Abstract: Selinexor is an oral, selective nuclear export inhibitor. STORM was a phase 2b, single-arm, open-label, multicenter trial of selinexor with low dose dexamethasone in patients with penta-exposed relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) that met its primary endpoint, with overall response of 26% (95% confidence interval [CI], 19 to 35%). Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was a secondary endpoint measured using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy – Multiple Myeloma (FACT-MM). This study examines impact of selinexor treatment on HRQoL of patients treated in STORM and reports two approaches to calculate minimal clinically important differences for the FACT-MM. Methods FACT-MM data were collected at baseline, on day 1 of each 4-week treatment cycle, and at end of treatment (EOT). Changes from baseline were analyzed for the FACT-MM total score, FACT-trial outcome index (TOI), FACT-General (FACT-G), and the MM-specific domain using mixed-effects regression models. Two approaches for evaluating minimal clinically important differences were explored: the first defined as 10% of the instrument range, and the second based on estimated mean baseline differences between Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) scores. Post-hoc difference analysis compared change in scores from baseline to EOT for treatment responders and non-responders. Results Eighty patients were included in the analysis; the mean number of prior therapies was 7.9 (standard deviation [SD] 3.1), and mean duration of myeloma was 7.6 years (SD 3.4). Each exploratory minimal clinically important difference threshold yielded consistent results whereby most patients did not experience HRQoL decline during the first six cycles of treatment (range: 53.9 to 75.7% for the first approach; range: 52.6 to 72.9% for the second). Treatment responders experienced less decline in HRQoL from baseline to EOT than non-responders, which was significant for the FACT-G, but not for other scores. Conclusion The majority of patients did not experience decline in HRQoL based on minimal clinically important differences during early cycles of treatment with selinexor and dexamethasone in the STORM trial. An anchor-based approach utilizing patient-level data (ECOG PS score) to define minimal clinically important differences for the FACT-MM gave consistent results with a distribution-based approach. Trial registration This trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov under the trial-ID NCT02336815 on January 8, 2015.

Abstract: Introduction - With over 12,000 deaths from MM anticipated in 2016, nearly all patients (pts) with multiple myeloma (MM) will become "quad refractory" to IMIDs (lenalidomide and pomalidomide) and proteasome inhibitors (bortezomib and carfilzomib), and eventually "penta refractory" to anti-CD38 Abs (daratumumab and isatuximab), defining high unmet need populations. Selinexor, an oral selective XPO1 inhibitor, induces nuclear accumulation and activation of tumor suppressor proteins, inhibition of NF-kB, and inhibition of translation of several oncoprotein mRNAs such as c-myc and cyclin D. Selinexor showed potent induction of apoptosis of MM cells independent of p53 signaling. In phase 1 clinical studies, selinexor with low dose dexamethasone (Sd) demonstrated potent anti MM activity in pts with MM. Methods - This phase II clinical trial evaluated Sd in pts with MM refractory to bortezomib, carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and pomalidomide ("quad"), with a subset also refractory to an anti-CD38 Ab ("penta"). Inclusion required CrCL≥20 mL/min, ANC≥1000/µL, platelets ≥50K/µL (≥30K if plasma cells were ≥50% of marrow cellularity). Pts were treated twice weekly (BIW) with oral selinexor 80 mg for 6 or 8 doses per 28 day cycle and dexamethasone (dex) 20 mg BIW. All pts received 5-HT3 antagonists. The primary objective was to determine the overall response rate (ORR) per IMWG criteria and duration of response (DOR), both adjudicated by an independent review committee (IRC). Secondary endpoints include progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). FISH analyses and gene expression profiling were performed on bone marrow aspirates. Results - 79 pts were enrolled: 48 quad (24 M/24 F, median age 62 yrs) and 31 penta (13 M / 18 F, median age 68 yrs). Both groups had a median of 7 prior treatment regimens including multiple dex-containing regimens. Baseline laboratory abnormalities included grade (Gr)≥3 anemia in 13% and Gr≥3 thrombocytopenia in 8%. Most penta pts received 8 doses / cycle (65%); most quad pts received 6 doses / cycle (83%). Common treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) hematological: thrombocytopenia (72%, Gr 3/4 58%), anemia (48%, Gr 3 25%) and neutropenia (29%, Gr≥3 21%). TRAEs non-hematological: nausea (72%, Gr 3 6%), fatigue (62%, Gr 3 14%) anorexia (49%, Gr 3 3%), vomiting (43%, Gr3 4%), asymptomatic hyponatremia (42%. Gr 3 20%), diarrhea (42%, Gr 3 5%) and weight loss (33%, Gr 3 1%). There was one case of febrile neutropenia (1%) and one case of clinically significant bleeding related to thrombocytopenia (1%). Seventy pts have discontinued therapy: PD (73%), AEs (17%), physician/pt preference (1%) and 6 deaths (one case related to selinexor, intracranial bleed in pt with Gr4 thrombocytopenia). Nine pts remain on study. Efficacy was evaluated in 78 pts (1 pt did not have measurable disease). The IRC-determined ORR (≥PR) for all pts was 21%, including 5% VGPR. ORR was 21% for quad pts and 20% for penta pts. Clinical benefit rates (≥MR) were 32% (all), 29% (quad), and 37% (penta). Median OS was 9.3 months (mo) for all pts, 〉 11 mo (median not reached) for responders (≥PR), and 5.7 mo for non-responders. Median DOR in responding pts was 5 