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.).

MRD dynamics during maintenance for improved prognostication of 1280 patients with myeloma in the TOURMALINE-MM3 and -MM4 trials.

Measurable residual disease (MRD) evaluation may help to guide treatment duration in multiple myeloma (MM). Paradoxically, limited longitudinal data exist on MRD during maintenance. We investigated the prognostic value of MRD dynamics in 1280 transplant-eligible and -ineligible patients from the TOURMALINE-MM3 and -MM4 randomized placebo-controlled phase 3 studies of 2-year ixazomib maintenance. MRD status at randomization showed independent prognostic value (median progression-free survival [PFS], 38.6 vs 15.6 months in MRD- vs MRD+ patients; HR, 0.47). However, MRD dynamics during maintenance provided more detailed risk stratification. A 14-month landmark analysis showed prolonged PFS in patients converting from MRD+ to MRD- status vs those with persistent MRD+ status (76.8% vs 27.6% 2-year PFS rates). Prolonged PFS was observed in patients with sustained MRD- status vs those converting from MRD- to MRD+ status (75.0% vs 34.2% 2-year PFS rates). Similar results were observed at a 28-month landmark analysis. Ixazomib maintenance vs placebo improved PFS in patients who were MRD+ at randomization (median, 18.8 vs 11.6 months; HR, 0.65) or at the 14-month landmark (median, 16.8 vs 10.6 months; HR, 0.65); no difference was observed in patients who were MRD-. This is the largest MM population undergoing yearly MRD evaluation during maintenance reported to date. We demonstrate the limited prognostic value of a single-time point MRD evaluation, because MRD dynamics over time substantially impact PFS risk. These findings support MRD- status as a relevant end point during maintenance and confirm the increased progression risk in patients converting to MRD+ from MRD- status. These trials were registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02181413 and #NCT02312258.

Genetic justification of COVID-19 patient outcomes using DERGA, a novel data ensemble refinement greedy algorithm.

Complement inhibition has shown promise in various disorders, including COVID-19. A prediction tool including complement genetic variants is vital. This study aims to identify crucial complement-related variants and determine an optimal pattern for accurate disease outcome prediction. Genetic data from 204 COVID-19 patients hospitalized between April 2020 and April 2021 at three referral centres were analysed using an artificial intelligence-based algorithm to predict disease outcome (ICU vs. non-ICU admission). A recently introduced alpha-index identified the 30 most predictive genetic variants. DERGA algorithm, which employs multiple classification algorithms, determined the optimal pattern of these key variants, resulting in 97% accuracy for predicting disease outcome. Individual variations ranged from 40 to 161 variants per patient, with 977 total variants detected. This study demonstrates the utility of alpha-index in ranking a substantial number of genetic variants. This approach enables the implementation of well-established classification algorithms that effectively determine the relevance of genetic variants in predicting outcomes with high accuracy.

Thrombotic and bleeding complications in patients with AL amyloidosis.

Haemostatic abnormalities and deregulated coagulation are common complications in AL amyloidosis. The relevant risks of thromboembolic and haemorrhagic events have not been thoroughly evaluated. To describe clinically significant thrombotic/haemorrhagic events in 450 consecutive patients with AL amyloidosis. Venous thromboembolic events (VTEs) were reported in 6% and arterial embolic events (AEEs) in 5% of patients, respectively, during a 55-month median follow-up. Lower albumin, lower eGFR, higher BM infiltration, soft tissue involvement, IMiD-based therapy and prior thrombosis were associated with VTE risk. Prior thrombosis was the only independent prognostic variable (HR 9.3, p = 0.001). Coronary arterial disease, prior AEE, 24-h proteinuria and higher platelet counts were associated with AEE risk. Significant bleeding events were reported in 9%, and associated mortality was 19%. Liver involvement, higher serum creatinine and higher baseline VWF:Ag levels were linked to bleeding risk. Using competing risk analysis, the cumulative probability of thrombosis/bleeding was higher during the first year following diagnosis, but a stable lower risk for both events remained for the duration of follow-up. In AL amyloidosis patients, the risk of thrombotic/arterial embolic events is significant, but the bleeding risk is also high. A multiparametric assessment is required to initiate anti-thrombotic or anti-platelet therapy appropriately.

Daratumumab-Based Treatment for Immunoglobulin Light-Chain Amyloidosis.

