The role of maintenance therapy following autologous stem cell transplantation in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: Considerations on behalf of the Chronic Malignancies Working Party of the EBMT.

Recent treatment advancements in multiple myeloma have led to significant improvements in patient outcomes. Maintenance therapy following autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (AHCT) is now standard of care and has been demonstrated to prolong and deepen treatment responses. Currently, lenalidomide remains the single agent that has been approved for maintenance post-AHCT in Europe and the USA which, if tolerated, is continued until disease progression. The treatment landscape is rapidly expanding however, and the optimal personalised maintenance approach for a patient is becoming more complex. Treatment outcomes for patients with high-risk disease remain poor and choice of maintenance in this population also remains unclear. This review article evaluates up-to-date literature regarding established maintenance approaches. It further analyses ongoing studies exploring maintenance regimens using combination and novel agents, approaches to maintenance in patients with cytogenetic high-risk disease and minimal residual disease response-adapted strategies that reflect the current evolving treatment paradigm.

Genomic Classification and Individualized Prognosis in Multiple Myeloma.

PURPOSE: Outcomes for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) are heterogenous, with overall survival (OS) ranging from months to over 10 years. METHODS: To decipher and predict the molecular and clinical heterogeneity of NDMM, we assembled a series of 1,933 patients with available clinical, genomic, and therapeutic data. RESULTS: Leveraging a comprehensive catalog of genomic drivers, we identified 12 groups, expanding on previous gene expression-based molecular classifications. To build a model predicting individualized risk in NDMM (IRMMa), we integrated clinical, genomic, and treatment variables. To correct for time-dependent variables, including high-dose melphalan followed by autologous stem-cell transplantation (HDM-ASCT), and maintenance therapy, a multi-state model was designed. The IRMMa model accuracy was significantly higher than all comparator prognostic models, with a c-index for OS of 0.726, compared with International Staging System (ISS; 0.61), revised-ISS (0.572), and R2-ISS (0.625). Integral to model accuracy was 20 genomic features, including 1q21 gain/amp, del 1p, TP53 loss, NSD2 translocations, APOBEC mutational signatures, and copy-number signatures (reflecting the complex structural variant chromothripsis). IRMMa accuracy and superiority compared with other prognostic models were validated on 256 patients enrolled in the GMMG-HD6 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02495922) clinical trial. Individualized patient risks were significantly affected across the 12 genomic groups by different treatment strategies (ie, treatment variance), which was used to identify patients for whom HDM-ASCT is particularly effective versus patients for whom the impact is limited. CONCLUSION: Integrating clinical, demographic, genomic, and therapeutic data, to our knowledge, we have developed the first individualized risk-prediction model enabling personally tailored therapeutic decisions for patients with NDMM.

Comparative Effectiveness of Teclistamab Versus Real-World Physician's Choice of Therapy in LocoMMotion and MoMMent in Triple-Class Exposed Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma.

INTRODUCTION: Teclistamab is the first approved B cell maturation antigen × CD3 bispecific antibody with precision dosing for the treatment of triple-class exposed (TCE) relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). We compared the effectiveness of teclistamab in MajesTEC-1 versus real-world physician's choice of therapy (RWPC) in patients from the prospective, non-interventional LocoMMotion and MoMMent studies. METHODS: Patients treated with teclistamab from MajesTEC-1 (N = 165) were compared with an external control arm from LocoMMotion (N = 248) or LocoMMotion + MoMMent pooled (N = 302). Inverse probability of treatment weighting adjusted for imbalances in prognostic baseline characteristics. The relative effect of teclistamab versus RWPC for overall response rate (ORR), very good partial response or better (≥ VGPR) rate, and complete response or better (≥ CR) rate was estimated with an odds ratio using weighted logistic regression transformed into a response-rate ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Weighted proportional hazards regression was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were well balanced between treatment cohorts after reweighting. Patients treated with teclistamab had significantly improved outcomes versus RWPC in LocoMMotion: ORR (RR [95% CI], 2.44 [1.79-3.33]; p < 0.0001), ≥ VGPR (RR 5.78 [3.74-8.93]; p < 0.0001), ≥ CR (RR 113.73 [15.68-825.13]; p < 0.0001), DOR (HR 0.39 [0.24-0.64]; p = 0.0002), PFS (HR 0.48 [0.35-0.64]; p < 0.0001), and OS (HR 0.64 [0.46-0.88]; p = 0.0055). Teclistamab versus RWPC in LocoMMotion + MoMMent also had significantly improved outcomes: ORR (RR 2.41 [1.80-3.23]; p < 0.0001), ≥ VGPR (RR 5.91 [3.93-8.88]; p < 0.0001), ≥ CR (RR 132.32 [19.06-918.47]; p < 0.0001), DOR (HR 0.43 [0.26-0.71]; p = 0.0011), PFS (HR 0.49 [0.37-0.66]; p < 0.0001), and OS (HR 0.69 [0.50-0.95]; p = 0.0247). CONCLUSION: Teclistamab demonstrated significantly improved effectiveness over RWPC in LocoMMotion ± MoMMent, emphasizing its clinical benefit as a highly effective treatment for patients with TCE RRMM. TRIAL REGISTRATION: MajesTEC-1, ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03145181 (phase 1) and NCT04557098 (phase 2); LocoMMotion, ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04035226; MoMMent, ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05160584.

