Triplet Therapy, Transplantation, and Maintenance until Progression in Myeloma.

BACKGROUND: In patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, the effect of adding autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) to triplet therapy (lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone [RVD]), followed by lenalidomide maintenance therapy until disease progression, is unknown. METHODS: In this phase 3 trial, adults (18 to 65 years of age) with symptomatic myeloma received one cycle of RVD. We randomly assigned these patients, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive two additional RVD cycles plus stem-cell mobilization, followed by either five additional RVD cycles (the RVD-alone group) or high-dose melphalan plus ASCT followed by two additional RVD cycles (the transplantation group). Both groups received lenalidomide until disease progression, unacceptable side effects, or both. The primary end point was progression-free survival. RESULTS: Among 357 patients in the RVD-alone group and 365 in the transplantation group, at a median follow-up of 76.0 months, 328 events of disease progression or death occurred; the risk was 53% higher in the RVD-alone group than in the transplantation group (hazard ratio, 1.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.23 to 1.91; P<0.001); median progression-free survival was 46.2 months and 67.5 months. The percentage of patients with a partial response or better was 95.0% in the RVD-alone group and 97.5% in the transplantation group (P = 0.55); 42.0% and 46.8%, respectively, had a complete response or better (P = 0.99). Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred in 78.2% and 94.2%, respectively; 5-year survival was 79.2% and 80.7% (hazard ratio for death, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.65). CONCLUSIONS: Among adults with multiple myeloma, RVD plus ASCT was associated with longer progression-free survival than RVD alone. No overall survival benefit was observed. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and others; DETERMINATION ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01208662.).

Autologous HSCT with novel agent-based induction and consolidation followed by lenalidomide maintenance for untreated multiple myeloma.

Triplet regimen comprising proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulatory drugs, and dexamethasone (DEX) is a recommended induction/consolidation therapy for multiple myeloma (MM) patients eligible for transplant. In this Japanese phase II study conducted from 2017 to 2019, newly diagnosed MM patients aged 20-65 received four induction cycles with bortezomib (Bor), lenalidomide (Len), and DEX (VRD), followed by Bor and high-dose melphalan with autologous stem cell rescue. Subsequently, they underwent four consolidation cycles with carfilzomib, Len, and DEX (KRD), followed by Len maintenance until disease progression. A total of 141 patients were analyzed. In an intent-to-treat population, the complete or better response post induction was 19.9%, rising to 39.7%, 58.9%, and 62.4% after transplant, consolidation, and 1-year maintenance, respectively. With a median follow-up of 38 months, the 3-year progression-free survival (PFS) rate was 83.5% and the 3-year overall survival rate was 92.5%. Severe adverse events (≥grade 3) occurred in ~30% of patients; however, there was no treatment-related mortality. These findings clearly showed the tolerability and effectiveness of this protocol. Nevertheless, patients with high-risk cytogenetics showed a trend toward lower 3-year PFS than those without (77.8% vs. 89.4%, p = 0.051), and ultra-high-risk cytogenetics (≥2 high-risk cytogenetics) had an even worse prognosis, with 61.2% 3-year PFS. To overcome this situation, a more potent treatment strategy incorporating novel agents such as the CD38-antibody should be assessed in future studies.

Early blast clearance during sequential conditioning prior to allogeneic stem cell transplantation in patients with acute myeloid leukaemia.

For patients with relapsed or refractory AML, sequential conditioning prior to allogeneic stem cell transplantation (alloSCT) is an established and potentially curative treatment option. Early response to treatment during conditioning indicates chemotherapy-responsive disease and may have prognostic value. We retrospectively evaluated blast clearance on day 5 after melphalan, administered 11 days prior to alloSCT as part of a sequential conditioning in 176 patients with active AML. Overall survival (OS) was 52% (95% confidence interval [CI] 45%-60%), and relapse-free survival (RFS) was 47% (95% CI 40%-55%) at 3 years. Patients who achieved early blast clearance did not show a significant improvement in OS and RFS (OS, hazard ratio [HR] HR 0.75, p 0.19; RFS, HR 0.71, p 0.09, respectively), but had a significantly lower non-relapse mortality rate (HR 0.46, p 0.017). HLA-mismatched donor, older age, adverse genetic risk and higher comorbidity scores were associated with inferior survival outcomes. A high initial blast count was only associated with inferior prognosis in patients receiving chemotherapy-only compared to total body irradiation containing conditioning therapy. These results indicate that for patients transplanted with active AML, sensitivity to chemotherapy might be of less importance, compared to other disease- and transplant-related factors.

Efficacy and Safety of the Melphalan/Hepatic Delivery System in Patients with Unresectable Metastatic Uveal Melanoma: Results from an Open-Label, Single-Arm, Multicenter Phase 3 Study.

