. Ostermann:OrthoBiotech: Honoraria. Mügge:OrthoBiotech: Honoraria. Wolf:OrthoBiotech: Honoraria. Gramatzki:OrthoBiotech: Consultancy, Honoraria. Maschmeyer:OrthoBiotech: Travel Grant. Sezer:OrthoBiotech: Consultancy, Honoraria. Heidemann:OrthoBiotech: Honoraria. Jäger:OrthoBiotech: Honoraria. Dechow:Celgene: Research Funding. Simon:OrthoBiotech: Honoraria. Straka:OrthoBiotech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Fingerle-Rowson:orthoBiotech: Employment. Knop:OrthoBiotech: Honoraria.

Abstract: A post hoc subgroup analysis of two phase III trials (NCT00416273, NCT00416208) was carried out to investigate the influence of 100/140 and 200 mg/m² melphalan as well as single/double autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) on progression‐free survival (PFS). Additionally, the effect of bortezomib consolidation on PFS was analyzed. Methods Following induction therapy and high‐dose melphalan with subsequent ASCT, patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) were randomized 1:1 to either four 35‐day cycles of bortezomib consolidation (1.6 mg/m² IV on days 1, 8, 15, 22) or observation. Results Of the 340 patients included in this analysis, 13.5% received 1 × MEL100/140, 22.9% 2 × MEL100/140, 31.2% 1 × MEL200, and 32.4% 2 × MEL200. With higher cumulative melphalan dose, PFS improved ( P  = .0085). PFS curves of patients treated with 2 × MEL100/140 and 1 × MEL200 were very similar. The superior dose effect of MEL200 over MEL100/140 was non‐existent in the bortezomib consolidation arm but pronounced in the observation arm ( P  = .0015). Similarly, double ASCT was only beneficial in patients without bortezomib consolidation ( P  = .0569). Conclusions Full dose melphalan and double transplantation seem advantageous only as long as patients are not receiving bortezomib consolidation afterwards.

Abstract: A post hoc analysis of two phase III trials was carried out to explore the influence of age and treatment factors on the effect of bortezomib consolidation on progression‐free survival (PFS) post autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). Methods Patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma were assigned to one of two trials (ClinicalTrials.gov IDs: NCT00416273, NCT00416208), which were conducted in parallel, based on age (18‐60 or 61‐75 years, respectively). Following induction and ASCT, patients were randomized 1:1 to four 35‐day cycles of bortezomib consolidation (1.6 mg/m 2 IV on days 1, 8, 15, 22) or observation only. Results Median PFS with bortezomib consolidation vs observation was 33.6 vs 29.0 months ( P  = 0.3599) in patients aged 18‐60 years (n = 202), and 33.4 vs 26.4 months ( P  = 0.0073) in patients aged 61‐75 years (n = 155), respectively. Bortezomib consolidation post‐ASCT appeared to equalize outcomes between older and younger patients who received prior treatment of differing intensity. This suggests that the effect of consolidation may be relative and may depend on the composition and intensity of induction and high‐dose therapy. Conclusion Older patients receiving less intensive prior treatment could experience a larger PFS benefit from bortezomib consolidation.

