International Myeloma Working Group immunotherapy committee consensus guidelines and recommendations for optimal use of T-cell-engaging bispecific antibodies in multiple myeloma.

Multiple myeloma remains an incurable disease, despite the development of numerous drug classes and combinations that have contributed to improved overall survival. Immunotherapies directed against cancer cell-surface antigens, such as chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy and T-cell-redirecting bispecific antibodies, have recently received regulatory approvals and shown unprecedented efficacy. However, these immunotherapies have unique mechanisms of action and toxicities that are different to previous treatments for myeloma, so experiences from clinical trials and early access programmes are essential for providing specific recommendations for management of patients, especially as these agents become available across many parts of the world. Here, we provide expert consensus clinical practice guidelines for the use of bispecific antibodies for the treatment of myeloma. The International Myeloma Working Group is also involved in the collection of prospective real-time data of patients treated with such immunotherapies, with the aim of learning continuously and adapting clinical practices to optimise the management of patients receiving immunotherapies.

Hematopoietic cell transplantation for older acute myeloid leukemia patients in first complete remission: results of a randomized phase III study.

Given the selection of elderly patients with AML in first complete remission (CR1) the advantage of consolidation with allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) over chemotherapy is still unclear. Newly diagnosed AML patients in CR1 aged 60-75 years were registered and a donor search initiated. After one consolidation cycle, patients with a matched donor were randomized to HCT with fludarabine/lowdose total body irradiation and cyclosporine/mycophenolate mofetil immunosuppression or conventional non-HCT. Primary outcome was restricted mean leukemia-free survival (RM-LFS) up to five years. Between 2010 and 2017, 245 patients (median age 67 years) were registered at CR1. After one consolidation, 26.9% of patients failed inclusion criteria. Of the 179 (73%) patients still on study, 75.4% had an HLA identical donor. Ten ineligible patients were excluded, and 125 randomized to HCT (n=83) or non-HCT (n=42). The primary outcome RM-LFS up to 5 years was 24.5 months (95%CI:18.9-30.1) in the HCT and 15.6 months (95%CI:10.4-20.8) in the non-HCT arm (p=0.022) due to a decrease in cumulative relapse incidence from 91.1 (95%CI:80.7-100.0) after non-HCT to 37.8 (95%CI:27.2-48.4)% after HCT (p.

Conditioning with melphalan 200 mg/m2 and subsequent ASCT improves progression-free and overall survival in elderly myeloma patients compared to standard of care.

OBJECTIVES: Despite the effectiveness of newer drugs for the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM), the outcomes are further improved by subsequent autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). Data on effectiveness in older patients are limited. We compared outcomes in patients aged 65-75 years depending on whether they were treated with ASCT or not and compared those to outcomes in patients <65 years. METHODS: This was a retrospective, single-center study. We compared progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for all MM patients below and above the age of 65 years treated ± ASCT at the Karolinska University Hospital between 2010 and 2020. PFS and OS were calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Variables affecting PFS and OS were evaluated using Cox regression model. RESULTS: Both PFS and OS were improved in the group 65-75 years treated +ASCT compared to those treated pharmacologically (p = 0.008 and p < 0.001, respectively). There were no significant differences between patients <65 years and those 65-75 years treated with ASCT. CONCLUSION: The findings indicate that even patients >65 years should be evaluated as candidates for ASCT. An individualized approach supported by a frailty/geriatric assessment score could assist clinicians to select the appropriate treatment for each patient.

Expert review on soft-tissue plasmacytomas in multiple myeloma: definition, disease assessment and treatment considerations.

In this review, two types of soft-tissue involvement in multiple myeloma are defined: (i) extramedullary (EMD) with haematogenous spread involving only soft tissues and (ii) paraskeletal (PS) with tumour masses arising from skeletal lesions. The incidence of EMD and PS plasmacytomas at diagnosis ranges from 1·7% to 4·5% and 7% to 34·4% respectively. EMD disease is often associated with high-risk cytogenetics, resistance to therapy and worse prognosis than in PS involvement. In patients with PS involvement a proteasome inhibitor-based regimen may be the best option followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in transplant eligible patients. In patients with EMD disease who are not eligible for ASCT, a proteasome inhibitor-based regimen such as lenalidomide-bortezomib-dexamethasone (RVD) may be the best option, while for those eligible for high-dose therapy a myeloma/lymphoma-like regimen such as bortezomib, thalidomide and dexamethasone (VTD)-RVD/cisplatin, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide and etoposide (PACE) followed by SCT should be considered. In both EMD and PS disease at relapse many strategies have been tried, but this remains a high-unmet need population.

