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

BACKGROUND: Bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRd) is a preferred first-line treatment option for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Whether the addition of the anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody isatuximab to the VRd regimen would reduce the risk of disease progression or death among patients ineligible to undergo transplantation is unclear. METHODS: In an international, open-label, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned, in a 3:2 ratio, patients 18 to 80 years of age with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were ineligible to undergo transplantation to receive either isatuximab plus VRd or VRd alone. The primary efficacy end point was progression-free survival. Key secondary end points included a complete response or better and minimal residual disease (MRD)-negative status in patients with a complete response. RESULTS: A total of 446 patients underwent randomization. At a median follow-up of 59.7 months, the estimated progression-free survival at 60 months was 63.2% in the isatuximab-VRd group, as compared with 45.2% in the VRd group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.60; 98.5% confidence interval, 0.41 to 0.88; P<0.001). The percentage of patients with a complete response or better was significantly higher in the isatuximab-VRd group than in the VRd group (74.7% vs. 64.1%, P = 0.01), as was the percentage of patients with MRD-negative status and a complete response (55.5% vs. 40.9%, P = 0.003). No new safety signals were observed with the isatuximab-VRd regimen. The incidence of serious adverse events during treatment and the incidence of adverse events leading to discontinuation were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Isatuximab-VRd was more effective than VRd as initial therapy in patients 18 to 80 years of age with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were ineligible to undergo transplantation. (Funded by Sanofi and a Cancer Center Support Grant; IMROZ ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03319667.).

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

The primary and prespecified updated analyses of ICARIA-MM (clinicaltrial gov. Identifier: NCT02990338) demonstrated improved progression-free survival (PFS) 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 III 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 (<75 vs. ≥75 years) and number of previous lines of therapy (2-3 vs. >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 was 24.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 20.3-31.3) with Isa-Pd and 17.7 months (95% CI: 14.4- 26.2) 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 versus 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 OS in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.

Isatuximab in combination with carfilzomib and dexamethasone in 1q21+ patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: Long-term outcomes in the Phase 3 IKEMA study.

Gain/amplification of 1q21 (≥3 copies), a chromosomal abnormality frequently observed in multiple myeloma, can negatively affect prognosis, due to its involvement in resistance to anti-myeloma therapy and disease progression. In this updated subgroup analysis of the randomized, Phase 3 IKEMA study (NCT03275285) in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM), we evaluated progression-free survival (PFS) and depth of response with the anti-CD38 antibody isatuximab plus carfilzomib-dexamethasone (Isa-Kd) versus Kd, in 1q21+ patients and related subgroups, at long-term follow-up (44.2 months). Our analysis included patients with 1q21+ (≥3 copies, with/without high-risk chromosomal abnormality [HRCA]), isolated 1q21+ (≥3 copies, without HRCA), gain(1q21) (3 copies, with/without HRCA), and amp(1q21) (≥4 copies, with/without HRCA). PFS benefit was achieved with Isa-Kd versus Kd in patients with 1q21+ (HR 0.58, 95% CI: 0.37-0.92), with isolated 1q21+ (HR 0.49, 95% CI: 0.27-0.92), with gain(1q21), or amp(1q21), consistent with the overall population and prior interim 1q21+ subgroup analyses. Median PFS with Isa-Kd versus Kd was 25.8 versus 16.2 months in 1q21+ patients and 38.2 versus 16.2 months in patients with isolated 1q21+. Clinically meaningful, higher rates of very good partial response or better, complete response or better (≥CR), minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity, and MRD negativity and ≥CR were reached with Isa-Kd versus Kd in patients with 1q21+, isolated 1q21+, gain(1q21), or amp(1q21). In Isa-Kd and Kd, the MRD negativity and ≥CR rate was 29.3% versus 15.4% in 1q21+ patients, 36.2% versus 12.9% in patients with isolated 1q21+, 27.9% versus 13.5% in patients with gain(1q21), and 31.3% versus 20.0% in patients with amp(1q21), respectively. In conclusion, addition of Isa to Kd in triplet combination therapy has shown PFS benefit and deeper responses, compared with Kd, in 1q21+ patients at higher risk of progression, including patients with isolated 1q21+, gain(1q21), and amp(1q21), thus supporting Isa-Kd an effective treatment option for patients with RRMM.

Isatuximab as monotherapy and combined with dexamethasone in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.

