Variation in immunoglobulin use and impact on survival in myeloma.

Serious infection is common in patients with multiple myeloma due to immune deficiency from the underlying disease and/or its treatment. Immunoglobulin replacement is one approach to reduce infection risk in these patients. However, few real-world data exist on its use in patients with myeloma. We investigated immunoglobulin use in Australia, New Zealand and Asia-Pacific using registry data and explored its association with survival outcomes. A total of 2374 patients with a median follow-up time of 29.5 months (interquartile range 13.3-54.3 months) were included in the analysis - 1673 from Australia, 313 Korea, 281 New Zealand and 107 Singapore. Overall, 7.1% of participants received immunoglobulin replacement within 24 months of diagnosis. Patients who received immunoglobulin replacement were likely to be younger, had lower baseline IgG levels (excluding paraprotein), were more likely to have baseline hypogammaglobulinaemia, baseline severe hypogammaglobulinaemia and abnormal baseline fluorescent in-situ hybridisation status, receive first-line myeloma treatment with immunomodulatory drugs or anti-CD38 therapy and undergo upfront autologous stem cell transplant. In our patient cohort, the use of immunoglobulin was not associated with overall survival benefit at the time of last follow-up (adjusted hazard ratio 0.72, 95% CI 0.46-1.14, p = 0.16). Understanding treatment approaches in clinical practice can help support future planning and provision of immunoglobulin resources.

A multi-center, phase Ib study of subcutaneous administration of isatuximab in combination with pomalidomide and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.

Not available.

The impact of biomarkers of malignancy (IMWG SLiM criteria) in myeloma in a real-world population: Clinical characteristics, therapy and outcomes from the Australian and New Zealand Myeloma and Related Diseases Registry (ANZ MRDR).

A decade after International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) biomarkers (SLiM criteria) were introduced, this real-world study examined their impact on diagnosis, therapy and outcomes in myeloma. Using the ANZ MRDR, 3489 newly diagnosed patients from 2013 to 2023, comprising 3232 diagnosed by CRAB ('CRAB patients', including 1758 who also satisfied ≥1 SLiM criteria) and 257 by SLiM ('SLiM patients') criteria were analysed. CRAB patients had higher R-ISS and lower performance status, with no difference in cytogenetic risk. SLiM patients had improved progression-free survival (PFS, 37.5 vs. 32.2 months, hazard ratio [HR] 1.31 [1.08-1.59], p = 0.003), overall survival (80.9 vs. 73.2 months, HR 1.64 [1.26-2.13], p < 0.001) and PFS2 (54.6 vs. 40.3 months, HR 1.51 [1.22-1.86], p < 0.001) compared with CRAB patients, partially explained by earlier diagnosis, with no differential impact between the plasma cell and light-chain criteria on PFS. However, 34% of CRAB patients did not manifest SLiM characteristics, raising the possibility that SLiM features are associated with different biological behaviours contributing to a better prognosis, for example, improved PFS2 in SLiM patients suggested less disease resistance at first relapse. These data support earlier initiation of therapy by SLiM. The superior survival outcomes of SLiM versus CRAB patients highlight the importance of defining these subgroups when interpreting therapeutic outcomes at induction and first relapse.

Belantamab Mafodotin, Pomalidomide, and Dexamethasone in Multiple Myeloma.