BACKGROUND: Uveal melanoma (UM) has a poor prognosis once liver metastases occur. The melphalan/Hepatic Delivery System (melphalan/HDS) is a drug/device combination used for liver-directed treatment of metastatic UM (mUM) patients. The purpose of the FOCUS study was to assess the efficacy and safety of melphalan/HDS in patients with unresectable mUM. METHODS: Eligible patients with mUM received treatment with melphalan (3.0 mg/kg ideal body weight) once every 6 to 8 weeks for a maximum of six cycles. The primary end point was the objective response rate (ORR). The secondary end points included duration of response (DOR), overall survival (OS), and progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: The study enrolled 102 patients with mUM. Treatment was attempted in 95 patients, and 91 patients received treatment. In the treated population (n = 91), the ORR was 36.3 % (95 % confidence interval [CI], 26.44-47.01), including 7.7 % of patients with a complete response. Thus, the study met its primary end point because the lower bound of the 95 % CI for ORR exceeded the upper bound (8.3 %) from the benchmark meta-analysis. The median DOR was 14 months, and the median OS was 20.5 months, with an OS of 80 % at 1 year. The median PFS was 9 months, with a PFS of 65 % at 6 months. The most common serious treatment-emergent adverse events were thrombocytopenia (15.8 %) and neutropenia (10.5 %), treated mostly on an outpatient basis with observation. No treatment-related deaths were observed. CONCLUSION: Treatment with melphalan/HDS provides a clinically meaningful response rate and demonstrates a favorable benefit-risk profile in patients with unresectable mUM (study funded by Delcath; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02678572; EudraCT no. 2015-000417-44).

Prognostic differences between carmustine, etoposide, cytarabine and melphalan (BEAM) and carmustine, etoposide, cytarabine, melphalan and fludarabine (BEAMF) regimens before autologous stem cell transplantation plus chimeric antigen receptor T therapy in patients with refractory/relapsed B-cell non-Hodgkin-lymphoma.

BACKGROUND AIMS: The combination therapy of autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (ASCT) and chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CART) therapy has been employed to improve outcomes for relapsed or refractory (R/R) B-cell non-Hodgkin-lymphoma (B-NHL). The widely used conditioning regimen before ASCT plus CART therapy reported in the literature was carmustine, etoposide, cytarabine and melphalan (BEAM). However, whether adding fludarabine to the BEAM regimen (BEAMF) can improve the survival of patients with R/R B-NHL remains unknown. METHODS: In total, 39 and 19 patients with R/R B-NHL were enrolled to compare clinical outcomes in the BEAM and BEAMF regimens before ASCT plus CD19/22 CART therapy, respectively. RESULTS: The objective response (OR) rates at 3 months to BEAM and BEAMF regimens before ASCT plus CD19/22 CART therapy were 71.8% and 94.7%, respectively (P = 0.093). The BEAMF regimen showed a trend towards a superior duration of response compared with the BEAM regimen (P = 0.09). After a median follow-up of 28 months (range: 0.93-51.9 months), the BEAMF regimen demonstrated superior 2-year progression-free survival (PFS) (89.5% versus 63.9%; P = 0.048) and 2-year overall survival (OS) (100% vs 77.3%; P = 0.035) compared with the BEAM regimen. In the multivariable Cox regression analysis, OR at month 3 (responders) was remarkably correlated with better OS (hazard ratio: 0.112, P = 0.005) compared with OR (non-responders). CONCLUSIONS: For patients with R/R B-NHL, the BEAMF regimen before ASCT plus CD19/22 CART therapy was correlated with superior PFS and OS than the BEAM regimen, and the BEAMF regimen is a promising alternative conditioning regimen for ASCT plus CAR-T therapy.

Clinical and safety outcomes of BeEAM (Bendamustine, Etoposide, Cytarabine, Melphalan) versus CEM (Carboplatin, Etoposide, Melphalan) in lymphoma patients as a conditioning regimen before autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is a pivotal treatment for lymphoma patients. The BeEAM regimen (Bendamustine, Etoposide, Cytarabine, Melphalan) traditionally relies on cryopreservation, whereas the CEM regimen (Carboplatin, Etoposide, Melphalan) has been optimized for short-duration administration without the need for cryopreservation. This study rigorously compares the clinical and safety profiles of the BeEAM and CEM regimens. METHODS: A controlled, randomized clinical trial was conducted with 58 lymphoma patients undergoing ASCT at the International Medical Center (IMC) in Cairo, Egypt. Patients were randomly assigned to either the BeEAM (n = 29) or CEM (n = 29) regimen, with an 18-month follow-up period. Clinical and safety outcomes were meticulously compared, focusing on time to engraftment for neutrophils and platelets, side effects, length of hospitalization, transplant-related mortality (TRM), and survival rates. RESULTS: The findings demonstrate a significant advantage for the CEM regimen. Neutrophil recovery was markedly faster in the CEM group, averaging 8.5 days compared to 14.5 days in the BeEAM group (p < 0.0001). Platelet recovery was similarly expedited, with 11 days in the CEM group versus 23 days in the BeEAM group (p < 0.0001). Hospitalization duration was substantially shorter for CEM patients, averaging 18.5 days compared to 30 days for those on BeEAM (p < 0.0001). Furthermore, overall survival (OS) was significantly higher in the CEM group at 96.55% (95% CI: 84.91-99.44%) compared to 79.31% (95% CI: 63.11-89.75%) in the BeEAM group (p = 0.049). Progression-free survival (PFS) was also notably superior in the CEM group, at 86.21% (95% CI: 86.14-86.28%) versus 62.07% (95% CI: 61.94-62.20%) in the BeEAM group (p = 0.036). CONCLUSION: The CEM regimen might demonstrate superiority over the BeEAM regimen, with faster neutrophil and platelet recovery, reduced hospitalization time, and significantly improved overall and progression-free survival rates. Future studies with longer duration and larger sample sizes are warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov under the registration number NCT05813132 ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05813132 ). (The first submitted registration date: is March 16, 2023).

