Use of Oral Antivirals Ritonavir-Nirmatrelvir and Molnupiravir in Patients with Multiple Myeloma Is Associated with Low Rates of Severe COVID-19: A Single-Center, Prospective Study.

In patients with multiple myeloma (MM), SARS-CoV-2 infection has been associated with a severe clinical course and high mortality rates due to the concomitant disease- and treatment-related immunosuppression. Specific antiviral treatment involves viral replication control with monoclonal antibodies and antivirals, including molnupiravir and the ritonavir-boosted nirmatrelvir. This prospective study investigated the effect of these two agents on SARS-CoV-2 infection severity and mortality in patients with MM. Patients received either ritonavir-nirmatrelvir or molnupiravir. Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics, as well as levels of neutralizing antibodies (NAbs), were compared. A total of 139 patients was treated with ritonavir-nirmatrelvir while the remaining 30 patients were treated with molnupiravir. In total, 149 patients (88.2%) had a mild infection, 15 (8.9%) had a moderate infection, and five (3%) had severe COVID-19. No differences in the severity of COVID-19-related outcomes were observed between the two antivirals. Patients with severe disease had lower neutralizing antibody levels before the COVID-19 infection compared to patients with mild disease (p = 0.04). Regarding treatment, it was observed that patients receiving belantamab mafodotin had a higher risk of severe COVID-19 (p < 0.001) in the univariate analysis. In conclusion, ritonavir-nirmatrelvir and molnupiravirmay prevent severe disease in MM patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. This prospective study indicated the comparable effects of the two treatment options, providing an insight for further research in preventing severe COVID-19 in patients with hematologic malignancies.

DREAMM-9: PHASE I STUDY OF BELANTAMAB MAFODOTIN PLUS STANDARD OF CARE IN PATIENTS WITH TRANSPLANT-INELIGIBLE NEWLY DIAGNOSED MULTIPLE MYELOMA

Background: The bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRd) regimen is a standard of care for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). Belantamab mafodotin (belamaf) is a B-cell maturation antigen-binding antibody-drug conjugate that eliminates myeloma cells by a multimodal mechanism: direct cell kill and anti-myeloma tumor immune response. Belamaf has demonstrated deep and durable responses as a monotherapy in the DREAMM-2 study of patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Preclinical evidence of belamaf in combination with bortezomib or lenalidomide suggests enhanced anti-myeloma activity, providing rationale for this treatment combination. Aims: To evaluate the safety and tolerability of this combination in adult pts with transplant-ineligible (TI) NDMM and establish the recommended Phase III dose. Methods: DREAMM-9 (NCT04091126) is an ongoing Phase I, open-label, randomized study of belamaf + VRd. The belamaf dose cohorts currently being evaluated are Cohort 1 (1.9 mg/kg Q3/4W), Cohort 2 (1.4 mg/kg Q6/8W), Cohort 3 (1.9 mg/kg Q6/8W), Cohort 4 (1.0 mg/kg Q3/4W), and Cohort 5 (1.4 mg/kg Q3/4W). Belamaf is given with VRd Q3W until Cycle 8, and with Rd Q4W thereafter. After evaluation of safety data for Cohort 1, Cohorts 2-5 were opened in parallel and enrolled pts were randomized 1:1:1:1. Primary endpoint is safety. Secondary endpoints include efficacy, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics (PK). Results: As of data cutoff (07 Dec 2021), 64 pts were analyzed across all cohorts. Median age (range) was 73.0 (51- 88) years, 55% were male, 80% were white, 8% had extramedullary disease, 59% were International Staging System stage II or III, 20% had amp1q, and 17% had high-risk cytogenetics (≥1 of: t(4;14), t(14;16), del17p). The median duration of follow-up varied: Cohort 1 (17.4 months [mo]), Cohort 2 (5.9 mo), Cohort 3 (6.1 mo), Cohort 4 (4.7 mo), Cohort 5 (5.8 mo). Median number of belamaf cycles were: Cohort 1 (6), Cohort 2 (3), Cohort 3 (3.5), Cohort 4 (4.5), and Cohort 5 (5). Most common adverse events (AEs) across cohorts included thrombocytopenia (49%), constipation (43%), diarrhea (32%), and peripheral sensory neuropathy (30%). AEs related to study treatment were experienced by 61 (97%) pts. Belamaf-related grade 3/4 AEs occurred in 24 (38%) pts. Belamaf dose reductions occurred in 11 (18%) pts, with dose delays in 10 (16%) pts. Three pts experienced a fatal severe AE (unrelated to study treatment);2 due to COVID-19 infection, 1 due to pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Early deep responses were observed;67-92% pts achieved ≥very good partial response (VGPR) (Table), with median time to VGPR of 2.1-2.9 months across cohorts. Of pts with ≥VGPR, 17 were minimal residual disease (MRD) negative, 10 in Cohort 1. As of data cutoff, 8-75% of pts achieved best response of complete response (CR) or stringent CR (sCR). Grade 3 corneal exam findings were reported in 25-58% of pts;grade 3 visual acuity changes were reported in 21-75% of pts. No grade 4 corneal exam findings or visual acuity changes were reported in pts receiving belamaf Q6/8W, compared with 0-17% and 0-8%, respectively, in the Q3/4W cohorts. Belamaf PK profile was similar to that in pts with RRMM, accounting for baseline characteristics. Image: Summary/Conclusion: Belamaf + VRd demonstrated high response rates in pts with TI NDMM, with a high rate of MRD negativity indicating deep responses. No new safety signals were observed relative to DREAMM-2. Study is ongoing to evaluate the safety and efficacy of variable dose intensities of belamaf in combination with VRd.

