Ide-cel or Standard Regimens in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma.

BACKGROUND: Survival is poor among patients with triple-class-exposed relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma. Idecabtagene vicleucel (ide-cel), a B-cell maturation antigen-directed chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy, previously led to deep, durable responses in patients with heavily pretreated relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma. METHODS: In this international, open-label, phase 3 trial involving adults with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma who had received two to four regimens previously (including immunomodulatory agents, proteasome inhibitors, and daratumumab) and who had disease refractory to the last regimen, we randomly assigned patients in a 2:1 ratio to receive either ide-cel (dose range, 150×106 to 450×106 CAR-positive T cells) or one of five standard regimens. The primary end point was progression-free survival. Key secondary end points were overall response (partial response or better) and overall survival. Safety was assessed. RESULTS: A total of 386 patients underwent randomization: 254 to ide-cel and 132 to a standard regimen. A total of 66% of the patients had triple-class-refractory disease, and 95% had daratumumab-refractory disease. At a median follow-up of 18.6 months, the median progression-free survival was 13.3 months in the ide-cel group, as compared with 4.4 months in the standard-regimen group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.49; 95% confidence interval, 0.38 to 0.65; P<0.001). A response occurred in 71% of the patients in the ide-cel group and in 42% of those in the standard-regimen group (P<0.001); a complete response occurred in 39% and 5%, respectively. Data on overall survival were immature. Adverse events of grade 3 or 4 occurred in 93% of the patients in the ide-cel group and in 75% of those in the standard-regimen group. Among the 225 patients who received ide-cel, cytokine release syndrome occurred in 88%, with 5% having an event of grade 3 or higher, and investigator-identified neurotoxic effects occurred in 15%, with 3% having an event of grade 3 or higher. CONCLUSIONS: Ide-cel therapy significantly prolonged progression-free survival and improved response as compared with standard regimens in patients with triple-class-exposed relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma who had received two to four regimens previously. The toxicity of ide-cel was consistent with previous reports. (Funded by 2seventy bio and Celgene, a Bristol-Myers Squibb company; KarMMa-3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03651128.).

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.).

Smoldering multiple myeloma: taking the narrow over the wide path?

ABSTRACT: Smoldering multiple myeloma (MM) is an asymptomatic clonal plasma cell condition considered as a premalignant entity that may evolve over time to symptomatic MM. Based on a "poorly defined" risk of progression, some well-intended investigators proposed prospective interventional trials for these individuals. We believe this may be a harmful intervention and favor a close "wait and watch" approach and rather enroll these patients in dedicated observational biological studies aiming to better identify patients who will evolve to MM, based on their plasma cells' biology, including genomics, epigenetics, and the immune microenvironment.

BCMA- or GPRC5D-targeting bispecific antibodies in multiple myeloma: efficacy, safety, and resistance mechanisms.

ABSTRACT: Bispecific antibodies that engage T cells to target B-cell maturation antigen or G-protein-coupled receptor class C group 5 member D have demonstrated remarkable efficacy in heavily pretreated relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (MM), leading to the recent accelerated approval of teclistamab, elranatamab, and talquetamab by health agencies. Future challenges, however, remain to define their optimal dosing schedule and duration, sequencing, and integration with established anti-MM therapeutics as well as delineating the biological and clinical mediators of immune escape.

Efficacy and safety of teclistamab in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma after BCMA-targeting therapies.

Teclistamab is a B­cell maturation antigen (BCMA)-directed bispecific antibody approved for the treatment of patients with triple-class exposed relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. In the phase 1/2 MajesTEC-1 study, a cohort of patients who had prior BCMA-targeted therapy (antibody-drug conjugate [ADC] or CAR-T cell therapy) were enrolled to explore teclistamab in patients previously exposed to anti-BCMA treatment. At median follow-up of 28.0 months (range, 0.7-31.1), 40 patients with prior BCMA-targeted therapy had received subcutaneous 1.5 mg/kg weekly teclistamab. Median prior lines of treatment were 6 (range, 3-14). Prior anti-BCMA therapy included ADC (n = 29), CAR-T (n = 15), or both (n = 4). Overall response rate was 52.5%; 47.5% of patients achieved very good partial response or better and 30.0% achieved complete response or better. Median duration of response was 14.8 months, median progression-free survival was 4.5 months, and median overall survival was 15.5 months. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were neutropenia, infections, cytokine release syndrome, and anemia; cytopenias and infections were the most common grade ≥3 TEAEs. Infections occurred in 28 (70.0%) patients (n = 13 [32.5%] maximum grade 3/4; n = 4 [10%] grade 5). Prior to starting teclistamab, baseline BCMA expression and immune characteristics were unaffected by prior anti-BCMA treatment. The MajesTEC-1 trial cohort C results demonstrate favorable efficacy and safety of teclistamab in patients with heavily pretreated RRMM and prior anti-BCMA treatment. NCT03145181; NCT04557098.