Improved survival in multiple Myeloma patients undergoing autologous stem cell transplantation is entirely in the standard cytogenetic risk groups.

INTRODUCTION: Novel drugs and drug combinations have improved outcomes for multiple myeloma patients. However, subgroups of patients still have a poor progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). In an attempt to identify how the novel drugs affect the outcome in standard-risk and high-risk patients, respectively, we have investigated 715 multiple myeloma (MM) patients who have undergone high dose treatment followed by autologous stem cell transplantation at our center during 1995 - 2020. Outcomes during three time periods, 1995-1999 (period I), 2000-2009 (period II), and 2010-2020 (period III), were compared separately for standard-risk and high-risk patients. Risk stratification was based on chromosome analysis for periods II and III. RESULTS: The whole cohort of patients showed significantly improved OS with time during the three periods being at a median of 5.8, 7.0, and 10.0 years, respectively. There is also a weak tendency for improved PFS, that is, a median of 2.4, 2.6, and 2.9 years, respectively, during the same periods. However, the separate analysis of standard-risk and high-risk patients showed that the overall improvement with time was due to improved standard-risk patients (median OS 8.4 years for the period I and not reached for period II and III). In contrast, no significant improvement was seen in high-risk patients. For patients with del17p, PFS was even worse during period III as compared to period II (median 1.6 vs 3.2 years respectively). CONCLUSION: Our results show that the dramatic improvement in outcome for MM patients during the last 20 years only applies for standard-risk patients, while high-risk MM patients still are doing poorly, indicating that the novel drugs developed during this time are preferentially effective in standard-risk patients. New treatment modalities like CAR-T cells, CAR-NK cells, and/or bispecific antibodies should be tried in clinical studies early in the course of the disease, especially in patients with high-risk cytogenetics.

Are Autologous Stem Cell Transplants Still Required to Treat Myeloma in the Era of Novel Therapies? A Review from the Chronic Malignancies Working Party of the EBMT.

Melphalan at a myeloablative dose followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) remains the standard of care for transplant-eligible patients with myeloma. However, therapies such as new immunomodulatory drugs and proteasome inhibitors and, more recently, monoclonal antibodies and chimeric antigen receptor T cells are challenging the traditional role of ASCT. Which patients benefit from ASCT? Can its use be delayed until first relapse? The field is moving rapidly as novel agents lead to new patient care strategies. The place of ASCT in this changing landscape will be reviewed and reassessed.

Translocation (11;14) in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, time to reclassify this standard risk chromosomal aberration?

OBJECTIVES: The most common translocation in multiple myeloma (MM) is t(11;14)(q13;q32), and its importance as prognostic factor has been controversial. The aim was to analyze its prognostic value. METHOD: In this retrospective study of 469 newly diagnosed myeloma patients, outcomes in patients with (11;14) and standard risk (t(11;14)SR) or high risk (t(11;14)HR) cytogenetics were compared to outcomes of patients without t(11;14) and SR (non-t(11;14)SR) or HR (non-t(11;14)HR), respectively. RESULTS: Overall progression-free survival (PFS) was shorter in t(11;14)SR than non-t(11;14)SR (median 28.9 vs 35.3 months); however, the difference was not significant (P = .2). Overall survival (OS) did not differ significantly between the groups. In the subgroup of patients that did not receive high-dose treatment, PFS was shorter for t(11;14)SR compared to non-t(11;14)SR, 10.6 vs 24.6 months (P = .01). Although OS were shorter for t(11,14)SR compared to non-t(11;14)SR (5-year OS 41.7% vs 63.8%), the difference was not significant (P = .1). In HDT patients, no significant difference was observed for OS or PFS between those with or without t(11;14). CONCLUSION: This study shows that t(11;14) is associated with poorer outcome in MM, particularly in non-high-dose-treated SR patients. It should be considered an intermediate or high-risk marker in these patients.

Upfront bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone compared to bortezomib, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone in multiple myeloma.

