Single-point and kinetics of peripheral residual disease by mass spectrometry to predict outcome in patients with high risk smoldering multiple myeloma included in the GEM-CESAR trial.

The value of quantitative immunoprecipitation mass spectrometry (QIP-MS) to identify the M-protein is being investigated in patients with monoclonal gammopathies but no data are yet available in high-risk smoldering myeloma (HRsMM). We have therefore investigated QIP-MS to monitor peripheral residual disease (PRD) in 62 HRsMM patients enrolled in the GEM-CESAR trial. After 24 cycles of maintenance, detecting the M-protein by MS or clonal plasma cells by NGF identified cases with a significantly shorter median PFS (mPFS; MS: not reached vs 1,4 years, p=0.001; NGF: not reached vs 2 years, p=0.0002) but reaching CR+sCR did not discriminate patients with different outcome. With NGF as a reference, the combined results of NGF and MS showed a high negative predictive value (NPV) of MS: 81% overall and 73% at treatment completion. When sequential results were considered, sustained negativity by MS or NGF was associated with a very favorable outcome with a mPFS not yet reached vs 1.66 years and 2.18 years in cases never attaining PRD or minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity, respectively. We can thus conclude that 1) the standard response categories of the IMWG do not seem to be useful for treatment monitoring in HRsMM patients, 2) MS could be used as a non-invasive, clinical valuable tool with the capacity of guiding timely bone marrow evaluations (based on its high NPV with NGF as a reference) and 3) similarly to NGF, sequential results of MS are able identify a subgroup of HRsMM patients with long-term disease control. This study was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02415413).

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).

Belantamab Mafodotin, Bortezomib, and Dexamethasone for Multiple Myeloma.

BACKGROUND: Belantamab mafodotin had single-agent activity in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma, a finding that supports further evaluation of the agent in combination with standard-care therapies. METHODS: In this phase 3, open-label, randomized trial, we evaluated belantamab mafodotin, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (BVd), as compared with daratumumab, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (DVd), in patients who had progression of multiple myeloma after at least one line of therapy. The primary end point was progression-free survival. Key secondary end points were overall survival, response duration, and minimal residual disease (MRD)-negative status. RESULTS: In total, 494 patients were randomly assigned to receive BVd (243 patients) or DVd (251 patients). At a median follow-up of 28.2 months (range, 0.1 to 40.0), median progression-free survival was 36.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 28.4 to not reached) in the BVd group and 13.4 months (95% CI, 11.1 to 17.5) in the DVd group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.31 to 0.53; P<0.001). Overall survival at 18 months was 84% in the BVd group and 73% in the DVd group. An analysis of the restricted mean response duration favored BVd over DVd (P<0.001). A complete response or better plus MRD-negative status occurred in 25% of the patients in the BVd group and 10% of those in the DVd group. Grade 3 or higher adverse events occurred in 95% of the patients in the BVd group and 78% of those in the DVd group. Ocular events were more common in the BVd group than in the DVd group (79% vs. 29%); such events were managed with dose modifications, and events of worsening visual acuity mostly resolved. CONCLUSIONS: As compared with DVd therapy, BVd therapy conferred a significant benefit with respect to progression-free survival among patients who had relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma after at least one line of therapy. Most patients had grade 3 or higher adverse events. (Funded by GSK; DREAMM-7 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04246047; EudraCT number, 2018-003993-29.).

Safety and efficacy of belantamab mafodotin with pembrolizumab in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma.