Impact of soluble BCMA and non-T-cell factors on refractoriness to BCMA-targeting T-cell engagers in multiple myeloma.

Adoptive T cell therapy is a promising therapy for multiple myeloma (MM), but its efficacy hinges on understanding relevant biological and predictive markers of response. B cell maturation antigen (BCMA) is a key target antigen in MM, with active development of multiple anti-BCMA T cell engagers (TCE) and chimeric antigen receptor T cell (CAR T) therapies. The regulation of surface BCMA expression by MM cells, resulting in the shedding of soluble BCMA (sBCMA), has triggered debate surrounding the significance of sBCMA as a predictive marker and its potential impact on treatment outcomes. In order to address this, we leveraged whole genome sequencing and in vitro assays to demonstrate that sBCMA may independently predict primary refractoriness to anti-BCMA therapies. In addition to sBCMA, tumor burden and surface BCMA antigen density collectively influence anti-BCMA TCE cytotoxic efficacy. Correlative analyses of 163 patients treated with anti-BCMA TCE teclistamab validated and further underscored the association between elevated baseline sBCMA (>400 ng/mL) and refractoriness. Importantly, increasing TCE dose, the use of TCE against alternative targets (e.g.,GPRC5D), or gamma secretase inhibitors were able to overcome high sBCMA. These findings highlight the importance of accounting for baseline sBCMA levels, disease burden, and TCE dose intensity when administering anti-BCMA TCEs, offering critical insights for optimizing therapeutic strategies to overcome specific high-risk features and primary anti-BCMA TCE refractoriness.

Correlation of immune fitness with response to teclistamab in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma in the MajesTEC-1 study.

ABSTRACT: Teclistamab, an off-the-shelf B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA) × CD3 bispecific antibody that mediates T-cell activation and subsequent lysis of BCMA-expressing myeloma cells, is approved for the treatment of patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (R/RMM). As a T-cell redirection therapy, clinical outcomes with teclistamab may be influenced by patient immune fitness and tumor antigen expression. We correlated tumor characteristics and baseline immune profiles with clinical response and disease burden in patients with R/RMM from the pivotal phase 1/2 MajesTEC-1 study, focusing on patients treated with 1.5 mg/kg of teclistamab (N = 165). Peripheral blood samples were collected at screening, and bone marrow samples were collected at screening and cycle 3. Better clinical outcomes to teclistamab correlated with higher baseline total T-cell counts in the periphery. In addition, responders (partial response or better) had a lower proportion of immunosuppressive regulatory T cells (Tregs), T cells expressing coinhibitory receptors (CD38, PD-1, and PD-1/TIM-3), and soluble BCMA and a T-cell profile suggestive of a more cytolytic potential, compared with nonresponders. Neither frequency of baseline bone marrow BCMA expression nor BCMA-receptor density was associated with clinical response to teclistamab. Improved progression-free survival was observed in patients with a lower frequency of T cells expressing exhaustion markers and immunosuppressive Tregs. Overall, response to teclistamab was associated with baseline immune fitness; nonresponders had immune profiles suggestive of immune suppression and T-cell dysfunction. These findings illustrate the importance of the contribution of the immune landscape to T-cell redirection therapy response. This trial was registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov as #NCT03145181/NCT04557098.

Ide-cel vs standard regimens in triple-class-exposed relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma: updated KarMMa-3 analyses.