OBJECTIVES: At our center, patients with multiple myeloma (MM) were treated upfront with bortezomib, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone (VCD) until cyclophosphamide was replaced with lenalidomide in the combination (VRD). These treatments have never been compared head-to-head in large real-life patient material. METHOD: A retrospective analysis of patients treated with VRD and VCD in the first line, both with and without subsequent high-dose treatment (HDT) and autologous stem cell transplantation. A total of 681 patients were included, 117 receiving VRD (71 with, 46 without HDT) and 564 receiving VCD (351 with, 213 without HDT). RESULTS: Overall response rate (≥partial response) was higher with VRD compared to VCD in the entire VRD group (98% vs 88%, P < 0.001) and in the non-HDT group (98% vs 79%, P < 0.001). Progression-free survival (PFS) at 18 months was longer with VRD compared to VCD in the entire VRD group, the non-HDT group and the HDT group (88% vs 63%, 82% vs 32% and 91% vs 73%, respectively). Overall survival at 18 months was better for VRD-treated patients in the entire VRD group (95% vs 89%, P = 0.048). CONCLUSION: Upfront VRD gives better responses and longer PFS compared to VCD in MM patients with or without subsequent HDT.

Case Report: Treatment of light-chain amyloidosis with daratumumab monotherapy in two patients.

Immunoglobulin light-chain amyloidosis (AL) affects multiple organs, most prominently the kidney and the heart. Renal and cardiac impairment are both associated with poor prognosis and most patients die as a consequence of renal or cardiac failure. Monoclonal antibodies such as daratumumab (human IgG1 anti-CD38) and elotuzumab (anti-SLAMF7) have shown promising efficacy for the treatment of relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma. In this case report we show 2 patients with severe AL, one with severe heart failure and one with heart and renal failure, undergoing treatment with daratumumab. Both patients showed a rapid decrease in FLC in response to daratumumab infusions, with few associated adverse events. Using therapeutic CD38 antibodies as a front-line treatment for AL could induce rapid responses while maintaining a tolerable safety profile in these ultra-fragile patients.

Splenic irradiation before hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for chronic myeloid leukemia: long-term follow-up of a prospective randomized study.

In the context of discussions on the reproducibility of clinical studies, we reanalyzed a prospective randomized study on the role of splenic irradiation as adjunct to the conditioning for hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) for chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). Between 1986 and 1989, a total of 229 patients with CML were randomized; of these, 225 (98 %; 112 with, 113 without splenic irradiation) could be identified in the database and their survival updated. Results confirmed the early findings with no significant differences in all measured endpoints (overall survival at 25 years: 42.7 %, 32.0-52.4 % vs 52.9 %, 43.2-62.6 %; p = 0.355, log rank test). Additional splenic irradiation failed to reduce relapse incidence. It did not increase non-relapse mortality nor the risk of late secondary malignancies. Comforting are the long-term results from this predefined consecutive cohort of patients: more than 60 % were alive at plus 25 years when they were transplanted with a low European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) risk sore. This needs to be considered today when treatment options are discussed for patients who failed initial tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy and have an available low risk HLA-identical donor.

Proteasome inhibitors and IMiDs can overcome some high-risk cytogenetics in multiple myeloma but not gain 1q21.

Chromosomal aberrations have significant prognostic importance in multiple myeloma (MM). However, proteasome inhibitors (PI) and IMiDs may partly overcome the poor prognostic impact of some of them. In this study, we investigated a population-based consecutive cohort newly diagnosed patients with MM admitted during a defined time period to hospitals in Denmark, Norway, and Sweden. The impact of treatment modality on the prognostic importance of specific chromosomal aberration was investigated, with special reference to gain 1q21. The median follow-up of patients still alive at analysis was 40 months for the high-dose (HDT)-treated ones and 29 months for the whole population. Three hundred forty-seven patients with a known 1q21 status were included in this study. The 347 patients were divided into three groups, that is, 119 patients with the 1q21 gain, 105 patients with other aberrations (OA), that is, del(13q), del(17p), t(4,14), and/or (14;16), and 123 patients with no aberrations (NA). The groups were compared in terms of overall survival (OS), time to progression (TTP), and response. The 3-yr OS for patients with gain 1q21 was 60% compared to patients with OA 74% and NO 82% (gain 1q21 vs. NO P < 0.001; gain 1q21 vs. OA P = 0.095). If treated with PI or IMiDs, the 3-yr OS was 58% for patients with gain 1q21 compared to patients with OA 78% and NO 78%, respectively (P = 0.041, P = 0.140). In HDT patients, the 3-yr OS was 69% for patients with gain 1q21 compared to patients with OA 84% and NO 88%, respectively (P < 0.008, P = 0.600). Thus, neither HDT nor using PI or IMiDs could overcome the poor prognostic impact of gain 1q21, while these drugs and HDT seemed to improve OS in patients with OA, approaching the survival in NO. Further, gain 1q21 appears to be one of the most important poor prognostic chromosomal aberrations in multiple myeloma with current treatments. Trials using new drugs or allogeneic transplantation are warranted.