BACKGROUND: Systemic immunoglobulin light-chain (AL) amyloidosis is characterized by deposition of amyloid fibrils of light chains produced by clonal CD38+ plasma cells. Daratumumab, a human CD38-targeting antibody, may improve outcomes for this disease. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with newly diagnosed AL amyloidosis to receive six cycles of bortezomib, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone either alone (control group) or with subcutaneous daratumumab followed by single-agent daratumumab every 4 weeks for up to 24 cycles (daratumumab group). The primary end point was a hematologic complete response. RESULTS: A total of 388 patients underwent randomization. The median follow-up was 11.4 months. The percentage of patients who had a hematologic complete response was significantly higher in the daratumumab group than in the control group (53.3% vs. 18.1%) (relative risk ratio, 2.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.1 to 4.1; P<0.001). Survival free from major organ deterioration or hematologic progression favored the daratumumab group (hazard ratio for major organ deterioration, hematologic progression, or death, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.93; P = 0.02). At 6 months, more cardiac and renal responses occurred in the daratumumab group than in the control group (41.5% vs. 22.2% and 53.0% vs. 23.9%, respectively). The four most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were lymphopenia (13.0% in the daratumumab group and 10.1% in the control group), pneumonia (7.8% and 4.3%, respectively), cardiac failure (6.2% and 4.8%), and diarrhea (5.7% and 3.7%). Systemic administration-related reactions to daratumumab occurred in 7.3% of the patients. A total of 56 patients died (27 in the daratumumab group and 29 in the control group), most due to amyloidosis-related cardiomyopathy. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with newly diagnosed AL amyloidosis, the addition of daratumumab to bortezomib, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone was associated with higher frequencies of hematologic complete response and survival free from major organ deterioration or hematologic progression. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; ANDROMEDA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03201965.).

How I treat relapsed multiple myeloma.

Despite recent advances, multiple myeloma remains an incurable disease for most patients, and initial remission will be followed by relapses requiring therapy. For many, there will be several remissions and relapses until resistance develops to all available therapies. With the introduction of several new agents, myeloma treatment has changed drastically, and there are new options for the management of relapsed or refractory disease, including new drug classes with distinct mechanisms of action and cellular therapies. However, resistance to major drug classes used in first-line remains the most critical factor for the choice of treatment at relapse. Continuous lenalidomide-based therapy is used extensively at first-line, and resistance to lenalidomide has become the key factor for the choice of salvage therapy. Daratumumab is increasingly used in first-line, and soon patients that relapse while on daratumumab will become a common challenge. Three-drug regimens are the standard approach to manage relapsed disease. Adding drugs with new mechanisms of activity can improve outcomes and overcomes class resistance, but, until now, while biology is important, it can offer only limited guidance for the choice of therapy.

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.

Belantamab mafodotin, lenalidomide and dexamethasone in transplant-ineligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: Part 1 results of a phase I/II study.

Preclinical and clinical data demonstrate synergy between belantamab mafodotin (belamaf) and immunomodulatory drugs with limited overlapping toxicities. We investigated the safety and efficacy of belamaf with lenalidomide 25mg on days 1-21 every 28 days and dexamethasone 40mg weekly (belamaf-Rd) in transplant ineligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. 36 patients (median age 72.5 years) were randomized to receive belamaf at three different doses (2.5/1.9/1.4 mg/kg) every 8 weeks (q8w). Dosing schedule was extended to every 12 weeks (q12w) to account for ocular toxicity. Most common ≥ Grade (Gr) 3 adverse events were fatigue (n=21, 58.3%), rash (n=6, 16.7%), diarrhea (n=8, 22.2%) and COVID-19 (n=5, 13.9%). Gr 3-4 ocular adverse events (OAEs), comprising of visual acuity decline from baseline and/or keratopathy, were reported in 39/216(18.1%)/ 33/244(13.5%)/ 26/207(12.6%) ophthalmological assessments in cohorts 2.5/1.9/1.4 mg/kg. Importantly, Gr 3-4 keratopathy was identified in 9/216 (4.2%)/ 1/244(0.4%)/ 1/207(0.5%) assessments. Most patients (32/36, 88.9%) were treated in the extended q12w schedule, where dose holds due to OAEs were 40, 33 and 16 in cohorts 2.5/1.9/1.4. Overall, ≥VGPR and ≥CR rates were 83.3% and 52.8%, without significant differences among cohorts. Over a median follow-up of 20.3 months no disease progression was reported; 6 patients discontinued treatment due to infection-related death (n=4 COVID-19, n=2 pneumonia) and 1 patient withdrew consent. Based on toxicity/efficacy balance, the recommended phase 2 dose was 1.9 mg/kg q8w, extended to q12w for toxicity. Belamaf-Rd, with the extended schedule for belamaf, has shown important clinical activity and a significant improvement of OAEs with minimal impact on vision-related functioning in an elderly, non-transplant eligible population.