Outcomes are poor in triple-class-exposed (TCE) relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). In the phase 3 KarMMa-3 (clinicaltrials.gov; NCT03651128) trial, patients with TCE RRMM and 2-4 prior regimens were randomized 2:1 to idecabtagene vicleucel (ide-cel) or standard regimens (SRs). An interim analysis (IA) demonstrated significantly longer median progression-free survival (PFS; primary endpoint; 13.3 vs 4.4 months; P<.0001) and higher overall response rate (ORR) with ide-cel vs SRs. At final PFS analysis (median follow-up, 30.9 months), ide-cel further improved median PFS vs SRs (13.8 vs 4.4 months; hazard ratio (HR), 0.49; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.38-0.63). PFS benefit with ide-cel vs SRs was observed regardless of number of prior lines of therapy, with greatest benefit after 2 prior lines (16.2 vs 4.8 months, respectively). ORR benefit was maintained with ide-cel vs SRs (71% vs 42%; complete response, 44% vs 5%). Patient-centric design allowed crossover from SRs (56%) to ide-cel upon progressive disease, confounding overall survival (OS) interpretation. At IA of OS, median (95% CI) was 41.4 (30.9-not reached [NR]) vs 37.9 (23.4-NR) months with ide-cel and SRs, respectively (HR, 1.01; 95% CI 0.73-1.40); median OS in both arms was longer than historical data (9-22 months). Two prespecified analyses adjusting for crossover showed OS favoring ide-cel. This trial highlighted the importance of individualized bridging therapy to ensure adequate disease control during ide-cel manufacturing. Ide-cel improved patient-reported outcomes vs SRs. No new safety signals were reported. These results demonstrate the continued favorable benefit-risk profile of ide-cel in early-line and TCE RRMM. NCT03651128.

Impact of elranatamab on quality of life: Patient-reported outcomes from MagnetisMM-3.

The physical and emotional burden of relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) has been strongly correlated with declining health-related quality of life (QOL) in the patients it affects. This analysis evaluated patient-reported outcomes (PROs) from B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA)-naive (n = 123) and -exposed (n = 64) patients with RRMM enrolled in the MagnetisMM-3 study (NCT04649359) and treated with the humanized, bispecific BCMA-CD3 antibody elranatamab. Patients received two step-up doses of elranatamab (12 mg on day 1, 32 mg on day 4) before starting the full dose of 76 mg on day 8 (each cycle = 28 days). Global health status, functioning and symptom data were collected electronically using validated and myeloma-specific questionnaires. Improvements in PROs occurred early, with marked reductions in pain and disease symptoms and notable improvements in patients' outlook for their future health. Additionally, 40.2% of BCMA-naive and 52.6% of BCMA-exposed patients perceived their disease as 'a little better' or 'much better' by Cycle 1, Day 15. The results from this analysis demonstrated that elranatamab maintained or improved symptomology and general health status, regardless of prior BCMA-directed therapy. Thus, in addition to its clinical benefits, elranatamab therapy may sustain or improve QOL in heavily pretreated patients with RRMM.

Sustained minimal residual disease negativity in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma and the impact of daratumumab in MAIA and ALCYONE.

In patients with transplant-ineligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM), daratumumab reduced the risk of disease progression or death by 44% in MAIA (daratumumab/lenalidomide/dexamethasone [D-Rd]) and 58% in ALCYONE (daratumumab/bortezomib/melphalan/prednisone [D-VMP]). Minimal residual disease (MRD) is a sensitive measure of disease and response to therapy. MRD-negativity status and durability were assessed in MAIA and ALCYONE. MRD assessments using next-generation sequencing (10-5) occurred for patients achieving complete response (CR) or better and after at least CR at 12, 18, 24, and 30 months from the first dose. Progression-free survival (PFS) by MRD status and sustained MRD negativity lasting ≥6 and ≥12 months were analyzed in the intent-to-treat population and among patients achieving at least CR. In MAIA (D-Rd, n = 368; lenalidomide and dexamethasone [Rd], n = 369) and ALCYONE (D-VMP, n = 350; bortezomib/melphalan/prednisone [VMP], n = 356), the median duration of follow-up was 36.4 and 40.1 months, respectively. MRD-negative status and sustained MRD negativity lasting ≥6 and ≥12 months were associated with improved PFS, regardless of treatment group. However, daratumumab-based therapy improved rates of MRD negativity lasting ≥6 months (D-Rd, 14.9% vs Rd, 4.3%; D-VMP, 15.7% vs VMP, 4.5%) and ≥12 months (D-Rd, 10.9% vs Rd, 2.4%; D-VMP, 14.0% vs VMP, 2.8%), both of which translated to improved PFS vs control groups. In a pooled analysis, patients who were MRD negative had improved PFS vs patients who were MRD positive. Patients with NDMM who achieved MRD-negative status or sustained MRD negativity had deep remission and improved clinical outcomes. These trials were registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02252172 (MAIA) and #NCT02195479 (ALCYONE).

