Carfilzomib and dexamethasone maintenance following salvage ASCT in multiple myeloma: A randomised phase 2 trial by the Nordic Myeloma Study Group.

OBJECTIVE: We investigated the efficacy and safety of carfilzomib-containing induction before salvage high-dose melphalan with autologous stem-cell transplantation (salvage ASCT) and maintenance with carfilzomib and dexamethasone after salvage ASCT in multiple myeloma. METHODS: This randomised, open-label, phase 2 trial included patients with first relapse of multiple myeloma after upfront ASCT who were re-induced with four cycles of carfilzomib, cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone. Two months after salvage, ASCT patients were randomised to either observation or maintenance therapy with iv carfilzomib 27 â†’ 56 mg/sqm and p.o. dexamethasone 20 mg every second week. The study enrolled 200 patients of which 168 were randomised to either maintenance with carfilzomib and dexamethasone (n = 82) or observation (n = 86). RESULTS: Median time to progression (TTP) after randomisation was 25.1 months (22.5-NR) in the carfilzomib-dexamethasone maintenance group and 16.7 months (14.4-21.8) in the control group (HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.30-0.71; P = .0004). The most common adverse events during maintenance were thrombocytopenia, anaemia, hypertension, dyspnoea and bacterial infections. CONCLUSION: In summary, maintenance therapy with carfilzomib and dexamethasone after salvage ASCT prolonged TTP with 8 months. The maintenance treatment was in general well-tolerated with manageable toxicity.

Effectiveness and infectious complications of BCMA T-cell engagers in treating multiple myeloma: Real-world evidence from Sweden.

BACKGROUND: Multiple myeloma (MM), an incurable disease characterized by frequent relapses and a need for multiple treatments, often progresses to a relapse/refractory status resistant to all available drugs and drug classes. Bispecific antibodies, specifically BCMA T-cell engagers, have emerged as effective treatments for MM, demonstrating impressive efficacy. However, these treatments can adversely affect the immune system, increasing vulnerability to infections. METHODS/RESULTS: This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of BCMA T-cell engagers in 58 Swedish patients with poor MM prognosis. The patients exhibited a 69% overall response rate, with 69% survival and 60% progression-free survival at 15 months. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the risk of infectious complications, the prognosis of MM patients can be significantly improved with vigilant monitoring and proactive management of infections. This real-world data highlight the potential of BCMA T-cell engagers in treating MM, emphasizing the need for careful patient monitoring to mitigate infection risks.

Regional differences in treatment and outcome for myeloma patients in Sweden: A population based Swedish myeloma register study.

BACKGROUND: We wanted to evaluate if health care for multiple myeloma (MM) patients is equal in different regions of Sweden. AIM: To study differences in survival for MM depending on health care region and early use of modern treatment. METHODS AND RESULTS: Data from the Swedish Myeloma Register from patients diagnosed between 2008 and 2017 was used. Cohorts were defined by the six healthcare regions (labeled A-F) in Sweden and modern initial treatment was defined as including certain drug combinations. To adjust for time to treatment bias, survival analyses were performed also for patients alive 6 months after diagnosis. In all treated MM patients (n = 5326), we observed a superior overall survival (OS) for region A compared to all other regions (p < .01 for all respectively). After adjusting for time to treatment there was also a superior survival in the region with highest use of modern initial treatment (region A) compared to the regions defined in the study as having intermediate and low use (p < .01 for both). In patients receiving autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) a superior survival was observed for region A compared to all regions besides region B. Similar results were seen when adjusting for a time to treatment bias. In patients not receiving ASCT, 75 years or older and adjusted for time to treatment bias, a difference was noted only between region A and E (log rank p = .04, HR 1.2, CI 1.00-1.44, p = .06). In multivariate analyses including age, international staging system stage and time period of diagnosis, differences in survival remained for patients receiving ASCT between region A versus C, D, E and F (p = .01, p < .01, p < .01, p = .03). CONCLUSION: We observed a superior survival in region A for patients receiving ASCT. Explanations may be higher usage of modern initial treatment or regional residual confounding. For patients not receiving ASCT, 75 years or older, differences in survival could be adjusted for.