BACKGROUND: Triplet or quadruplet therapies incorporating proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulators, and anti-CD38 antibodies have led to prolonged survival among patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma; however, most patients have a relapse. Frontline lenalidomide therapy has increased the number of patients with lenalidomide-refractory disease at the time of the first relapse. METHODS: In this phase 3, randomized, open-label trial, we evaluated belantamab mafodotin, pomalidomide, and dexamethasone (BPd), as compared with pomalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (PVd), in lenalidomide-exposed patients who had relapsed or refractory myeloma after at least one line of therapy. The primary end point was progression-free survival. Disease response and safety were also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 302 patients underwent randomization; 155 were assigned to the BPd group, and 147 to the PVd group. At a median follow-up of 21.8 months (range, <0.1 to 39.2), the 12-month estimated progression-free survival with BPd was 71% (95% confidence interval [CI], 63 to 78), as compared with 51% (95% CI, 42 to 60) with PVd (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.73; P<0.001). Data on overall survival were immature. The percentage of patients with a response to treatment (partial response or better) was 77% (95% CI, 70 to 84) in the BPd group and 72% (95% CI, 64 to 79) in the PVd group; 40% (95% CI, 32 to 48) and 16% (95% CI, 11 to 23), respectively, had a complete response or better. Grade 3 or higher adverse events occurred in 94% of the patients in the BPd group and 76% of those in the PVd group. Ocular events occurred in 89% of the patients who received BPd (grade 3 or 4 in 43%) and 30% of those who received PVd (grade 3 or 4 in 2%); ocular events in the BPd group were managed with belantamab mafodotin dose modification. Ocular events led to treatment discontinuation in 9% of the patients in the BPd group and in no patients in the PVd group. CONCLUSIONS: Among lenalidomide-exposed patients with relapsed or refractory myeloma, BPd conferred a significantly greater benefit than PVd with respect to progression-free survival, as well as deeper, more durable responses. Ocular events were common but were controllable by belantamab mafodotin dose modification. (Funded by GSK; DREAMM-8 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04484623; EudraCT number, 2018-004354-21.).

Daratumumab, cyclophosphamide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone for transplant-ineligible myeloma: AMaRC 03-16.

ABSTRACT: In newly diagnosed transplant-ineligible patients with myeloma, daratumumab has improved outcomes when added to the standard-of-care regimens. In a randomized trial, we tested whether similar improvements would be observed when daratumumab was added to the bortezomib, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone (VCD) regimen. Transplant-ineligible patients with untreated myeloma were randomized to receive VCD or VCD plus daratumumab (VCDD). A total of 121 patients were randomized: 57 in the VCD arm and 64 in the VCDD arm. Baseline characteristics were balanced between the 2 arms. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 16.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 15.3-21.7) and 25.8 months (95% CI, 19.9-33.5) in the VCD and VCDD arms, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.67; log-rank test P = .066). In a preplanned analysis, it was demonstrated that the daratumumab-containing arm showed a significant improvement in PFS from 18 months onward, based on estimates at fixed time points after randomization. The proportions of patients who were progression-free at the following time points were: 18 months, 48% vs 68% (P = .0002); 24 months, 36% vs 52% (P = .0001); and 30 months, 27% vs 41% (P < .0001) in the VCD and VCDD arms, respectively. The best overall response and very good partial response rate were significantly higher in the daratumumab arm compared with the VCD and VCDD arms, respectively (65% vs 86%, P = .007; and 28% vs 52%, P = .009). Seventy-two percent of the VCDD patients completed the 9 cycles of induction therapy with no grade 3 or 4 peripheral neuropathy adverse events. This study supports VCDD as an option for the initial treatment of transplant-ineligible patients with myeloma. This trial was registered at the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12617000202369).

Recent Developments in Convenience of Administration of the Anti-CD38 Antibody Isatuximab: Subcutaneous Delivery and Fast Intravenous Infusion in Patients With Multiple Myeloma.