Prognostic value of minimal residual disease negativity in myeloma: combined analysis of POLLUX, CASTOR, ALCYONE, and MAIA.

We explored minimal residual disease (MRD) in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) and transplant-ineligible (TIE) newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) using data from 4 phase 3 studies (POLLUX, CASTOR, ALCYONE, and MAIA). Each study previously demonstrated that daratumumab-based therapies improved MRD negativity rates and reduced the risk of disease progression or death by approximately half vs standards of care. We conducted a large-scale pooled analysis for associations between patients achieving complete response or better (≥CR) with MRD-negative status and progression-free survival (PFS). MRD was assessed via next-generation sequencing (10-5 sensitivity threshold). Patient-level data were pooled from all 4 studies and for patients with TIE NDMM and patients with RRMM who received ≤2 prior lines of therapy (≤2 PL). PFS was evaluated by response and MRD status. Median follow-up (months) was 54.8 for POLLUX, 50.2 for CASTOR, 40.1 for ALCYONE, and 36.4 for MAIA. Patients who achieved ≥CR and MRD negativity had improved PFS vs those who failed to reach CR or were MRD positive (TIE NDMM and RRMM hazard ratio [HR] 0.20, P < .0001; TIE NDMM and RRMM ≤2 PL HR 0.20, P < .0001). This benefit occurred irrespective of therapy or disease setting. A time-varying Cox proportional hazard model confirmed that ≥CR with MRD negativity was associated with improved PFS. Daratumumab-based treatment was associated with more patients reaching ≥CR and MRD negativity. These findings represent the first large-scale analysis with robust methodology to support ≥CR with MRD negativity as a prognostic factor for PFS in RRMM and TIE NDMM. These trials were registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02076009, #NCT02136134, #NCT02195479, and #NCT02252172.

Adjusting for subsequent therapies in the TOURMALINE-MM1 study shows clinically meaningful improvement in overall survival with addition of ixazomib to lenalidomide and dexamethasone.

TOURMALINE-MM1, the only blinded randomized study in patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM; ≥1 prior therapy) in the last 10 years, investigated ixazomib + lenalidomide + dexamethasone (IRd) versus lenalidomide + dexamethasone (Rd). Final overall survival (OS) data were based on a median follow-up of 85 months. In RRMM trials where patients have had 1-3 relapses after initial treatment, a high proportion receive subsequent therapy. Application of salvage therapies in blinded trials and newer modes of therapy can increasingly complicate the interpretation of OS. This analysis explores the impact of subsequent therapies on OS outcomes in TOURMALINE-MM1. The inverse probability of censoring weights (IPCW) method, marginal structural model (MSM), and rank-preserving structural failure time model (RPSFTM) were utilized to adjust for confounding on OS, introduced by subsequent therapies. Analyses were conducted for the intent-totreat (ITT) population and ≥2 prior lines subgroup. Unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) for IRd versus Rd was 0.94 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.78-1.13) in the ITT population. After adjusting for the impact of subsequent therapies by the RPSFTM method, estimated HR for IRd versus Rd in the ITT population was 0.89 (95% CI: 0.74-1.07). Adjusting with IPCW and MSM methods also showed an improvement in HR, favoring IRd. IRd may be particularly beneficial in patients with ≥2 prior lines of therapy (IPCW and MSM HR=0.52, 95% CI: 0.30-0.88; RPSFTM HR=0.68, 95% CI: 0.51-0.91). These analyses highlight the growing challenge of demonstrating OS benefit in MM patients and the importance of assessing confounding introduced by subsequent therapies when interpreting OS.

Oral ixazomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone for transplant-ineligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.