Belantamab mafodotin: an important treatment option for vulnerable patients with triple class exposed relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma.

Not available.

Isatuximab-pomalidomide-dexamethasone versus pomalidomide-dexamethasone in patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma: final overall survival analysis.

The primary and pre-specified updated analyses of ICARIA-MM (NCT02990338) demonstrated improved progression-free survival and a benefit in overall survival (OS) was reported with the addition of isatuximab, an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody, to pomalidomide-dexamethasone (Pd) in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. Here, we report the final OS analysis. This multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase 3 study included patients who had received and failed ≥2 previous therapies, including lenalidomide and a proteasome inhibitor. Between January 10, 2017, and February 2, 2018, 307 patients were randomized (1:1) to isatuximab-pomalidomide- dexamethasone (Isa-Pd; n = 154) or Pd (n = 153), stratified based on age (3). At data cutoff for the final OS analysis after 220 OS events (January 27, 2022), median follow-up duration was 52.4 months. Median OS (95% confidence interval) was 24.6 months (20.3-31.3 months) with Isa-Pd and 17.7 months (14.4-26.2 months) with Pd (hazard ratio = 0.78; 95% CI, 0.59-1.02; 1-sided P = 0.0319). Despite subsequent daratumumab use in the Pd group and its potential benefit on PFS in the first subsequent therapy line, median PFS2 was significantly longer with Isa-Pd vs. Pd (17.5 vs. 12.9 months; log-rank 1-sided P = 0.0091). In this analysis, Isa-Pd continued to be efficacious and well tolerated after follow-up of approximately 52 months, contributing to a clinically meaningful, 6.9-month improvement in median overall survival in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.

Efficacy and safety of daratumumab with ixazomib and dexamethasone in lenalidomide-exposed patients after one prior line of therapy: Final results of the phase 2 study DARIA.

The use of lenalidomide in frontline therapy for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) has increased the number of those who become refractory to lenalidomide at second line. In this context, we assessed the efficacy of daratumumab in combination with ixazomib and dexamethasone (Dara-Ixa-dex) in the prospective phase 2 study DARIA. Eligible patients had relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM) after one prior line with a lenalidomide-based regimen. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included survival outcomes, safety and changes in biomarkers of bone metabolism. Overall, 50 patients were enrolled (median age 69 years, 56% males). 32 (64%) patients were refractory to lenalidomide, and 17 (34%) had undergone autologous transplant. The ORR was 64% (n = 32); whereas 17 (34%) had a very good partial response or better. The median time to first response was 1.0 month. After a median follow-up of 23.4 months, the median PFS and OS were 8.1 and 39.2 months, respectively. Furthermore, significant changes in markers of bone metabolism became evident as early as at 6 months on treatment. Regarding safety, 21 (42%) patients had ≥1 grade 3/4 adverse event (AE); the most common was thrombocytopenia (n = 9, 18%). 14 (28%) patients had ≥1 serious AE (SAE), the most common being acute kidney injury and pneumonia (n = 2, each). Four patients died due to infections. In conclusion, second-line treatment with Dara-Ixa-dex in patients with RRMM pre-treated with a lenalidomide-based regimen resulted in rapid responses along with a favorable effect on bone metabolism.

Ixazomib plus daratumumab and dexamethasone: Final analysis of a phase 2 study among patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.

