A.R.R.O.W.2: Once- vs twice-weekly carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.

Twice-weekly carfilzomib (27 mg/m2) plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone (KRd27) is a standard-of-care in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Once-weekly carfilzomib regimens have shown clinical benefits with improved patient convenience. This open-label, phase 3, multicenter, randomized study aimed to demonstrate noninferiority of the overall response rate (ORR) for once-weekly carfilzomib (56 mg/m2) plus Rd (KRd56) vs twice-weekly KRd27 in RRMM. A total of 454 patients were randomized (1:1) to receive carfilzomib as once-weekly 30-minute infusions of 56 mg/m2 (KRd56; n=228) or twice-weekly 10-minute infusions of 27 mg/m2 (KRd27; n=226). Baseline characteristics were balanced between groups. ORR was 82.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 76.9‒87.2) in the once-weekly group vs 86.3% (95% CI, 81.1‒90.5) in the twice-weekly group (risk ratio, 0.954 [95% CI, 0.882‒1.032]) and did not meet the threshold for statistical significance of noninferiority (P=0.0666). Complete response or better was obtained in 46.9% of patients in the once-weekly arm and 36.3% in the twice-weekly arm. The proportions of patients who achieved complete response and were also assessed negative for minimal residual disease were 21.5% and 18.1%, respectively (odds ratio, 1.235 [95% CI, 0.775‒1.970]). Progression-free survival was comparable between groups (hazard ratio, 0.945 [95% CI, 0.617‒1.447]). The safety profile was similar for both groups. In conclusion, although statistical significance for noninferiority of ORR was not achieved, the efficacy and safety of once-weekly KRd56 were similar to those of twice-weekly KRd27 and once-weekly KRd56 may be an effective and convenient treatment option for patients with RRMM. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT03859427.

An open-label, first-in-human, single agent, dose escalation study for the evaluation of safety and efficacy of SAR442085 in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma.

OBJECTIVES: Cluster of differentiation 38 (CD38) is a key target on multiple myeloma (MM) cells. This multi-centre, Phase 1, single-agent study (NCT04000282) investigated SAR442085, a novel fragment crystallisable (Fc)-modified anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody (mAb), with enhanced affinity towards Fc-gamma receptor on effector cells in patients with relapsed and/or refractory (RR) MM. METHODS: This study comprised two parts: Part-A (dose-escalation involving anti-CD38 mAb pre-treated and naïve patients) and Part-B (dose expansion). Primary endpoints were maximum tolerated dose and recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D). RESULTS: Thirty-seven heavily pre-treated patients were treated in Part A. Part-B (dose-expansion) was not studied. Seven dose-limiting toxicities were reported at DL3, DL5, DL6, and DL7. RP2D was determined to be 5-7·5 mg/kg. Most common treatment-emergent adverse events were infusion-related reactions in 70·3% (26/37) patients. Grade ≥3 thrombocytopenia was reported in 48·6% (18/37). Overall response rate was 70% in anti-CD38 mAb naïve and 4% in anti-CD38 pre-treated patients, with a median progression-free survival of 7·62 (95%CI: 2·858; not calculable) months and 2·79 (95%CI: 1·150; 4·172) months and, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of SAR442085 was promising in anti-CD38 mAb naïve patients but did not extend to the larger cohort of anti-CD38 mAb pre-treated patients. This observation, along with transient high-grade thrombocytopenia, could potentially limit its clinical use.

Isatuximab, Bortezomib, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone for Multiple Myeloma.

BACKGROUND: Bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRd) is a preferred first-line treatment option for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Whether the addition of the anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody isatuximab to the VRd regimen would reduce the risk of disease progression or death among patients ineligible to undergo transplantation is unclear. METHODS: In an international, open-label, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned, in a 3:2 ratio, patients 18 to 80 years of age with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were ineligible to undergo transplantation to receive either isatuximab plus VRd or VRd alone. The primary efficacy end point was progression-free survival. Key secondary end points included a complete response or better and minimal residual disease (MRD)-negative status in patients with a complete response. RESULTS: A total of 446 patients underwent randomization. At a median follow-up of 59.7 months, the estimated progression-free survival at 60 months was 63.2% in the isatuximab-VRd group, as compared with 45.2% in the VRd group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.60; 98.5% confidence interval, 0.41 to 0.88; P<0.001). The percentage of patients with a complete response or better was significantly higher in the isatuximab-VRd group than in the VRd group (74.7% vs. 64.1%, P = 0.01), as was the percentage of patients with MRD-negative status and a complete response (55.5% vs. 40.9%, P = 0.003). No new safety signals were observed with the isatuximab-VRd regimen. The incidence of serious adverse events during treatment and the incidence of adverse events leading to discontinuation were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Isatuximab-VRd was more effective than VRd as initial therapy in patients 18 to 80 years of age with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were ineligible to undergo transplantation. (Funded by Sanofi and a Cancer Center Support Grant; IMROZ ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03319667.).