Continuous lenalidomide-dexamethasone (Rd)-based regimens are among the standards of care in transplant-ineligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients. The oral proteasome inhibitor ixazomib is suitable for continuous dosing, with predictable, manageable toxicities. In the double-blind, placebo-controlled TOURMALINE-MM2 trial, transplant-ineligible NDMM patients were randomized to ixazomib 4 mg (n = 351) or placebo (n = 354) plus Rd. After 18 cycles, dexamethasone was discontinued and treatment was continued using reduced-dose ixazomib (3 mg) and lenalidomide (10 mg) until progression/toxicity. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Median PFS was 35.3 vs 21.8 months with ixazomib-Rd vs placebo-Rd, respectively (hazard ratio [HR], 0.830; 95% confidence interval, 0.676-1.018; P = .073; median follow-up, 53.3 and 55.8 months). Complete (26% vs 14%; odds ratio [OR], 2.10; P < .001) and ≥ very good partial response (63% vs 48%; OR, 1.87; P < .001) rates were higher with ixazomib-Rd vs placebo-Rd. In a prespecified high-risk cytogenetics subgroup, median PFS was 23.8 vs 18.0 months (HR, 0.690; P = .019). Overall, treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were mostly grade 1/2. With ixazomib-Rd vs placebo-Rd, 88% vs 81% of patients experienced grade ≥3 TEAEs, 66% vs 62% serious TEAEs, and 35% vs 27% TEAEs resulting in regimen discontinuation; 8% vs 6% died on study. Addition of ixazomib to Rd was tolerable with no new safety signals and led to a clinically meaningful PFS benefit of 13.5 months. Ixazomib-Rd is a feasible option for certain patients who can benefit from an all-oral triplet combination. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01850524.

Once weekly selinexor, carfilzomib and dexamethasone in carfilzomib non-refractory multiple myeloma patients.

BACKGROUND: Proteasome inhibitors (PIs), including carfilzomib, potentiate the activity of selinexor, a novel, first-in-class, oral selective inhibitor of nuclear export (SINE) compound, in preclinical models of multiple myeloma (MM). METHODS: The safety, efficacy, maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of selinexor (80 or 100 mg) + carfilzomib (56 or 70 mg/m2) + dexamethasone (40 mg) (XKd) once weekly (QW) was evaluated in patients with relapsed refractory MM (RRMM) not refractory to carfilzomib. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients, median prior therapies 4 (range, 1-8), were enrolled. MM was triple-class refractory in 38% of patients and 53% of patients had high-risk cytogenetics del(17p), t(4;14), t(14;16) and/or gain 1q. Common treatment-related adverse events (all/Grade 3) were thrombocytopenia 72%/47% (G3 and G4), nausea 72%/6%, anaemia 53%/19% and fatigue 53%/9%, all expected and manageable with supportive care and dose modifications. MTD and RP2D were identified as selinexor 80 mg, carfilzomib 56 mg/m2, and dexamethasone 40 mg, all QW. The overall response rate was 78% including 14 (44%) ≥ very good partial responses. Median progression-free survival was 15 months. CONCLUSIONS: Weekly XKd is highly effective and well-tolerated. These data support further investigation of XKd in patients with MM.

The role of E3 ubiquitin ligase in multiple myeloma: potential for cereblon E3 ligase modulators in the treatment of relapsed/refractory disease.

INTRODUCTION: Insights into the mechanisms of protein homeostasis and proteasomal degradation have led to new strategies of redirecting the ubiquitin-proteasome system (UPS) to reduce or eliminate proteins or survival factors key to malignant pathobiology, multiple myeloma (MM) in particular. These strategies have enabled researchers to target proteins that were previously considered difficult to modulate by pharmacological means. AREAS COVERED: This review provides a brief overview of UPS biology, particularly the role of the CRL4CRBN E3 ubiquitin ligase complex, and summarizes current strategies for co-opting the UPS, including CELMoD compounds, SNIPERs, PROTACs, and degronimids. A detailed discussion is provided on lead CELMoD compounds iberdomide and mezigdomide, which are currently being evaluated in clinical trials in patients with MM. EXPERT OPINION: Since a high proportion of patients develop drug resistance, it is vital to have novel therapeutic agents for treating relapsed patients with MM more effectively. It is encouraging that the expanding pathophysiological insight into cellular signaling pathways in MM increasingly translates into the development of novel therapeutic agents such as targeted protein degraders. This holds promise for improving outcomes in MM and beyond.

Final analysis of the phase III non-inferiority COLUMBA study of subcutaneous versus intravenous daratumumab in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma.