Isatuximab-based combinations are among the accepted standard-of-care regimens for early-line treatment of patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM), based on the results of the Phase 3 ICARIA-MM and IKEMA trials. Further study findings have shown benefit with Isa-based combinations in patients with newly diagnosed MM, as reported from the randomized GMMG-HD7 and CONCEPT trials. Isa is currently approved in various countries for intravenous (IV) administration in patients with RRMM. A more convenient route of administration, such as subcutaneous (SC) injection, and faster IV infusion may substantially increase convenience of treatment. In this review, we outline evidence emerging from clinical trials that shows increasing clinical applicability of Isa across the MM therapeutic spectrum. We then review recent study results demonstrating that new treatment modalities, either SC Isa administration via an on-body delivery system (OBDS) or fast, 30-minute, fixed-volume IV infusion, are safe and effective, and enhance convenience of treatment with Isa for MM patients and healthcare providers. In the recently reported Phase 1b study, the safety profile and efficacy of Isa administered SC plus pomalidomide-dexamethasone were comparable to those observed with Isa administered IV plus pomalidomide-dexamethasone in the control arm and in the ICARIA-MM trial. Analysis of patient-reported outcomes indicated patient confidence in SC Isa administration and satisfaction with treatment delivery by OBDS. These findings point to SC administration as the preferred route for future treatment with Isa-based combinations, as well as to the use of fast, 30-minute IV infusions in settings where SC administration of Isa might not be available.

Carfilzomib, thalidomide, and dexamethasone are safe and effective in relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma: final report of the single-arm, multicenter, phase II ALLG MM018/AMN002 study.

This multicenter, phase II study of the Australasian Lymphoma and Leukemia Group and the Asian Myeloma Network investigated fixed-duration (18-month) treatment with carfilzomib (K), thalidomide (T), and dexamethasone (d) (KTd) in patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma who had received one to three prior lines of therapy. Patients received induction with up to 12 28-day cycles of carfilzomib (20 mg/m2 intravenously in cycle 1 on days 1 and 2, then 56 mg/m2 [36 mg/m2 for patients ≥75 years] from day 8 onwards), thalidomide 100 mg orally in the evening and weekly dexamethasone 40 mg (20 mg for patients ≥75 years). During maintenance, thalidomide was omitted, while carfilzomib was continued on days 1, 2, 15, and 16 with fortnightly dexamethasone. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival. Secondary endpoints were overall response rate, overall survival, duration of response, safety, and tolerability. Ninety-three patients (median age 66.3 years [range, 41.9-84.5]) were enrolled and followed up for a median of 26.4 months (range, 1.6-54.6). The median progression-free survival was 22.3 months (95% confidence interval: 15.7-25.6) and the 2-year progression-free survival was 46.3% (95% confidence interval: 35.1-52.8). The median overall survival was not reached and the 2-year overall survival was 73.8% (95% confidence interval: 62.9-81.9). The overall response rate was 88% (73% had a very good partial response or better). There was no difference in the depth of response, progression-free survival or overall survival comparing Asian and non-Asian cohorts (P=0.61). The safety profile of KTd was consistent with that of each individual drug. KTd is well tolerated and effective in patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma irrespective of Asian or non-Asian ethnicity and provides an alternative treatment option, particularly in circumstances in which the use of carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (KRd) is limited by access, cost, or renal impairment.

Peripheral blood stem cell mobilisation following bortezomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone induction for multiple myeloma: a real-world single-centre experience.

BACKGROUND: Bortezomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone (VRd) is now the standard-of-care induction therapy for newly diagnosed transplant-eligible multiple myeloma patients, replacing bortezomib, cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone (VCD) therapy. Lenalidomide can negatively impact stem cell yield because of its myelosuppressive effects, although studies have shown that the latter can be overcome with the use of cyclophosphamide for peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) mobilisation. AIMS AND METHODS: To investigate whether lenalidomide impacts on PBSC mobilisation and to evaluate the optimal mobilisation strategy post VRd induction, we performed a retrospective review of 56 myeloma patients at a single centre who had PBSC mobilisation between January 2019 and March 2021 and compared three cohorts: (i) VCD induction; mobilisation with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) alone (n = 23); (ii) four cycles VRd induction; mobilisation with G-CSF and cyclophosphamide (G-CSF + Cyclo) (n = 20); and (iii) three cycles VRd induction; mobilisation with G-CSF alone (n = 13). RESULTS: There was no difference in the mean total CD34 count between VCD and VRd patients who had G-CSF mobilisation (6.27 × 106 /kg vs 5.50 × 106 /kg, P > 0.99). VRd patients mobilised with G-CSF + Cyclo achieved higher mean total CD34 counts compared with G-CSF alone (8.89 × 106 /kg vs 5.50 × 106 /kg, P = 0.04). The majority of VRd patients who had G-CSF + Cyclo (19 of 20; 95%) collected sufficient cells for two or more autologous stem cell transplants (ASCTs), regardless of whether this was required, compared with eight of 13 (62%) VRd patients who had G-CSF alone. CONCLUSION: We conclude that successful PBSC mobilisation for at least one ASCT is possible after three cycles of VRd induction using G-CSF alone. The upfront use of a cyclophosphamide-based mobilisation strategy has a role in patients who have had VRd induction, where the aim is to collect enough stem cells for two or more ASCTs.