Belantamab Mafodotin, Pomalidomide, and Dexamethasone in Multiple Myeloma.

BACKGROUND: Triplet or quadruplet therapies incorporating proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulators, and anti-CD38 antibodies have led to prolonged survival among patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma; however, most patients have a relapse. Frontline lenalidomide therapy has increased the number of patients with lenalidomide-refractory disease at the time of the first relapse. METHODS: In this phase 3, randomized, open-label trial, we evaluated belantamab mafodotin, pomalidomide, and dexamethasone (BPd), as compared with pomalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (PVd), in lenalidomide-exposed patients who had relapsed or refractory myeloma after at least one line of therapy. The primary end point was progression-free survival. Disease response and safety were also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 302 patients underwent randomization; 155 were assigned to the BPd group, and 147 to the PVd group. At a median follow-up of 21.8 months (range, <0.1 to 39.2), the 12-month estimated progression-free survival with BPd was 71% (95% confidence interval [CI], 63 to 78), as compared with 51% (95% CI, 42 to 60) with PVd (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.73; P<0.001). Data on overall survival were immature. The percentage of patients with a response to treatment (partial response or better) was 77% (95% CI, 70 to 84) in the BPd group and 72% (95% CI, 64 to 79) in the PVd group; 40% (95% CI, 32 to 48) and 16% (95% CI, 11 to 23), respectively, had a complete response or better. Grade 3 or higher adverse events occurred in 94% of the patients in the BPd group and 76% of those in the PVd group. Ocular events occurred in 89% of the patients who received BPd (grade 3 or 4 in 43%) and 30% of those who received PVd (grade 3 or 4 in 2%); ocular events in the BPd group were managed with belantamab mafodotin dose modification. Ocular events led to treatment discontinuation in 9% of the patients in the BPd group and in no patients in the PVd group. CONCLUSIONS: Among lenalidomide-exposed patients with relapsed or refractory myeloma, BPd conferred a significantly greater benefit than PVd with respect to progression-free survival, as well as deeper, more durable responses. Ocular events were common but were controllable by belantamab mafodotin dose modification. (Funded by GSK; DREAMM-8 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04484623; EudraCT number, 2018-00434-21.).

Nivolumab, Pomalidomide, and Elotuzumab Combination Regimens for Treatment of Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma: Results from the Phase 3 CheckMate 602 Study.

BACKGROUND: Preclinical studies suggest that combining nivolumab, a programmed death-1 (PD-1) immune checkpoint inhibitor, with pomalidomide/dexamethasone (Pd) with or without elotuzumab, an antisignaling lymphocytic activation molecule F7 monoclonal antibody, may improve multiple myeloma (MM) treatment efficacy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The phase 3 CheckMate 602 study (NCT02726581) assessed the efficacy and safety of nivolumab plus pomalidomide/dexamethasone (NPd) and NPd plus elotuzumab (NE-Pd). Eligible patients (aged ≥ 18 years) had measurable MM after ≥ 2 prior lines of therapy, that included an immunomodulatory drug (IMiD) and proteasome inhibitor (PI), each for ≥ 2 consecutive cycles, alone or combined, and were refractory to their last line of therapy. Patients were randomized 3:3:1 to receive NPd, Pd, or NE-Pd. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS); overall response rate (ORR) was a key secondary endpoint. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 16.8 months, PFS was similar between treatment arms (Pd, 7.3 months [95% CI, 6.5-8.4]; NPd, 8.4 months [95% CI, 5.8-12.1]; NE-Pd, 6.3 months [95% CI, 2.4-11.1]). ORR was similar in the Pd (55%), NPd (48%), and NE-Pd (42%) arms. Nivolumab-containing arms were associated with a less favorable safety profile versus Pd, including a higher rate of thrombocytopenia (NPd, 25.0%; NE-Pd, 16.7%; Pd, 15.7%), any-grade immune-mediated adverse events (NPd, 13.9%; NE-Pd, 16.7%; Pd, 2.9%), and adverse events leading to discontinuation (NPd, 25.0%; NE-Pd, 33.3%; Pd, 18.6%). No new safety signals were identified. CONCLUSION: CheckMate 602 did not demonstrate clinical benefit of nivolumab (+/- elotuzumab) plus Pd versus Pd for patients with relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM).