Mezigdomide plus Dexamethasone in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma.

BACKGROUND: Despite recent progress, multiple myeloma remains incurable. Mezigdomide is a novel cereblon E3 ubiquitin ligase modulator with potent antiproliferative and tumoricidal activity in preclinical models of multiple myeloma, including those resistant to lenalidomide and pomalidomide. METHODS: In this phase 1-2 study, we administered oral mezigdomide in combination with dexamethasone to patients with relapsed and refractory myeloma. The primary objectives of phase 1 (dose-escalation cohort) were to assess safety and pharmacokinetics and to identify the dose and schedule for phase 2. In phase 2 (dose-expansion cohort), objectives included the assessment of the overall response (partial response or better), safety, and efficacy of mezigdomide plus dexamethasone at the dose and schedule determined in phase 1. RESULTS: In phase 1, a total of 77 patients were enrolled in the study. The most common dose-limiting toxic effects were neutropenia and febrile neutropenia. On the basis of the phase 1 findings, investigators determined the recommended phase 2 dose of mezigdomide to be 1.0 mg, given once daily in combination with dexamethasone for 21 days, followed by 7 days off, in each 28-day cycle. In phase 2, a total of 101 patients received the dose identified in phase 1 in the same schedule. All patients in the dose-expansion cohort had triple-class-refractory multiple myeloma, 30 patients (30%) had received previous anti-B-cell maturation antigen (anti-BCMA) therapy, and 40 (40%) had plasmacytomas. The most common adverse events, almost all of which proved to be reversible, included neutropenia (in 77% of the patients) and infection (in 65%; grade 3, 29%; grade 4, 6%). No unexpected toxic effects were encountered. An overall response occurred in 41% of the patients (95% confidence interval [CI], 31 to 51), the median duration of response was 7.6 months (95% CI, 5.4 to 9.5; data not mature), and the median progression-free survival was 4.4 months (95% CI, 3.0 to 5.5), with a median follow-up of 7.5 months (range, 0.5 to 21.9). CONCLUSIONS: The all-oral combination of mezigdomide plus dexamethasone showed promising efficacy in patients with heavily pretreated multiple myeloma, with treatment-related adverse events consisting mainly of myelotoxic effects. (Funded by Celgene, a Bristol-Myers Squibb Company; CC-92480-MM-001 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03374085; EudraCT number, 2017-001236-19.).

Maintenance lenalidomide in newly diagnosed transplant eligible and non-eligible myeloma patients; profiling second primary malignancies in 4358 patients treated in the Myeloma XI Trial.

