Peripheral Immunotype Correlates with Minimal Residual Disease Status and Is Modulated by Immunomodulatory Drugs in Multiple Myeloma.

Data indicate reversal of immune dysfunction with active treatment; however, the precise contribution of specific immune effector and immune suppressor components to achieve a minimal residual disease (MRD) state and immunomodulatory drug-mediated immunomodulatory effects in multiple myeloma (MM) patients remains poorly understood. In this prospective proof-of-principle study we sought to determine the dynamic alterations in natural killer (NK), NK-T, and T cells, including maturation and activating/inhibitory repertoire associated with MRDpos versus MRDneg status after autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) and during lenalidomide-based maintenance therapy. Of the 46MM patients enrolled, 36 had bone marrow MRD assessment 60+ days post-ASCT, 30 had longitudinal blood immunotyping during maintenance (pretherapy and after cycles 1, 3, and 6), and 20 had both MRD assessment and longitudinal immunotyping. Multicolor flow cytometry was used for MRD and immunotyping. Although the absolute number of NK cells was significantly lower in patients with MRDpos response, phenotypically NK cells in these patients displayed higher expression of activating receptors KIRDS4 and decreased expression of inhibitory molecules NKG2A compared with the MRDneg group. Furthermore, we observed significantly lower frequencies of T cells displaying KIR3DL1 in MRDpos versus MRDneg patients. Longitudinal immunotyping during lenalidomide maintenance showed loss of mature NK effector function, augmentation of NK-T effector function, and acquisition of PD1 independent anergic state. Our findings also suggest skewing of T cells toward an exhausted state during the maintenance phase in MRDpos patients. Put together, these observations provide a distinctive signature for MRDneg and MRDpos groups. These data support exploration of immune profiling in prospective clinical trials according to MRD-defined responses to identify patients that may benefit from maintenance intensification/modification or maintenance withdrawal.

Efficacy of Selinexor in Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM) Patients with del17p and Other High-Risk Abnormalities (A Retrospective Single-Center Study).

Selinexor (Seli) is a first-in-class, oral selective inhibitor of the nuclear export protein, exportin-1 (XPO1). Seli exhibits its antitumor effect through the blockage of XPO1, which increases nuclear retention of tumor suppressor proteins (TSPs), including p53, thereby limiting the translation of oncogenes, triggering cell cycle arrest and the death of malignant cells. Multiple Myeloma (MM) patients with del17p are deficient in TP53 and have a particularly poor prognosis. Given its unique mechanism of action, we investigated whether Seli has increased efficacy in RRMM patients with del17p compared to other high-risk cytogenetics (OHRC). This is an IRB-approved observational study of RRMM patients with high-risk cytogenetics (del17p, t (4;14), t (14;16) or gain 1q) or standard-risk cytogenetics treated at the Levine Cancer Institute (LCI) with a Seli-based regimen between January 2019 and December 2022. Time-to-event endpoints (PFS, OS) were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier (KM) methods. Log-rank tests compared time-to-event endpoints between cohorts [del17p vs. OHRC vs. standard risk]. We identified 40 RRMM patients with high-risk cytogenetics, including 16 patients with del17p and 24 patients with OHRC, as well as 20 with standard-risk cytogenetics. The median age was 62.5 vs. 69 vs. 65.5 years (del17p group vs. OHRC vs. standard risk). The median prior line of therapies was five (range: 3-16) with similar rates of prior autologous stem cell transplant in all arms (68.8% vs. 62.5% vs. 70.0%). The most frequently used regimens were Seli-Pomalidomide-dexamethasone(dex) or Seli-Carfilzomib-dex (Seli-Kd) in the del17p group and Seli-Kd in the OHRC and standard-risk groups. The median time to start the Seli-based regimen after initial MM diagnosis was 5.6 years for the del17p group, 4.1 years in OHRC, and 4.8 years in the standard-risk group. The median follow-up time after the start of the Seli-based regimen was 10.5 months (mos) in the del17p group, 8.4 mos in OHRC, and 10.3 mos in the standard-risk group. In the del17p group, 50% had an objective response, 41.7% in the OHRC, and 35% in the standard-risk group (p = 0.71). Depth of response was also similar across the arms (12.5% vs. 12.5% vs. 10.0% VGPR p = 0.99). The median OS was 10.9 mos in the del17p group, 10.3 mos in the OHRC, and 10.3 mos in the standard-risk group (p = 0.92). The median OS was 15.5 mos for patients who received Seli as a bridging therapy versus 9 mos for Seli use for other reasons rather than as a bridge. Overall, Seli-based regimens showed promising responses even in this heavily pretreated population. Our analysis suggests that Seli-based regimens lead to similar outcomes among RRMM patients with del17p, OHRC, and standard-risk cytogenetics. This contrasts with previously reported outcomes using combinations of novel therapies in this population, where the del17p patients often have a poorer prognosis. Interestingly, our data suggest that Seli is a particularly effective bridging modality for patients preparing for CAR-T cell therapies in our population. Further investigation into this population is warranted, including in earlier lines of therapy, in hopes of seeing a more durable response.