This phase 2 study evaluated isatuximab as monotherapy or combined with dexamethasone in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Patients had RRMM refractory to an immunomodulatory drug (IMiD) and a proteasome inhibitor (PI) or had received ≥3 prior lines of therapy incorporating an IMiD and PI. Patients received isatuximab either as monotherapy (20 mg/kg on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 [once weekly] of cycle 1 followed by 20 mg/kg on days 1 and 15 of subsequent cycles; Isa group) or in combination with dexamethasone (40 mg/d [20 mg/d in patients aged ≥75 years] once weekly; Isa-dex group). Treated patients (N = 164) had received a median of 4 (range, 2-10) prior treatment lines. Patients received a median of 5 (1-24) and 7 (1-22) treatment cycles; at data cutoff, 13 (11.9%) of 109 and 15 (27.3%) of 55 patients remained on treatment in the Isa and Isa-dex arms, respectively. Overall response rate (primary efficacy end point) was 23.9% in the Isa arm and 43.6% in the Isa-dex arm (odds ratio, 0.405; 95% confidence interval, 0.192-0.859; P = .008). Median progression-free survival and overall survival were 4.9 and 18.9 months for Isa, and 10.2 and 17.3 months for Isa-dex. Infusion reactions (mostly grade 1/2) and hematologic abnormalities were the most common adverse events. There was a similar incidence of grade 3 or higher infections in both groups (22.0% and 21.8%). In conclusion, addition of dexamethasone to isatuximab increased response rates and survival outcomes with no detrimental effect on safety. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01084252.

Isatuximab, carfilzomib, and dexamethasone in relapsed multiple myeloma (IKEMA): a multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Isatuximab is an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody approved in combination with pomalidomide-dexamethasone and carfilzomib-dexamethasone for relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. This phase 3, open-label study compared the efficacy of isatuximab plus carfilzomib-dexamethasone versus carfilzomib-dexamethasone in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma. METHODS: This was a prospective, randomised, open-label, parallel-group, phase 3 study done at 69 study centres in 16 countries across North America, South America, Europe, and the Asia-Pacific region. Patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma aged at least 18 years who had received one to three previous lines of therapy and had measurable serum or urine M-protein were eligible. Patients were randomly assigned (3:2) to isatuximab plus carfilzomib-dexamethasone (isatuximab group) or carfilzomib-dexamethasone (control group). Patients in the isatuximab group received isatuximab 10 mg/kg intravenously weekly for the first 4 weeks, then every 2 weeks. Both groups received the approved schedule of intravenous carfilzomib and oral or intravenous dexamethasone. Treatment continued until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival and was assessed in the intention-to-treat population according to assigned treatment. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose according to treatment received. The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03275285. FINDINGS: Between Nov 15, 2017, and March 21, 2019, 302 patients with a median of two previous lines of therapy were enrolled. 179 were randomly assigned to the isatuximab group and 123 to the control group. Median progression-free survival was not reached in the isatuximab group compared with 19·15 months (95% CI 15·77-not reached) in the control group, with a hazard ratio of 0·53 (99% CI 0·32-0·89; one-sided p=0·0007). Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) of grade 3 or worse occurred in 136 (77%) of 177 patients in the isatuximab group versus 82 (67%) of 122 in the control group, serious TEAEs occurred in 105 (59%) versus 70 (57%) patients, and TEAEs led to discontinuation in 15 (8%) versus 17 (14%) patients. Fatal TEAEs during study treatment occurred in six (3%) versus four (3%) patients. INTERPRETATION: The addition of isatuximab to carfilzomib-dexamethasone significantly improves progression-free survival and depth of response in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma, representing a new standard of care for this patient population. FUNDING: Sanofi. VIDEO ABSTRACT.

Anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody interference with blood compatibility testing: Differentiating isatuximab and daratumumab via functional epitope mapping.

BACKGROUND: There are two FDA-approved anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies for treatment of multiple myeloma: isatuximab and daratumumab. Owing to expression of CD38 on reagent red blood cells (RBCs), these antibodies interfere with indirect antiglobulin tests (IATs). We sought to understand differences in such interference by performing binding experiments. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: In vitro experiments to compare the binding to RBCs of isatuximab and daratumumab alone or in the presence of a mouse anti-human CD38 antibody (HB-7 or AT13/5) or a nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide-analog CD38 inhibitor were performed and quantified by flow cytometry, imaging, mass spectrometry, surface plasmon resonance, and LigandTracer technologies. Serologic testing was performed on plasma samples spiked with isatuximab or daratumumab. RESULTS: CD38 expressed on RBCs can be directly bound by daratumumab, whereas isatuximab requires a co-factor, such as HB-7, AT13/5, or a CD38 inhibitor, suggesting that the isatuximab epitope on RBCs is masked in vitro. Daratumumab samples more frequently showed interference and had stronger reactions than isatuximab samples. Dithiothreitol treatment was equally effective in mitigating the interference caused by either drug. DISCUSSION: Both isatuximab and daratumumab interfere with IATs but at different magnitudes, reflecting distinct binding to CD38 on RBCs. From the binding studies, we conclude that the isatuximab epitope on RBCs is masked in vitro and binding requires a certain CD38 conformation or co-factor. This circumstance may explain why interference is seen only in a subset of patients receiving isatuximab when compared with interference seen in most patients on daratumumab therapy.