Background: Early trials of long-term lenalidomide use reported an increased incidence of second primary malignancy (SPM), including acute myeloid leukaemia and myelodysplastic syndrome. Later, meta-analysis suggested the link to be secondary to lenalidomide in combination with melphalan. Methods: Myeloma XI is a large, phase III randomised trial in-which lenalidomide was used at induction and maintenance, in transplant eligible (TE) and non-eligible (TNE) newly diagnosed patients (NCT01554852). Here we present an analysis of SPM incidence and profile the SPM type to determine the impact of autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) and lenalidomide exposure in 4358 patients treated on study. Data collection took place from the start of the trial in May 2010, to May 2019, as per the protocol timeline. The Median follow-up following maintenance randomisation was 54.5 and 46.1 months for TE and TNE patients, respectively. Findings: In the TE pathway, the overall SPM incidence was 7.7% in lenalidomide maintenance patients compared to 3.2% in those being observed (p = 0.006). Although the TNE lenalidomide maintenance patients had the greatest SPM incidence (15.4%), this was not statistically significant when compared to the observed patients (10%, p = 0.10).The SPM incidence was higher in patients who received lenalidomide at induction and maintenance (double exposure), when compared to those treated with lenalidomide at one time point (single exposure). Again, this was most marked in TNE patients where the overall SPM incidence was 16.9% in double exposed patients, compared to 11.7% in single exposed patients, and 11.2% in patients who did not receive lenalidomide (p = 0.04). This is likely an effect of treatment duration, with the median number of cycles being 27 in the TNE double exposed patients, vs 6 in the single exposure patients.Haematological SPMs were uncommon, diagnosed in 50 patients (incidence 1.1%). The majority of cases were diagnosed in TE patients treated with lenalidomide maintenance (n = 25, incidence 2.8%), suggesting a possible link with melphalan. Non-melanoma skin cancer incidence was highest in patients receiving lenalidomide maintenance, particularly in TNE patients, where squamous cell carcinoma and basal cell carcinoma were diagnosed in 5.5% and 2.6% of patients, respectively. The incidence of most solid tumour types was higher in lenalidomide maintenance patients.Mortality due to progressive myeloma was reduced in patients receiving lenalidomide maintenance, noted to be 16.6% compared 22.6% in those observed in TE patients and 32.7% compared to 41.5% in TNE patients. SPM related mortality was low, 1.8% and 6.1% in TE and TNE lenalidomide maintenance patients, respectively, compared to 0.4% and 2.8% in those being observed. Interpretation: This provides reassurance that long-term lenalidomide treatment is safe and associated with improved outcomes in TE and TNE populations, although monitoring for SPM development should be incorporated into clinic review processes. Funding: Primary financial support was from Cancer Research UK [C1298/A10410].

Comparative Efficacy of Teclistamab Versus Current Treatments in Real-World Clinical Practice in the Prospective LocoMMotion Study in Patients with Triple-Class-Exposed Relapsed and/or Refractory Multiple Myeloma.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with triple-class-exposed relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (TCE-RRMM) have a poor prognosis and limited treatment options. Teclistamab, a B-cell maturation antigen × CD3 bispecific antibody, was studied in patients with TCE-RRMM in the single-arm MajesTEC-1 study. To assess the relative effectiveness of teclistamab versus real-world physician's choice of therapy (RWPC), adjusted comparisons were performed using individual patient data from MajesTEC-1 and LocoMMotion, a prospective study of patients with TCE-RRMM. METHODS: An external control arm for MajesTEC-1 was created from patients in LocoMMotion (n = 248; clinical cut-off: November 2, 2021) and compared with treated patients (n = 165) from MajesTEC-1 (teclistamab 1.5 mg/kg weekly; clinical cut-off: March 16, 2022). Inverse probability weighting was used to adjust for imbalances in baseline covariates. For binary endpoints [overall response rate (ORR), very good partial response or better (≥ VGPR) rate, complete response or better (≥ CR)], relative effect of teclistamab versus RWPC was estimated with an odds ratio and relative response rate and 95% confidence interval (CI), derived from weighted logistic regression. Weighted Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% CIs for time-to-event endpoints [duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS)]. RESULTS: After weighting, baseline characteristics were balanced across cohorts. In adjusted comparisons, teclistamab-treated patients were 2.3-fold, 5.2-fold and 148.3-fold, more likely to reach ORR [response-rate ratio (RR) = 2.31, 95% CI 1.77-2.85, p < 0.0001], ≥ VGPR (RR = 5.19, 95% CI 3.26-7.12, p < 0.0001) and ≥ CR (RR = 148.25, 95% CI 20.63-1065.40, p < 0.0001), respectively, versus patients receiving RWPC. Following adjustment, DOR (HR 0.32, 95% CI 0.19-0.54, p < 0.0001) and PFS (HR 0.48, 95% CI 0.35-0.65, p < 0.0001) were significantly longer with teclistamab versus RWPC. OS was numerically better with teclistamab versus RWPC [HR 0.77 (0.55-1.09), p = 0.1419]. CONCLUSION: Teclistamab demonstrated improved effectiveness versus RWPC, highlighting its clinical benefit as a novel and effective treatment for patients with TCE-RRMM. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Majest TEC-1, ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04557098; LocoMMotion, ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04035226.