Isatuximab-pomalidomide-dexamethasone versus pomalidomide-dexamethasone in patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma: final overall survival analysis.

The primary and prespecified updated analyses of ICARIA-MM (clinicaltrial gov. Identifier: NCT02990338) demonstrated improved progression-free survival (PFS) and a benefit in overall survival (OS) was reported with the addition of isatuximab, an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody, to pomalidomide-dexamethasone (Pd) in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. Here, we report the final OS analysis. This multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase III study included patients who had received and failed ≥2 previous therapies, including lenalidomide and a proteasome inhibitor. Between January 10, 2017, and February 2, 2018, 307 patients were randomized (1:1) to isatuximab-pomalidomide-dexamethasone (Isa-Pd; N=154) or Pd (N=153), stratified based on age (<75 vs. ≥75 years) and number of previous lines of therapy (2-3 vs. >3). At data cutoff for the final OS analysis after 220 OS events (January 27, 2022), median follow-up duration was 52.4 months. Median OS was 24.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 20.3-31.3) with Isa-Pd and 17.7 months (95% CI: 14.4- 26.2) with Pd (hazard ratio=0.78; 95% CI: 0.59-1.02; 1-sided P=0.0319). Despite subsequent daratumumab use in the Pd group and its potential benefit on PFS in the first subsequent therapy line, median PFS2 was significantly longer with Isa-Pd versus Pd (17.5 vs. 12.9 months; log-rank 1-sided P=0.0091). In this analysis, Isa-Pd continued to be efficacious and well tolerated after follow-up of approximately 52 months, contributing to a clinically meaningful, 6.9-month improvement in median OS in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.

Isatuximab in combination with carfilzomib and dexamethasone in 1q21+ patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: Long-term outcomes in the Phase 3 IKEMA study.

Gain/amplification of 1q21 (≥3 copies), a chromosomal abnormality frequently observed in multiple myeloma, can negatively affect prognosis, due to its involvement in resistance to anti-myeloma therapy and disease progression. In this updated subgroup analysis of the randomized, Phase 3 IKEMA study (NCT03275285) in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM), we evaluated progression-free survival (PFS) and depth of response with the anti-CD38 antibody isatuximab plus carfilzomib-dexamethasone (Isa-Kd) versus Kd, in 1q21+ patients and related subgroups, at long-term follow-up (44.2 months). Our analysis included patients with 1q21+ (≥3 copies, with/without high-risk chromosomal abnormality [HRCA]), isolated 1q21+ (≥3 copies, without HRCA), gain(1q21) (3 copies, with/without HRCA), and amp(1q21) (≥4 copies, with/without HRCA). PFS benefit was achieved with Isa-Kd versus Kd in patients with 1q21+ (HR 0.58, 95% CI: 0.37-0.92), with isolated 1q21+ (HR 0.49, 95% CI: 0.27-0.92), with gain(1q21), or amp(1q21), consistent with the overall population and prior interim 1q21+ subgroup analyses. Median PFS with Isa-Kd versus Kd was 25.8 versus 16.2 months in 1q21+ patients and 38.2 versus 16.2 months in patients with isolated 1q21+. Clinically meaningful, higher rates of very good partial response or better, complete response or better (≥CR), minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity, and MRD negativity and ≥CR were reached with Isa-Kd versus Kd in patients with 1q21+, isolated 1q21+, gain(1q21), or amp(1q21). In Isa-Kd and Kd, the MRD negativity and ≥CR rate was 29.3% versus 15.4% in 1q21+ patients, 36.2% versus 12.9% in patients with isolated 1q21+, 27.9% versus 13.5% in patients with gain(1q21), and 31.3% versus 20.0% in patients with amp(1q21), respectively. In conclusion, addition of Isa to Kd in triplet combination therapy has shown PFS benefit and deeper responses, compared with Kd, in 1q21+ patients at higher risk of progression, including patients with isolated 1q21+, gain(1q21), and amp(1q21), thus supporting Isa-Kd an effective treatment option for patients with RRMM.