Daratumumab, Bortezomib, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone for Multiple Myeloma.

BACKGROUND: Daratumumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting CD38, has been approved for use with standard myeloma regimens. An evaluation of subcutaneous daratumumab combined with bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRd) for the treatment of transplantation-eligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma is needed. METHODS: In this phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned 709 transplantation-eligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma to receive either subcutaneous daratumumab combined with VRd induction and consolidation therapy and with lenalidomide maintenance therapy (D-VRd group) or VRd induction and consolidation therapy and lenalidomide maintenance therapy alone (VRd group). The primary end point was progression-free survival. Key secondary end points were a complete response or better and minimal residual disease (MRD)-negative status. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 47.5 months, the risk of disease progression or death in the D-VRd group was lower than the risk in the VRd group. The estimated percentage of patients with progression-free survival at 48 months was 84.3% in the D-VRd group and 67.7% in the VRd group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.42; 95% confidence interval, 0.30 to 0.59; P<0.001); the P value crossed the prespecified stopping boundary (P = 0.0126). The percentage of patients with a complete response or better was higher in the D-VRd group than in the VRd group (87.9% vs. 70.1%, P<0.001), as was the percentage of patients with MRD-negative status (75.2% vs. 47.5%, P<0.001). Death occurred in 34 patients in the D-VRd group and 44 patients in the VRd group. Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in most patients in both groups; the most common were neutropenia (62.1% with D-VRd and 51.0% with VRd) and thrombocytopenia (29.1% and 17.3%, respectively). Serious adverse events occurred in 57.0% of the patients in the D-VRd group and 49.3% of those in the VRd group. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of subcutaneous daratumumab to VRd induction and consolidation therapy and to lenalidomide maintenance therapy conferred a significant benefit with respect to progression-free survival among transplantation-eligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. (Funded by the European Myeloma Network in collaboration with Janssen Research and Development; PERSEUS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03710603; EudraCT number, 2018-002992-16.).

Australia and New Zealand consensus position statement: use of COVID-19 therapeutics in patients with haematological malignancies.

Despite widespread vaccination rates, we are living with high transmission rates of SARS-CoV-2. Although overall hospitalisation rates are falling, the risk of serious infection remains high for patients who are immunocompromised because of haematological malignancies. In light of the ongoing pandemic and the development of multiple agents for treatment, representatives from the Haematology Society of Australia and New Zealand and infectious diseases specialists have collaborated on this consensus position statement regarding COVID-19 management in patients with haematological disorders. It is our recommendation that both patients with haematological malignancies and treating specialists be educated regarding the preventive and treatment options available and that patients continue to receive adequate vaccinations, keeping in mind the suboptimal vaccine responses that occur in haematology patients, in particular, those with B-cell malignancies and on B-cell-targeting or depleting therapy. Patients with haematological malignancies should receive treatment for COVID-19 in accordance with the severity of their symptoms, but even mild infections should prompt early treatment with antiviral agents. The issue of de-isolation following COVID-19 infection and optimal time to treatment for haematological malignancies is discussed but remains an area with evolving data. This position statement is to be used in conjunction with advice from infectious disease, respiratory and intensive care specialists, and current guidelines from the National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce and the New Zealand Ministry of Health and Cancer Agency Te Aho o Te Kahu COVID-19 Guidelines.