In the primary analysis of the phase III COLUMBA study, daratumumab by subcutaneous administration (DARA SC) demonstrated non-inferiority to intravenous administration (DARA IV) for relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Here, we report the final analysis of efficacy and safety from COLUMBA after a median of 29.3 months follow-up (additional 21.8 months after the primary analysis). In total, 522 patients were randomized (DARA SC, n=263; DARA IV, n=259). With longer follow-up, DARA SC and DARA IV continued to show consistent efficacy and maximum trough daratumumab concentration as compared with the primary analysis. The overall response rate was 43.7% for DARA SC and 39.8% for DARA IV. The maximum mean (standard deviation [SD]) trough concentration (cycle 3, day 1 pre-dose) of serum DARA was 581 (SD, 315) µg/mL for DARA SC and 496 (SD, 231) µg/mL for DARA IV. Median progression-free survival was 5.6 months for DARA SC and 6.1 months for DARA IV; median overall survival was 28.2 months and 25.6 months, respectively. Grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 50.8% of patients in the DARA SC group and 52.7% in the DARA IV group; the most common (≥10%) were thrombocytopenia (DARA SC, 14.2%; DARA IV, 13.6%), anemia (13.8%; 15.1%), and neutropenia (13.1%; 7.8%). The safety profile remained consistent with the primary analysis after longer follow-up. In summary, DARA SC and DARA IV continue to demonstrate similar efficacy and safety, with a low rate of infusion-related reactions (12.7% vs. 34.5%, respectively) and shorter administration time (3-5 minutes vs. 3-7 hours) supporting DARA SC as a preferable therapeutic choice. (Clinicaltrials gov. Identifier: NCT03277105.

Health-related quality of life in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma: treatment with daratumumab, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone in the phase 3 POLLUX trial.

In the phase 3 POLLUX trial, daratumumab in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone (D-Rd) significantly improved progression-free survival in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) compared with lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rd) alone. Here, we present patient-reported outcomes (PROs) from POLLUX, assessed using the validated European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30-item (EORTC QLQ-C30) and the EuroQol 5-dimensional descriptive system (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaires. Changes from baseline are presented as least-squares mean changes with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) derived from a mixed-effects model. PRO assessment compliance rates were high and similar in both D-Rd and Rd groups through cycle 40 (week 156). In this on-treatment analysis, mean changes from baseline were significantly greater in EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status, physical functioning, and pain scores in the D-Rd group versus the Rd group at multiple time points; however, magnitude of changes was low, suggesting no meaningful impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Subgroup results were similar to those in the overall population. In the POLLUX study, baseline HRQoL was maintained with prolonged D-Rd treatment. These findings complement the sustained and significant improvement in progression-free survival observed with D-Rd and supports its use in patients with RRMM. Clinical trial registration: NCT02076009.

Once-per-week selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone versus twice-per-week bortezomib and dexamethasone in patients with multiple myeloma (BOSTON): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Selinexor combined with dexamethasone has shown activity in patients with heavily pre-treated multiple myeloma. In a phase 1b/2 study, the combination of oral selinexor with bortezomib (a proteasome inhibitor) and dexamethasone induced high response rates with low rates of peripheral neuropathy, the main dose-limiting toxicity of bortezomib. We aimed to evaluate the clinical benefit of weekly selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone versus standard bortezomib and dexamethasone in patients with previously treated multiple myeloma. METHODS: This phase 3, randomised, open-label trial was done at 123 sites in 21 countries. Patients aged 18 years or older, who had multiple myeloma, and who had previously been treated with one to three lines of therapy, including proteasome inhibitors, were randomly allocated (1:1) to receive selinexor (100 mg once per week), bortezomib (1·3 mg/m2 once per week), and dexamethasone (20 mg twice per week), or bortezomib (1·3 mg/m2 twice per week for the first 24 weeks and once per week thereafter) and dexamethasone (20 mg four times per week for the first 24 weeks and twice per week thereafter). Randomisation was done using interactive response technology and stratified by previous proteasome inhibitor therapy, lines of treatment, and multiple myeloma stage. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Patients who received at least one dose of study treatment were included in the safety population. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03110562. The trial is ongoing, with 55 patients remaining on randomised therapy as of Feb 20, 2020. FINDINGS: Of 457 patients screened for eligibility, 402 were randomly allocated-195 (49%) to the selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone group and 207 (51%) to the bortezomib and dexamethasone group-and the first dose of study medication was given between June 6, 2017, and Feb 5, 2019. Median follow-up durations were 13·2 months [IQR 6·2-19·8] for the selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone group and 16·5 months [9·4-19·8] for the bortezomib and dexamethasone group. Median progression-free survival was 13·93 months (95% CI 11·73-not evaluable) with selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone and 9·46 months (8·11-10·78) with bortezomib and dexamethasone (hazard ratio 0·70 [95% CI 0·53-0·93], p=0·0075). The most frequent grade 3-4 adverse events were thrombocytopenia (77 [39%] of 195 patients in the selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone group vs 35 [17%] of 204 in the bortezomib and dexamethasone group), fatigue (26 [13%] vs two [1%]), anaemia (31 [16%] vs 20 [10%]), and pneumonia (22 [11%] vs 22 [11%]). Peripheral neuropathy of grade 2 or above was less frequent with selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (41 [21%] patients) than with bortezomib and dexamethasone (70 [34%] patients; odds ratio 0·50 [95% CI 0·32-0·79], p=0·0013). 47 (24%) patients in the selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone group and 62 (30%) in the bortezomib and dexamethasone group died. INTERPRETATION: A once-per-week regimen of selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone is a novel, effective, and convenient treatment option for patients with multiple myeloma who have received one to three previous lines of therapy. FUNDING: Karyopharm Therapeutics.