BACKGROUND: Belantamab mafodotin (belamaf) has shown promising antimyeloma activity in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) as a single agent. It was hypothesized that its multimodal activity may be enhanced by programmed cell death protein 1 pathway inhibition and activation of T cell-mediated antitumor responses. This study investigated the efficacy and safety of belamaf with pembrolizumab in patients with RRMM. METHODS: DREAMM-4 (NCT03848845) was an open-label, single-arm, phase 1/2 study divided into dose-escalation (part 1) and dose-expansion (part 2) phases. Patients were ≥18 years old with ≥3 prior lines of therapy including a proteasome inhibitor, an immunomodulatory drug, and an anti-CD38 agent. Patients received belamaf (2.5 or 3.4 mg/kg, part 1; 2.5 mg/kg, part 2) and 200 mg pembrolizumab for ≤35 cycles. RESULTS: Of 41 enrolled patients, 34 (n = 6 part 1, n = 28 part 2) who received 2.5 mg/kg belamaf plus pembrolizumab were included in this final analysis. Sixteen patients (47%) achieved an overall response. Minimal residual disease negativity was achieved in three of 10 patients who had very good partial response or better. Five of eight patients who had prior anti-B-cell maturation antigen therapy achieved partial response or better, including two who had B-cell maturation antigen-refractory disease. Common grade ≥3 adverse events were keratopathy (38%) and thrombocytopenia (29%). Despite belamaf-related ocular events, quality-of-life measures remained stable over time. No new safety signals were observed. CONCLUSIONS: The results of DREAMM-4 demonstrated clinical activity and a favorable safety profile of belamaf plus pembrolizumab in patients with RRMM. This trial is registered at www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov as NCT03848845.

An open-label phase 2 study treating patients with first or second relapse of multiple myeloma with carfilzomib, pomalidomide, and dexamethasone (KPd): SELECT study.

Once-weekly carfilzomib at 56 mg/m2 plus immunomodulatory drugs and dexamethasone has shown efficacy and tolerability treating early relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). The phase 2 SELECT study (NCT04191616) evaluated efficacy/safety of weekly carfilzomib, pomalidomide, and dexamethasone (KPd) in early RRMM patients refractory to lenalidomide. All 52 treated patients were refractory to prior treatment, and 19 (37%) were triple-class refractory. Overall response rate (ORR; primary endpoint) was 58% (35% ≥ very good partial response, 6% ≥ complete response); median response duration was 20.3 months. Minimal residual disease negativity (10-5) was achieved in 10% of patients. Median progression-free survival was 11.1 months; median overall survival was 18.8 months. Adverse events (AEs) were consistent with the known safety profile including grade ≥3 treatment-emergent AEs reported in 67% of patients. Although the primary endpoint of ORR was not met, KPd showed meaningful clinical benefits in lenalidomide-refractory RRMM patients, including those who were daratumumab-refractory and/or triple-class refractory.

CD200 genotype is associated with clinical outcome of patients with multiple myeloma.

Immune dysfunction in patients with MM affects both the innate and adaptive immune system. Molecules involved in the immune response pathways are essential to determine the ability of cancer cells to escape from the immune system surveillance. However, few data are available concerning the role of immune checkpoint molecules in predicting the myeloma control and immunological scape as mechanism of disease progression. We retrospectively analyzed the clinical impact of the CD200 genotype (rs1131199 and rs2272022) in 291 patients with newly diagnosed MM. Patients with a CD200 rs1131199 GG genotype showed a median overall survival (OS) significantly lower than those with CC+CG genotype (67.8 months versus 94.4 months respectively; p: 0.022) maintaining significance in the multivariate analysis. This effect was specially detected in patients not receiving an autologous stem cell transplant (auto-SCT) (p < 0.001). In these patients the rs1131199 GG genotype negatively influenced in the mortality not related with the progression of MM (p: 0.02) mainly due to infections events.

Selinexor, daratumumab, bortezomib and dexamethasone for the treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma: results of the phase II, nonrandomized, multicenter GEM-SELIBORDARA study.