Efficacy and outcome of allogeneic transplantation in IgD and nonsecretory myeloma. A report on behalf of the Myeloma Subcommittee of the Chronic Malignancies Working Party of the European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation.

We have recently reported on the outcome of autologous transplantation in the rare myelomas (IgD, IgE, IgM, and nonsecretory [NS]) but there is no real information on the outcome of these conditions after allogeneic transplantation. We used the European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation myeloma database to compare the outcomes after allogeneic transplantation of 1354 common myelomas (IgG, IgA, and light chain myeloma) with the outcome in 26 IgD myelomas and 52 NS myelomas. There was little difference between common and the IgD and NS myeloma patients with respect to prognostic factors although the IgD group had a higher beta 2 microglobulin at diagnosis, shorter time to transplantation, and more T cell depletion. IgD and NS patients had a significantly greater achievement of complete remission at conditioning but this did not translate into equivalent progression-free survival and overall survival for the IgD patients although the NS outcome was very similar to that of common myeloma. The PFS and OS of IgD, common, and NS myelomas appear similar after allogeneic transplantation, despite a tendency for higher early relapse rate in IgD myeloma. Allogeneic transplantation may, therefore, be an option to investigate in prospective observational studies.

American Society of Blood and Marrow Transplantation, European Society of Blood and Marrow Transplantation, Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinical Trials Network, and International Myeloma Working Group Consensus Conference on Salvage Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation in Patients with Relapsed Multiple Myeloma.

In contrast to the upfront setting in which the role of high-dose therapy with autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) as consolidation of a first remission in patients with multiple myeloma (MM) is well established, the role of high-dose therapy with autologous or allogeneic HCT has not been extensively studied in MM patients relapsing after primary therapy. The International Myeloma Working Group together with the Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinical Trials Network, the American Society of Blood and Marrow Transplantation, and the European Society of Blood and Marrow Transplantation convened a meeting of MM experts to: (1) summarize current knowledge regarding the role of autologous or allogeneic HCT in MM patients progressing after primary therapy, (2) propose guidelines for the use of salvage HCT in MM, (3) identify knowledge gaps, (4) propose a research agenda, and (5) develop a collaborative initiative to move the research agenda forward. After reviewing the available data, the expert committee came to the following consensus statement for salvage autologous HCT: (1) In transplantation-eligible patients relapsing after primary therapy that did NOT include an autologous HCT, high-dose therapy with HCT as part of salvage therapy should be considered standard; (2) High-dose therapy and autologous HCT should be considered appropriate therapy for any patients relapsing after primary therapy that includes an autologous HCT with initial remission duration of more than 18 months; (3) High-dose therapy and autologous HCT can be used as a bridging strategy to allogeneic HCT; (4) The role of postsalvage HCT maintenance needs to be explored in the context of well-designed prospective trials that should include new agents, such as monoclonal antibodies, immune-modulating agents, and oral proteasome inhibitors; (5) Autologous HCT consolidation should be explored as a strategy to develop novel conditioning regimens or post-HCT strategies in patients with short (less than 18 months remissions) after primary therapy; and (6) Prospective randomized trials need to be performed to define the role of salvage autologous HCT in patients with MM relapsing after primary therapy comparing it to "best non-HCT" therapy. The expert committee also underscored the importance of collecting enough hematopoietic stem cells to perform 2 transplantations early in the course of the disease. Regarding allogeneic HCT, the expert committee agreed on the following consensus statements: (1) Allogeneic HCT should be considered appropriate therapy for any eligible patient with early relapse (less than 24 months) after primary therapy that included an autologous HCT and/or high-risk features (ie, cytogenetics, extramedullary disease, plasma cell leukemia, or high lactate dehydrogenase); (2) Allogeneic HCT should be performed in the context of a clinical trial if possible; (3) The role of postallogeneic HCT maintenance therapy needs to be explored in the context of well-designed prospective trials; and (4) Prospective randomized trials need to be performed to define the role salvage allogeneic HCT in patients with MM relapsing after primary therapy.

Autologous/reduced-intensity allogeneic stem cell transplantation vs autologous transplantation in multiple myeloma: long-term results of the EBMT-NMAM2000 study.