N-Terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NTproBNP) in patients with symptomatic multiple myeloma: report from a single institution.

Elevated levels of serum cardiovascular markers including natriuretic peptides (NPs) such as amino terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NTproBNP) have been associated with disease severity and survival in cancer patients and more recently in multiple myeloma (MM). In the present study, we retrospectively reviewed 87 consecutive symptomatic TEMM (transplant-eligible) and 126 TIMM (transplant-ineligible) patients treated at our institution that did undergo NTproBNP testing from 2017 to 2020. Median age at diagnosis was 59.3 years and 75.4 years for the TEMM and TIMM groups, respectively (p = 0.0001). NTproBNP ≥ 300 ng/L was used to assess survival outcomes in the group of symptomatic MM. Patients with AL amyloidosis and symptomatic MM were excluded from the study. Median OS for patients with NTproBNP ≥ 300 ng/L was shorter (45.9 months) as compared to those with NTproBNP of < 300 ng/L (non-reached) (p = 0.0001). In addition, OS was shorter for those with CCI > 2, ISS2-3, and high-risk cytogenetics by FISH and ≥ 70 years of age. Multivariate analysis showed that HR cytogenetics and ISS2-3 were independent predictors for OS in the entire cohort of MM patients. When restricted to TIMM, age ≥ 80 years and NTproBNP ≥ 800 ng/L were predictors for OS in univariate and multivariate analyses. In conclusion, NTproBNP appears to be an independent predictor factor for OS in symptomatic TIMM patients. The use of NTproBNP as a frailty marker remains to be elucidated. However, NTproBNP could potentially be used to guide treatment decisions aimed to minimize cardiovascular and renal toxicity for myeloma therapies that potentially do have cardio-renal implications.

The impact of COVID-19 in the management of AL amyloidosis and Immunoglobulin Deposition Disease: A single-center experience.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with AL amyloidosis and immunoglobulin deposition diseases (IDD) are vulnerable during the COVID-19 pandemic due to the immune compromise from the plasma cell disorder and therapy-related immune defects. We describe a local experience in providing care for patients with AL amyloidosis and IDD. METHOD: Patient treatment and disease status since the beginning of the pandemic on March 11, 2020, as declared by WHO, were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: Ninety-six patients with AL amyloidosis and IDD were included. Four patients with IDD and 22 patients with systemic AL amyloidosis were receiving treatment during the pandemic. Since the pandemic, patients' treatments were discontinued if they achieved VGPR or better postinduction. Seven patients discontinued all treatment after achieving VGPR, and others required treatment modifications. 28 patients have been tested for COVID-19, and all tests have been negative. Three patients died since the pandemic, two from organ complications of systemic AL amyloidosis and one from an unrelated cause. CONCLUSION: The management of AL amyloidosis and IDD must be individualized on the clinical characteristics, centers' access to care under the pandemic restrictions, and the epidemiological aspects of the outbreak.