The treatment landscape for multiple myeloma has significantly evolved in the last decade. Notwithstanding, a large proportion of patients continue to relapse and novel combinations continue to be needed. In this phase II study, selinexor, a first-in-class inhibitor of exportin-1 was evaluated in combination with standard daratumumab-bortezomib-dexamethasone (DVd), for the treatment of relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). The aim of the trial was to assess the efficacy and safety of the combination of selinexor with DVd (S-DVd). A total of 57 patients were enrolled in the two parts of the study. Part 1 enrolled a heavily pretreated population with at least three prior lines (PL) of therapy and part 2 enrolled an early relapse population with at least one PL of therapy. The primary endpoint was complete response (CR) rate in part 2 and overall response rate (ORR) in part 1. In the latter, 24 patients were treated with a median of three PL. Overall response rate (ORR) was 50% with two CR. Median progression- free survival (PFS) was 7 months. In part 2, 33 patients were enrolled, with a median of one PL. ORR was 82% and CR or better was 33%. Median PFS was 24 months. In lenalidomide-refractory patients, a median PFS of 22.1 months was observed. Thrombocytopenia was the most common hematological adverse event (69%; grade 3-4: 34%) and nausea, the most frequent non-hematological adverse event (38%; grade 3-4: 6%). Sixty-two percent of the patients required dose modifications. In summary, although the primary endpoint of the study was not met, the combination of S-DVd showed encouraging clinical efficacy with a generally manageable safety profile representing a potential option for the treatment of RRMM patients.

Promises, Pitfalls, and Clinical Applications of Artificial Intelligence in Pediatrics.

Artificial intelligence (AI) broadly describes a branch of computer science focused on developing machines capable of performing tasks typically associated with human intelligence. Those who connect AI with the world of science fiction may meet its growing rise with hesitancy or outright skepticism. However, AI is becoming increasingly pervasive in our society, from algorithms helping to sift through airline fares to substituting words in emails and SMS text messages based on user choices. Data collection is ongoing and is being leveraged by software platforms to analyze patterns and make predictions across multiple industries. Health care is gradually becoming part of this technological transformation, as advancements in computational power and storage converge with the rapid expansion of digitized medical information. Given the growing and inevitable integration of AI into health care systems, it is our viewpoint that pediatricians urgently require training and orientation to the uses, promises, and pitfalls of AI in medicine. AI is unlikely to solve the full array of complex challenges confronting pediatricians today; however, if used responsibly, it holds great potential to improve many aspects of care for providers, children, and families. Our aim in this viewpoint is to provide clinicians with a targeted introduction to the field of AI in pediatrics, including key promises, pitfalls, and clinical applications, so they can play a more active role in shaping the future impact of AI in medicine.

ANCHOR: melflufen plus dexamethasone and daratumumab or bortezomib in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: final results of a phase I/IIa study.

Melphalan flufenamide (melflufen), a first-in-class, alkylating peptide-drug conjugate, demonstrated clinical benefit in combination with dexamethasone in triple-class refractory multiple myeloma (MM). The phase I/IIa ANCHOR study evaluated melflufen (30 or 40 mg) and dexamethasone (40 mg with daratumumab; 20 mg followed by 40 mg with bortezomib; dose reduced if aged ≥75 years) in triplet combination with daratumumab (16 mg/kg; daratumumab arm) or bortezomib (1.3 mg/m2; bortezomib arm) in patients with relapsed/refractory MM refractory to an immunomodulatory agent and/or a proteasome inhibitor and who had received one to four prior lines of therapy. Primary objectives were to determine the optimal dose of melflufen in triplet combination (phase I) and overall response rate (phase IIa). In total, 33 patients were treated in the daratumumab arm and 23 patients received therapy in the bortezomib arm. No dose-limiting toxicities were reported at either melflufen dose level with either combination. With both triplet regimens, the most common grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events were thrombocytopenia and neutropenia; thrombocytopenia was the most common treatment-emergent adverse event leading to treatment discontinuation. In the daratumumab arm, patients receiving melflufen 30 mg remained on treatment longer than those receiving the 40-mg dose. In the daratumumab arm, the overall response rate was 73% and median progression-free survival was 12.9 months. Notably, in the bortezomib arm, the overall response rate was 78% and median progression-free survival was 14.7 months. Considering the totality of the data, melflufen 30 mg was established as the recommended dose for use with dexamethasone and daratumumab or bortezomib for future studies in relapsed/refractory MM.