HIGH RESPONSES RATES WITH SINGLE AGENT BELANTAMAB MAFODOTIN IN RELAPSED SYSTEMIC AL AMYLOIDOSIS

Background: Systemic AL amyloidosis is an incurable relapsing plasma cell disorder. Despite therapeutic advances, there are no approved treatments for relapse disease. Treatment is often challenging due to underlying organ dysfunction. Belantamab mafodotin is an antibody-drug conjugate targeting B-cell maturation antigen with approval for relapsed refractory myeloma. In multiply pre-treated myeloma, the DREAMM-2 phase II trial showed an overall response rate of 32% for those with 2.5 mg/kg dose administered every three weeks with 2/3rd patients reporting keratopathy. A small case series of 6 patients with relapsed AL amyloidosis (Zhang et al , ASH 2021) was recently reported and a phase 2 trial is recruiting for patients with refractory amyloidosis (NCT04617925). Aims: We report our initial results using Belantamab monotherapy for the treatment of patients with AL amyloidosis with relapsed disease. Methods: Data for consecutive patients who were administered Belantamab at a specialist referral centre, National Amyloidosis Centre, University College London, was analysed. Results: Eleven patients were included 8 male, 3 female. Median age at Belantamab initiation was 65 (range 42-74) years. Eight patients had λ AL-type and three κ AL-type. At diagnosis, median involved free light-chain concentration was 534 (range 73-7181) mg/l. A median of two organs involved at baseline (range 1-3): 4 had cardiac involvement (half Mayo stage 2;half Mayo stage 3a) and 8 had renal involvement. The median prior lines of therapy was 3 (range 2-5) with all exposed to prior immunomodulatory drugs, proteasome inhibitors and 73% to anti-CD38 antibody treatments. Thirty-six percent had relapsed after melphalan-conditioned autologous stem cell transplantation. A median of 3 cycles of belantamab were delivered (range 1-8). The most frequent adverse event was ocular toxicity which was experienced in 8 patients (grade 1-3), necessitating dose modification of the three-weekly schedule. One patient developed transient grade 1 dyspnoea and liver dysfunction. No patients developed cytopenias, unlike previous reports (Zhang et al , 2021), nor infections beyond COVID (2 patients mild with no hospital admissions). The majority of the cohort required dose reduction either at initiation (patient 4, due to end stage renal failure;patient 11, post-renal transplant) or during therapy (n=5;three to 1.9mg/kg, two to 1.25mg/kg) due to ocular toxicity. Only one patient remained on the standard dose of 2.5mg/kg for >3 cycles. Ocular toxicity improved after treatment interruption (drug intervals 4-6 weeks) and no patients required complete treatment cessation. One patient is too early to assess response. Haematological responses (PR or better) were seen in 7 patients with 3 complete responses and two very good partial responses (VGPR) which are ongoing. Both renal patients (patients 4 and 11) commenced a dose of 1.25mg/kg and sustained a VGPR with no additional toxicity. Patient 3 had a 42% reduction in sFLC after two doses but then a prolonged gap due to keratopathy and has lost the response. There were no cardiac or renal toxicities observed. Summary/Conclusion: Belantamab mafodotin demonstrates significant activity in patients with heavily pre-treated AL amyloidosis with 70% achieving a ≥PR. Apart from keratopathy requiring dose modification, no other substantial toxicity was observed. Two patients with renal impairment (stage V CKD and ESRD) and one patient post-renal transplant tolerated treatment with no additional toxicity. Belantamab mafodotin shows promise in treatment of relapsed AL and needs further prospective trials.

