Outcomes of venetoclax-based therapy in patients with t(11;14) light chain amyloidosis after failure of daratumumab-based therapy.

BACKGROUND: Daratumumab's incorporation in the upfront treatment of light chain (AL) amyloidosis has led to daratumumab (dara) refractoriness early in disease course. Patients who experience relapse or have suboptimal response to dara-based-therapy, have limited options. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of venetoclax-based therapy in t(11;14) positive AL patients who previously failed dara. METHODS: Thirty-one patients with AL were included in this bi-institutional retrospective analysis. RESULTS: Dara failure was due to inadequate response in 20 (65%) patients, haematologic relapse in 7 (22%), and both haematologic plus organ relapse in 4 (13%). Overall haematologic response rate to venetoclax-based therapy was 97%, with ≥ VGPR being 91%. Of the 19 evaluable patients with cardiac involvement, 14 (74%) achieved organ response. Of the 13 evaluable patients with renal involvement, 6 (46%) achieved organ response. With a median follow-up of 22 months, median time-to-next-treatment (TTNT) and overall survival (OS) were not reached. The 12- and 24-month TTNT rates were 74% and 56%, respectively. At data-cut-off, four patients had died, all from AL-related organ complications. The 12- and 24-month OS rates were 89% and 85%, respectively. Grade ≥3 adverse events occurred in 26% of patients, with 6% due to infections. CONCLUSION: These findings are encouraging for the use of venetoclax as salvage therapy post-dara failure.

Safety and Efficacy of SGLT2 Inhibitors for Amyloid Light-Chain Cardiomyopathy.

BACKGROUND: Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) have demonstrated benefit in patients with heart failure, but minimal data exists around the use of these medications in amyloid light-chain cardiomyopathy (AL-CM). We performed a retrospective study assessing the safety and efficacy of SGLT2i in AL-CM. METHODS: We queried our institutional registry and identified 27 AL-CM patients who received SGLT2i. The safety analysis included all 27 patients and assessed SGLT2i-associated adverse events, hospitalizations, and deaths. To decrease confounding, the efficacy analysis included only a subset of patients with stable disease (on stable anti-plasma cell therapy for ≥2 months prior to baseline and achieved at least a hematologic Very Good Partial Response) and compared disease marker changes in these patients (n=17) with those of a contemporaneous untreated control cohort from our registry (n=21). RESULTS: The mean age of the overall population was 68.6 (standard deviation 9.4) years. Seven (14.6%) patients had diabetes, and 19 (39.6%) had chronic kidney disease. In the safety analysis, median follow-up time was 10.9 (interquartile range 7.2) months. Two (7.4%) patients discontinued SGLT2i due to hypovolemia and genital irritation, and 6 (22.2%) additional patients temporarily held SGLT2i due to an adverse event, commonly related to volume depletion. Thirteen hospitalizations, all considered unrelated to SGLT2i use, and no deaths occurred. In the efficacy analysis, SGLT2i-treated patients had more severe disease at baseline than controls, demonstrating significantly higher median troponin-T and loop diuretic dose (P<0.05). Compared with controls, SGLT2i treatment was associated with significantly greater reductions in loop diuretic dose (P<0.001) and NTproBNP (P=0.033) across 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up timepoints. SGLT2i treatment was also associated with a significantly greater reduction in mean arterial pressure at 12 months (P=0.031) but not at other timepoints. No significant differences were observed on changes in weight, eGFR, troponin-T, proteinuria, or albumin. CONCLUSIONS: In this small-scale retrospective study, we demonstrate that SGLT2i is well-tolerated by most patients with AL-CM, but volume depletion symptoms may limit continuous use. SGLT2i may aid management of congestion in AL-CM as evidenced by reduced diuretic dose and NTproBNP without adverse renal effects. Larger long-term studies are needed to build on our findings.