Efficacy and safety of melflufen plus daratumumab and dexamethasone in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: results from the randomized, open-label, phase III LIGHTHOUSE study.

Melphalan flufenamide (melflufen), a first-in-class alkylating peptide-drug conjugate, plus dexamethasone was approved in Europe for use in patients with triple-class refractory relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) with ≥3 prior lines of therapy and without prior autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) or with a time to progression >36 months after prior ASCT. The randomized LIGHTHOUSE study (NCT04649060) assessed melflufen plus daratumumab and dexamethasone (melflufen group) versus daratumumab in patients with RRMM with disease refractory to an immunomodulatory agent and a proteasome inhibitor or who had received ≥3 prior lines of therapy including an immunomodulatory agent and a proteasome inhibitor. A partial clinical hold issued by the US Food and Drug Administration for all melflufen studies led to financial constraints and premature study closure on February 23rd 2022 (data cut-off date). In total, 54 of 240 planned patients were randomized (melflufen group, N=27; daratumumab group, N=27). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was not reached in the melflufen group versus 4.9 months in the daratumumab group (Hazard Ratio: 0.18 [95% Confidence Interval, 0.05-0.65]; P=0.0032) at a median follow-up time of 7.1 and 6.6 months, respectively. Overall response rate (ORR) was 59% in the melflufen group versus 30% in the daratumumab group (P=0.0300). The most common grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events in the melflufen group versus daratumumab group were neutropenia (50% vs. 12%), thrombocytopenia (50% vs. 8%), and anemia (32% vs. 19%). Melflufen plus daratumumab and dexamethasone demonstrated superior PFS and ORR versus daratumumab in RRMM and a safety profile comparable to previously published melflufen studies.

Clinical characteristics and outcomes in risk-stratified patients with smoldering multiple myeloma: data from the Czech Republic Registry of Monoclonal Gammopathies.

Smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM) is an asymptomatic precursor to active multiple myeloma (MM). The aim of this study was to report clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with SMM stratified based on their risk of progression to MM using the Mayo 20/2/20 criteria. Data were leveraged from the Czech Myeloma Group Registry of Monoclonal Gammopathies (RMG). Key outcomes included progression-free survival from SMM diagnosis to active MM diagnosis or death (PFS), progression-free survival from SMM diagnosis to progression on first line (1 L) MM treatment or death (PFS2), and overall survival (OS). Of 498 patients, 174 (34.9%) were classified as high risk and 324 (65.1%) as non-high risk. Median follow-up was approximately 65 months. During follow-up, more patients in the high-risk vs non-high-risk group received 1 L MM treatment (76.4% vs 46.6%, p < 0.001). PFS, PFS2, and OS were significantly shorter in high-risk vs non-high-risk patients (13.2 vs 56.6 months, p < 0.001; 49.9 vs 84.9 months, p < 0.001; 93.2 vs 131.1 months, p = 0.012, respectively). The results of this study add to the growing body of evidence that patients with high-risk vs non-high-risk SMM have significantly worse outcomes, including OS.

Association of Selinexor Dose Reductions With Clinical Outcomes in the BOSTON Study.