Novel therapies have improved outcomes for multiple myeloma (MM) patients, but most ultimately relapse, making treatment decisions for relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM) patients increasingly challenging. We report the final analysis of a single-arm, phase 2 study evaluating the oral proteasome inhibitor (PI) ixazomib combined with daratumumab and dexamethasone (IDd; NCT03439293). Sixty-one RRMM patients (ixazomib/daratumumab-naïve; 1-3 prior therapies) were enrolled to receive IDd (28-day cycles) until disease progression/unacceptable toxicity. Median age was 69 years; 14.8% of patients had International Staging System stage III disease; 14.8% had received three prior therapies. Patients received a median of 16 cycles of IDd. In 59 response-evaluable patients, the overall response rate was 64.4%; the confirmed ≥very good partial response (VGPR) rate (primary endpoint) was 30.5%. Rates of ≥VGPR in patient subgroups were: high-risk cytogenetics (n = 15, 26.7%), expanded high-risk cytogenetics (n = 24, 29.2%), aged ≥75 years (n = 12, 16.7%), lenalidomide-refractory (n = 21, 28.6%), and prior PI/IMiD therapy (n = 58, 31.0%). With a median follow-up of 31.6 months, median progression-free survival was 16.8 months (95% confidence interval: 10.1-23.7). Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in 54.1% of patients; 44.3% had serious TEAEs; TEAEs led to dose modifications/reductions/discontinuations in 62.3%/36.1%/16.4%. There were five on-study deaths. Any-grade and grade ≥3 peripheral neuropathy occurred in 18.0% and 1.6% of patients. Quality of life was generally maintained throughout treatment. IDd showed a positive risk-benefit profile in RRMM patients and was active in clinically relevant subgroups with no new safety signals.

Management of multiple myeloma-related renal impairment: recommendations from the International Myeloma Working Group.

Here, the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) updates its clinical practice recommendations for the management of multiple myeloma-related renal impairment on the basis of data published until Dec 31, 2022. All patients with multiple myeloma and renal impairment should have serum creatinine, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and free light chains (FLCs) measurements together with 24-h urine total protein, electrophoresis, and immunofixation. If non-selective proteinuria (mainly albuminuria) or involved serum FLCs value less than 500 mg/L is detected, then a renal biopsy is needed. The IMWG criteria for the definition of renal response should be used. Supportive care and high-dose dexamethasone are required for all patients with myeloma-induced renal impairment. Mechanical approaches do not increase overall survival. Bortezomib-based regimens are the cornerstone of the management of patients with multiple myeloma and renal impairment at diagnosis. New quadruplet and triplet combinations, including proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulatory drugs, and anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies, improve renal and survival outcomes in both newly diagnosed patients and those with relapsed or refractory disease. Conjugated antibodies, chimeric antigen receptor T-cells, and T-cell engagers are well tolerated and effective in patients with moderate renal impairment.

Early prediction of COVID-19 outcome using artificial intelligence techniques and only five laboratory indices.

We aimed to develop a prediction model for intensive care unit (ICU) hospitalization of Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) patients using artificial neural networks (ANN). We assessed 25 laboratory parameters at first from 248 consecutive adult COVID-19 patients for database creation, training, and development of ANN models. We developed a new alpha-index to assess association of each parameter with outcome. We used 166 records for training of computational simulations (training), 41 for documentation of computational simulations (validation), and 41 for reliability check of computational simulations (testing). The first five laboratory indices ranked by importance were Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, Lactate Dehydrogenase, Fibrinogen, Albumin, and D-Dimers. The best ANN based on these indices achieved accuracy 95.97%, precision 90.63%, sensitivity 93.55%. and F1-score 92.06%, verified in the validation cohort. Our preliminary findings reveal for the first time an ANN to predict ICU hospitalization accurately and early, using only 5 easily accessible laboratory indices.

Outcomes of patients with light chain (AL) amyloidosis after failure of daratumumab-based therapy.

As daratumumab use in AL amyloidosis increases, more patients will either relapse after or become refractory to daratumumab. We present the outcome of 33 patients with AL who failed on daratumumab (due to haematological relapse in 21 [64%] patients and inadequate haematological response in 12 [36%]) and received further treatment. Overall response rate in the post-daratumumab failure treatment was 55% (CR/VGPR: 14 [42%] and PR: 3 [9%] patients). Patients retreated with daratumumab and patients harbouring +1q21 had lower rates of response. Treatment of patients with AL who fail daratumumab therapy is feasible when non-cross-resistant drugs or other targeted therapies are available.

Outcomes for patients with systemic light chain amyloidosis and Mayo stage 3B disease.