Pomalidomide, Bortezomib, and Dexamethasone in Lenalidomide-Pretreated Multiple Myeloma: A Subanalysis of OPTIMISMM by Frailty and Bortezomib Dose Adjustment.

INTRODUCTION: A proportion of patients with multiple myeloma (MM) are older and/or have comorbidities, requiring dose adjustments. Data from OPTIMISMM (NCT01734928) supported the use of pomalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (PVd) for treating relapsed/refractory MM. This subanalysis of OPTIMISMM assessed outcome by frailty and/or bortezomib dose adjustment. METHODS: Patient frailty (nonfrail vs. frail) was classified using age, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status. Data from patients requiring a bortezomib dose reduction, interruption, and/or withdrawal during PVd treatment were assessed. RESULTS: Among 559 patients, 93 of 281 (33.1%) and 93 of 278 (33.5%) patients who received PVd and bortezomib and dexamethasone (Vd), respectively, were frail. Overall response rate (ORR) and median progression-free survival (PFS) were higher in nonfrail vs. frail with PVd treatment (ORR, 82.8% vs. 79.6%; PFS, 14.7 vs. 9.7 months); significantly higher than with Vd regardless of frailty. Grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were higher with PVd vs. Vd, regardless of frailty. Discontinuations of PVd were lower in nonfrail vs. frail patients (19.2% vs. 30.1%); the median duration of treatment was similar (DoT; 8.8 vs. 8.9 months, respectively). Patients who received PVd with a bortezomib dose adjustment (n = 240) had a longer median DoT (9.3 vs. 4.5 months) and PFS (12.1 vs. 8.4 months) vs. those without. CONCLUSION: Frail patients treated with PVd demonstrated a higher ORR and a longer PFS and DoT vs. Vd, despite a higher frequency of grade ≥ 3 TEAEs leading to pomalidomide, bortezomib, and/or dexamethasone discontinuation. Therefore, PVd treatment may improve patient outcomes, regardless of frailty.

Teclistamab Improves Patient-Reported Symptoms and Health-Related Quality of Life in Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma: Results From the Phase II MajesTEC-1 Study.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) report significantly lower HRQoL compared with patients with newly diagnosed MM and experience further deterioration in HRQoL with each relapse and subsequent treatment. Therefore, consideration of the impact of treatment on HRQoL in addition to clinical outcomes is vital. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the phase I/II MajesTEC-1 (NCT03145181, NCT04557098) study, patients with RRMM who received teclistamab, an off-the-shelf, T-cell redirecting BCMA × CD3 bispecific antibody, had deep and durable responses with manageable safety. HRQoL was assessed using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire core 30-item and the EuroQol 5 Dimension 5 Level descriptive questionnaire. Changes over time from baseline were measured with a repeated measures mixed-effects model. Proportions of patients with clinically meaningful improvement after starting treatment and time to clinically meaningful worsening were assessed. RESULTS: Compliance was maintained throughout the study. Compared with baseline, positive changes were observed for pain, global health status, and emotional functioning with treatment; other assessments were largely unchanged from baseline. Post hoc analysis showed patients with deeper clinical response generally reported improved HRQoL outcomes. Following an initial decline in HRQoL in some scales, the proportion of patients reporting clinically meaningful improvements increased, while the proportion reporting clinically meaningful worsening decreased over time. Clinically meaningful improvements in pain were reported in ≥40% of patients at most assessment time points. CONCLUSIONS: These results complement previously reported clinical benefits and support teclistamab as a promising therapeutic option for patients with RRMM.

Predictors of unsustained measurable residual disease negativity in transplant-eligible patients with multiple myeloma.

