Daratumumab Monotherapy for Heavily Pre-treated and Refractory Myeloma: Results from a UK Multicentre Real World Cohort.

Daratumumab is the first anti-CD38 targeting monoclonal antibody approved as monotherapy in multiply relapsed myeloma patients who progressed following prior treatment with proteasome inhibitors (PIs) and immunomodulatory agents (IMiDs). We present real world data on the efficacy of single agent daratumumab in a cohort of 55 multiply relapsed patients treated in the UK.The median age was 72 years, the majority (96%) received ≥ 3 previous lines of treatment; 54.5% were PI-refractory, 76.4% were IMiD-refractory and 47.2% were double refractory; 20% of patients had high-risk (HR) disease.The overall response rate was 49%. After a median follow up of 9.2 months, the median progression-free survival (PFS) for the total cohort was 5.1 months. Patients who achieved a partial response or better (≥PR) demonstrated a significantly longer PFS compared to those with

Panobinostat in combination with bortezomib and dexamethasone in multiply relapsed and refractory myeloma; UK routine care cohort.

The combination of panobinostat, bortezomib and dexamethasone (PanBorDex) is available as a treatment option for relapsed refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) based on the PANORAMA-1 trial which investigated this triplet in early relapse. In routine clinical care, PanBorDex is used primarily in later relapses and is commonly administered in attenuated dosing schedules to mitigate the treatment-related toxicity. We set out to evaluate efficacy and safety outcomes with PanBorDex later in the disease course and evaluate the role of attenuated dosing schedules. This was a retrospective evaluation of patients treated in routine clinical practice between 2016-2019 across seven heamatology centres in the UK; patients who received at least one dose of PanBorDex were eligible for inclusion. The dosing schedule of panobinostat (10mg, 15mg or 20mg, twice or three times a week) and bortezomib (0.7mg/m2, 1mg/m2 or 1.3mg/m2 once or twice weekly) was as per treating physician choice. Patients received treatment until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary outcome is response rates according to IMWG criteria. Key secondary endpoints include progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Other secondary endpoints include rates of adverse events according to CTCAE criteria. In total, 61 patients were eligible for inclusion and received PanBorDex primarily as ≥5th line of treatment. One third of patients received PanBorDex at full dose, for the remaining two thirds, treatment was given in reduced dose intensities. The overall response rate was 44.2%, including 14.7% very good partial response (VGPR) rates; 68.8% of patients derived clinical benefit with stable disease or better. The median PFS was 3.4 months; non-refractory patients and those who achieved VGPR benefited from prolonged PFS of 11.4 months and 17.7 months, respectively. The median OS was 9.5 months. The triplet was associated with 45% and 18% incidence of grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia and diarrhea, respectively.

Infections in relapsed myeloma patients treated with isatuximab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone during the COVID-19 pandemic: Initial results of a UK-wide real-world study.

OBJECTIVES: There are no real-world data describing infection morbidity in relapsed/refractory myeloma (RRMM) patients treated with anti-CD38 isatuximab in combination with pomalidomide and dexamethasone (IsaPomDex). In this UK-wide retrospective study, we set out to evaluate infections experienced by routine care patients who received this novel therapy across 24 cancer centres during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: The primary endpoint was infection morbidity (incidence, grading, hospitalization) as well as infection-related deaths. Secondary outcomes were clinical predictors of increased incidence of any grade (G2-5) and high grade (≥G3) infections. RESULTS: In a total cohort of 107 patients who received a median (IQR) of 4 cycles (2-8), 23.4% of patients experienced ≥1 any grade (G2-5) infections (total of 31 episodes) and 18.7% of patients experienced ≥1 high grade (≥G3) infections (total of 22 episodes). Median time (IQR) from start of therapy to first episode was 29 days (16-75). Six patients experienced COVID-19 infection, of whom 5 were not vaccinated and 1 was fully vaccinated. The cumulative duration of infection-related hospitalizations was 159 days. The multivariate (MVA) Poisson Regression analysis demonstrated that a higher co-morbidity burden with Charlson Co-morbidity Index (CCI) score ≥4 (incidence rate ratio (IRR) = 3, p = 0.012) and sub-optimal myeloma response less than a partial response (

Efficacy of Isatuximab With Pomalidomide and Dexamethasone in Relapsed Myeloma: Results of a UK-Wide Real-World Dataset.