A Clinical and Correlative Study of Elotuzumab, Carfilzomib, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone (Elo-KRd) for Lenalidomide Refractory Multiple Myeloma in First Relapse.

INTRODUCTION: Treatment of patients with multiple myeloma (MM) in first relapse remains a challenge. This phase II study combined elotuzumab (Elo) with carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (KRd) for treatment of MM in first relapse with the aim of improving efficacy. METHODS: Enrolled patients received Elo-KRd induction for 4 cycles, and Elo-lenalidomide maintenance until progression. The primary endpoint was VGPR or better (≥VGPR) postinduction. Secondary endpoints were MRD by flow cytometry, OS, PFS, and safety. Correlatives included characterization of the impact of Elo-KRd on NK and T cell subsets via flow cytometry. Target accrual of 40 patients was not met due to COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: Of 15 patients enrolled, 10 (67%) had high-risk features (del17p, t[4;14], t[14;16], 1q gain/amplification, plasma cell leukemia, extramedullary MM, or functional high risk), 12 (80%) were lenalidomide-refractory, and 5 (33.3%) bortezomib-refractory. Postinduction ≥VGPR was 7/15 (46.7%) and MRD-negative (10-5) rate 20%. Overall response during study was 80%, including ≥VGPR as best response of 53.3%. At median follow-up of 28.2 (range, 3.8 to 44.2) months, the median PFS was 11.5 months (95% CI 1.9, 18), and median OS not reached (95% CI 10.1, NA). No new safety concerns were reported. Elo-KRd treatment did not augment NK cell distribution or activity in blood or bone marrow. Effector CD4+ and CD8+ T cells significantly decreased postinduction, with concomitant acquisition of T central memory phenotype, particularly at a high rate in ≥VGPR group. CONCLUSION: A short course of Elo-KRd induction followed by Elo-lenalidomide maintenance demonstrated activity in predominantly lenalidomide-refractory and / or high-risk MM. The results with this well-tolerated combination are comparable to other contemporary approved triplet combinations.

Safety and Cost Benefits of the Rapid Daratumumab Infusion Protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Daratumumab is approved for the treatment of multiple myeloma in both frontline and relapsed/refractory settings. Its major limitation is the long infusion time, especially with the first dose. Recent data demonstrated the feasibility of infusing daratumumab at an accelerated rate of 90 minutes starting from cycle 1 on day 15. Herein, we report the safety profile and cost associated with rapid daratumumab infusion protocol. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A chart review was performed to identify patients who completed at least 1 cycle of daratumumab (single agent or in combination) from April 2016 to October 2018. Patients were divided into 2 cohorts: cohort 1 received rapid daratumumab infusion after its implementation in March 2018, whereas cohort 2 included patients treated with daratumumab administered at the standard rate. The primary endpoint was to compare differences in rates of infusion-related reactions (IRRs). An Excel (Microsoft)-based model was developed to estimate cost and productivity. RESULTS: A total of 100 patients with relapsed/refractory disease were included in this study (53 in cohort 1 and 47 in cohort 2). Of the 53 patients in cohort 1, 18 (34%) received rapid daratumumab infusion starting with cycle 1. Overall, there was no statistically significant difference in rates of IRRs between cohort 1 and 2 (1.9% vs. 4.3%, P = .59); 1 patient in cohort 1 developed an IRR. The total costs estimated for a 52-week regimen of daratumumab infused at standard and rapid rates were $137,200 and $122,200 (P < .001), respectively. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that rapid daratumumab infusion is safe and tolerable and provides cost savings for patients with relapsed/refractory disease.

Clinical potential of SLAMF7 antibodies - focus on elotuzumab in multiple myeloma.

Elotuzumab is one of the first monoclonal antibodies to be approved for the treatment of multiple myeloma. It is a humanized immunoglobulin G kappa (IgGκ) antibody that targets signaling lymphocytic activation molecule family member 7 (SLAMF7), a surface marker that is highly expressed on normal and malignant plasma cells. This review summarizes the preclinical and clinical data that led to the approval of elotuzumab, along with a discussion on the ongoing and future clinical investigations.