HUMORAL RESPONSE RATE POST MRNA COVID19 VACCINATION (BNT162B2) IS HIGLY DEPENDENT TO BONE MARROW PLASMACYTOSIS: LONG FOLLOW-UP OF SYMPTOMATIC MULTIPLE MYELOMA PATIENTS

Background: SARS-COV-2 anti-Spike IgG response following mRNA vaccination (BNT162b2) is suboptimal and highly variable in MM patients. Patients and Methods: We report here a single-institution retrospective analysis of 127 consecutive patients with symptomatic MM (71 males, 56 females), [median age 69.5 years (range 45-85)], 63 patients with untreated MM and 64 patients with MM refractory to one or more previous treatment lines. Myeloma therapies included PI+IMiD combos, IMiD-based regimens, PI-based regimens, anti-CD38 mAb-based therapies, antibody-drug conjugates (Belantamab Mafodotin monotherapy), dexamethasone and high dose melphalan. Anti-spike IgG antibody were detected also in 50 healthy volunteers. Patients with symptomatic MM and healthy controls received two dose of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine (Pfizer BioNTech) on days 1 and 21 between 29 April and 15 May 2021. Patients with prior history of SARS-CoV-2 were excluded from analysis. Quantitative determination of anti-spike S1/S2 IgG antibody was performed at 4 weeks from vaccination completion (LIAISONR SARS-COV-2 S1/S2 IgG, LIAISONR). It was previously established a threshold >15 AU/ml of anti-Spike IgG which was related to neutralizing activity of anti-SARS-COV-2 antibodies. Results: Sixty-five out of 127 patients were evaluable for response. Antispike IgG antibody were detected in 50/65 (76.9%) MM patients, defined as responders [177 AU/mL (range 26.4 - 1430)]. 23.1% of MM patients, defined as non-responders, failed to respond at two doses of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine [3.8 AU/mL (range 0.65 - 9.33)]. Seroprotection rate at cutoff of 15 AU/mL was 100% in controls [249 AU/mL (range 104 - 2430)]. No statistically significant differences were found between the two subgroups of patients for myeloma disease phase (relapse/refractory MM vs. untreated symptomatic MM), LDH, residual gammaglobulin levels, WBC, ANC, lymphocytic response, age and sex (Tab. 2). Conversely, plasmacytosis, B2M and haemoglobin concentration were associated with a different response to vaccine. Patients with extreme plasmacytosis (60.0 20.3 vs. 28.218.8 meanSD;p <0.001) (Tab. 2) had a mean titer less than 15 AU/ml of anti-Spike IgG compared with patients with a low plasmacytosis, who, conversely, showed significantly higher mean titers of anti-Spike IgG. B2M was significantly higher in non-responders compared to responders (4.6 4.1 vs. 3.23.6 mean SD;p = 0.006) (Tab. 2). Haemoglobin value was significantly lower in non-responders compared to responders (10.8 1.8 vs. 12.11.8 mean SD;p = 0.008) (Tab. 2). Multivariate analysis confirmed the bone marrow infiltration pattern and haemoglobin value as statistically significant variables. In addition, in the present cohort, the myeloma treatment, including high-dose melphalan and autologous stem cell transplantation, have not been associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Conclusions: In our experience, significant fraction of MM patients (23.1%) does not developed any detectable anti-Spike IgG after two dose of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine. Lack of IgG response associated with three statistically significant variables: extreme plasmacytosis, B2M, and haemoglobin concentration. In the subgroup of patients with good response to vaccine, after a median follow-up of 7 months from second dose of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine, no cases of COVID-19 occurred. .