Real-world data on the efficacy and tolerability of isatuximab with pomalidomide and dexamethasone (IsaPomDex) in relapsed/refractory myeloma patients have not been reported. In this UK-wide retrospective study, IsaPomDex outcomes were evaluated across 24 routine care cancer centers. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), duration of response (DOR) for patients who achieved an objective response (≥partial response [PR]), and adverse events (AEs). In a total cohort 107 patients, median follow up (interquartile range [IQR]) was 12.1 months (10.1-18.6 mo), median age (IQR) was 69 years (61-77). Median (IQR) Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) score was 3 (2-4); 43% had eGFR <60 mL/min. Median (IQR) number of prior therapies was 3 (3-3). Median (IQR) number of IsaPomDex cycles administered was 7 (3-13). ORR was 66.4%, with responses categorized as ≥ very good partial response: 31.8%, PR: 34.6%, stable disease: 15.9%, progressive disease: 15%, and unknown 2.8%. Median PFS was 10.9 months. Median DOR was 10.3 months. There was no statistical difference in median PFS by age (<65: 10.2 versus 65-74 13.2 versus ≥75: 8.5 mo, log-rank P = 0.4157), by CCI score (<4: 10.2 mo versus ≥4: 13.2, log-rank P = 0.6531), but inferior PFS was observed with renal impairment (≥60: 13.2 versus <60: 7.9 mo, log-rank P = 0.0408). Median OS was 18.8 months. After a median of 4 cycles, any grade AEs were experienced by 87.9% of patients. The most common ≥G3 AEs were neutropenia (45.8%), infections (18.7%), and thrombocytopenia (14%). Our UK-wide IsaPomDex study demonstrated encouraging efficacy outcomes in the real world, comparable to ICARIA-MM trial.

Can upfront DPYD extended variant testing reduce toxicity and associated hospital costs of fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy? A propensity score matched analysis of 2022 UK patients.

AIM: To independently assess the impact of mandatory testing using an extended DPYD variant panel (ToxNav®) and consequent dose adjustment of Capecitabine/5-FU on recorded quantitative toxicity, symptoms of depression, and hospital costs. METHODS: We used propensity score matching (PSM) to match 466 patients tested with ToxNav® with 1556 patients from a historical cohort, and performed regression analysis to estimate the impact of ToxNav®on toxicity, depression, and hospital costs. RESULTS: ToxNav® appeared to reduce the likelihood of experiencing moderate (OR: 0.59; 95%CI: 0.45-0.77) and severe anaemia (OR: 0.55; 95%CI: 0.33-0.90), and experience of pain for more than 4 days a week (OR: 0.50; 95%CI: 0.30-0.83), while it increased the likelihood of mild neutropenia (OR: 1.73; 95%CI: 1.27-2.35). It also reduced the cost of chemotherapy by 12% (95%CI: 3-31) or £9765, the cost of non-elective hospitalisation by 23% (95%CI: 8-36) or £2331, and the cost of critical care by 21% (95%CI: 2-36) or £1219 per patient. For the DPYD variant associated with critical risk of toxicity (rs3918290), the improved non-elective hospital costs were > £20,000, whereas variants associated with hand-foot syndrome toxicity had no detectable cost improvement. CONCLUSION: Upfront testing of DPYD variants appears to reduce the toxicity burden of Capecitabine and 5-FU in cancer patients and can lead to substantial hospital cost savings, only if the dose management of the drugs in response to variants detected is standardised and regulated.

Outcomes of anti-CD38 isatuximab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone in five relapsed myeloma patients with prior exposure to anti-C38 daratumumab: case series.

Objectives: Daratumumab is the first anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody (Mab) used to treat myeloma in the newly diagnosed setting and in the relapsed setting. Isatuximab, another Mab targeting a specific epitope on the CD38 receptor, was recently approved in the UK in combination with pomalidomide and dexamethasone (IsaPomDex) to treat myeloma patients who received three prior lines of therapy. However, there is a lack of understanding of whether using a prior anti-CD38 Mab (e.g. daratumumab) can affect the efficacy of another Mab (e.g. isatuximab), when the latter is used to treat a subsequent relapse.Methods: We performed a UK-wide outcomes study of IsaPomDex in the real-world. In this case series, we report a detailed descriptive analysis of the characteristics and clinical outcomes of five IsaPomDex patients in UK routine practice (Patients I to V), with a prior exposure to daratumumab.Results: Age range was 51-77 years with two patients >70 and three patients <70 years. The cytogenetic risk was standard in two patients, high in two patients and not known in one patient. Prior daratumumab regimen were monotherapy (dara-mono) in one patient (II), and daratumumab with bortezomib and dexamethasone (DVd) in four patients. Responses to prior daratumumab were: very good partial response (VGPR) in two patients (I and III), minor response-stable disease (MR-SD) in one patient (II), and progressive disease (PD) in two patients (IV and V). Median (range) number of IsaPomDex cycles received was 2 (1-4). Outcomes of IsaPomDex were PD in three patients (II, IV and V) and a response in two patients. Response categories were: MR-SD in patient I and PR in patient III.Discussion: Despite the limitations of our case series, we described the first UK real-world report of IsaPomDex outcomes in myeloma patients with a prior exposure to daratumumab.Conclusion: Large prospective studies are required to further evaluate myeloma outcomes in this setting.

Ixazomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone is effective and well tolerated in multiply relapsed (≥2nd relapse) refractory myeloma: a multicenter real world UK experience.

There are limited real world data on ixazomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (IRd) in multiply relapsed myeloma. We analyzed outcomes of 116 patients who received IRd predominantly at second and subsequent relapse including those refractory to proteasome inhibitors (PIs). With a median follow up 16.3 months, the overall response rate was 66.9%; median progression-free survival (PFS) was 17.7 months with median overall survival (OS) not reached (NR). PFS and OS were significantly shorter in advanced disease (PFS; 12.6 vs. 21.2 months (p = .01), OS; 15.9 months vs. NR (p = .01) for ISS3 vs. ISS 1&2, respectively). PFS and OS were significantly shorter in clinical high risk (CHR) compared to standard risk (SR) patients (PFS; 9.3 months vs. NR (p = .001), OS; 11.5 months vs. NR (p < .001), respectively). There was a trend toward shorter PFS in PI-refractory patients 13.7 vs. 19.6 months for non-PI refractory (p = .2). The triplet combination was generally well tolerated.

A multicenter comparative acute myeloid leukemia study: can we explain the differences in the outcomes in resource-constrained settings?

Outcomes in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) are dependent on patient- and disease-characteristics, treatment, and socioeconomic factors. AML outcomes between resource-constrained and developed countries have not been compared directly. We analyzed two cohorts: from São Paulo state, Brazil (USP, n = 312) and Oxford, United Kingdom (OUH, n = 158). USP cohort had inferior 5-year overall survival compared with OUH (29% vs. 49%, adjusted-p=.027). USP patients have higher early-mortality (23% vs. 6% p<.001) primarily due to multi-resistant Gram-negative bacterial and fungal infections. USP had higher 5-year cumulative incidence of relapse (60% vs. 50%, p=.0022), were less likely to undergo hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) (28% vs. 75%, p<.001) and waited longer for HSCT (median, 23.8 vs. 7.2 months, p<.001). Three-year survival in relapsed patients was worse in USP than OUH (10% vs. 39%, p<.001). Our study indicates that efforts to improve AML outcomes in Brazil should focus on infection prevention and control, and access to HSCT.

Integrating clinical features with genetic factors enhances survival prediction for adults with acute myeloid leukemia.

The 2017 European LeukemiaNet 2017 acute myeloid leukemia (AML) risk stratification (ELN2017) is widely used for risk-stratifying patients with AML. However, its applicability in low- and middle-income countries is limited because of a lack of full cytogenetic and molecular information at diagnosis. Here, we propose an alternative for risk stratification (the Adapted Genetic Risk [AGR]), which permits cytogenetic or molecular missing data while retaining prognostic power. We first analyzed 167 intensively treated patients with nonacute promyelocytic leukemia AML enrolled in São Paulo, Brazil (Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo), as our training data set, using ELN2017 as the standard for comparison with our AGR. Next, we combined our AGR with clinical prognostic parameters found in a Cox proportional hazards model to create a novel scoring system (survival AML score, SAMLS) that stratifies patients with newly diagnosed AML. Finally, we have used 2 independent test cohorts, Faculdade de Medicina de Ribeirão Preto (FMRP; Brazil, n = 145) and Oxford University Hospitals (OUH; United Kingdom, n = 157) for validating our findings. AGR was statistically significant for overall survival (OS) in both test cohorts (FMRP, P = .037; OUH, P = .012) and disease-free survival in FMRP (P = .04). The clinical prognostic features in SAMLS were age (>45 years), white blood cell count (<1.5 or >30.0 × 103/µL), and low albumin levels (<3.8 g/dL), which were associated with worse OS in all 3 cohorts. SAMLS showed a significant difference in OS in the training cohort (P < .001) and test cohorts (FMRP, P = .0018; OUH, P < .001). Therefore, SAMLS, which incorporates the novel AGR evaluation with clinical parameters, is an accurate tool for AML risk assessment.

Real-world effectiveness and safety of ixazomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.