Isatuximab plus carfilzomib and dexamethasone in relapsed multiple myeloma patients with high-risk cytogenetics: IKEMA subgroup analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The presence of high-risk chromosomal abnormalities [t(4;14), del(17p), and t(14;16)] has been linked with inferior outcomes in patients with multiple myeloma (MM). A prespecified interim analysis of the Phase 3 IKEMA study (NCT03275285) demonstrated that isatuximab (Isa) + carfilzomib (K) and dexamethasone (d; Isa-Kd) significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) versus Kd in patients with relapsed MM. This prespecified subgroup analysis of IKEMA examined efficacy and safety in patients with high-risk cytogenetics. METHODS: High-risk cytogenetics was assessed by central laboratory and patients were classified as high risk if abnormalities were present in ≥1 of the following: del(17p): 50% cutoff; t(4;14), and/or t(14;16): 30% cutoff. RESULTS: Of the randomized patients, 23.5% (Isa-Kd) and 25.2% (Kd) had ≥1 high-risk chromosomal abnormality. A PFS benefit was seen in favor of Isa-Kd for patients with standard-risk (HR 0.440; 95% CI 0.266-0.728) and high-risk cytogenetics (HR 0.724; 95% CI 0.361-1.451). Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were more common with Isa-Kd (85.7%) versus Kd (63.3%) in patients with high-risk cytogenetics; however, the incidence of serious TEAEs (64.3% vs. 66.7%) was similar. CONCLUSIONS: Isa-Kd is a new treatment option for the difficult-to-treat subgroup of patients with relapsed MM and high-risk cytogenetics.

Subgroup analysis of ICARIA-MM study in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma patients with high-risk cytogenetics.

Treatment benefit in multiple myeloma (MM) patients with high-risk cytogenetics remains suboptimal. The phase 3 ICARIA-MM trial (NCT02990338) showed that isatuximab plus pomalidomide-dexamethasone prolongs median progression-free survival (mPFS) in patients with relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM). This subgroup analysis of ICARIA-MM compared the benefit of isatuximab in high-risk [defined by the presence of del(17p), t(4;14) or t(14;16)] versus standard-risk patients. The efficacy of isatuximab in patients with gain(1q21) abnormality was also assessed in a retrospective subgroup analysis. In ICARIA-MM, 307 patients received isatuximab-pomalidomide-dexamethasone (n = 154) or pomalidomide-dexamethasone (n = 153). Isatuximab (10 mg/kg intravenously) was given weekly in the first 28-day cycle, and every other week thereafter. Standard pomalidomide-dexamethasone doses were given. Isatuximab-pomalidomide-dexamethasone improved mPFS (7·5 vs 3·7 months; HR, 0·66; 95% CI, 0·33-1·28) and overall response rate (ORR, 50·0% vs 16·7%) in high-risk patients. In patients with isolated gain(1q21), isatuximab addition improved mPFS (11·2 vs 4·6 months; HR, 0·50; 95% CI, 0·28-0·88) and ORR (53·6% vs 27·6%). More grade ≥3 adverse events occurred in high-risk patients receiving isatuximab (95·7%) versus the control group (67·6%); however, isatuximab did not increase events leading to discontinuation or treatment-related mortality. Isatuximab-pomalidomide-dexamethasone provides a consistent benefit over pomalidomide-dexamethasone treatment in RRMM patients regardless of cytogenetic risk.

Validated Method Based on Immunocapture and Liquid Chromatography Coupled to High-Resolution Mass Spectrometry to Eliminate Isatuximab Interference with M-Protein Measurement in Serum.

In multiple myeloma (MM) disease, malignant plasma cells produce excessive quantities of a monoclonal immunoglobulin (Ig), known as M-protein. M-protein levels are measured in the serum of patients with MM using electrophoresis techniques to determine the response to treatment. However, therapeutic monoclonal antibodies, such as isatuximab, may confound signals using electrophoresis assays. We developed a robust assay based on immunocapture and liquid chromatography coupled to high-resolution mass spectrometry (IC-HPLC-HRMS) in order to eliminate this interference. Following immunocapture of Ig and free light chains (LC) in serum, heavy chains (HC) and LC were dissociated using dithiothreitol, sorted by liquid chromatography and analyzed using HRMS (Q-Orbitrap). This method allowed the M-proteins to be characterized and the signals from isatuximab and M-proteins to be discriminated. As M-protein is specific to each patient, no standards were available for absolute quantification. We therefore used alemtuzumab (an IgG kappa mAb) as a surrogate analyte for the semiquantification of M-protein in serum. This assay was successfully validated in terms of selectivity/specificity, accuracy/precision, robustness, dilution linearity, and matrix variability from 10.0 to 200 µg/mL in human serum. This method was used for clinical assessment of samples and eliminated potential interference due to isatuximab when monitoring patients with MM.