BeEAM vs. BEAM: evaluating conditioning regimens for autologous stem cell transplantation in patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL.

PURPOSE: To evaluate whether BeEAM is an alternative to BEAM for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). METHODS: Data of 60 patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL who underwent ASCT from January 2018 to June 2023 in our center, including 30 patients in the BeEAM group and 30 patients in the BEAM group, were retrospectively analyzed. The time to hematopoietic reconstitution, treatment-related adverse events, number of hospitalization days, hospitalization cost, and survival benefit were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: The clinical characteristics of the patients did not significantly differ between the two groups. The median number of reinfused CD34 + cells was 5.06 × 106/kg and 5.17 × 106/kg in the BeEAM and BEAM groups, respectively, which did not significantly different (p = 0.8829). In the BeEAM and BEAM groups, the median time to neutrophil implantation was 10.2 and 10.27 days, respectively (p = 0.8253), and the median time to platelet implantation was 13.23 and 12.87 days, respectively (p = 0.7671). In the BeEAM and BEAM groups, the median hospitalization duration was 30.37 and 30.57 days, respectively (p = 0.9060), and the median hospitalization cost was RMB 83,425 and RMB 96,235, respectively (p = 0.0560). The hospitalization cost was lower in the BeEAM group. The most common hematologic adverse events were grade ≥ 3 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia, whose incidences were similar in the two groups. The most common non-hematologic adverse events were ≤ grade 2 and the incidences of these events did not significantly differ between the two groups. Median overall survival was not reached in either group, with predicted 5-year overall survival of 72.5% and 60% in the BeEAM and BEAM groups, respectively (p = 0.5872). Five-year progression-free survival was 25% and 20% in the BeEAM and BEAM groups, respectively (p = 0.6804). CONCLUSION: As a conditioning regimen for relapsed or refractory DLBCL, BeEAM has a desirable safety profile and is well tolerated, and its hematopoietic reconstitution time, number of hospitalization days, and survival benefit are not inferior to those of BEAM. BeEAM has a lower hospitalization cost and is an alternative to BEAM.

A nationwide phase II study of delayed local treatment for children with high-risk neuroblastoma: The Japan Children's Cancer Group Neuroblastoma Committee Trial JN-H-11.

PURPOSE: Survival rates of patients with high-risk neuroblastoma are unacceptable. A time-intensified treatment strategy with delayed local treatment to control systemic diseases has been developed in Japan. We conducted a nationwide, prospective, single-arm clinical trial with delayed local treatment. This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of delayed surgery to increase treatment intensity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seventy-five patients with high-risk neuroblastoma were enrolled in this study between May 2011 and September 2015. Delayed local treatment consisted of five courses of induction chemotherapy (cisplatin, pirarubicin, vincristine, and cyclophosphamide) and myeloablative high-dose chemotherapy (melphalan, etoposide, and carboplatin), followed by local tumor extirpation with surgery and irradiation. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). The secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), response rate, adverse events, and surgical complications. RESULTS: Seventy-five patients were enrolled, and 64 were evaluable (stage 3, n = 8; stage 4, n = 56). The estimated 3-year PFS and OS rates (95% confidence interval [CI]) were 44.4% [31.8%-56.3%] and 80.7% [68.5%-88.5%], resspectively. The response rate of INRC after completion of the treatment protocol was 66% (42/64; 95% CI: 53%-77%; 23 CR [complete response], 10 VGPR [very good partial response], and nine PR [partial response]). None of the patients died during the protocol treatment or within 30 days of completion. Grade 4 adverse effects, excluding hematological adverse effects, occurred in 48% of patients [31/64; 95% CI: 36%-61%]. Major Surgical complications were observed in 25% of patients [13/51; 95% CI: 14%-40%]. CONCLUSION: This study indicates that delayed local treatment is feasible and shows promising efficacy, suggesting that this treatment should be considered further in a comparative study of high-risk neuroblastoma.