Thromboprophylaxis in multiple myeloma: a case-based review with practical guidelines.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) poses a significant challenge in the context of multiple myeloma, with an incidence of up to 10% in newly diagnosed patients and varying frequency in the relapsed/refractory setting. Accurate VTE risk assessment and personalized thromboprophylaxis strategies are important parts of supportive care in myeloma. There are three validated risk assessment models for prediction of VTE risk in newly diagnosed myeloma-SAVED, IMPEDE-VTE, and PRISM. In this review, we delve into the practical applications of VTE risk prediction models in the context of current therapies. By emphasizing the necessity of a tailored approach, we underscore the importance of considering patient-specific, disease-specific, and treatment-specific risk factors in each clinical scenario, and using that data to complement the output from risk assessment models. We also provide a summary of currently available data on VTE thromboprophylaxis in myeloma, and highlight specific situations where direct oral anticoagulants should be strongly considered. Our objective is to fill the critical gaps in VTE prophylaxis and management through the analysis of specific patient cases and provide a practical overview for clinicians.

Teclistamab in relapsed refractory multiple myeloma: multi-institutional real-world study.

The objective of our study was to report real-world data on the safety and efficacy of standard-of-care teclistamab in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (MM). This is a multi-institutional retrospective cohort study and included all consecutive patients that received at least one dose of teclistamab up until August 2023. One hundred and ten patients were included, of whom, 86% had triple-class refractory disease, 76% penta-refractory disease, and 35% had prior exposure to B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA)-targeting therapies. The overall response rate (ORR) in our cohort was 62%, with a ≥ very good partial remission (VGPR) rate of 51%. The ORR in patients with and without prior BCMA-targeted therapies was 54% vs 67%, respectively (p = 0.23). At a median follow-up of 3.5 months (range, 0.39-10.92), the estimated 3 month and 6 month progression free survival (PFS) was 57% (95% CI, 48%, 68%) and 52% (95% CI, 42%, 64%) respectively. The incidence of cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and immune effector cell associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS) was 56% and 11% respectively, with grade ≥3 CRS and ICANS noted in 3.5% and 4.6% of patients respectively. 78 unique infections were diagnosed in 44 patients, with the incidence of all-grade and grade ≥3 infections being 40% vs 26% respectively. Primary prophylaxis with intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) was associated with a significantly lower infection risk on multivariate analysis (Hazard ratio [HR] 0.33; 95% CI 0.17, 0.64; p = 0.001).

Dietary interventions in cancer: a systematic review of all randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Prior systematic reviews addressing the impact of diet on cancer outcomes have focused on specific dietary interventions. In this systematic review, we assessed all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating dietary interventions for cancer patients, examining the range of interventions, endpoints, patient populations, and results. METHODS: This systematic review identified all RCTs conducted before January 2023 testing dietary interventions in patients with cancer. Assessed outcomes included quality of life, functional outcomes, clinical cancer measurements (eg, progression-free survival, response rates), overall survival, and translational endpoints (eg, inflammatory markers). RESULTS: In total, 252 RCTs were identified involving 31 067 patients. The median sample size was 71 (interquartile range 41 to 118), and 80 (32%) studies had a sample size greater than 100. Most trials (n = 184, 73%) were conducted in the adjuvant setting. Weight or body composition and translational endpoints were the most common primary endpoints (n = 64, 25%; n = 52, 21%, respectively). Direct cancer measurements and overall survival were primary endpoints in 20 (8%) and 7 (3%) studies, respectively. Eight trials with a primary endpoint of cancer measurement (40%) met their endpoint. Large trials in colon (n = 1429), breast (n = 3088), and prostate cancer (n = 478) each showed no effect of dietary interventions on endpoints measuring cancer. CONCLUSION: Most RCTs of dietary interventions in cancer are small and measure nonclinical endpoints. Although only a small number of large RCTs have been conducted to date, these trials have not shown an improvement in cancer outcomes. Currently, there is limited evidence to support dietary interventions as a therapeutic tool in cancer care.

Alterations in chromosome 1q in multiple myeloma randomized clinical trials: a systematic review.