DREAMM-9: PHASE I STUDY OF BELANTAMAB MAFODOTIN PLUS STANDARD OF CARE IN PATIENTS WITH TRANSPLANT-INELIGIBLE NEWLY DIAGNOSED MULTIPLE MYELOMA

Background: The bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRd) regimen is a SoC for NDMM. Belamaf, a B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA)-targeting antibody-drug conjugate, demonstrated durable responses in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. Preclinical studies of belamaf in combination with bortezomib/ lenalidomide suggest enhanced antimyeloma activity. We report preliminary findings of belamaf + VRd for patients with TI NDMM. Materials and Methods: DREAMM-9 (NCT04091126) is an ongoing Phase I, open label, randomized, dose and schedule evaluation trial. Adults with TI NDMM and ECOG status 0-2 are eligible. VRd is administered Q3W until Cycle 8, followed by lenalidomide + dexamethasone (Rd) Q4W. Belamaf + VRd is administered until Cycle 8, and with Rd thereafter. The currently evaluated belamaf dose cohorts are: Cohort 1 (1.9 mg/kg Q3/4W), Cohort 2 (1.4 mg/kg Q6/8W), Cohort 3 (1.9 mg/ kg Q6/8W), Cohort 4 (1.0 mg/kg Q3/4W), and Cohort 5 (1.4 mg/kg Q3/4W). Primary endpoint is safety. Secondary endpoints include efficacy, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics (PK). Results: Overall 36 patients were treated across the 5 cohorts. The median (range) age was 74.0 (63-80) years;56% patients were male, 17 (47%) had stage 2 disease, 3 (8%) had extramedullary disease, 6 (17%) patients had high risk cytogenetic abnormalities;the median number of belamaf cycles ranged from 1-9. No new safety signals were observed. Across Cohorts 1-5, all patients experienced AEs related to study treatment;1 patient in Cohort 1 died due to COVID-19 infection. The most common AEs leading to dose modification were thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, and corneal events. Patients in Cohort 2 and 3 had the lowest number of Grade ≥3 corneal events (3 and 2 events, respectively). All 12 patients in Cohort 1, all 6 in Cohorts 3 and 5, and 5/6 patients in Cohorts 2 and 4 have responded to the treatment;≥half of patients in each cohort achieved very good partial response or better. As of data cut-off, 3/12 patients in Cohort 1, 2/6 in Cohort 4, and 1/6 patients each in Cohorts 3 and 5 remained in complete response. Belamaf PK profile was similar to that observed in patients with RRMM taking into consideration baseline patients characteristics. Conclusions: Preliminary data suggest addition of belamaf to VRd did not reveal new safety signals and demonstrates high response rates, albeit with short follow-up. The trial is ongoing to confirm safety and evaluate the efficacy of belamaf + VRd. .

Prescrire's ratings of new drugs in 2021: A brief review

Three new drugs, all based on messenger RNA or small interfering RNA technology, represented a major therapeutic advance in 2021. But the bigger picture is that most of the new authorisations that advanced patient care were adaptations of existing drugs. And that more than half of this year's new authorisations were not advances, and in fact about one-tenth represented a step backwards compared to existing options.