ABSTRACT: The role of measurable residual disease (MRD) negativity as a biomarker to stop treatment is being investigated in transplant-eligible patients with multiple myeloma (MM). Thus, it is important to identify risk factors of MRD resurgence and/or progressive disease (PD) among patients achieving undetectable MRD to avoid undertreating them. Here, we studied 267 newly diagnosed transplant-eligible patients with MM enrolled in the GEM2012MENOS65 and GEM2014MAIN clinical trials who achieved MRD negativity by next-generation flow cytometry. After a median follow-up of 73 months since the first MRD negative assessment, 111 of the 267 (42%) patients showed MRD resurgence and/or PD. The only prognostic factors at diagnosis that predicted MRD resurgence and/or PD were an International Staging System (ISS) 3 and the presence of ≥0.01% circulating tumor cells (CTCs). Failure to achieve MRD negativity after induction also predicted higher risk of MRD resurgence and/or PD. Patients having 0 vs 1 vs ≥2 risk factors (ISS 3, ≥0.01% CTCs, and late MRD negativity) showed 5-year rates of MRD resurgence and/or PD of 16%, 33%, and 57%, respectively (P < .001). Thus, these easily measurable risk factors could help refine the selection of patients for whom treatment cessation after MRD negativity is being investigated in clinical trials. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT01916252 and NCT02406144.

Evolution of Pharmacological Treatments and Associated Costs for Multiple Myeloma in the Public Healthcare System of Catalonia: A Retrospective Observational Study.

(1) Background: Our understanding of and treatment for multiple myeloma (MM) has advanced significantly, and new pharmacological treatments have promising benefits but high price tags. This study analyzes prescription patterns and pharmaceutical expenditure for MM treatments in Catalonia's public healthcare system over eight years. (2) Methods: A retrospective observational study examined MM treatment data from 2015 to 2022 in Catalonia, using healthcare registries from the Catalan Health Service to collect information on patients, medicines used, and treatment costs. (3) Results: A total of 4556 MM patients received treatment, with a rising trend in the number of treated patients each year from 902 in 2015 to 1899 in 2022. The mean age was 68.9 years, and patients were almost evenly distributed by gender (51.5% male). Most patients were treated with bortezomib (3338 patients), lenalidomide (2952), and/or daratumumab (1093). Most drugs showed increased utilization annually, most significantly for lenalidomide and daratumumab. The total pharmacological treatment cost throughout the entire study period was EUR 321,811,249, with lenalidomide leading with the highest total cost (EUR 157,236,784), and daratumumab exhibiting the highest increase in annual expenditure. (5) Conclusions: The study reveals a progressive increase in the number of MM patients treated and rising pharmaceutical costs. Lenalidomide and daratumumab incurred the highest costs. The findings highlight MM treatment's economic impact and the need to monitor prescription patterns and expenditures to optimize healthcare resources and decision making. Understanding these trends can guide resource allocation effectively.

Recovery of uninvolved heavy/light chain pair immunoparesis in newly diagnosed transplant-eligible myeloma patients complements the prognostic value of minimal residual disease detection.

Immunoparesis (IP) in multiple myeloma (MM) patients can be measured by classic assessment of immunoglobulin (Ig) levels or by analysis of the uninvolved heavy/light chain pair of the same immunoglobulin (uHLC) by the Hevylite® assay. In this study we evaluate the prognostic value of recovery from IP measured by classic total Ig and uHLC assessment in newly diagnosed MM transplant-eligible (NDMM-TE) patients with intensive treatment and its association with Minimal Residual Disease (MRD). Patients were enrolled and treated in the PETHEMA/GEM2012MENOS65 trial and continued in the PETHEMA/GEM2014MAIN trial. Total Ig (IgG, IgA and IgM) and uHLC were analyzed in a central laboratory at diagnosis, after consolidation treatment and after the first year of maintenance. MRD was analyzed by next generation flow cytometry after consolidation (sensitivity level 2x10-6). We found no differences in progression free survival (PFS) between patients who recovered and patients who didn't recover from IP after consolidation when examining classic total Ig and uHLC. However, after the first year of maintenance, in contrast to patients with classic IP, patients with recovery from uHLC IP had longer PFS than patients without recovery, with hazard ratio of 0.42 (CI95% 0.21-0.81; p=0.008). Multivariate analysis with Cox proportional-hazards regression models confirmed recovery from uHLC IP after the first year of maintenance as an independent prognostic factor for PFS, with an increase in C-statistic of 0.05 (-0.04-0.14; p<0.001) when adding uHLC IP recovery. Moreover, we observed that MRD status and uHLC IP recovery affords complementary information for risk stratification. In conclusion, recovery from uHLC IP after one year of maintenance is an independent prognostic factor for PFS in NDMM-TE patients who receive intensive treatment. Immune reconstitution, measured as recovery from uHLC IP, provides complementary prognostic information to MRD assessment.