Multiplex immunohistochemistry elucidates increased distance between cytotoxic T cells and plasma cells in relapsed myeloma, and identifies Lag-3 as the most common checkpoint receptor on cytotoxic T cells of myeloma patients.

A dysfunctional immune tumour microenvironment facilitates disease progression in multiple myeloma (MM). Using multiplex immunohistochemistry (mIHC), we described the quantitative and qualitative changes in CD3+ CD8+ cytotoxic T-cells and assess their proximity to malignant plasma cells (PCs) in patients with monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS), newly diagnosed (ND) and relapsed/refractory (RR) MM. Formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded trephine sections from patients with MGUS (n=32), NDMM (n=65) and RRMM (n=59) were sequentially stained for CD138, CD3, CD8, and checkpoint receptors (CPR) Tim-3, Lag-3, and PD-1. Halo® image analysis platform was used for cell segmentation and phenotyping, facilitating enumeration of cytotoxic T-cells and analysis of proximity to PCs. The percentage of CD8+ cytotoxic T-cells in proximity to PCs is greater in patients with NDMM than patients with RRMM (at 50gm distance 90.8% vs. 81.5%, p=0.038). There is a trend for more CD3+ T-cells in MGUS (p=0.08) but no difference was observed in the prevalence of CD8+ cytotoxic T-cells (p=0.48). Lag-3 is the most common CPR expressed on cytotoxic T-cells in myeloma (p.

The prognostic impact of t(11;14) in multiple myeloma: A real-world analysis from the Australian Lymphoma Leukaemia Group (ALLG) and the Australian Myeloma and Related Diseases Registry (MRDR).

The prognostic impact of t(11;14) in multiple myeloma (MM) needs to be better understood to inform future treatment decisions. The Australian Lymphoma Leukaemia Group embarked on a retrospective, observational cohort study using real-world data to interrogate treatment patterns and outcomes in 74 MM patients with t(11;14) [t(11;14)-MM] diagnosed over 10 years. This was compared to 159 and 111 MM patients with high-risk IgH translocations (IgH HR-MM) and hyperdiploidy (Hyperdiploid-MM), respectively, from the Australian Myeloma and Related Diseases Registry. No appreciable differences in age, gender, ISS, LDH levels, 1q21 or del(17p) status, or treatment patterns were observed between groups. Median PFS-1 was not different between groups but both t(11;14)-MM and IgH HR-MM had an inferior PFS-2 vs. Hyperdiploid-MM: median PFS-2 8.2 months, 10.0 months, and 19.8 months (p = 0.002), respectively. The 3-year OS were 69%, 71%, and 82% (p = 0.026), respectively. In the t(11;14)-MM group, gain or amplification of 1q21 at diagnosis predicted for poorer OS (HR 3.46, p = 0.002). Eleven patients had received venetoclax with 45% achieving better than a very good partial response. Results suggest that t(11;14) MM may confer an unfavorable risk profile and that the use of targeted therapies such as venetoclax earlier in the treatment algorithm should be explored.

Elranatamab in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma: phase 2 MagnetisMM-3 trial results.

Elranatamab is a humanized B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA)-CD3 bispecific antibody. In the ongoing phase 2 MagnetisMM-3 trial, patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma received subcutaneous elranatamab once weekly after two step-up priming doses. After six cycles, persistent responders switched to biweekly dosing. Results from cohort A, which enrolled patients without prior BCMA-directed therapy (n = 123) are reported. The primary endpoint of confirmed objective response rate (ORR) by blinded independent central review was met with an ORR of 61.0% (75/123); 35.0% ≥complete response. Fifty responders switched to biweekly dosing, and 40 (80.0%) improved or maintained their response for ≥6 months. With a median follow-up of 14.7 months, median duration of response, progression-free survival and overall survival (secondary endpoints) have not been reached. Fifteen-month rates were 71.5%, 50.9% and 56.7%, respectively. Common adverse events (any grade; grade 3-4) included infections (69.9%, 39.8%), cytokine release syndrome (57.7%, 0%), anemia (48.8%, 37.4%), and neutropenia (48.8%, 48.8%). With biweekly dosing, grade 3-4 adverse events decreased from 58.6% to 46.6%. Elranatamab induced deep and durable responses with a manageable safety profile. Switching to biweekly dosing may improve long-term safety without compromising efficacy. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04649359 .