BACKGROUND: Dose modifications in response to adverse events (AEs) can maintain tumor response and improve therapy tolerability. We conducted a post-hoc analysis of the efficacy and safety of reduced selinexor doses in the BOSTON trial (NCT03110562). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Efficacy, safety, and quality of life (QoL) in 195 patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma randomized to once-weekly (QW) selinexor (100 mg), QW subcutaneous bortezomib (1.3 mg/m2), and twice-weekly dexamethasone (20 mg) were compared between patients with dose reductions and those without. RESULTS: In total, 126 patients (65%) had selinexor dose reductions (median dose 71.4 mg/wk). In patients with dose reductions versus those without median progression-free survival was 16.6 months (95% CI 12.9-not evaluable [NE]) versus 9.2 months [95% CI 6.8-15.5]), overall response rate was 81.7% (95% CI 73.9-88.1%) versus 66.7% (95% CI 54.3-77.6%), ≥very good partial response was (51.6% [95% CI 42.5-60.6%] vs. 31.9% [95% CI 21.2-44.2]), median duration of response was not reached (95% CI 13.8-NE) versus 12.0 months (95% CI 8.3-NE), and time to next treatment was 22.6 months (95% CI 14.6-NE) versus 10.5 months (95% CI 6.3-18.2). Mean best change from baseline on the EORTC QLQ-C30 Global Health Status/QoL scale was 10.0 ± 20.5 versus 4.0 ± 20.9. Duration-adjusted AE rates that were lower after selinexor dose reduction included thrombocytopenia (62.5% before vs. 47.6% after), nausea (31.6% vs. 7.3%), fatigue (28.1% vs. 9.9%), decreased appetite (21.5% vs. 6.4%), anemia (17.9% vs. 10.3%), and diarrhea (12.9% vs. 5.2%). CONCLUSION: Appropriate dose reductions in response to AEs of the 100 mg selinexor starting dose in the BOSTON study were associated with improved efficacy, reduced AE rates and improved QoL.

Selinexor-Based Triplet Regimens in Patients With Multiple Myeloma Previously Treated With Anti-CD38 Monoclonal Antibodies.

BACKGROUND: The increasing use of anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies (αCD38 mAbs) for newly diagnosed or early relapsed multiple myeloma (MM), especially in non-transplant eligible patients, may lead to more patients developing αCD38 mAb-refractory disease earlier in the treatment course with fewer treatment options. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analyzed the efficacy and safety of selinexor-based triplets (selinexor+dexamethasone [Sd] plus pomalidomide [SPd, n = 23], bortezomib [SVd, n = 16] or carfilzomib (SKd, n = 23]) in a subset of STOMP (NCT02343042) and BOSTON (NCT03110562) study patients treated previously with αCD38 mAbs. RESULTS: Sixty-two patients (median 4 prior therapies, range 1 to 11, 90.3% refractory to αCD38 mAb) were included. Overall response rates (ORR) in the SPd, SVd and SKd cohorts were 52.2%, 56.3%, and 65.2%, respectively. Overall response rate was 47.4% among patients who had MM refractory to the third drug reintroduced in the Sd-based triplet. Median progression-free survival in the SPd, SVd, and SKd cohorts was 8.7, 6.7, and 15.0 months, respectively, and median overall survival was 9.6, 16.9, and 33.0 months, respectively. Median time to discontinuation in the SPd, SVd, and SKd cohorts was 4.4, 5.9, and 10.6 months, respectively. The most common hematological adverse events were thrombocytopenia, anemia, and neutropenia. Nausea, fatigue, and diarrhea were primarily grade 1/2. Adverse events were generally manageable with standard supportive care and dose modifications. CONCLUSION: Selinexor-based regimens may offer effective and well-tolerated therapy to patients with relapsed and/or refractory MM who had disease previously exposed or refractory to αCD38 mAb therapy and could help address the unmet clinical need in these high-risk patients.

Isatuximab, carfilzomib, and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma: updated results from IKEMA, a randomized Phase 3 study.