Integrated analysis of randomized controlled trials evaluating bortezomib + lenalidomide + dexamethasone or bortezomib + thalidomide + dexamethasone induction in transplant-eligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.

Objective: Providing the most efficacious frontline treatment for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) is critical for patient outcomes. No direct comparisons have been made between bortezomib + lenalidomide + dexamethasone (VRD) and bortezomib + thalidomide + dexamethasone (VTD) induction regimens in transplant-eligible NDMM. Methods: An integrated analysis was performed using patient data from four trials meeting prespecified eligibility criteria: two using VRD (PETHEMA GEM2012 and IFM 2009) and two using VTD (PETHEMA GEM2005 and IFM 2013-04). Results: The primary endpoint was met, with VRD demonstrating a noninferior rate of at least very good partial response (≥ VGPR) after induction vs VTD. GEM comparison demonstrated improvement in the ≥ VGPR rate after induction for VRD vs VTD (66.3% vs 51.2%; P = .00281) that increased after transplant (74.4% vs 53.5%). Undetectable minimal residual disease rates post induction (46.7% vs 34.9%) and post transplant (62.4% vs 47.3%) support the benefit of VRD vs VTD. Treatment-emergent adverse events leading to study and/or treatment discontinuation were less frequent with VRD (3%, GEM2012; 6%, IFM 2009) vs VTD (11%, IFM 2013-04). Conclusion: These results supported the benefit of VRD over VTD for induction in transplant-eligible patients with NDMM. The trials included are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01916252, NCT01191060, NCT00461747, and NCT01971658).

Subcutaneous daratumumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone versus pomalidomide and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (APOLLO): extended follow up of an open-label, randomised, multicentre, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The primary analysis of the APOLLO trial, done after a median follow-up of 16·9 months, showed that daratumumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone significantly improved progression-free survival versus pomalidomide and dexamethasone. Here, we report the final overall survival and updated safety results from APOLLO. METHODS: APOLLO was an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial conducted at 48 academic centres and hospitals across 12 countries in Europe, that included adults aged 18 years or older with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma who had an ECOG performance status score of 0-2, had received at least one previous line of therapy, including lenalidomide and a proteasome inhibitor, had a partial response or better to one or more previous lines of antimyeloma therapy, and were refractory to lenalidomide if they had received only one previous line of therapy. An interactive web-response system was used to randomly assign patients (1:1) to receive daratumumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone or pomalidomide and dexamethasone; patients were stratified by the number of previous lines of therapy and International Staging System disease stage. Oral pomalidomide (4 mg once daily; days 1-21) and dexamethasone (40 mg once daily; days 1, 8, 15, and 22) were given in 28-day cycles until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Daratumumab (1800 mg subcutaneously or 16 mg/kg intravenously) was administered weekly (cycles 1-2), every 2 weeks (cycles 3-6), and every 4 weeks thereafter. The primary endpoint of progression-free survival, which has previously been reported, and the pre-planned secondary endpoint of overall survival were assessed in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03180736) and is no longer enrolling patients. FINDINGS: Between June 22, 2017, and June 13, 2019, 304 patients were randomly assigned: 151 to the daratumumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone group and 153 to the pomalidomide and dexamethasone group. The median age was 67 years (IQR 60-72); 143 (47%) patients were female and 161 (53%) were male, and 272 (89%) were White. At a median follow-up of 39·6 months (IQR 37·1-43·7), median overall survival was 34·4 months (95% CI 23·7-40·3) in the daratumumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone group versus 23·7 months (19·6-29·4) in the pomalidomide and dexamethasone group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·82 [95% CI 0·61-1·11]; p=0·20). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events were neutropenia (103 [69%] of 149 with daratumumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone vs 76 [51%] of 150 with pomalidomide and dexamethasone), anaemia (27 [18%] vs 32 [21%]), and thrombocytopenia (27 [18%] vs 28 [19%]). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 80 (54%) of 149 patients in the daratumumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone group and in 60 (40%) of 150 patients in the pomalidomide and dexamethasone group, the most common of which was pneumonia (23 [15%] of 149 vs 13 [9%] of 150). Treatment-emergent adverse events resulting in death occurred in 13 (9%) of 149 patients in the daratumumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone group and in 13 (9%) of 150 patients in the pomalidomide and dexamethasone group, with 4 (3%) of 151 adverse events leading to death within 30 days of the last treatment dose thought to be related to study treatment in the daratumumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone group (septic shock [n=1]; sepsis [n=1]; bone marrow failure, campylobacter infection, and liver disorder [n=1]; and pneumonia [n=1]) and none in the pomalidomide and dexamethasone group. INTERPRETATION: Although the difference in overall survival observed between treatment groups was not significant, the safety profile results with long-term follow-up reported here continue to support the use of daratumumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. FUNDING: European Myeloma Network and Janssen Research & Development.