mo, and median PFS in all pts was 2.1 mo. Baseline cytogenetics were assessed in 41 pts. The ORR in 18 pts with high-risk FISH abnormalities was 33% (Table 1). Notably, 3 of the 13 pts with a 17p abnormality responded (ORR 23%). Transcriptomic profiling revealed differentially expressed genes (DEGs) between responders and non-responders in both whole blood RNA and CD138+ bone marrow cells. Pathways enriched in responders included IL-6, IL-8 and IGF-1 pathways. Conclusions - Oral Sd is active in heavily pretreated pts with refractory MM, including those with MM refractory to anti-CD38 Ab and those with high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities. Response was associated with longer survival. The main toxicities of Sd are thrombocytopenia, nausea, anorexia, and fatigue. AEs were manageable with supportive care and dose interruptions/reductions. To our knowledge, this is the first report of anti-tumor activity in the penta-refractory MM population. This population of MM pts has exhausted all currently available treatment options and has an extremely poor prognosis and therefore requires new therapies. Expansion of this trial in this high unmet medical need, penta refractory population is planned. Table 1 Activity of Sd in Patients with High Risk MM Cytogenetics Table 1. Activity of Sd in Patients with High Risk MM Cytogenetics Disclosures Vogl: Constellation: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Acetylon: Research Funding; GSK: Research Funding; Calithera: Research Funding; Teva: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding. Jagannath:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy. Baz:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Takeda/Millennium: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Signal Genetics: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding. Nooka:Spectrum, Novartis, Onyx pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Richter:Takeda: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Vij:Karyopharm: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria. Schiller:Incyte Corporation: Research Funding. Costa:Sanofi: Honoraria, Research Funding. Chari:Array Biopharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding. Siegel:Takeda: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Merck: Honoraria. Fonseca:Janssen: Consultancy; AMGEN: Consultancy; Millennium, a Takeda Company: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Patent Pending: Patents & Royalties: The use of calcium isotopes as biomarkers for bone metabolisms; Patent: Patents & Royalties: Prognostication of MM based on genetic categorization of FISH of the disease; AMGEN: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Millennium, a Takeda Company: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; AMGEN: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Millennium, a Takeda Company: Consultancy; Millennium, a Takeda Company: Consultancy; Patent: Patents & Royalties: Prognostication of MM based on genetic categorization of FISH of the disease; Bayer: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Patent Pending: Patents & Royalties: The use of calcium isotopes as biomarkers for bone metabolisms; AMGEN: Consultancy; Patent: Patents & Royalties: Prognostication of MM based on genetic categorization of FISH of the disease; Patent: Patents & Royalties: Prognostication of MM based on genetic categorization of FISH of the disease; Patent Pending: Patents & Royalties: The use of calcium isotopes as biomarkers for bone metabolisms; Patent Pending: Patents & Royalties: The use of calcium isotopes as biomarkers for bone metabolisms; Celgene: Consultancy. Kauffman:Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Shacham:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Saint-Martin:Karyopharm: Employment. Picklesimer:Karyopharm: Employment. Friedlander:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Employment. Choe-Juliak:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Employment.

Abstract: Selinexor, a first-in-class, oral, selective exportin 1 (XPO1) inhibitor, induces apoptosis in cancer cells through nuclear retention of tumor suppressor proteins and the glucocorticoid receptor, along with inhibition of translation of oncoprotein mRNAs. We studied selinexor in combination with low-dose dexamethasone in patients with multiple myeloma refractory to the most active available agents. Patients and Methods This phase II trial evaluated selinexor 80 mg and dexamethasone 20 mg, both orally and twice weekly, in patients with myeloma refractory to bortezomib, carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and pomalidomide (quad-refractory disease), with a subset also refractory to an anti-CD38 antibody (penta-refractory disease). The primary end point was overall response rate (ORR). Results Of 79 patients, 48 had quad-refractory and 31 had penta-refractory myeloma. Patients had received a median of seven prior regimens. The ORR was 21% and was similar for patients with quad-refractory (21%) and penta-refractory (20%) disease. Among patients with high-risk cytogenetics, including t(4;14), t(14;16), and del(17p), the ORR was 35% (six of 17 patients). The median duration of response was 5 months, and 65% of responding patients were alive at 12 months. The most common grade ≥ 3 adverse events were thrombocytopenia (59%), anemia (28%), neutropenia (23%), hyponatremia (22%), leukopenia (15%), and fatigue (15%). Dose interruptions for adverse events occurred in 41 patients (52%), dose reductions occurred in 29 patients (37%), and treatment discontinuation occurred in 14 patients (18%). Conclusion The combination of selinexor and dexamethasone has an ORR of 21% in patients with heavily pretreated, refractory myeloma with limited therapeutic options.