Longer-term outcomes with the anti-CD38 antibody isatuximab in combination with carfilzomib-dexamethasone (Isa-Kd) were evaluated in the randomized Phase 3 trial IKEMA (NCT03275285), in a prespecified, follow-up analysis of progression-free survival (PFS, primary study endpoint), final complete response (CR) using Hydrashift Isa immunofixation assay, minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity, and safety. Enrolled patients had relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (1-3 prior treatment lines). Isa 10 mg/kg was administered intravenously weekly in cycle 1 then biweekly. Efficacy analyses were performed in the intent-to-treat population (Isa-Kd: n = 179, Kd: n = 123) and safety evaluated in treated patients (Isa-Kd: n = 177, Kd: n = 122). Consistent with the primary interim analysis, the addition of Isa to Kd prolonged PFS (HR 0.58, 95.4% CI: 0.42-0.79; median PFS 35.7 [95% CI: 25.8-44.0] vs 19.2 [95% CI: 15.8-25.0] months). PFS benefit was observed with Isa-Kd across subgroups, including patients with poor prognosis. The stringent CR/CR rate was 44.1% vs 28.5% (odds-ratio: 2.09, 95% CI: 1.26-3.48), the MRD negativity rate 33.5% vs 15.4% (odds-ratio: 2.78, 95% CI: 1.55-4.99) and the MRD negativity CR rate 26.3% vs 12.2%, with Isa-Kd vs Kd. The safety profile of Isa-Kd was similar to that reported in the prior interim analysis. These findings further support Isa-Kd as a standard-of-care treatment for relapsed multiple myeloma patients.Clinical trial information: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03275285.

Daratumumab with lenalidomide and dexamethasone in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma patients - real world evidence analysis.

We performed real world evidence (RWE) analysis of daratumumab, lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Dara-Rd) versus lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rd) treatment in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma patients (RRMM). In total, 240 RRMM patients were treated with Dara-Rd from 2016 to 2022 outside of clinical trials in all major Czech hematology centers. As a reference, 531 RRMM patients treated with Rd were evaluated. Patients' data were recorded in the Czech Registry of Monoclonal Gammopathies (RMG). Partial response (PR) or better response (ORR) was achieved in significantly more patients in Dara-Rd than in Rd group (91.2% vs. 69.9%; p < 0.001). The median progression free survival (PFS) was 26.9 months in the Dara-Rd and 12.8 months in the Rd group (p < 0.001). Median overall survival (OS) was not reached in the Dara-Rd compared to 27.2 months in the Rd group (p = 0.023). In patients with 1-3 previous treatment lines, there was significant PFS benefit of Dara-Rd compared to Rd (median PFS not reached vs. 13.2 months; p < 0.001). In patients with > 3 previous treatment lines, there was no significant PFS benefit of Dara-Rd treatment (7.8 months vs. 9.9 months; p = 0.874), similarly in patients refractory to PI + IMIDs (11.5 months vs. 9.2 months; p = 0.376). In RWE conditions, the median PFS in RRMM patients treated with Dara-Rd is shorter when compared to clinical trials. In heavily pretreated RRMM patients, efficacy of Dara-Rd treatment is limited; best possible outcomes of Dara-Rd are achieved in minimally pretreated patients.

Personalised progression prediction in patients with monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance or smouldering multiple myeloma (PANGEA): a retrospective, multicohort study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with precursors to multiple myeloma are dichotomised as having monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance or smouldering multiple myeloma on the basis of monoclonal protein concentrations or bone marrow plasma cell percentage. Current risk stratifications use laboratory measurements at diagnosis and do not incorporate time-varying biomarkers. Our goal was to develop a monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance and smouldering multiple myeloma stratification algorithm that utilised accessible, time-varying biomarkers to model risk of progression to multiple myeloma. METHODS: In this retrospective, multicohort study, we included patients who were 18 years or older with monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance or smouldering multiple myeloma. We evaluated several modelling approaches for predicting disease progression to multiple myeloma using a training cohort (with patients at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA; annotated from Nov, 13, 2019, to April, 13, 2022). We created the PANGEA models, which used data on biomarkers (monoclonal protein concentration, free light chain ratio, age, creatinine concentration, and bone marrow plasma cell percentage) and haemoglobin trajectories from medical records to predict progression from precursor disease to multiple myeloma. The models were validated in two independent validation cohorts from National and Kapodistrian University of Athens (Athens, Greece; from Jan 26, 2020, to Feb 7, 2022; validation cohort 1), University College London (London, UK; from June 9, 2020, to April 10, 2022; validation cohort 1), and Registry of Monoclonal Gammopathies (Czech Republic, Czech Republic; Jan 5, 2004, to March 10, 2022; validation cohort 2). We compared the PANGEA models (with bone marrow [BM] data and without bone marrow [no BM] data) to current criteria (International Myeloma Working Group [IMWG] monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance and 20/2/20 smouldering multiple myeloma risk criteria). FINDINGS: We included 6441 patients, 4931 (77%) with monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance and 1510 (23%) with smouldering multiple myeloma. 3430 (53%) of 6441 participants were female. The PANGEA model (BM) improved prediction of progression from smouldering multiple myeloma to multiple myeloma compared with the 20/2/20 model, with a C-statistic increase from 0·533 (0·480-0·709) to 0·756 (0·629-0·785) at patient visit 1 to the clinic, 0·613 (0·504-0·704) to 0·720 (0·592-0·775) at visit 2, and 0·637 (0·386-0·841) to 0·756 (0·547-0·830) at visit three in validation cohort 1. The PANGEA model (no BM) improved prediction of smouldering multiple myeloma progression to multiple myeloma compared with the 20/2/20 model with a C-statistic increase from 0·534 (0·501-0·672) to 0·692 (0·614-0·736) at visit 1, 0·573 (0·518-0·647) to 0·693 (0·605-0·734) at visit 2, and 0·560 (0·497-0·645) to 0·692 (0·570-0·708) at visit 3 in validation cohort 1. The PANGEA models improved prediction of monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance progression to multiple myeloma compared with the IMWG rolling model at visit 1 in validation cohort 2, with C-statistics increases from 0·640 (0·518-0·718) to 0·729 (0·643-0·941) for the PANGEA model (BM) and 0·670 (0·523-0·729) to 0·879 (0·586-0·938) for the PANGEA model (no BM). INTERPRETATION: Use of the PANGEA models in clinical practice will allow patients with precursor disease to receive more accurate measures of their risk of progression to multiple myeloma, thus prompting for more appropriate treatment strategies. FUNDING: SU2C Dream Team and Cancer Research UK.