IMiD resistance in multiple myeloma: current understanding of the underpinning biology and clinical impact.

Immunomodulatory agents (IMiDs) are a cornerstone of treatment for patients with multiple myeloma. IMiDs are used in therapeutic combinations at all stages of disease and are approved as a single-agent maintenance treatment after autologous stem cell transplantation. However, patients become resistant to ongoing therapy over time and inevitably relapse. It is only in the last decade that the mechanism of IMiD action has been elucidated; through binding to the cereblon component of the CRL4CRBN E3 ubiquitin ligase, a set of neosubstrates is designated for degradation by the proteasome. In myeloma cells, this includes the zinc-finger B-cell transcription factors Ikaros and Aiolos, which, in turn, lead to decreased levels of IRF4 and c-MYC and cell death. As our knowledge of IMiD mechanism of action has advanced, the ability to study resistance mechanisms has also developed. This review explores the existing work on IMiD resistance and proposes areas of future research that may advance our understanding and management of this common clinical condition.

Impact of Ultra High-risk Genetics on Real-world Outcomes of Transplant-eligible Multiple Myeloma Patients.

Refined prediction of early relapse following standard-of-care (SoC) autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) could inform real-world risk-stratified post-ASCT strategies. We investigated the impact of double hit genetics (≥2 adverse markers: t(4;14), t(14;16), t(14;20), gain(1q), del(17p)) on outcome in 139 NDMM patients who underwent SoC ASCT between January 2014 and October 2019 at our center. Double hit genetics were associated with a significantly shortened progression-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] = 4.27, P < 0.001) and overall survival (HR = 4.01, P = 0.03), and characterized most early relapses. Our results support the real-world utility of extended genetic profiling for improved risk prediction in NDMM.

The prevalence and outcomes of frail older adults in clinical trials in multiple myeloma: A systematic review.

Multiple myeloma (MM) is an incurable blood cancer that primarily affects older adults. Several frailty tools have been developed to address the heterogeneity of aging in this population. Uptake of these measures has been variable, leading to a gap in knowledge regarding the proportion of enrolled trial participants considered frail and uncertainty in the treatment-related effects and outcomes among this high-risk population. We performed a systematic review of therapeutic interventional MM clinical trials reporting on frailty. We included 43 clinical trials (24 randomized controlled trials and 19 non-randomized trials) which met eligibility criteria. Frailty was increasingly incorporated in studies in more recent years with 41.9% of included studies being reported in the last two years. Commonly used frailty tools included the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) frailty index (41.8%), and the simplified frailty score (39.5%). Frailty status was categorized with 3 levels as (frail, intermediate fit, or fit) in 51.2% of the studies and dichotomized (frail, non-frail) in 18.6% of studies. Frailty prevalence greatly varied across trials ranging from 17.2% to 73.6% of the cohort. Of the included studies, 72.0% conducted subgroup analysis (planned or post-hoc) based on frailty status. Most studies demonstrated a consistent benefit of MM interventions among the frail and non-frail populations, however in general, frail patients had worse outcomes compared to the fit. Although frailty is increasingly being incorporated in MM clinical trials, due to the variation in both the definition and categorization of frailty, there remains heterogeneity in the prevalence of frailty and its potential associated impact on outcomes.

Optimizing the value of lenalidomide maintenance by extended genetic profiling: an analysis of 556 patients in the Myeloma XI trial.