CONTINUOUS THERAPY WITH CARFILZOMIB-LENALIDOMIDE-DEXAMETHASONE (KRD): A MULTICENTRIC EXPERIENCE IN REAL-LIFE

The irreversible proteasome inhibitor Carfilzomib has a proven efficacy in doublet and triplet combinations for the treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) as shown in the ENDEAVOR and ASPIRE trials. Here we retrospectively analyzed a series of RRMM patients treated with KRd regimen over 18 cycles to evaluate efficacy and tolerability of continuous treatment (Table 1). Data were elaborated using SPSS Statistics Version 26. Overall survival (OS) was calculated from the time of the beginning of treatment until the date of death for any cause or last follow-up visit. Progression free survival (PFS) was defined as the time from the beginning of treatment to documented progression. OS and PFS were analysed by the Kaplan-Meier test. The statistical significance level was set at the 95th percentile. 36 patients were enrolled at one Calabrian and three Sicilian centres on behalf of the Sicilian Myeloma Network from June 2016 to November 2021. 24 of them were on first relapse (66,6%). Median number of cycles was 31.5 (range 18-61). Overall response rate (ORR) at first response to KRd was 92%: 3 patients (8%) achieved a complete response (CR), 14 patients (39%) achieved a very good partial response (VGPR), 16 (45%) achieved PR, 2 (5%) a minimal response (MR) and 1 (3%) had a stable disease (SD). ORR at best response was 97% (56% CR, 30% VGPR, 4% PR), 1 patient (3%) had SD. At last follow up ORR was 53%: (36% CR, 8% VGPR, 8% PR), one (3%) had a SD. Progression disease (PD) occurred in 16 patients (44%), 15 of them were exposed to another treatment, among them 9 patients were exposed to at least two more treatments including novel agents (Daratumumab, Pomalidomide, Belantamab- Mafodotin). Median PFS was not reached and so was median OS calculated from the beginning of KRd. 9 patients (25%) reported grade 3-4 hematological AEs, 13 patients experienced (36%) grade 3-4 nonhematological AEs, only 3 (8%) cardiovascular AEs. Lenalidomide was reduced in 21 (58%), interrupted in 9 (25%) patients due to serious adverse events (SAEs). During Sars-Cov-2 pandemic waves, to reduce hospital admission, 8 patients who achieved at least VGPR continue halved Carfilzomib administration schedule (total dose 27 mg/m2 once every 2 weeks instead of twice) maintaining previous response except for 1 patient who experienced PD (at cycle 32, after one more year of KRD treatment). Real-world experiences often significantly diverge from randomized clinical trials for patients selection resulting into differences in terms of efficacy and tolerability. In our study KRd combination deepened response over time without relevant toxicity as showed also in a subgroup analysis of ASPIRE and ENDEAVOR. In addition, schedule modification during Sars-Cov-2 pandemic reduced the number of hospital admissions without losing quality of response, thus opening the question of which is the best administration regimen of Carfilzomib as maintenance. (Table Presented).

Patients with Multiple Myeloma on Anti-CD38 or Anti-BCMA Based Regimens and Patients with Waldenstrom's Macroglobulinemia Under Rituximab or BTK Inhibitors Have a Poor Humoral Response Following COVID-19 Vaccination

[Formula presented] Introduction: Recent data suggest a suboptimal antibody response to COVID-19 vaccination in patients with hematological malignancies. Herein, we evaluated the development of neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) against SARS-CoV-2 in patients with plasma cell neoplasms (PCNs) after vaccination with either the mRNA BNT162b2 or viral vector AZD1222 vaccine, up to 50 days post their first vaccine dose. Methods: This is an ongoing large prospective study (NCT04743388) evaluating the kinetics of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies after COVID-19 vaccination in healthy subjects and in patients with hematological malignancies or solid tumors. Here we present the data on patients with PCNs in comparison to controls of similar age and gender, who were vaccinated during the same time period (January to March 2021) in Athens (Greece). Major exclusion criteria for both patients and controls included the presence of: (i) autoimmune disorder under immunosuppressive therapy or other active malignant disease;(ii) HIV or active hepatitis