Patient Characteristics, Treatment Patterns, and Outcomes in Triple-Class Exposed Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma Patients, a Retrospective Observational Study Using Czech Registry Data.

BACKGROUND: Although novel therapies improved prognosis of multiple myeloma (MM) patients, clinical outcomes in the multi-refractory population are still poor. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We reviewed data from the Czech Registry of Monoclonal Gammopathies, identified and characterized triple-class exposed (3CE) relapsed/refractory MM patients, treatment patterns after 3CE, assessed overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), time to next treatment (TTNT), explored cohorts with and without triple- and penta-refractoriness. RESULTS: In 83 3CE patients who started subsequent therapies, the median OS was 14.2 months (95% CI, 8.5-19.9), PFS 6.2 months (95% CI, 3.9-8.5), and TTNT 7.2 months (95% CI, 4.6-9.8). Triple- and penta-class refractory patients had a significantly worse prognosis in all outcomes. Their life expectancy was shorter, the disease progression started earlier, and the TTNT was shorter, which increased likelihood of becoming refractory to more therapies. Time-to-event results from the first index date and all index dates analyses were very similar. CONCLUSION: Similar to previous studies from the US and Europe, our results show a high disease burden. Introduction of novel therapies, such as CAR-T cells, new bispecific and trispecific monoclonal antibodies, and other drugs, is expected to bring significant benefits to these patients.

Overall Survival With Daratumumab, Bortezomib, and Dexamethasone in Previously Treated Multiple Myeloma (CASTOR): A Randomized, Open-Label, Phase III Trial.

PURPOSE: At the primary analysis of CASTOR (median follow-up, 7.4 months), daratumumab plus bortezomib and dexamethasone (D-Vd) significantly prolonged progression-free survival versus bortezomib and dexamethasone (Vd) alone in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). We report updated efficacy and safety results at the final analysis for overall survival (OS). METHODS: CASTOR was a multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase III study during which eligible patients with ≥ 1 line of prior therapy were randomly assigned to Vd (up to eight cycles) with or without daratumumab (until disease progression). After positive primary analysis and protocol amendment, patients receiving Vd were offered daratumumab monotherapy after disease progression. RESULTS: At a median (range) follow-up of 72.6 months (0.0-79.8), significant OS benefit was observed with D-Vd (hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.92; P = .0075). Median OS was 49.6 months with D-Vd versus 38.5 months with Vd. Prespecified subgroup analyses demonstrated an OS advantage with D-Vd versus Vd for most subgroups, including patients age ≥ 65 years and patients with one or two prior lines of therapy, International Staging System stage III disease, high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities, and prior bortezomib treatment. The most common (≥ 10%) grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events with D-Vd versus Vd were thrombocytopenia (46.1% v 32.9%), anemia (16.0% v 16.0%), neutropenia (13.6% v 4.6%), lymphopenia (10.3% v 2.5%), and pneumonia (10.7% v 10.1%). CONCLUSION: D-Vd significantly prolonged OS in patients with RRMM, with the greatest OS benefit observed in patients with one prior line of therapy. To our knowledge, our results, together with the OS benefit observed with daratumumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone in the phase III POLLUX study, demonstrate for the first time an OS benefit with daratumumab-containing regimens in RRMM (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02136134 [CASTOR]).