Abstract: Introduction: There is considerable heterogeneity in the clinical outcome of newly diagnosed multiple-myeloma (NDMM) with some patients having a good prognosis while others fail to respond or relapse quickly after therapy progressing rapidly to death. Using risk scores based on clinical, biochemical and genetic features it is possible to predict some of this variation giving an ability to segment the disease into risk strata. Clinical studies have suggested that patients with standard-risk disease have benefited more from the recent advances in therapy compared to those with high-risk disease. The development of clinical trials specifically recruiting patients with high-risk disease features offers the potential to improve the outcome of a subgroup of patients with a very poor clinical outcome. To perform such studies is it important to have a unifying definition of high-risk including standard parameters, group size and outcome of individual risk strata so that clinical trial rigor can be achieved (e.g., common entry criteria, statistical power). In order to understand the size and feasibility of such studies we analyzed the Myeloma Genome Project (MGP) dataset to assess multiple risk factors and scores to determine and compare how they perform as risk stratifiers with each other. Methods: The MGP dataset is a large set of molecular and clinical data from 1273 patient with NDMM. Data were available on clinical variables (Albumin (Alb), B2-microglobulin (B2M), LDH, age), cytogenetic variables [t(4;14), t(14;16), t(14;20), 17p-, TP53 mutations, 1q+ and 1p-] and gene expression analysis (GEP70). A literature search was used to identify risk models used in clinical studies. Survival analysis was performed in R. The median follow-up at the time of analysis was 54.5 (53.2-56.5) months. Results: The median patient age was 66 years, with 641 (50.4%) patients over age 65. The sex ratio (M:F) was 1:0.66. African American, White, and Asian constituted 17%, 76%, and 2%, of cases respectively. 26.7% received a stem cell transplant. We determined the size of the strata and actual risk (measure by the hazard ratios, HR) compared to standard risk cases for both PFS and OS of the various clinical models available, data are summarized in Figure 1. When looking at individual risk scores, the HR for progression for t(4;14), TP53 inactivation (deletion and mutations), gain(1q), and del(1p) were 1.4, 1.1, 1.3, and 1.1 respectively. When considering overall survival these HR were 1.4, 1.7, 1.5, and 1.4 respectively. We went on to analyze the impact of these events in combination and show that combined, there is increased specificity, especially for OS (HR 2.3-5.1) but they identify small subsets making up & lt;10% of patients. We then analyzed the purely clinical scores (ISS) and combined clinical/genetic scores. We show again, that the more specific risk scores (double hit, Boyd IV, GEP70) identify between 7-13% of cases with HR (2-3.1) for OS. When we looked specifically at the younger patients (= & lt; 65), similar trends were seen with GEP70 by RNA-seq offering one of the most interesting means of identifying HR cases. Conclusion: In this large NDMM dataset, we demonstrate the clear variation in risk groups that occur dependent upon the approach used resulting in heterogeneous levels of risk, strata size, and performance. With the exception of GEP70, none of the single features are sensitive or specific enough to identify all cases. Risk models based on a combination of markers improve the ability to detect true high-risk disease but there remains variability. At a molecular level the inclusion of TP53 inactivation, and 1q+ improve the performance of the ISS. This analysis provides insights into standardizing the definition of high-risk and the generation of consensus definitions for clinical trial entry. Figure 1 Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Braunstein: Jansen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: 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; AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Epizyme: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Pawlyn: Celgene / BMS: 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; Amgen: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Cairns: Amgen: Research Funding; Merck Sharpe and Dohme: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene / BMS: Other: travel support, Research Funding. Jackson: GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; celgene BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; J and J: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; oncopeptides: Consultancy; Sanofi: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Morgan: BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jansen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GSK: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Davies: Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Constellation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene/BMS: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Abstract: To assess how changes in curriculum, accreditation standards, and certification and licensure competencies impacted how medical students and physician residents value interprofessional team and patient‐centered care. Primary Data Source The Department of Veterans Affairs Learners’ Perceptions Survey (2003–2013). The nationally administered survey asked a representative sample of 56,569 U.S. medical students and physician residents, with a comparison group of 78,038 nonphysician trainees, to rate satisfaction with 28 elements, in two overall domains, describing their clinical learning experiences at VA medical centers. Study Design Value preferences were scored as independent adjusted associations between an element (interprofessional team, patient‐centered preceptor) and the respective overall domain (clinical learning environment, faculty, and preceptors) relative to a referent element (quality of clinical care, quality of preceptor). Principal Findings Physician trainees valued interprofessional (14 percent vs. 37 percent, p   〈  .001) and patient‐centered learning (21 percent vs. 36 percent, p   〈  .001) less than their nonphysician counterparts. Physician preferences for interprofessional learning showed modest increases over time (2.5 percent/year, p   〈  .001), driven mostly by internal medicine and surgery residents. Preferences did not increase with trainees’ academic progress. Conclusions Despite changes in medical education, physician trainees continue to lag behind their nonphysician counterparts in valuing experience with interprofessional team and patient‐centered care.