Long-term follow-up of prospective studies comparing allogeneic transplantation to autologous transplantation in multiple myeloma is few and controversial. This is an update at a median follow-up of 96 months of the European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation Non-Myeloablative Allogeneic stem cell transplantation in Multiple Myeloma (NMAM)2000 study that prospectively compares tandem autologous/reduced intensity conditioning allogeneic transplantation (auto/RICallo) to autologous transplantation alone (auto). There are 357 myeloma patients up to age 69 years enrolled. Patients with an HLA-identical sibling were allocated to auto/RICallo (n = 108) and those without to auto alone (n = 249). At 96 months progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 22% and 49% vs 12% (P = .027) and 36% (P = .030) with auto/RICallo and auto respectively. The corresponding relapse/progression rate (RL) was 60% vs 82% (P = .0002). Non-relapse mortality at 36 months was 13% vs 3% (P = .0004). In patients with the del(13) abnormality corresponding PFS and OS were 21% and 47% vs 5% (P = .026), and 31% (P = .154). Long-term outcome in patients with multiple myeloma was better with auto/RICallo as compared with auto only and the auto/RICallo approach seemed to overcome the poor prognostic impact of del(13) observed after autologous transplantation. Follow up longer than 5 years is necessary for correct interpretation of the value of auto/RICallo in multiple myeloma.

Improved survival in myeloma patients: starting to close in on the gap between elderly patients and a matched normal population.

The outcome for multiple myeloma patients has improved since the introduction of bortezomib, thalidomide and lenalidomide. However, studies comparing new and conventional treatment include selected patient groups. We investigated consecutive patients (n = 1638) diagnosed in a defined period and compared survival with a gender- and age-matched cohort Swedish population (n = 9 340 682). Median overall survival for non-high-dose treated patients was 2·8 years. The use of bortezomib, thalidomide or lenalidomide in first line therapy predicted a significantly longer overall survival (median 4·9 years) compared to conventional treatment (2·3 years). Among non-high-dose treated patients receiving at least 2 lines with bortezomib, thalidomide or lenalidomide, 69% and 63% have survived at 3 and 5 years as compared to 48% and 22% with conventional drugs and 88% and 79% in the matched cohort populations, respectively. The median overall survival in high-dose treated patients was 6·9 years. Of these patients, 84% survived at 3 years and 70% at 5 years as compared to 98% and 95% in the matched cohort population. Overall survival in the best non-high-dose treated outcome group is closing the gap with the matched cohort. Upfront use of new drugs is clearly better than waiting until later lines of treatment.

Addition of thalidomide to melphalan and prednisone treatment prolongs survival in multiple myeloma--a retrospective population based study of 1162 patients.

The combination of melphalan and prednisone (MP) has been the standard treatment of multiple myeloma (MM). Since the introduction of novel agents, the clinical outcome in MM has improved. Six randomized prospective studies with thalidomide combined with melphalan and prednisone (MPT) compared to MP have been performed, most of them showing that MPT gives a better response rate and median overall survival (OS). Amongst 1843 MM patients admitted to 15 Swedish centres, we selected all patients treated with MP and MPT in first, second, third or fourth line of therapy, in total 888 patients treated with MP and 274 with MPT. Patients were evaluated for response rate, OS and Time to Next Treatment. Multivariate Cox model analysis was made to adjust for different criteria at time for MM-diagnosis. The median OS from beginning of first line of treatment was 2.2/4.2 yrs after MP/MPT respectively, and in second, third and fourth line of treatment 1.8/2.9, 1.4/1.6 and 1.1/1.9 yrs (P < 0.0001, 0.003, 0.74 and 0.235). The relative risk for death in the MPT group vs. the MP group was 0.61 (95% CI: 0.45-0.84) in first and 0.55 (0.38-0.83), P < 0.01) in second line. Treatment with MPT gave a significantly better OS rate after both first and second line of therapy when compared with treatment with MP only.

Approach to the treatment of multiple myeloma: a clash of philosophies.

In this Perspective, we summarize some of the most contentious issues surrounding diagnosis and treatment of myeloma. We outline how a fundamental clash of philosophies, cure versus control, may be at the heart of many of the controversies. From the very definition of the disease to risk stratification to the validity of current clinical trial endpoints, we highlight the major areas of debate and provide alternative viewpoints that have implications for trial design and interpretation, as well as clinical practice.