B and C infection, (iii) end-stage renal disease and (iv) prior diagnosis of COVID-19. Serum was collected on day 1 (D1;before the first vaccine dose), on day 22 (D22;before the second dose of the BNT162b2 or 3 weeks post the first AZD1222 dose) and on day 50 (D50;4 weeks post second dose of the BNT162b2 or 7 weeks post the first AZD1222 dose). NAbs against SARS-CoV-2 were measured using an FDA approved-ELISA methodology (cPass™ SARS-CoV-2 NAbs Detection Kit, GenScript, Piscataway, NJ, USA). Results: We evaluated 382 patients with PCNs after vaccination with either the BNT162b2 or the AZD1222 vaccine. Patients with MM (n=213), WM (n=106), SMM (n=38) and MGUS (n=25) and 226 healthy controls were enrolled in the study. Of MM/SMM/MGUS patients, 215 (77.9%) were vaccinated with the BNT162b2 and 61 (22.1%) with the AZD1222 vaccine, while out of 106 WM patients 90 (84.9%) were vaccinated with the BNT162b2 and 16 (15.1%) with the AZD1222 vaccine. Vaccination with either two doses of the BNT162b2 or one dose of the AZD1222 vaccine led to lower production of NAbs against SARS-CoV-2 in patients compared with controls both on day 22 and on day 50 (P<0.001 for all comparisons). After the first dose of the vaccine, on D22, the patient group had lower NAb titers compared with controls: the median NAb inhibition titer was 27% (IQR: 15.3-42%) for MM/SMM/MGUS versus 20.5% (IQR: 10-37%) for WM patients versus 38.7% (IQR: 22-54.3%) for controls (P<0.001 for all comparisons). On D50 the median NAb inhibition titer was 62.8% (IQR: 26-88.9%) for MM/SMM/MGUS versus 36% (IQR: 18-78%) for WM patients versus 90% (IQR: 58-96.4%) for controls (P<0.001 for all comparisons). 57.3% MM/SMM/MGUS, 42% WM patients and 81% controls developed NAb titers ≥50% (p<0.001 for patients versus controls). Furthermore, MM patients showed an inferior NAb response compared with MGUS on day 22 (p=0.009) and on day 50 (p=0.003). Importantly, active treatment with either anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies or belantamab mafodotin and lymphopenia at the time of vaccination were independent prognostic factors for suboptimal antibody response following vaccination in MM (p<0.05). Disease-related immune dysregulation and therapy-related immunosuppression were involved in the low humoral response in patients with WM. Importantly, active treatment with either rituximab or Bruton's Tyrosine Kinase inhibitors (BTKIs) was proven as an independent prognostic factor for suboptimal antibody response following vaccination in WM (p<0.05). Regarding adverse events, 33% and 31.6% patients reported mild reactions after the first and second dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine, respectively;32.8% patients vaccinated with the first dose of AZD1222 also presented with local reactions. Conclusion: Patients with MM and WM have a low humoral response following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, especially those who are under treatment with anti-CD38-, anti-BCMA-, anti-CD20- or BTKIs-based regimens. This result suggest that these patients have to continue the protective measures ag inst SARS-CoV-2 as they are at high risk for COVID-19. Further studies on the kinetics of immune subpopulations following COVID-19 vaccination will elucidate the underlying immune landscape and determine the potential need for additional booster vaccine doses or protective administration of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 in MM/WM patients with poor response after full vaccination. Disclosures: Terpos: Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding;BMS: Honoraria;Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding;Genesis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding;GSK: Honoraria, Research Funding;Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding;Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding;Novartis: Honoraria;Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Gavriatopoulou: Janssen: Honoraria;Takeda: Honoraria;Sanofi: Honoraria;Karyopharm: Honoraria;Genesis: Honoraria;GSK: Honoraria;Amgen: Honoraria. Kastritis: Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding;Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding;Genesis: Honoraria;Takeda: Honoraria;Pfizer: Honoraria. Dimopoulos: Janssen: Honoraria;BeiGene: Honoraria;Takeda: Honoraria;Amgen: Honoraria;BMS: Honoraria.