Patients with cardiac light chain amyloidosis and Mayo stage 3b disease define a high-risk population with very poor prognosis. Here, we report treatment outcomes of 80 consecutive patients with newly diagnosed AL and Mayo 3b who received novel regimens. Early mortality (<1 month) rate was 12.5%. On intention-to-treat, overall hematologic response rate was 40%, with complete response (CR)/very good partial response (VGPR) in 25% and partial response (PR) in 15%. At 1- and 3- month landmark analysis CR or VGPR/PR rates were 25%/23.5% and 34%/25.5%, respectively. Among patients that were treated with daratumumab-based therapies, 52.6% and 85.7% achieved at least VGPR within one 1 and 3 months, respectively. Three-month cardiac response rate was 11.3% and 6-month was 18.8%. At least hemVGPR at 3 months was associated with cardiac response at 6 months (p = 0.034). Median overall survival (OS) was 6.3 months. At 1-month landmark at least hemPR was associated with better median OS (24.1 vs. 4.9 months, p = 0.017) and at 3-month landmark, at least hemVGPR was associated with a median OS of 40.7 versus 17 months for hemPR and 7.4 months for those without hematologic response (p = 0.028). Cardiac response at 3 months was associated with longer median OS (59.7 vs. 10.9 months, p = 0.044). Factors associated with poorer survival were κ-light chain amyloidosis (median OS 2.9 vs. 7.4 months, p = 0.028), peripheral nerve involvement (3.4 vs. 10.45 months, p = 0.024), systolic blood pressure <90 mmHg (2 vs. 8 months, p = 0.002), baseline LVEF <55% (median OS 3.4 vs. 32 months, p = 0.29) and New York Heart Association (NYHA) class (2.7 months for NYHA 3B-4 vs. 8 months for NYHA 2-3A, p = 0.02). Twenty-one patients (26.3%) received salvage therapy and ORR was 57.1%. Median OS for patients who received second line therapy was 24 months. In conclusion, patients with Mayo 3b disease benefit from early hematologic response but cardiac response rates remain low.

Population pharmacokinetics and exposure-response analyses of daratumumab plus pomalidomide/dexamethasone in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma.

AIM: A population pharmacokinetic (PPK) model was developed to characterize pharmacokinetics (PK) of subcutaneous or intravenous daratumumab administration in a new indication (i.e., combination with pomalidomide and dexamethasone [D-Pd] in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma [RRMM]). Analyses were conducted to explore exposure-response (E-R) relationships for efficacy and select treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). METHODS: The PPK analysis included pooled data from the D-Pd cohorts of the phase 3 APOLLO and phase 1b EQUULEUS studies. Covariates were evaluated in the PPK model. Model-predicted exposures to daratumumab were compared between covariate subgroups of interest and used to investigate relationships between daratumumab exposure and efficacy and safety in APOLLO. RESULTS: The PPK analysis included 1146 daratumumab PK samples from 239 patients (APOLLO, n = 140; EQUULEUS, n = 99). Observed concentration-time data of daratumumab were well described by a two-compartment PPK model with first-order absorption and parallel linear and nonlinear elimination pathways. Treatment with D-Pd provided similar daratumumab PK characteristics versus historical daratumumab monotherapy. The E-R dataset contained data from 290 APOLLO patients (D-Pd, n = 140; Pd, n = 150). The PK-efficacy relationship of daratumumab supported improved progression-free survival for patients in the D-Pd group vs. the Pd group. Additionally, TEAEs did not increase with increasing PK exposure in the D-Pd group. CONCLUSIONS: The PPK and E-R analyses support the daratumumab subcutaneous 1800 mg dosing regimen in combination with Pd for treatment of patients with RRMM. No dose adjustment is recommended in this indication for any of the investigated factors, none of which had clinically relevant effects on daratumumab PK.