Extra copies of chromosome 1q21 (+1q: gain = 3 copies, amp >= 4 copies) are associated with worse outcomes in multiple myeloma (MM). This systematic review assesses the current reporting trends of +1q, the efficacy of existing regimens on +1q, and its prognostic implications in MM randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane Registry of RCTs were searched from January 2012 to December 2022. Only MM RCTs were included. A total of 124 RCTs were included, of which 29 (23%) studies reported on +1q. Among them, 10% defined thresholds for +1q, 14% reported survival data separately for gain and amp, and 79% considered +1q a high-risk cytogenetic abnormality. Amongst RCTs that met the primary endpoint showing improvement in progression free survival (PFS), lenalidomide maintenance (Myeloma XI), selinexor (BOSTON), and isatuximab (IKEMA and ICARIA) were shown to improve PFS for patients with evidence of +1q. Some additional RCT's such as Myeloma XI+ (carfilzomib), ELOQUENT-3 (elotuzumab), and HOVON-65/GMMG-HD4 (bortezomib) met their endpoint showing improvement in PFS and also showed improvement in PFS in the +1q cohort, although the confidence interval crossed 1. All six studies that reported HR for +1q patients vs. without (across both arms) showed worse OS and PFS for +1q. There is considerable heterogeneity in the reporting of +1q. All interventions that have shown to be successful in RCTs and have clearly reported on the +1q subgroup have shown concordant direction of results and benefit of the applied intervention. A more standardized approach to reporting this abnormality is needed.

The changing spectrum of infection with BCMA and GPRC5D targeting bispecific antibody (bsAb) therapy in patients with relapsed refractory multiple myeloma.

There is a paucity of granular data on infection risk with B-cell maturation antigen (BMCA) and GPRC5D bispecific antibodies (bsAb) in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). The aim of our multi-institutional study was to characterize the incidence, etiologies, and risk factors of infections from the start of therapy to the last follow-up or 90 days after study exit. A total of 66 patients received BCMA bsAb monotherapy, 15 GPRC5D bsAb monotherapy, and 15 GPRC5D bsAb combination therapy with daratumumab and/or pomalidomide. While the infection rate per 100 days was 0.57 for BCMA bsAb, it was 0.62 for GPRC5D bsAb combination and 0.13 for GPRC5D bsAb monotherapy; P=0.05. The proportion of infections that were grade ≥3 was higher in the BCMA bsAb group compared to the GPRC5D groups (58% vs. 36%; P=0.04). Grade 5 events were observed in 8% (n=8) of the patients, all treated with BCMA bsAb. The 9 month cumulative incidence of any grade of infection was similar in the BCMA and GPRC5D-combination groups (57% and 62%) and significantly higher than in the GPRC5D-mono group (16%); P=0.012. The cumulative incidence of grade ≥3 infections was highest in the BCMA group reaching 54% at 18 months; P=0.06. Multivariate analysis showed that BCMA bsAb therapy or GPRC5D combination therapy, history of previous infections, baseline lymphopenia, and baseline hypogammaglobulinemia were significantly associated with a higher risk of grade ≥3 infections. Our results indicate that BCMA bsAb and GPRC5D-combination therapies in RRMM are associated with higher cumulative incidence of infection and grade ≥3 infection compared to GPRC5D bsAb mono.