Abstract: Background High-dose therapy (HDT) with autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is the established standard-of-care for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) who are young and/or fit. The number of older patients receiving HDT-ASCT is increasing, although they often receive lower-intensity treatment. Novel agent-based consolidation therapy can be used to improve responses following ASCT and prolong progression-free survival (PFS). The proteasome inhibitor bortezomib, given as post-ASCT consolidation therapy, resulted in an improved PFS compared with observation alone (median 33.6 vs 27.8 months, adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.70, p=0.0058) in a combined analysis of two phase 3 trials (MMY3012 [DSMM XIb; NCT00416273] and MMY3013 [DSMM X; NCT00416208]; JCO 2015;33:8511). These studies enrolled 222 patients aged ≤60 years and 158 aged 〉 60 years. In this post-hoc analysis we investigated the effect of age and related treatment factors on PFS in more detail. Methods In both trials, 371 patients were randomized 1:1 following ASCT to receive four 35-day cycles of bortezomib consolidation (n=186; bortezomib 1.6 mg/m2 IV administered on days 1, 8, 15, and 22) or observation (n=185; no treatment). The primary endpoint was PFS from the start of induction chemotherapy. Response and progression were assessed at the start of each bortezomib cycle and at the end-of-treatment/observation visit (week 25), as well as during the follow-up period of 30-60 months. Patient characteristics and treatments were compared between trials; PFS following randomization was assessed separately for each study. Univariate, bivariate, and multivariate Cox regressions were conducted to evaluate the impact of treatment group, age (≤60 vs 〉 60 years), single vs tandem ASCT, melphalan conditioning dose (MEL 〈 200 vs 200 mg/m2), bortezomib exposure during induction (exposed vs naïve), post-ASCT response (partial response vs ≥very good partial response [VGPR]), and cytogenetics on PFS. Results A number of relevant factors were different between age groups (median age in ≤60 group 53 years vs 66 years in 〉 60 group), including the HDT regimen received (MEL100 7% vs 10%; MEL140 3% vs 59%; MEL200 88% vs 31%). The rate of double transplantation was similar for the younger and older cohorts (55% vs 59%), likely due to the older patients receiving age-adjusted high-dose melphalan with a lower toxicity, allowing a similar rate of double transplantation as younger patients receiving MEL200. Among the 357 patients included in these analyses, median PFS from start of induction was 33.6 vs 27.8 months with bortezomib consolidation vs observation (log-rank p=0.0243). Median PFS for bortezomib vs observation was 33.6 vs 29.0 months (HR 0.86; p=0.3599) in the younger cohort and 33.4 vs 26.4 months (HR 0.60; p=0.0073) in the older cohort. PFS for older patients who received bortezomib consolidation was very similar to PFS in younger patients (p=0.861); survival curves were superimposable despite the older patients having received less intensive pretreatment. Univariate analysis demonstrated that treatment group (bortezomib vs observation) had an effect on PFS (HR 0.75; exploratory p-value 〈 0.05), as did age ( 〉 60 vs ≤60 years; HR 1.30), melphalan dose (200 vs 〈 200 mg/m2; HR 0.74), single vs tandem ASCT (HR 1.35), and cytogenetics (high-risk vs no change; HR 2.62). On bivariate analysis of treatment group plus other covariates, the PFS benefit of bortezomib consolidation vs observation remained consistent (HR 0.71-0.76) across analyses with other covariates. On multivariate Cox regression analysis (Table), bortezomib consolidation (HR 0.72), prior bortezomib during induction (HR 0.69), ≥VGPR post-ASCT (HR 0.76), high-risk cytogenetics (HR 2.58), and single vs tandem ASCT (HR 1.54) were independent prognostic factors for PFS. Conclusions For patients with NDMM, bortezomib consolidation post-ASCT appeared to equalize the outcome for older patients who had received less intensive pretreatment than younger patients prior to randomization. A consistent PFS benefit was demonstrated with bortezomib consolidation vs observation in the context of other prognostic factors. In a multivariate analysis, the use of tandem transplantation retained independent prognostic relevance, whereas MEL200 as first HDT did not. Table. Table. Disclosures Straka: Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel/Accommodation/Expenses, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel/Accommodation/Expenses; Chugai: Research Funding. Knop:Takeda: Consultancy. Vogel:Janssen-Cilag GmbH: Employment. Kropff:Celgene: Consultancy, Other: Travel/Accommodation/Expenses, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: Travel/Accommodation/Expenses, Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Metzner:Amgen: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Celgene: Other: Travel/Accommodation/Expenses; Takeda: Other: Travel/Accommodation/Expenses. Langer:Celgene: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy. Sayer:Riemser Pharma: Consultancy. Bassermann:Celgene: Other: Travel/Accommodation/Expenses. Gramatzki:Janssen: Other: Travel/Accommodation/Expenses, Research Funding. Rösler:Janssen: Consultancy, Other: Travel/Accommodation/Expenses. Engelhardt:MSD: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel/Accommodation/Expenses , Research Funding. Fischer:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria. Einsele:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel/Accommodation/Expenses , Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel/Accommodation/Expenses , Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Other: Travel/Accommodation/Expenses , Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau.

Abstract: For patients with advanced indolent non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) or elderly patients with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), the recently reported results of the German StiL NHL-1 2003 and the international BRIGHT phase III trials showed that, as first-line treatment, the combination of bendamustine and rituximab is at least as effective as rituximab/cyclophosphamide/doxorubicin/vincristine/prednisone or rituximab/cyclophosphamide/vincristine/prednisone, possibly with a better therapeutic index. Bendamustine is therefore increasingly used in clinical practice. Because bendamustine has been used for many years in Germany and in Switzerland, our institutions have had extensive experience with bendamustine, both as a single agent and in combination with rituximab. In this comprehensive review, we summarize the most important clinical data from phase II/III trials with bendamustine in patients with indolent NHL and MCL, both in the relapsed/refractory setting and in the first-line setting. In addition, this review provides practical advice on how to optimally manage bendamustine therapy in patients with NHL.

Abstract: A bstract : Research on the biology, regulation, and transplantation of human hematopoietic stem cells requires test systems for the detection, monitoring, and quantitation of these cells. Xenografted animal models provide suitable stem cell assays, since they allow long‐term engraftment, multilineage differentiation, and serial transfer of human hematopoietic cells. Recent techniques for the separation of hematopoietic cells have provided highly purified cellular subsets selected on the basis of the surface marker phenotype. The stem cell content of these subsets, however, is still unclear. Also, innovative approaches for the induction of hematopoietic cell proliferation and differentiation have generated ex vivo manipulated cells whose biological properties and functions still remain to be assessed. This paper reports on the biological characterization of these cell populations by the use of xenograft models.