Practical Considerations in Managing Relapsed Multiple Myeloma.

Considerable advances have been made in the treatment of relapsed and relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma, with numerous novel agents and combination strategies receiving regulatory approval worldwide during the past several years. An increasing body of phase III data has clearly demonstrated increased overall response rates, improved depths of response, and more durable responses when a third novel agent is incorporated into lenalidomide-dexamethasone and bortezomib-dexamethasone platforms, in most cases with acceptable toxicity. The carfilzomib-dexamethasone doublet has also demonstrated promising activity. With this rapid progress has come many new questions. We review the data supporting the use of these novel treatment paradigms for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma, discuss the place of autologous and allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in this rapidly evolving treatment space, and propose strategies to best use these regimens, considering the disease, host, and previous treatment factors.

Investigation of a gene signature to predict response to immunomodulatory derivatives for patients with multiple myeloma: an exploratory, retrospective study using microarray datasets from prospective clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Immunomodulatory derivatives (IMiDs), along with proteasome inhibitors, are key components of treatment regimens for multiple myeloma. Nonetheless, outcomes vary among treated individuals. Drug-specific gene-expression profile (GEP) signatures that aid the prediction of favourable and unfavourable outcomes can provide patients with the most effective therapy for their individual disease. We aimed to develop and validate a gene expression signature to suggest which patients would benefit most from IMiD-based therapies. METHODS: For this exploratory retrospective study, we selected a cohort of patients with newly diagnosed or relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma who were treated in clinical trials with IMiD-containing regimens. Cohorts were eligible if they had publicly available GEP data from patients' bone marrow plasma cells, with long-term follow-up and clinicopathological data. In the development stage of the model, we identified 176 IMiD response genes that were differentially expressed before and after IMiD exposure using pharmacogenomic GEP data from patients who had bone marrow samples taken before and 48 h after a test dose exposure with thalidomide (n=42), lenalidomide (n=18), or pomalidomide (n=18). 14 of these genes had p values less than 0·05 for associations with progression-free survival in patients who received thalidomide in induction and maintenance therapy in the Total Therapy (TT) 2 trial (ie, the training cohort). We combined the 14 genes to create a continuous IMiD-14 score and an optimal cutoff. The subgroup with an IMiD-14 score higher than the cutoff was deemed to be IMiD-resistant. We obtained validation cohorts from four studies of IMiD combination regimens: the TT3a trial (thalidomide in induction and maintenance), the TT3b trial (thalidomide in induction and lenalidomide in maintenance), the TT6 trial (thalidomide in induction and lenalidomide in maintenance), and the vincristine, doxorubicin, and dexamethasone (VAD) group of the HOVON65/GMMG-HD4 trial (thalidomide in maintenance). The primary endpoint was to show the prognostic value of the IMiD-14 gene signature for progression-free survival. FINDINGS: In the training cohort, progression-free survival was significantly shorter in the 83 patients with IMiD-14 high scores than in the 92 patients with IMiD-14 low scores; 3 year progression-free survival was 52% (95% CI 42-64) for the IMiD-14 high group versus 85% (78-92) for the IMiD-14 low group, with a hazard ratio (HR) of 2·51 (95% CI 1·72-3·66; p<0·0001). These findings were supported by the results in the validation cohorts, TT3a (115 patients with IMiD-14 high vs 160 patients with IMiD-14 low; 3 year progression-free survival 63% [95% CI 55-73] vs 87% [82-92]; HR 1·54 [1·11-2·15], p=0·010), TT3b (77 patients with IMiD-14 high vs 89 patients with IMiD-14 low; 62% [52-74] vs 80% [72-89]; HR 2·07 [1·28-3·34], p=0·0024), TT6 (20 patients with IMiD-14 high vs 36 patients with IMiD-14 low; 39% [22-68] vs 74% [61-90]; HR 2·40 [1·09-5·30], p=0·026), and the VAD group of HOVON65/GMMG-HD4 (65 patients with IMiD-14 high vs 77 patients with IMiD-14 low; 16% [9-28] vs 54% [44-67]; HR 2·29 [1·52-3·45], p<0·0001). INTERPRETATION: Our results suggest that the IMiD-14 model has prognostic value in patients with multiple myeloma who are treated with IMiDs. Some genes in the model could provide novel targets for IMiD resistance and therapeutic intervention. The IMiD-14 model warrants evaluation in prospective studies. FUNDING: Conquer Cancer Foundation ASCO Young Investigator Award and the Carolinas Myeloma Research Fund.