Plain Language Summary of the iNNOVATE study: ibrutinib plus rituximab is well-tolerated and effective in people with Waldenström's macroglobulinemia.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This article provides a short summary of 5-year results from the iNNOVATE trial. The original paper was published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology in October 2021. People with Waldenström's macroglobulinemia (WM) were randomly divided into two groups of 75 people each. One group received a combination treatment composed of two drugs, ibrutinib plus rituximab, and the other group took placebo ("sugar pill") plus rituximab. Ibrutinib (also known by the brand name Imbruvica®) is a drug that reduces cancer cells' ability to multiply and survive. Ibrutinib is an FDA-approved drug for the treatment of WM. Rituximab is a drug that helps the immune system find and kill cancer cells. Participants in the trial were treated and their health monitored for up to 5 years (63 months). WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?: During the 5 years of monitoring, more people who took ibrutinib plus rituximab experienced an improvement in their disease and lived longer without their disease getting worse compared to those who took placebo plus rituximab. Side effects from ibrutinib and rituximab were manageable and generally decreased over time. Participants in both study groups reported improvements in quality of life, but those who took ibrutinib plus rituximab reported significantly greater improvement in their quality of life (as measured by FACT-An score) compared to those who took placebo plus rituximab. WHAT DO THE RESULTS MEAN?: These results show that ibrutinib plus rituximab is better than rituximab alone in people with WM and that ibrutinib plus rituximab is safe and effective in the long term. This information confirms the role of ibrutinib plus rituximab as a standard of care for WM. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02165397 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Isatuximab plus pomalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone versus pomalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone in patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (ICARIA-MM): follow-up analysis of a randomised, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: The primary analysis of the ICARIA-MM study showed significant improvement in progression-free survival with addition of isatuximab to pomalidomide-dexamethasone in relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma. Here, we report a prespecified updated overall survival analysis at 24 months after the primary analysis. METHODS: In this randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 3 study adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma who had received at least two previous lines of therapy, including lenalidomide and a proteasome inhibitor, and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 were recruited from 102 hospitals in 24 countries across Europe, North America, and the Asia-Pacific regions. Patients were excluded if they had anti-CD38 refractory disease or previously received pomalidomide. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1), using an interactive response technology with permuted blocked randomisation (block size of four) and stratified by number of previous treatment lines (2-3 vs >3) and aged (<75 vs ≥75 years), to isatuximab-pomalidomide-dexamethasone (isatuximab group) or pomalidomide-dexamethasone (control group). In the isatuximab group, intravenous isatuximab 10 mg/kg was administered on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of the first 4-week cycle, and then on days 1 and 15 of subsequent cycles. Both groups received oral pomalidomide 4 mg on days 1-21 of each cycle, and weekly oral or intravenous dexamethasone 40 mg (20 mg if aged ≥75 years) on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of each cycle. Treatment was continued until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal of consent. Here' we report a prespecified second interim analysis of overall survival (time from randomisation to any-cause death), a key secondary endpoint, in the intention-to-treat population (ie, all patients who provided informed consent and allocated a randomisation number) at 24 months after the primary analysis. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose or part dose of study treatment. The prespecified stopping boundary for the overall survival analysis was when the derived p value was equal to or less than 0·0181. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02990338, and is active, but not recruiting. FINDINGS: Between Jan 10, 2017, and Feb 2, 2018, 387 patients were screened and 307 randomly assigned to either the isatuximab (n=154) or control group (n=153). Median follow-up at data cutoff (Oct 1, 2020) was 35·3 months (IQR 33·5-37·4). Median overall survival was 24·6 months (95% CI 20·3-31·3) in the isatuximab group and 17·7 months (14·4-26·2) in the control group (hazard ratio 0·76 [95% CI 0·57-1·01]; one-sided log-rank p=0·028, not crossing prespecified stopping boundary). The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-emergent adverse events in the isatuximab group versus the control group were neutropenia (76 [50%] of 152 patients vs 52 [35%] of 149 patients), pneumonia (35 [23%] vs 31 [21%]), and thrombocytopenia (20 [13%] vs 18 [12%]). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events were observed in 111 (73%) patients in the isatuximab group and 90 (60%) patients in the control group. Two (1%) treatment-related deaths occurred in the isatuximab group (one due to sepsis and one due to cerebellar infarction) and two (1%) occurred in the control group (one due to pneumonia and one due to urinary tract infection). INTERPRETATION: Addition of isatuximab plus pomalidomide-dexamethasone resulted in a 6·9-month difference in median overall survival compared with pomalidomide-dexamethasone and is a new standard of care for lenalidomide-refractory and proteasome inhibitor-refractory or relapsed multiple myeloma. Final overall survival analysis follow-up is ongoing. FUNDING: Sanofi.