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.).

A sequential cohort study evaluating single-agent KappaMab and KappaMab combined with lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone in relapsed and/or refractory kappa light chain-restricted multiple myeloma (AMaRC 01-16).

KappaMab (KM; formerly MDX-1097) is a monoclonal antibody specific for the kappa myeloma antigen (KMA), a cell-surface antigen expressed on malignant plasma cells in kappa-restricted multiple myeloma (κMM), some lymphomas, occasional tonsillar B cells and in vitro activated B cells, but not on normal B cells in bone marrow. Phase I/IIa studies of single-agent KM confirmed a favourable toxicity profile and evidence of anti-myeloma activity. Ex-vivo studies demonstrating upregulation of KMA by lenalidomide, and enhanced effector-cell cytotoxicity provided the rationale for this phase IIb study where KM or KM in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone (KM-Rd) was administered in relapsed, refractory κMM patients. In addition, outcomes for a real-world matched case-control cohort from the Australian and New Zealand Myeloma and Related Diseases Registry (MRDR) who received Rd were compared to the KM-Rd cohort. KM-Rd demonstrated an overall response rate of 82.5% which compared favourably to the Rd-MRDR cohort of 45.1%. Both single-agent KM and KM-Rd regimens were well tolerated, with the KM-Rd safety profile similar to patients given only Rd in other clinical settings. Based on the excellent safety profile and significant efficacy, further clinical trials escalating the KM dose and pairing KM with other standard-of-care treatments are planned.

Plain language summary of the MAIA study of daratumumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone for the treatment of people with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This is a summary of a clinical trial called MAIA. The trial tested 2 combinations of cancer drugs (daratumumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone compared with lenalidomide and dexamethasone) in people with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. None of the participants who took part in the study had been treated before or were eligible to receive stem-cell transplants. HOW WAS THE STUDY IN THIS SUMMARY CONDUCTED?: A total of 737 participants took part. Half of the participants took daratumumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone, while the other half of the participants took only lenalidomide and dexamethasone. Once participants started taking the drugs, the cancer was monitored for improvement (response to treatment), worsening (disease progression), or no change. Participants' blood and urine were tested for myeloma protein to measure response to the treatment. Participants were also monitored for side effects. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS OF THE STUDY?: After approximately 56 months of follow-up, more participants who took daratumumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone were alive and had decreased myeloma protein levels (indicating improvement of cancer) than participants who took only lenalidomide and dexamethasone. The most common side effects were abnormally low white and red blood cell counts and increased lung infections. WHAT DO THE RESULTS OF THE STUDY MEAN?: In the MAIA study, participants with multiple myeloma who took daratumumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone lived longer and had decreased myeloma protein levels than participants who took only lenalidomide and dexamethasone, indicating survival could be more likely with daratumumab added. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02252172 (Phase 3 MAIA study).

Final analysis of carfilzomib, dexamethasone, and daratumumab vs carfilzomib and dexamethasone in the CANDOR study.