Switching to daratumumab SC from IV is safe and preferred by patients with multiple myeloma.

INTRODUCTION: Two phase 3 studies demonstrated superior efficacy of intravenous daratumumab (DARA IV) plus bortezomib/melphalan/prednisone (ALCYONE) or lenalidomide/dexamethasone (Rd; MAIA) versus standard-of-care regimens for transplant-ineligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. In these studies, patients could switch from DARA IV to subcutaneous daratumumab (DARA SC) while receiving daratumumab monotherapy in ALCYONE (as of Cycle 11) or daratumumab plus Rd in MAIA. The phase 3 COLUMBA study demonstrated noninferiority of DARA SC to DARA IV. DARA SC reduced administration time, allowing patients to spend less time in healthcare settings, a relevant practical consideration for patient care in the COVID-19 pandemic/settings of limited healthcare resources. METHODS: DARA SC 1800 mg was administered every 4 weeks, per approved dosing schedules. We evaluated safety and patient-reported experience (ALCYONE only) among patients who switched from DARA IV to DARA SC. RESULTS: Fifty-seven patients in ALCYONE and 135 in MAIA switched to DARA SC. Three (2.2%; MAIA) patients reported injection-site reactions, all of which were mild. No infusion-related reactions occurred with DARA SC. In ALCYONE, >80% of patients preferred DARA SC over DARA IV. Grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in 5.3% of patients in ALCYONE and 25.9% in MAIA; one (0.7%; MAIA) patient experienced a TEAE with an outcome of death. CONCLUSION: For transplant-ineligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, DARA SC (monotherapy/with Rd) was safe and preferred over DARA IV. ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02195479/NCT02252172.

MRD dynamics during maintenance for improved prognostication of 1280 patients with myeloma in the TOURMALINE-MM3 and -MM4 trials.

Measurable residual disease (MRD) evaluation may help to guide treatment duration in multiple myeloma (MM). Paradoxically, limited longitudinal data exist on MRD during maintenance. We investigated the prognostic value of MRD dynamics in 1280 transplant-eligible and -ineligible patients from the TOURMALINE-MM3 and -MM4 randomized placebo-controlled phase 3 studies of 2-year ixazomib maintenance. MRD status at randomization showed independent prognostic value (median progression-free survival [PFS], 38.6 vs 15.6 months in MRD- vs MRD+ patients; HR, 0.47). However, MRD dynamics during maintenance provided more detailed risk stratification. A 14-month landmark analysis showed prolonged PFS in patients converting from MRD+ to MRD- status vs those with persistent MRD+ status (76.8% vs 27.6% 2-year PFS rates). Prolonged PFS was observed in patients with sustained MRD- status vs those converting from MRD- to MRD+ status (75.0% vs 34.2% 2-year PFS rates). Similar results were observed at a 28-month landmark analysis. Ixazomib maintenance vs placebo improved PFS in patients who were MRD+ at randomization (median, 18.8 vs 11.6 months; HR, 0.65) or at the 14-month landmark (median, 16.8 vs 10.6 months; HR, 0.65); no difference was observed in patients who were MRD-. This is the largest MM population undergoing yearly MRD evaluation during maintenance reported to date. We demonstrate the limited prognostic value of a single-time point MRD evaluation, because MRD dynamics over time substantially impact PFS risk. These findings support MRD- status as a relevant end point during maintenance and confirm the increased progression risk in patients converting to MRD+ from MRD- status. These trials were registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02181413 and #NCT02312258.