Real-world data on regimens for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) represent an important component of therapeutic decision-making. This multi-centric, retrospective, observational study conducted by the treating physicians evaluated the effectiveness and safety of ixazomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (IRd) in 155 patients who received ixazomib via early access programs in Greece, the UK, and the Czech Republic. Median age was 68 years; 17% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≥ 2; median number of prior therapies was 1 (range 1-7); 91%, 47%, and 17% had received prior bortezomib, thalidomide, and lenalidomide, respectively. Median duration of exposure to ixazomib was 9.6 months. Overall response rate was 74%, including 35% very good partial response or better (16% complete response). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 27.6 months (27.6 and 19.9 months in patients with 1 or > 1 prior lines, respectively). IRd treatment for ≥ 6 months was associated with longer PFS (hazard ratio 0.06). Fourteen patients (9%) discontinued IRd due to adverse events/toxicity in the absence of disease progression. Peripheral neuropathy was reported in 35% of patients (3% grades 3-4). These findings support the results of the phase III TOURMALINE-MM1 trial in a broader real-world RRMM population.

Treatment-free interval as an additional measure of efficacy in a large UK dataset of transplant ineligible myeloma patients.

Treatment of transplant-ineligible (TNE) newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) requires a balance between disease control and maintaining quality of life (QoL). Patients value treatment-free remission periods in this incurable condition, as they are associated with better QoL. We set out to study clinical outcomes of consecutive TNE NDMM patients in routine care treated in Thames Valley Cancer Network between 2009 and 2017. The primary outcome was the evaluation of the treatment-free interval (TFI) after 1st and subsequent lines of therapy in the total cohort and in individual subgroups, according to age (≤75 vs. >75 years), and co-morbidities using Charlson Co-morbidity Index (CCI): mild: 0-2 vs. moderate: 3-4 vs. severe: ≥5). Secondary outcomes include response rates, overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) between subgroups: according to age and according to co-morbidities. In a total cohort of 292 patients, median TFI (IQR) was longest after first-line therapy 6.9 months (1.4-16.9), reducing after second line therapy to 1.8 months (.7-6.9), and after third line therapy to 0.6 months (0.2-1.5). Median TFI followed the same trend across the different subgroups, by age (≤75, >75 years) and by CCI (0-2, 3-4, ≥5). Overall response rate (ORR) to first line therapy for total cohort was 67%, with responses categorised as complete response (CR): 21%, very good partial response: 16%, partial response: 30%, stable disease: 18%, and progressive disease: 8%. ORR in individual subgroups by age were (≤75: 70% vs. >75: 63%), and by CCI (0-2: 65% vs. 3-4: 71% vs. ≥5: 77%). Median OS and PFS for the total cohort were (30.2 months, 95% CI: 23.8-36.9), and (9 months, 95% CI: 7.9-9.8), respectively. Patients aged >75 years showed a significant reduction in OS and PFS compared to those ≤75 years of age: OS (49.0 vs. 22.4 months, p<0.0001, HR: 2.08, 95% CI: 1.5-2.8), PFS (9.7 vs. 8.0 months, p<0.01, HR: 1.47, 95% CI: 1.1-1.9). Median OS was significantly reduced with worsening co-morbidities: (CCI 0-2: 52.4 months vs. CCI 3-4: 33.0 months vs. CCI ≥5: 24.0 months, p = 0.01, HR: 1.43, 95% CI: 1.1-1.9). Median PFS was significantly reduced in the severely co-morbid subgroup (CCI 0-2: 9.4 months vs. CCI 3-4: 9.6 months vs. CCI ≥5: 7.1 months, p = 0.025, HR: 1.3, 95% CI: 1.0-1.6). This study demonstrated that first line therapy in the TNE NDMM setting resulted in the longest TFI which was modest at a median of 6.9 months, and decreased significantly following subsequent lines of therapy and across the different subgroups by age and by co-morbidities. Therapy objective should be to maximise the benefit of first line treatment. We envisage that the recent shift towards a continuous therapeutic approach will benefit TNE patients in view of improved survival data demonstrated by a number phase 3 trials. When continuous therapy is not appropriate due to patient choice or toxicities, an efficacious (not limited to thalidomide and bortezomib) but tolerable first line FDT strategy, which can maximise TFI and maintain a good QoL, remains a reasonable alternative approach.

Resource implications of bortezomib therapy in a large UK cohort: An evaluation study.