Large T cell clones expressing immune checkpoints increase during multiple myeloma evolution and predict treatment resistance.

Tumor recognition by T cells is essential for antitumor immunity. A comprehensive characterization of T cell diversity may be key to understanding the success of immunomodulatory drugs and failure of PD-1 blockade in tumors such as multiple myeloma (MM). Here, we use single-cell RNA and T cell receptor sequencing to characterize bone marrow T cells from healthy adults (n = 4) and patients with precursor (n = 8) and full-blown MM (n = 10). Large T cell clones from patients with MM expressed multiple immune checkpoints, suggesting a potentially dysfunctional phenotype. Dual targeting of PD-1 + LAG3 or PD-1 + TIGIT partially restored their function in mice with MM. We identify phenotypic hallmarks of large intratumoral T cell clones, and demonstrate that the CD27- and CD27+ T cell ratio, measured by flow cytometry, may serve as a surrogate of clonal T cell expansions and an independent prognostic factor in 543 patients with MM treated with lenalidomide-based treatment combinations.

Impact of Prolonged Ischemia on the Immunohistochemical Expression of Programmed Death Ligand 1 (PD-L1).

Antibodies targeting programmed death receptor 1 or programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) have become a standard of care to treat different cancers; for some of these tumors, there is a correlation between tissue expression of PD-L1 and response rates in patients. Although most of the analytical challenges in the evaluation of PD-L1 expression have been standardized, preanalytical issues have been less explored. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of time of ischemia on the performance of 2 commonly used antibodies against PD-L1. Sixteen tonsillectomy samples were kept in ischemia for <30 minutes from sample obtention (control) and 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 hours at room temperature before formalin fixation and paraffin embedding. Selected areas were inserted into TMA paraffin recipient blocks stained with SP142 and SP263 antibodies and evaluated by 2 blind observers. The proportion of suboptimally stained samples was significantly higher for samples with cold ischemia times 6 hours or over ( P <0.0001). False-negative results were 25% in samples exposed to 6 hours of ischemia and raised to 34% for samples remaining in ischemia for 12 or 24 hours. When all observations were pooled, SP142 provided suboptimal results in 24% of observations and SP263 in 12.5%; this is a statistically significant difference ( P =0.042). In conclusion, the quality of staining for PD-L1 in tonsil samples varies with the time of cold ischemia. The SP142 antibody presented a significantly lower tolerance to prolonged cold ischemia than SP263. These results reveal the relevance of controlled preanalytical processing of samples.

Mezigdomide plus Dexamethasone in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma.

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