Acute Erythroid Leukemia Post-Chemo-Radiotherapy and Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation Due to Multiple Myeloma: Tracing the Paths to Leukemic Transformation.

The clinical impact of therapy-related acute leukemias is increasing with the extension of cancer-related survival; however, the origins remain largely unknown. Acute erythroleukemia (AEL), a rare unfavorable type of myeloid neoplasia, may also develop secondary to cytotoxic therapy. The disorder is featured by specific genetic alterations, most importantly multi-allelic mutations of the TP53 gene. While AEL might appear as a part of the therapy-related MDS/AML, spectrum information regarding the genetic complexity and progression is largely missing. We present two AEL cases arising after cytotoxic therapy and melphalan-based myeloablation/autologous peripheral stem cell transplantation due to multiple myeloma (MM). As stated, multiple pathogenic TP53 variants were present unrelated to preexisting MM, in parallel with uninvolved/wild-type hemopoiesis. Potential mechanisms of leukemic transformation are discussed, which include (1) preexisting preneoplastic hemopoietic stem cells (HSC) serving as the common origin for both MM and AEL, (2) the generation and intramedullary survival of p53-deficient post-chemotherapy HSCs, (3) reinoculation of mobilized autologous TP53 mutated HSCs, and (4) melphalan treatment-related late-onset myelodysplasia/leukemia with newly acquired TP53 mutations.

Patient-reported outcomes in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma treated with melflufen plus dexamethasone: analyses from the Phase II HORIZON study.

Relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) is known to have a high burden of disease and complications associated with refractoriness to prior lines of therapy. Severe pain and fatigue symptoms and impairments in physical and emotional functioning have been strongly linked to reduced health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with RRMM. Assessment of patient reported-outcome measures from the pivotal, Phase II HORIZON study (OP-106; NCT02963493) in patients with RRMM (n = 64) demonstrated that melphalan flufenamide (melflufen) plus dexamethasone treatment preserved HRQoL. Patients had clinically meaningful improvements, even after eight treatment cycles, in relevant scales such as global health status/QoL, physical functioning, emotional functioning, pain, and fatigue. Patients with triple-class-refractory disease (n = 50) displayed similar improvements. Patient-reported outcome deterioration was delayed for a substantial amount of time in patients who experienced a response to melflufen plus dexamethasone treatment relative to patients who did not experience a response. These findings support the notion that treatment with melflufen plus dexamethasone may sustain or improve HRQoL over time in patients with RRMM, including in patients with triple-class-refractory disease for whom outcomes are generally worse. The clinical benefits observed in patients from the HORIZON trial are encouraging and supportive of translation into real-world practice.

Short telomere length predicts nonrelapse mortality after stem cell transplantation for myelodysplastic syndrome.

Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation is the only potentially curative treatment for patients with myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS), but long-term survival is limited by the risk of transplant-related complications. Short telomere length, mediated by inherited or acquired factors, impairs cellular response to genotoxic and replicative stress and could identify patients at higher risk for toxicity after transplantation. We measured relative telomere length in pretransplant recipient blood samples in 1514 MDS patients and evaluated the association of telomere length with MDS disease characteristics and transplantation outcomes. Shorter telomere length was significantly associated with older age, male sex, somatic mutations that impair the DNA damage response, and more severe pretransplant cytopenias, but not with bone marrow blast count, MDS treatment history, or history of prior cancer therapy. Among 1267 patients ≥40 years old, telomere length in the shortest quartile was associated with inferior survival (P < .001) because of a high risk of nonrelapse mortality (NRM; P = .001) after adjusting for significant clinical and genetic variables. The adverse impact of shorter telomeres on NRM was independent of recipient comorbidities and was observed selectively among patients receiving more intensive conditioning, including myeloablative regimens and higher dose melphalan-based reduced-intensity regimens. The effect of shorter telomeres on NRM was prominent among patients who developed severe acute graft-versus-host disease, suggesting that short telomere length may limit regenerative potential of mucosal tissues after acute injury. MDS patients with shorter telomere length, who have inferior survival driven by excess toxicity, could be considered for strategies focused on minimizing toxic effects of transplantation.

Thrombosis in patients with myeloma treated in the Myeloma IX and Myeloma XI phase 3 randomized controlled trials.

Newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients treated with immunomodulatory drugs are at high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), but data are lacking from large prospective cohorts. We present thrombosis outcome data from Myeloma IX (n = 1936) and Myeloma XI (n = 4358) phase 3 randomized controlled trials for NDMM that treated transplant-eligible and transplant-ineligible patients before and after publication of thrombosis prevention guidelines. In Myeloma IX, transplant-eligible patients randomly assigned to cyclophosphamide, vincristine, doxorubicin, and dexamethasone (CVAD) induction had higher risk of VTE compared with patients treated with cyclophosphamide, thalidomide, and dexamethasone (CTD) (22.5% [n = 121 of 538] vs 16.1% [n = 89 of 554]; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR],1.46; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.11-1.93). For transplant-ineligible patients, those randomly assigned to attenuated CTD (CTDa) induction had a higher risk of VTE compared with those treated with melphalan and prednisolone (MP) (16.0% [n = 68 of 425] vs 4.1% [n = 17 of 419]; aHR, 4.25; 95% CI, 2.50-7.20). In Myeloma XI, there was no difference in risk of VTE (12.2% [n = 124 of 1014] vs 13.2% [n = 133 of 1008]; aHR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.72-1.18) or arterial thrombosis (1.2% [n = 12 of 1014] vs 1.5% [n = 15 of 1008]; aHR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.37-1.70) between transplant-eligible pathways for patients treated with cyclophosphamide, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (CRD) or CTD. For transplant-ineligible patients, there was no difference in VTEs between attenuated CRD (CRDa) and CTDa (10.4% [n = 95 of 916] vs 10.7% [n = 97 of 910]; aHR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.73-1.29). However, arterial risk was higher with CRDa than with CTDa (3.1% [n = 28 of 916] vs 1.6% [n = 15 of 910]; aHR, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.02-3.57). Thrombotic events occurred almost entirely within 6 months of treatment initiation. Thrombosis was not associated with inferior progression-free survival (PFS) or overall survival (OS), apart from inferior OS for patients with arterial events (aHR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.12-2.08) in Myeloma XI. The Myeloma XI trial protocol incorporated International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) thrombosis prevention recommendations and compared with Myeloma IX, more patients received thromboprophylaxis (80.5% vs 22.3%) with lower rates of VTE for identical regimens (CTD, 13.2% vs 16.1%; CTDa, 10.7% vs 16.0%). However, thrombosis remained frequent in spite of IMWG-guided thromboprophylaxis, suggesting that new approaches are needed.

Carfilzomib with cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone or lenalidomide and dexamethasone plus autologous transplantation or carfilzomib plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone, followed by maintenance with carfilzomib plus lenalidomide or lenalidomide alone for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (FORTE): a randomised, open-label, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Bortezomib-based induction followed by high-dose melphalan (200 mg/m2) and autologous stem-cell transplantation (MEL200-ASCT) and maintenance treatment with lenalidomide alone is the current standard of care for young and fit patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of different carfilzomib-based induction and consolidation approaches with or without transplantation and of maintenance treatment with carfilzomib plus lenalidomide versus lenalidomide alone in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. METHODS: UNITO-MM-01/FORTE was a randomised, open-label, phase 2 trial done in 42 Italian academic and community practice centres. We enrolled transplant-eligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma aged 65 years or younger with a Karnofsky Performance Status of 60% or higher. Patients were stratified according to International Staging System stage (I vs II/III) and age (<60 years vs 60-65 years) and randomly assigned (1:1:1) to KRd plus ASCT (four 28-day induction cycles with carfilzomib plus lenalidomide plus dexamethasone [KRd], melphalan at 200 mg/m2 and autologous stem-cell transplantation [MEL200-ASCT], followed by four 28-day KRd consolidation cycles), KRd12 (12 28-day KRd cycles), or KCd plus ASCT (four 28-day induction cycles with carfilzomib plus cyclophosphamide plus dexamethasone [KCd], MEL200-ASCT, and four 28-day KCd consolidation cycles). Carfilzomib 36 mg/m2 was administered intravenously on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16; lenalidomide 25 mg administered orally on days 1-21; cyclophosphamide 300 mg/m2 administered orally on days 1, 8, and 15; and dexamethasone 20 mg administered orally or intravenously on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16, 22, and 23. Thereafter, patients were stratified according to induction-consolidation treatment and randomly assigned (1:1) to maintenance treatment with carfilzomib plus lenalidomide or lenalidomide alone. Carfilzomib 36 mg/m2 was administered intravenously on days 1-2 and 15-16 every 28 days for up to 2 years; lenalidomide 10 mg was administered orally on days 1-21 every 28 days until progression or intolerance in both groups. The primary endpoints were the proportion of patients with at least a very good partial response after induction with KRd versus KCd and progression-free survival with carfilzomib plus lenalidomide versus lenalidomide alone as maintenance treatment, both assessed in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02203643. Study recruitment is complete, and all patients are in the follow-up or maintenance phases. FINDINGS: Between Feb 23, 2015, and April 5, 2017, 474 patients were randomly assigned to one of the induction-intensification-consolidation groups (158 to KRd plus ASCT, 157 to KRd12, and 159 to KCd plus ASCT). The median duration of follow-up was 50·9 months (IQR 45·7-55·3) from the first randomisation. 222 (70%) of 315 patients in the KRd group and 84 (53%) of 159 patients in the KCd group had at least a very good partial response after induction (OR 2·14, 95% CI 1·44-3·19, p=0·0002). 356 patients were randomly assigned to maintenance treatment with carfilzomib plus lenalidomide (n=178) or lenalidomide alone (n=178). The median duration of follow-up was 37·3 months (IQR 32·9-41·9) from the second randomisation. 3-year progression-free survival was 75% (95% CI 68-82) with carfilzomib plus lenalidomide versus 65% (58-72) with lenalidomide alone (hazard ratio [HR] 0·64 [95% CI 0·44-0·94], p=0·023). During induction and consolidation, the most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (21 [13%] of 158 patients in the KRd plus ASCT group vs 15 [10%] of 156 in the KRd12 group vs 18 [11%] of 159 in the KCd plus ASCT group); dermatological toxicity (nine [6%] vs 12 [8%] vs one [1%]); and hepatic toxicity (13 [8%] vs 12 [8%] vs none). Treatment-related serious adverse events were reported in 18 (11%) of 158 patients in the KRd-ASCT group, 29 (19%) of 156 in the KRd12 group, and 17 (11%) of 159 in the KCd plus ASCT group; the most common serious adverse event was pneumonia, in seven (4%) of 158, four (3%) of 156, and five (3%) of 159 patients. Treatment-emergent deaths were reported in two (1%) of 158 patients in the KRd plus ASCT group, two (1%) of 156 in the KRd12 group, and three (2%) of 159 in the KCd plus ASCT group. During maintenance, the most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (35 [20%] of 173 patients on carfilzomib plus lenalidomide vs 41 [23%] of 177 patients on lenalidomide alone); infections (eight [5%] vs 13 [7%]); and vascular events (12 [7%] vs one [1%]). Treatment-related serious adverse events were reported in 24 (14%) of 173 patients on carfilzomib plus lenalidomide versus 15 (8%) of 177 on lenalidomide alone; the most common serious adverse event was pneumonia, in six (3%) of 173 versus five (3%) of 177 patients. One patient died of a treatment-emergent adverse event in the carfilzomib plus lenalidomide group. INTERPRETATION: Our data show that KRd plus ASCT showed superiority in terms of improved responses compared with the other two treatment approaches and support the prospective randomised evaluation of KRd plus ASCT versus standards of care (eg, daratumumab plus bortezomib plus thalidomide plus dexamethasone plus ASCT) in transplant-eligible patients with multiple myeloma. Carfilzomib plus lenalidomide as maintenance therapy also improved progression-free survival compared with the standard-of-care lenalidomide alone. FUNDING: Amgen, Celgene/Bristol Myers Squibb. TRANSLATION: For the Italian translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