BACKGROUND: Bortezomib is a cornerstone in the management of multiple myeloma. It remains an attractive treatment option because it is efficacious, reasonably well tolerated and easy to administer. However, data on resource implications in the UK for both patients and healthcare providers are limited. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of 127 patients to assess implications of bortezomib therapy on patients and healthcare resources. A patient-episode was defined as a patient attending the chemotherapy day treatment unit solely for bortezomib administration. Data were collected for the duration of therapy as follows: cost of drug calculated using the UK's bortezomib indicative price as per British National Formulary, cost of drug administration in the chemotherapy day treatment unit calculated using the National Health Service's schedule of service cost, time from check-in to drug administration, patient travel time and distance calculated using Google maps, and cost of travel. RESULTS: Median drug cost and administration cost per patient were £8336 (£2084-£108,368) and £4640 (£290-£15,080), respectively. Median time from check-in to administration was 63 min (range 5-433), median travel time was 90 min (range 8-270) and 80 min (range 8-280) during peak and off-peak periods, respectively. Median return travel distance was 33.4 miles (range 1.2-224) for travel cost per patient per trip was £8.35-£13.20. CONCLUSIONS: Our real-world resource analysis demonstrated that delivering bortezomib therapy can be associated with significant cost and time implications for patients and healthcare providers. Our study method sets a basis for evaluating resource implications of other novel approaches to myeloma therapy.

Clinical outcomes of bortezomib-based therapy in myeloma.

Bortezomib, a first generation proteasome inhibitor, is used in both newly diagnosed and relapsed myeloma settings. Considerable differences exist in the usage of bortezomib therapy in the clinical practice setting in comparison to clinical trial setting as well manufacturer's recommendations. These differences include route of administration (intravenous (iv) vs. subcutaneous (sc)), frequency from twice to once weekly, choice of alkylating agent used in combination with bortezomib (melphalan or cyclophosphamide), and choice of glucocorticoids (dexamethasone or prednisolone). We reviewed data from 272 consecutive bortezomib-treated myeloma patients, who received therapy within the regional Thames Valley Cancer Network for both newly diagnosed myeloma (NDMM, n = 120) and relapsed MM (RMM, n = 152). We investigated the influence of age, sex, transplant, bortezomib combinations (doublet vs. triplet), cumulative bortezomib dose per treatment line (<50mg vs. ≥50mg), and route of administration (iv vs. sc) on time to next treatment (TTNT) and on overall survival (OS). Route of bortezomib administration (iv vs. sc) influenced neither OS (41 vs 35 months, p = 0.5), nor TTNT (14 vs. 19 months, p = 0.052). Our study showed a statistically significant improvement in median OS in patients receiving a cumulative dose ≥50mg compared to <50mg (42 vs. 33months, p = 0.003), although presence of confounders need to be taken into account, such as disease stage, performance status, genetic changes and prior therapies. Median OS was longer using triplet therapies compared to a doublet in the RMM cohort (37 vs. 29 months, p = 0.06), although this did not reach statistical significance. Multivariate Cox Regression analysis showed that cumulative bortezomib dose ≥50mg (p = 0.002, HR = 1.83, 95% CI 1.25-2.67) and autologous transplant (p = 0.002, HR = 2.6, 95% CI 1.41-3.98) were both significant factors associated with improved OS. Our data argues in favour of continuing bortezomib for the recommended duration as per Summary of Product Characteristics (SPC), subject to good tolerability, in order to deepen response or extend the duration of best response.

GATA1-mutant clones are frequent and often unsuspected in babies with Down syndrome: identification of a population at risk of leukemia.

Transient abnormal myelopoiesis (TAM), a preleukemic disorder unique to neonates with Down syndrome (DS), may transform to childhood acute myeloid leukemia (ML-DS). Acquired GATA1 mutations are present in both TAM and ML-DS. Current definitions of TAM specify neither the percentage of blasts nor the role of GATA1 mutation analysis. To define TAM, we prospectively analyzed clinical findings, blood counts and smears, and GATA1 mutation status in 200 DS neonates. All DS neonates had multiple blood count and smear abnormalities. Surprisingly, 195 of 200 (97.5%) had circulating blasts. GATA1 mutations were detected by Sanger sequencing/denaturing high performance liquid chromatography (Ss/DHPLC) in 17 of 200 (8.5%), all with blasts >10%. Furthermore low-abundance GATA1 mutant clones were detected by targeted next-generation resequencing (NGS) in 18 of 88 (20.4%; sensitivity ∼0.3%) DS neonates without Ss/DHPLC-detectable GATA1 mutations. No clinical or hematologic features distinguished these 18 neonates. We suggest the term "silent TAM" for neonates with DS with GATA1 mutations detectable only by NGS. To identify all babies at risk of ML-DS, we suggest GATA1 mutation and blood count and smear analyses should be performed in DS neonates. Ss/DPHLC can be used for initial screening, but where GATA1 mutations are undetectable by Ss/DHPLC, NGS-based methods can identify neonates with small GATA1 mutant clones.