Prediction of individual patient benefit from lenalidomide (Len) maintenance after autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) remains challenging. Here, we investigated extended molecular profiling for outcome prediction in patients in the National Cancer Research Institute Myeloma XI (MyXI) trial. Patients in the MyXI trial randomized to Len maintenance or observation after ASCT were genetically profiled for t(4;14), t(14;16), t(14;20), del(1p), gain(1q), and del(17p) and co-occurrence of risk markers was computed. Progression-free survival (PFS), subsequent progression (PFS2), and overall survival (OS) were calculated from maintenance randomization, and groups were compared using Cox proportional hazards regression. Of 556 patients, 17% with double-hit multiple myeloma (MM) (≥2 risk markers), 32% with single-hit (1 risk marker), and 51% without risk markers were analyzed. Single-hit MM derived the highest PFS benefit from Len maintenance, specifically, isolated del(1p), del(17p), and t(4;14), with ∼40-fold, 10-fold, and sevenfold reduced risk of progression or death (PFS), respectively, compared with observation. This benefit translated into improved PFS2 and OS for this group of patients compared with observation; median PFS was 10.9 vs 57.3 months for observation vs Len maintenance. Patients with isolated gain(1q) derived no benefit, and double-hit MM limited benefit (regardless or risk lesions involved) from Len maintenance. Extended genetic profiling identifies patients deriving exceptional benefit from Len maintenance and should be considered for newly diagnosed patients to support management discussions along their treatment pathway. This trial was registered at www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN49407852 as # ISRCTN49407852.

The addition of vorinostat to lenalidomide maintenance for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma of all ages: results from 'Myeloma XI', a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase III trial.

Lenalidomide is an effective maintenance agent for patients with myeloma, prolonging first remission and, in transplant eligible patients, improving overall survival (OS) compared to observation. The 'Myeloma XI' trial, for newly diagnosed patients, aimed to evaluate whether the addition of the histone deacetylase inhibitor vorinostat to the lenalidomide maintenance backbone could improve outcomes further. Patients included in this analysis were randomised to maintenance therapy with lenalidomide alone (10 mg/day on days 1-21 of each 28-day cycle), or in combination with vorinostat (300 mg/day on day 1-7 and 15-21 of each 28-day cycle) with treatment continuing until unacceptable toxicity or progressive disease. There was no significant difference in median progression-free survival between those receiving lenalidomide-vorinostat or lenalidomide alone, 34 and 40 months respectively (hazard ratio [HR] 1.18, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.96-1.44, p = 0.109). There was also no significant difference in median OS, not estimable and 75 months respectively (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.76-1.29, p = 0.929). Subgroup analysis demonstrated no statistically significant heterogeneity in outcomes. Combination lenalidomide-vorinostat appeared to be poorly tolerated with more dose modifications, fewer cycles of maintenance therapy delivered and higher rates of discontinuation due to toxicity than lenalidomide alone. The trial did not meet its primary end-point, there was no benefit from the addition of vorinostat to lenalidomide maintenance.

Fitness and frailty in myeloma.

As the aging population grows, so too does the number of well-tolerated antimyeloma therapies. Physicians will see an increasing volume of patients for subsequent lines of therapy, which could now extend this relationship for over a decade. For younger patients, treatment choices are infrequently impacted by concerns of fitness, but instead about effecting the deepest, most durable response. Older adults, in contrast, are more likely to experience under- than overtreatment, and therefore more objective (and ideally straightforward) ways to evaluate their fitness and ability to tolerate therapy will increasingly assist in decision-making. Post hoc analyses categorizing the fitness of trial patients in the modern treatment era globally demonstrate that even in highly selected populations, those that are recategorized as less fit or frail are consistently at higher risk of inferior outcomes and increased toxicities. Real-world data are comparatively lacking but do demonstrate that most patients with myeloma are not representative of those enrolled on clinical trials, generally more heavily burdened by comorbidities and more likely to be categorized as "less than fit." Simultaneously, the number of therapeutic options open to patients in the relapsed setting continues to grow, now including T-cell engagers and cellular therapies, with their unique toxicity profiles. The aim of this review is to summarize the available data, highlight some of the approaches possible to easily assess fitness and how results might inform treatment selection, and illustrate ways that patients' condition can be optimized rather than lead to exclusion from the more complex therapies newly available.