HLA genotyping in Japanese patients with multiple myeloma receiving bortezomib: An exploratory biomarker study of JCOG1105 (JCOG1105A1).

Bortezomib (Btz) shows robust efficacy in patients with multiple myeloma (MM); however, some patients experience suboptimal responses and show specific toxicities. Therefore, we attempted to identify specific HLA alleles associated with Btz-related toxicities and response to treatment. Eighty-two transplant-ineligible patients with newly diagnosed MM enrolled in a phase II study (JCOG1105) comparing two less intensive melphalan, prednisolone, plus Btz (MPB) regimens were subjected to HLA typing. The frequency of each allele was compared between the groups, categorized based on toxicity grades and responses to MPB therapy. Among 82 patients, the numbers of patients with severe peripheral neuropathy (PN; grade 2 or higher), skin disorders (SD; grade 2 or higher), and pneumonitis were 16 (19.5%), 15 (18.3%), and 6 (7.3%), respectively. Complete response was achieved in 10 (12.2%) patients. Although no significant HLA allele was identified by multiple comparisons, several candidates were identified. HLA-B*40:06 was more prevalent in patients with severe PN than in those with less severe PN (odds ratio [OR] = 6.76). HLA-B*40:06 and HLA-DRB1*12:01 were more prevalent in patients with SD than in those with less severe SD (OR = 7.47 and OR = 5.55, respectively). HLA-DRB1*08:02 clustered in the group of patients with pneumonitis (OR = 11.34). Complete response was achieved in patients carrying HLA-DQB1*03:02, HLA-DQB1*05:01, and HLA-DRB1*01:01 class II alleles. HLA genotyping could help predict Btz-induced toxicity and treatment efficacy in patients with MM, although this needs further validation.

Early relapse after high-dose melphalan autologous stem cell transplant predicts inferior survival and is associated with high disease burden and genetically high-risk disease in multiple myeloma.