Use of subjective minimizing language at hematology and oncology conferences: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Subjective minimizing language in oncology conferences may undermine patient-centered care and hinder comprehensive treatment strategies. Subjective terms like "safe," "tolerable," and "well-tolerated" can vary in interpretation among individuals, making it difficult to compare results across trials and potentially downplaying significant risks and limitations associated with treatments. METHODS: This study evaluates subjective minimizing language in major oncology conferences and its use in adverse event reporting. We conducted a search of three electronic databases, ASCO, ASH, and ESMO, for published abstracts from January 1, 2019, to December 31, 2021. This study included prospective cohort studies or clinical trials in humans that used safety terms like "safe," "well-tolerated," "tolerable," "no new safety signal," or "no new safety concern" in the abstract text. RESULTS: Out of 34,975 reviewed records, 5299 (15.2%) abstracts used subjective minimizing language terms. The analysis included 2797 (52.8%) abstracts meeting the inclusion criteria. The majority of studies were Phase 1 trials (45.5%), followed by Phase 2 (29.6%) and Phase 3 trials (7.4%). Solid tumors accounted for the most common disease category (56.5%), followed by malignant hematology following (37.1%). Subjective minimizing terms like "safe" (69.2%), "well-tolerated" (53.2%), "tolerable" (25.6%), and "no new safety signal/concerns" (10%) were used frequently. Of the abstracts using subjective minimizing language (n = 2797), 81.9% reported data on any grade adverse events (AEs). Grade I/II AEs were reported in 62.6% of abstracts, Grade III/IV AEs in 78%, and Grade V AEs (death related to AEs) in 8.8%. Discontinuation due to AEs occurred in 11.4% (SD 9.5%) of studies using subjective minimizing language terms. CONCLUSIONS: Frequent use of subjective minimizing language in major oncology conferences' abstracts may obscure interpretation of study results and the safety of novel treatments. Researchers and clinicians should provide precise and standardized information to avoid overstatement of benefits and understand the true impact of interventions on patients' safety and well-being.

Clinician preferences on treatment of smoldering myeloma: a cross-sectional survey.

Background: Smoldering myeloma (SMM) is an asymptomatic precursor condition to multiple myeloma (MM) with a variable risk of progression. The management of high-risk SMM (HR-SMM) remains controversial, particularly with changes in diagnostic criteria that led to reclassifying of some patients with SMM to MM. This study aimed to assess clinician preferences for whether to treat patients with HR-SMM and/or patients with MM diagnosed solely by SLiM criteria (free light chain ratio >100, bone marrow plasma cell percentage >60, greater than two focal marrow lesions on MRI) through an electronic survey. Methods: This was a cross-sectional survey of clinicians, conducted via an anonymous online REDCap survey from May 16th to July 5th, 2023. The survey included questions on demographics, SMM surveillance practices, and management preferences for two clinical scenarios (HR-SMM and MM based solely on the free light chain ratio >100 criterion). Data was analysed descriptively via Microsoft Excel. Findings: A total of 146 clinicians completed the full survey, with 92% recommending against routine treatment for a patient with HR-SMM based on a single time point assessment, instead preferring active surveillance. For patients with MM diagnosed solely on the basis of a free light chain ratio >100, 61% recommended active treatment, while 37% recommended active surveillance. The most common reasons recommending against treatment of HR-SMM were toxicity, lack of demonstrated overall survival benefit, and low MM-defining event rates in clinical trials. Interpretation: The survey indicates that most clinicians recommend against routine treatment for HR-SMM. Active surveillance is the prevailing standard of care and it is therefore an appropriate control arm in future SMM trials. More randomised trials are needed to determine if early treatment of modern-era SMM offers a net benefit to patients. Funding: None.

Adverse Event Reporting in Randomized Clinical Trials for Multiple Myeloma.

Importance: Cancer treatment can result in burdensome toxic effects that profoundly affect patient quality of life. In seeking to emphasize the efficacy of tested treatments, clinical trial reports may use subjective or minimizing terms to describe adverse events (AEs). Objective: To evaluate patterns of AE reporting in multiple myeloma (MM) randomized clinical trials (RCTs) published between 2015 and early 2023. Design, Setting, and Participants: For this cohort study, the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched to assess the prevalence of minimizing terms in MM RCTs published between January 1, 2015, and March 1, 2023. Minimizing terms were defined as subjective terms used to favorably describe the safety profile of the intervention. The terms searched included convenient, manageable, acceptable, expected, well-tolerated, tolerable, favorable, and safe. Final data analysis was performed on July 21, 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the occurrence of at least 1 minimizing term in an article. Univariate logistic regression analyses were performed to evaluate the association between the presence of at least 1 minimizing term and the actual incidence of grade 3 or 4 AEs, serious AEs, or grade 5 AEs. Results: Of the 65 RCTs included, 56 (86%) used minimizing terms when describing treatment-emergent AEs. The most frequently used minimizing terms were well-tolerated or tolerable in 29 trials (45%), manageable in 18 (28%), and acceptable in 16 (25%). Grade 3 or 4 AE rate in the examined RCTs ranged from 23% to 94%, with a median of 75% (IQR, 59%-82%). A univariate regression analysis demonstrated no association between the use of minimizing terms and grade 3 or 4 AE rates (odds ratio [OR], 1.35 [95% CI, 0.88-2.10] per 10% AE rate increase; P = .17) or grade 5 AE rates (OR, 3.16 [95% CI, 0.27-12.7] per 10% AE rate increase; P = .45). Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that trial investigators and sponsors regularly use minimizing terms to describe toxic effects in MM trials, and use of this terminology may not reflect actual AE rates in these studies. Instead of using these terms, trial investigators should highlight event rates and patient-reported outcomes, to allow clinicians and patients to better evaluate the true tolerability of AEs.