CANDOR (NCT03158688) is a phase 3, randomized, open-label trial comparing carfilzomib, daratumumab, and dexamethasone (KdD) vs carfilzomib and dexamethasone (Kd) in adults with relapsed/refectory multiple myeloma (RRMM) with 1 to 3 prior therapies. The CANDOR study met its primary end point of progression-free survival (PFS) in the primary analysis. Here, we report the final analysis of the study, including secondary end points and subgroup analyses thereof. The median follow-up was 50 months. Patients treated with KdD had higher minimal residual disease-negative (MRD-) achievement rates (28% vs 9%; odds ratio [OR], 4.22; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 2.28-7.83) and MRD- complete response rates (22% vs 8%; OR, 3.55; 95% CI, 1.83-6.88) than those treated with Kd. Median PFS was 28.4 months for KdD vs 15.2 months for Kd (hazard ratio [HR], 0.64; 95% CI, 0.49-0.83). Median overall survival (OS) for KdD was 50.8 months vs 43.6 months for Kd (HR, 0.78 [0.60-1.03]; P = .042). Trends toward improved OS occurred in predefined subgroups, including patients refractory to lenalidomide (KdD, not reached vs Kd, 38.2 months; HR, 0.69 [0.43-1.11]) and refractory to proteasome inhibitor (KdD, 43.2 months vs Kd, 30.0 months; HR, 0.70 [0.45-1.09]), and there was significant improvement in patients with high-risk cytogenetics (KdD, 34.3 months vs Kd: 17.1 months; HR, 0.52 [0.29-0.94]). No new safety signals were identified. In summary, the final analysis of CANDOR confirmed the PFS benefit and showed a trend in OS benefit with KdD vs Kd. These findings reinforce KdD as a standard of care for RRMM, especially in clinically relevant patient subgroups. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT03158688.

Listening to What Matters Most: Consumer Endorsed Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) for Use in Multiple Myeloma Clinical Trials: A Descriptive Exploratory Study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with multiple myeloma (MM) experience some of the highest levels of symptom burden of all hematological malignancies. Therefore, assessment of quality of life (QoL) is critical for the delivery of patient-centered cancer care. Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) are commonly used to measure QoL in people with MM. However, it is unknown whether measures used, are appropriate and informative to address issues that matter most to patients. AIM: This exploratory study was designed to establish consumer endorsed PROMs to measure QoL in people with MM. METHOD: This was a descriptive, exploratory study. Participants were invited to provide feedback on the acceptability, appropriateness, and practicability of ten commonly used PROMs via telephone-based, semi-structured interviews and surveys. Data were analyzed using a manifest content analysis approach and descriptive statistics. RESULTS: 26 individuals participated in the study. Participants emphasized the importance of selecting a suite of PROMs that captures the diversity of quality-of-life experiences and priorities reported over the course of treatment, while minimizing the burden of completing PROMs. Based on these criteria, a suite of three PROMs - the MyPOS, the Brief Fatigue Inventory, and COST-FACIT were endorsed by study participants. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the first study of its kind to establish a suite of consumer-endorsed PROMs for use in clinical trials in patients with MM. Ensuring that the patient voice is at the center of advances in cancer treatment is a hallmark of quality cancer care.

The importance of frailty assessment in multiple myeloma: a position statement from the Myeloma Scientific Advisory Group to Myeloma Australia.

Multiple myeloma (MM) is a disease of older people, yet factors relating to comorbidity and frailty may threaten treatment tolerability for many of this heterogenous group. There has been increasing interest in defining specific and clinically relevant frailty assessment tools within the MM population, with the goal of using these frailty scores, not just as a prognostic instrument, but also as a predictive tool to allow for a frailty-adapted treatment approach. This paper reviews the various frailty assessment frameworks used in the evaluation of patients with MM, including the International Myeloma Working Group Frailty Index (IMWG-FI), the Mayo Frailty Index and the simplified frailty scale. While the IMWG-FI remains the most widely accepted tool, the simplified frailty scale is the most user-friendly in busy day-to-day clinics based on its ease of use. This paper summarises the recommendations from the Myeloma Scientific Advisory Group (MSAG) of Myeloma Australia, on the use of frailty assessment tools in clinical practice and proposes a frailty-stratified treatment algorithm to aid clinicians in tailoring therapy for this highly heterogeneous patient population.