Predicting patient outcome in multiple myeloma remains challenging despite the availability of standard prognostic biomarkers. We investigated outcome for patients relapsing early from intensive therapy on NCRI Myeloma XI. Relapse within 12 months of autologous stem cell transplant was associated with markedly worse median progression-free survival 2 (PFS2) of 18 months and overall survival (OS) of 26 months, compared to median PFS2 of 85 months and OS of 91 months for later relapsing patients despite equal access to and use of subsequent therapies, highlighting the urgent need for improved outcome prediction and early intervention strategies for myeloma patients.

Randomised phase II study to optimise melphalan, prednisolone, and bortezomib in untreated multiple myeloma (JCOG1105).

We conducted a randomised phase II study to determine the optimal dose and schedule of melphalan, prednisone, and bortezomib (MPB) (jRCTs031180097). Transplant-ineligible untreated multiple myeloma patients were randomised to Arm A (twice weekly bortezomib in one six-week cycle followed by eight five-week cycles of four times once weekly bortezomib with melphalan and prednisolone on days 1-4) or Arm B (nine four-week cycles of three times once weekly bortezomib with melphalan and prednisolone on days 1-4). The primary end-point was complete response (CR) rate. Of 91 patients randomised to two arms, 88 were eligible. The median cumulative bortezomib doses were 45·8 and 35·1 mg/m2 , CR rate was 18·6% [95% confidence interval (CI) 8·4-33·4] and 6·7% (95% CI 1·4-18·3), and the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 2·5 and 1·4 years in Arms A and B [hazard ratio (HR) 1·93 (95% CI 1·09-3·42)], respectively. Frequent grade ≥3 haematologic toxicities in Arms A and B were neutropenia (64·4% vs. 28·3%) and thrombocytopenia (35·6% vs. 10·9%). Grade 2/3 peripheral neuropathy was observed in 24·4/2·2% in Arm A and 8·7/0% in Arm B. In conclusion, Arm A was the more promising regimen, suggesting that the twice weekly schedule of bortezomib in the first cycle and higher cumulative dose of both bortezomib and melphalan influences the efficacy of modified MPB.

Subcutaneous daratumumab plus standard treatment regimens in patients with multiple myeloma across lines of therapy (PLEIADES): an open-label Phase II study.

Daratumumab is a CD38-targeting monoclonal antibody approved for intravenous (IV) infusion for multiple myeloma (MM). We describe the Phase II PLEIADES study of a subcutaneous formulation of daratumumab (DARA SC) in combination with standard-of-care regimens: DARA SC plus bortezomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone (D-VRd) for transplant-eligible newly diagnosed MM (NDMM); DARA SC plus bortezomib/melphalan/prednisone (D-VMP) for transplant-ineligible NDMM; and DARA SC plus lenalidomide/dexamethasone (D-Rd) for relapsed/refractory MM. In total, 199 patients were treated (D-VRd, n = 67; D-VMP, n = 67; D-Rd, n = 65). The primary endpoints were met for all cohorts: the ≥very good partial response (VGPR) rate after four 21-day induction cycles for D-VRd was 71·6% [90% confidence interval (CI) 61·2-80·6%], and the overall response rates (ORRs) for D-VMP and D-Rd were 88·1% (90% CI 79·5-93·9%) and 90·8% (90% CI 82·6-95·9%). With longer median follow-up for D-VMP and D-Rd (14·3 and 14·7 months respectively), responses deepened (ORR: 89·6%, 93·8%; ≥VGPR: 77·6%, 78·5%), and minimal residual disease-negativity (10-5 ) rates were 16·4% and 15·4%. Infusion-related reactions across all cohorts were infrequent (≤9·0%) and mild. The median DARA SC administration time was 5 min. DARA SC with standard-of-care regimens demonstrated comparable clinical activity to DARA IV-containing regimens, with low infusion-related reaction rates and reduced administration time.

Melflufen plus dexamethasone in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: long-term survival follow-up from the Phase II study O-12-M1.

An updated survival analysis was conducted for the Phase II study O-12-M1 of melphalan flufenamide (melflufen) plus dexamethasone in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) with two or more prior lines of therapy (including bortezomib and lenalidomide). Partial response or better was seen in 31%. After a 46-month median overall survival (OS) follow-up, melflufen plus dexamethasone had a median OS of 20·7 months (75th percentile OS, 47·5 months). The median time-to-next treatment for melflufen plus dexamethasone was 7·9 months. In summary, melflufen plus dexamethasone resulted in sustained long-term clinical benefit in patients with RRMM.

A dose-dense short-term therapy for human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome patients with high-risk Burkitt lymphoma or high-grade B-cell lymphoma: safety and efficacy results of the "CARMEN" phase II trial.