Anti-CD38 antibody therapy for patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: differential mechanisms of action and recent clinical trial outcomes.

CD38 is a transmembrane glycoprotein that functions both as a receptor and an ectoenzyme, playing key roles in the regulation of calcium signaling and migration of immune cells to tumor microenvironments. High expression on multiple myeloma (MM) cells and limited expression on normal cells makes CD38 an ideal target for the treatment of MM patients. Two monoclonal antibodies directed at CD38, isatuximab and daratumumab, are available for use in patients with relapsed and/or refractory MM (RRMM); daratumumab is also approved in newly diagnosed MM and light-chain amyloidosis. Clinical experience has shown that anti-CD38 antibody therapy is transforming treatment of MM owing to its anti-myeloma efficacy and manageable safety profile. Isatuximab and daratumumab possess similarities and differences in their mechanisms of action, likely imparted by their binding to distinct, non-overlapping epitopes on the CD38 molecule. In this review, we present the mechanistic properties of these two antibodies and outline available evidence on their abilities to induce adaptive immune responses and modulate the bone marrow niche in MM. Further, we discuss differences in regulatory labeling between these two agents and analyze recent key clinical trial results, including evidence in patients with underlying renal impairment and other poor prognostic factors. Finally, we describe the limited existing evidence for the use of isatuximab or daratumumab after disease progression on prior anti-CD38 mono- or combination therapy, highlighting the need for additional clinical evaluations to define optimal anti-CD38 antibody therapy selection and sequencing in RRMM.

Clinical characteristics and outcomes of IgD myeloma: experience across UK national trials.

Immunoglobulin D (IgD) myeloma is a subtype often considered to have adverse features and inferior survival, but there is a paucity of data from large clinical studies. We compare the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with IgD myeloma from UK phase 3 myeloma trials analyzed in 2 groups: old (1980-2002) and recent (2002-2016) clinical trials, based on the time of adoption of novel myeloma therapies. Patients with IgD myeloma comprised 44 of 2789 (1.6%) and 70 of 5773 (1.2%) of the old and recent trials, respectively. Overall, IgD myeloma was associated with male predominance, low-level paraproteinemia (<10g/L), and λ light chain preference. The frequency of ultra-high-risk cytogenetics was similar in IgD myeloma compared with other subtypes (4.3% vs 5.3%, P > .99). Despite the old trial series being a younger group (median age: 59 vs 63 years, P = .015), there was a higher frequency of bone lesions, advanced stage at diagnosis, worse performance status, and severe renal impairment compared with the recent trials. Furthermore, the early mortality rate was significantly higher for the old trial series (20% vs 4%, P = .01). The overall response rate following induction therapy was significantly higher in the recent trials (89% vs 43%, P < .0001), and this was consistent with improved median overall survival (48 months; 95% confidence interval [CI] 35-67 months vs 22 months; 95% CI, 16-29 months). Survival outcomes for IgD myeloma have significantly improved and are now comparable to other myeloma types because of earlier diagnosis, novel therapies, and improved supportive care. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as # NCT01554852.

Frailty-adjusted therapy in Transplant Non-Eligible patients with newly diagnosed Multiple Myeloma (FiTNEss (UK-MRA Myeloma XIV Trial)): a study protocol for a randomised phase III trial.