Characteristics of post hoc subgroup analyses of oncology clinical trials: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Subgroup analyses in clinical trials assess intervention effects on specific patient subgroups, ensuring generalizability. However, they are usually only able to generate hypotheses rather than definitive conclusions. This study examined the prevalence and characteristics of post hoc subgroup analysis in oncology. METHODS: We systematically reviewed published subgroup analyses from 2000 to 2022. We included articles presenting secondary, post hoc, or subgroup analyses of interventional clinical trials in oncology, cancer survivorship, or cancer screening, published separately from the original clinical trial publication. We collected cancer type, year of publication, where and how subgroup analyses were reported, and funding. RESULTS: Out of 16 487 screened publications, 1612 studies were included, primarily subgroup analyses of treatment trials for solid tumors (82%). Medical writers contributed to 31% of articles, and 58% of articles reported conflicts of interest. Subgroup analyses increased significantly over time, with 695 published between 2019 and 2022, compared to 384 from 2000 to 2014. Gastrointestinal tumors (25%) and lymphoid lineage tumors (39%) were the most frequently studied solid and hematological malignancies, respectively. Industry funding and reporting of conflicts of interest increased over time. Subgroup analyses often neglected to indicate their secondary nature in the title. Most authors were from high-income countries, most commonly North America (45%). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the rapidly growing use of post hoc subgroup analysis of oncology clinical trials, revealing that the majority are supported by pharmaceutical companies, and they frequently fail to indicate their secondary nature in the title. Given the known methodological limitations of subgroup analyses, caution is recommended among authors, readers, and reviewers when conducting and interpreting these studies.

Role of autologous haematopoietic cell transplantation in the treatment of systemic light chain amyloidosis in the era of anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies.

The primary goal of the initial treatment in systemic light chain amyloidosis is to obtain a rapid and profound haematological response as safely as possible, coupled with supportive care by a multidisciplinary team. The treatment landscape has evolved with the introduction of highly effective therapies targeting the plasma cell clones, which can attain high rates of haematological complete response with minimal treatment-related morbidity and mortality. Consequently, the role of high-dose melphalan followed by autologous haematopoietic cell transplantation (HDM-AHCT) is being analysed, particularly considering the absence of randomised controlled trial data supporting its superiority over standard-dose therapies in systemic light chain amyloidosis treatment. In this Viewpoint, we will explore the role of HDM-AHCT in the management of patients with systemic light chain amyloidosis who are eligible for transplantation, and the unresolved questions surrounding HDM-AHCT use as both front-line and salvage therapy.

Follow up duration of phase III Multiple Myeloma Clinical Trials: A systematic review.

Long-term follow-up of multiple myeloma (MM) clinical trials are needed to assess long-term outcomes. We aimed to investigate the length of follow-up of all phase III MM clinical trials. Median follow-up duration of clinical trials of newly diagnosed MM was longer when compared to relapsed/refractory MM clinical trials (42.7 vs. 20.5 months, respectively). The follow-up duration of phase III clinical trials in MM is relatively short when compared to the improved outcomes in the current era. Efforts should be made to facilitate long-term clinical trials follow-up and/or publication of results of updated results.