A few prospective trials in HIV-positive patients with Burkitt lymphoma (BL) or high-grade B-cell lymphoma (HGBL) have been reported. Investigated therapies have shown good efficacy but relevant safety problems, with high rates of interruptions, severe mucositis, septic complications, and fungal infections. Here, we report the results of a multicentre phase II trial addressing a new dose-dense, short-term therapy aimed at maintaining efficacy and improving tolerability. The experimental programme included a 36-day polychemotherapy induction followed by high-dose cytarabine-based consolidation and response-tailored BEAM (carmustine, etoposide, cyatarabine, and melphalan)- conditioned autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). This therapy would be considered active if ≥11 complete remissions (CR) after induction (primary endpoint) were recorded among 20 assessable patients. HIV-positive adults (median age 42, range 26-58; 16 males) with untreated BL (n = 16), HGBL (n = 3) or double-hit lymphoma (n = 1) were enrolled. All patients had high-risk features, with meningeal and bone marrow infiltration in five and nine patients respectively. The experimental programme was safe and active in a multicentre setting, with only two episodes of grade 4 non-haematological toxicity (hepatotoxicity and mucositis), and no cases of systemic fungal infections; two patients died of toxicity (bacterial infections). Response after induction (median duration: 47 days; interquartile range 41-54), was complete in 13 patients and partial in five [overall response rate = 90%; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 77-100]. All responders received consolidation, and five required autologous stem cell transplant. At a median follow-up of 55 (41-89) months, 14 patients are relapse-free and 15 are alive, with a five-year progression-free survival and an overall survival of 70% (95% CI = 60-80%) and 75% (95% CI = 66-84) respectively. No patient with cerebrospinal fluid (CSF)/meningeal lymphoma experienced central nervous system recurrence. With respect to previously reported regimens, this programme was delivered in a shorter period, and achieved the main goal of maintaining efficacy and improving tolerability.

Overall survival with daratumumab, bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (ALCYONE): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Standard-of-care treatment for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma includes combination therapies for patients who are not eligible for autologous stem-cell transplantation. At the primary analysis for progression-free survival of the phase 3 ALCYONE trial, progression-free survival was significantly longer with daratumumab in combination with bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone (D-VMP) versus bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone (VMP) alone in patients with transplant-ineligible, newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Here we report updated efficacy and safety results from a prespecified, interim, overall survival analysis of ALCYONE with more than 36 months of follow-up. METHODS: ALCYONE was a multicentre, randomised, open-label, active-controlled, phase 3 trial that enrolled patients between Feb 9, 2015, and July 14, 2016, at 162 sites in 25 countries across North America, South America, Europe, and the Asia-Pacific region. Patients were eligible for inclusion if they had newly diagnosed multiple myeloma and were ineligible for high-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem-cell transplantation, because of their age (≥65 years) or because of substantial comorbidities. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio and by permuted block randomisation to receive D-VMP or VMP. An interactive web-based randomisation system was used. Randomisation was stratified by International Staging System disease stage, geographical region, and age. There was no masking to treatment assignments. All patients received up to nine 6-week cycles of subcutaneous bortezomib (1·3 mg/m2 of body surface area on days 1, 4, 8, 11, 22, 25, 29, and 32 of cycle one and on days 1, 8, 22, and 29 of cycles two through nine), oral melphalan (9 mg/m2 once daily on days 1 through 4 of each cycle), and oral prednisone (60 mg/m2 once daily on days 1 through 4 of each cycle). Patients in the D-VMP group also received intravenous daratumumab (16 mg/kg of bodyweight, once weekly during cycle one, once every 3 weeks in cycles two through nine, and once every 4 weeks thereafter as maintenance therapy until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, which has been reported previously. Results presented are from a prespecified interim analysis for overall survival. The primary analysis population (including for overall survival) was the intention-to-treat population of all patients who were randomly assigned to treatment. The safety population included patients who received any dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02195479. FINDINGS: 706 patients were randomly assigned to treatment groups (350 to the D-VMP group, 356 to the VMP group). At a median follow-up of 40·1 months (IQR 37·4-43·1), a significant benefit in overall survival was observed for the D-VMP group. The hazard ratio (HR) for death in the D-VMP group compared with the VMP group was 0·60 (95% CI 0·46-0·80; p=0·0003). The Kaplan-Meier estimate of the 36-month rate of overall survival was 78·0% (95% CI 73·2-82·0) in the D-VMP group and 67·9% (62·6-72·6) in the VMP group. Progression-free survival, the primary endpoint, remained significantly improved for the D-VMP group (HR 0·42 [0·34-0·51]; p<0·0001). The most frequent adverse events during maintenance daratumumab monotherapy in patients in the D-VMP group were respiratory infections (54 [19%] of 278 patients had upper respiratory tract infections; 42 [15%] had bronchitis, 34 [12%] had viral upper respiratory tract infections), cough (34 [12%]), and diarrhoea (28 [10%]). INTERPRETATION: D-VMP prolonged overall survival in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were ineligible for stem-cell transplantation. With more than 3 years of follow-up, the D-VMP group continued to show significant improvement in progression-free survival, with no new safety concerns. FUNDING: Janssen Research & Development.