INTRODUCTION: Multiple myeloma is a bone marrow cancer, which predominantly affects older people. The incidence is increasing in an ageing population.Over the last 10 years, patient outcomes have improved. However, this is less apparent in older, less fit patients, who are ineligible for stem cell transplant. Research is required in this patient group, taking into account frailty and aiming to improve: treatment tolerability, clinical outcomes and quality of life. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Frailty-adjusted therapy in Transplant Non-Eligible patients with newly diagnosed Multiple Myeloma is a national, phase III, multicentre, randomised controlled trial comparing standard (reactive) and frailty-adjusted (adaptive) induction therapy delivery with ixazomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone (IRD), and to compare maintenance lenalidomide to lenalidomide+ixazomib, in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma not suitable for stem cell transplant. Overall, 740 participants will be registered into the trial to allow 720 and 478 to be randomised at induction and maintenance, respectively.All participants will receive IRD induction with the dosing strategy randomised (1:1) at trial entry. Patients randomised to the standard, reactive arm will commence at the full dose followed by toxicity dependent reactive modifications. Patients randomised to the adaptive arm will commence at a dose level determined by their International Myeloma Working Group frailty score. Following 12 cycles of induction treatment, participants alive and progression free will undergo a second (double-blind) randomisation on a 1:1 basis to maintenance treatment with lenalidomide+placebo versus lenalidomide+ixazomib until disease progression or intolerance. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been obtained from the North East-Tyne & Wear South Research Ethics Committee (19/NE/0125) and capacity and capability confirmed by local research and development departments for each participating centre prior to opening to recruitment. Participants are required to provide written informed consent prior to trial registration. Trial results will be disseminated by conference presentations and peer-reviewed publications. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN17973108, NCT03720041.

Perspectives on the Risk-Stratified Treatment of Multiple Myeloma.

The multiple myeloma treatment landscape has changed dramatically. This change, paralleled by an increase in scientific knowledge, has resulted in significant improvement in survival. However, heterogeneity remains in clinical outcomes, with a proportion of patients not benefiting from current approaches and continuing to have a poor prognosis. A significant proportion of the variability in outcome can be predicted on the basis of clinical and biochemical parameters and tumor-acquired genetic variants, allowing for risk stratification and a more personalized approach to therapy. This article discusses the principles that can enable the rational and effective development of therapeutic approaches for high-risk multiple myeloma.

Minimal Residual Disease After Autologous Stem-Cell Transplant for Patients With Myeloma: Prognostic Significance and the Impact of Lenalidomide Maintenance and Molecular Risk.

PURPOSE: Minimal residual disease (MRD) can predict outcomes in patients with multiple myeloma, but limited data are available on the prognostic impact of MRD when assessed at serial time points in the context of maintenance therapy after autologous stem-cell transplant (ASCT) and the interaction between MRD and molecular risk. METHODS: Data from a large phase III trial (Myeloma XI) were examined to determine the relationship between MRD status, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) in post-ASCT patients randomly assigned to lenalidomide maintenance or no maintenance at 3 months after ASCT. MRD status was assessed by flow cytometry (median sensitivity 0.004%) before maintenance random assignment (ASCT + 3) and 6 months later (ASCT + 9). RESULTS: At ASCT + 3, 475 of 750 (63.3%) patients were MRD-negative and 275 (36.7%) were MRD-positive. MRD-negative status was associated with improved PFS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.47; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.58 P < .001) and OS (HR = 0.59; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.85; P = .0046). At ASCT + 9, 214 of 326 (65.6%) were MRD-negative and 112 (34.4%) were MRD-positive. MRD-negative status was associated with improved PFS (HR = 0.20; 95% CI, 0.13 to 0.31; P < .0001) and OS (HR = 0.33; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.75; P = .0077). The findings were very similar when restricted to patients with complete response/near complete response. Sustained MRD negativity from ASCT + 3 to ASCT + 9 or the conversion to MRD negativity by ASCT + 9 was associated with the longest PFS/OS. Patients randomly assigned to lenalidomide maintenance were more likely to convert from being MRD-positive before maintenance random assignment to MRD-negative 6 months later (lenalidomide 30%, observation 17%). High-risk molecular features had an adverse effect on PFS and OS even for those patients achieving MRD-negative status. On multivariable analysis of MRD status, maintenance therapy and molecular risk maintained prognostic impact at both ASCT + 3 and ASCT + 9. CONCLUSION: In patients with multiple myeloma, MRD status at both ASCT + 3 and ASCT + 9 is a powerful predictor of PFS and OS.

Predicting the Future: Machine-Based Learning for MRD Prognostication.

The prognostic significance of minimal residual disease (MRD) detection in multiple myeloma is well established. Understanding factors that predict for MRD negativity, such as tumor burden, cytogenetic, and immune-related biomarkers, may enable us to improve outcome prediction at diagnosis, and in the future move toward tailored treatment approaches. See related article by Guerrero et al., p. 2598.