DREAMM-9: Phase I Study of Belantamab Mafodotin Plus Standard of Care in Patients with Transplant-Ineligible Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma

Introduction: The bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRd) regimen is an acceptable standard of care (SoC) for both transplant-eligible and transplant-ineligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (TI NDMM). Ongoing development of novel therapies and combinations strive to improve survival outcomes beyond what is expected from SoC. Belantamab mafodotin (belamaf) is a B-cell maturation antigen-binding antibody-drug conjugate that eliminates myeloma cells by a multimodal mechanism and has demonstrated durable responses in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Preclinical evidence of belamaf in combination with bortezomib or lenalidomide suggests enhanced anti-myeloma activity, providing rationale for this treatment combination. We report the preliminary findings of belamaf + VRd for TI NDMM patients. Methods: DREAMM-9 (NCT04091126) is an ongoing Phase I, open-label, randomized, dose and schedule evaluation study of belamaf + VRd in patients with TI NDMM. Eligible patients include those ≥18 years old with ECOG status 0-2 and adequate organ system functions. The study evaluates safety and tolerability of belamaf + VRd in up to 8 cohorts, up to 144 patients, to establish the recommended phase 3 dose (RP3D). VRd is administered Q3W until cycle 8, followed by lenalidomide + dexamethasone (Rd) Q4W. Belamaf + VRd is administered until cycle 8, and then in combination with Rd thereafter. The belamaf dose cohorts currently being evaluated are: cohort 1 (1.9 mg/kg Q3/4W), cohort 2 (1.4 mg/kg Q6/8W), cohort 3 (1.9 mg/kg Q6/8W), cohort 4 (1.0 mg/kg Q3/4W), and cohort 5 (1.4 mg/kg Q3/4W). After evaluation of safety data for cohort 1, cohorts 2-5 were opened in parallel and enrolled patients were randomized 1:1:1:1. Safety data, clinical activity, and drug concentrations will be assessed, and used to determine the belamaf RP3D. This analysis reports the preliminary results from cohort 1. Primary endpoints include number of patients with adverse events (AEs). Secondary endpoints include establishing relative dose intensity of lenalidomide and bortezomib in combination with belamaf, cumulative dose of belamaf, pharmacokinetics (PK) profile of belamaf when combined with VRd, overall response rate (ORR), complete response (CR), stringent complete response (sCR), complete response rate ([CRR];% of patients with a confirmed CR or better), and rate of very good partial response or better (≥VGPR). Exploratory endpoints include assessing minimal residual disease (MRD) in patients who achieve ≥VGPR, and safety and efficacy exposure-response relationships. Results: Twelve patients in cohort 1 were included in this preliminary analysis. Eight patients (67%) were male;median age (range) was 72.5 years (63-77). Ten patients (83%) were white and 2 (17%) were Asian. Nine patients (75%), were ISS stage II or III, and 4 (33%) patients had high-risk cytogenetics (consisting of one or more of the following: t(4;14), t(14;16), del17p, 17p13del). AEs related to study treatment were experienced by all 12 patients. Dose reductions occurred in 12 (100%) patients, all of whom also experienced a dose delay. Most common AEs leading to dose modification were thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, and corneal events. Grade 3 or 4 AEs related to belamaf occurred in 9 (75%) patients. During the trial, one patient experienced a fatal severe AE due to COVID-19 infection (unrelated to study treatment;Table). All patients, 100% (n=12;95% CI: 73.5-100) achieved ≥VGPR. Early deep responses were observed;2 (17%) patients achieved VGPR as early as 4 weeks. As of data cut-off, 5 (42%) remain in CR and 3 (25%) in sCR. Based on real-time data captured in the clinical database, 7 out of 9 patients achieved MRD-negative status at the first test after VGPR. Belamaf PK profile was similar to that observed in patients with RRMM taking into consideration baseline patients characteristics. Conclusion: Preliminary data suggest addition of belamaf to VRd did not reveal new safety signals and demonstrates high response rates, albeit with short follow up. The study is ongoing to confirm safety and evaluate the efficacy of belamaf + VRd. Updated data for cohort 1 will be reported at the congress. Funding: GSK (Study 209664);belamaf drug linker technology licensed from Seagen;belamaf monoclonal antibody produced using POTELLIGENT Technology licensed from BioWa. [Formula presented] Disclosures: Usmani: Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding;Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding;Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau;Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding;SkylineDX: Consultancy, Research Funding;Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau;Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau;Janssen Oncology: Consultancy, Research Funding;Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding;EdoPharma: Consultancy;GSK: Consultancy, Research Funding;Celgene/BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau;Array BioPharma: Consultancy, Research Funding;Abbvie: Consultancy;Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Quach: Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding;Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding;GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding;Janssen/Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding;Sanofi: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding;Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding;Antengene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;CSL: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Koh: Pfizer: Consultancy;Jassen: Honoraria;AstraZeneca: Honoraria;Novartis: Honoraria;GSK: Honoraria;Roche: Honoraria;Takeda: Honoraria. Guenther: Novartis: Consultancy;Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria;Roche: Consultancy;Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria;Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria;AbbVie: Consultancy;Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria;Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria. Zhou: GlaxoSmithKline: Current Employment. Kaisermann: GlaxoSmithKline: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Mis: GlaxoSmithKline: Current Employment. Williams: GlaxoSmithKline: Current Employment. Yeakey: GlaxoSmithKline: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Ferron-Brady: GlaxoSmithKline: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Figueroa: GlaxoSmithKline: Current Employment. Kremer: GlaxoSmithKline: Current Employment. Gupta: Novartis: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company;GlaxoSmithKline: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Janowski: Celgene: Consultancy;AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

2020 FDA TIDES (Peptides and Oligonucleotides) Harvest.

2020 has been an extremely difficult and challenging year as a result of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and one in which most efforts have been channeled into tackling the global health crisis. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved 53 new drug entities, six of which fall in the peptides and oligonucleotides (TIDES) category. The number of authorizations for these kinds of drugs has been similar to that of previous years, thereby reflecting the consolidation of the TIDES market. Here, the TIDES approved in 2020 are analyzed in terms of chemical structure, medical target, mode of action, and adverse effects.