Isatuximab for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: review of key subgroup analyses from the Phase III ICARIA-MM study.

In the Phase III ICARIA-MM study (NCT02990338), the addition of the anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody isatuximab to pomalidomide and dexamethasone led to increased progression-free survival and improved response rates in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. There is an unmet treatment need, particularly among patients with poor prognoses, including those with high-risk cytogenetics, those who have renal impairment, those who are elderly and those who are refractory to prior lines of treatment. In this review, the subgroup analyses from the ICARIA-MM study, representing subpopulations with poor prognostic factors, are discussed. Overall, the addition of isatuximab to pomalidomide and dexamethasone improved progression-free survival and disease response rates across different subgroups, regardless of prognostic factor.

Lay abstract Currently, the majority of patients with multiple myeloma are not cured, and current treatments may not be helpful for patients with poor prognoses, including those with high-risk chromosomal changes, those who have impaired kidney function, those who are elderly and those who are refractory to prior treatments. In this review, we will discuss the benefits of the combination of isatuximab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone in these difficult-to-treat patients.

Isatuximab monotherapy in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: A Japanese, multicenter, phase 1/2, safety and efficacy study.

Isatuximab, an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody, targets cells that strongly express CD38 including malignant plasma cells. This open-label, single-arm, multicenter, phase 1/2 trial investigated the tolerability/safety and efficacy of isatuximab monotherapy in Japanese patients with heavily pretreated, relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). In Phase 1, patients were sequentially assigned to receive isatuximab once weekly (QW) in cycle 1 (4 weeks) and every 2 weeks (Q2W) in subsequent cycles. Cohort 1 (n = 3) received 10 mg/kg QW/Q2W; cohort 2 (n = 5) received 20 mg/kg QW/Q2W. No dose-limiting toxicities occurred; the recommended dose for the single-arm phase 2 study (n = 28) was 20 mg/kg QW/Q2W. The overall safety profile was consistent with the current knowledge of isatuximab. The most common adverse events were infusion reactions (42.9%; 12/28); all were grade 1/2 and generally occurred during the first infusion. The overall response rate with 20 mg/kg QW/Q2W isatuximab was 36.4% (12/33); patients with high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities had comparable results. In phase 2, the median progression-free survival was 4.7 (95% confidence interval, 3.75 to not reached) months. Median overall survival was not reached. Isatuximab monotherapy was well tolerated and effective in patients with heavily pretreated RRMM including high-risk cytogenetic patients. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT02812706.

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

BACKGROUND: Isatuximab is a monoclonal antibody that binds a specific epitope on the human CD38 receptor and has antitumour activity via multiple mechanisms of action. In a previous phase 1b study, around 65% of patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma achieved an overall response with a combination of isatuximab with pomalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone. The aim of this study was to determine the progression-free survival benefit of isatuximab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone compared with pomalidomide and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma. METHODS: We did a randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 3 study at 102 hospitals in 24 countries in Europe, North America, and the Asia-Pacific regions. Eligible participants were adult patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma who had received at least two previous lines of treatment, including lenalidomide and a proteasome inhibitor. Patients were excluded if they were refractory to previous treatment with an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody. We randomly assigned patients (1:1) to either isatuximab 10 mg/kg plus pomalidomide 4 mg plus dexamethasone 40 mg (20 mg for patients aged ≥75 years), or pomalidomide 4 mg plus dexamethasone 40 mg. Randomisation was done using interactive response technology and stratified according to the number of previous lines of treatment (2-3 vs >3) and age (<75 years vs ≥75 years). Treatments were assigned based on a permuted blocked randomisation scheme with a block size of four. The isatuximab-pomalidomide-dexamethasone group received isatuximab intravenously on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 in the first 28-day cycle, then on days 1 and 15 in subsequent cycles. Both groups received oral pomalidomide on days 1 to 21 in each cycle, and oral or intravenous dexamethasone on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of each cycle. Treatment continued until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or consent withdrawal. Dose reductions for adverse reactions were permitted for pomalidomide and dexamethasone, but not for isatuximab. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, determined by an independent response committee and assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all participants who received at least one dose of study drug. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02990338. FINDINGS: Between Jan 10, 2017, and Feb 2, 2018, we randomly assigned 307 patients to treatment: 154 to isatuximab-pomalidomide-dexamethasone, and 153 to pomalidomide-dexamethasone. At a median follow-up of 11·6 months (IQR 10·1-13·9), median progression-free survival was 11·5 months (95% CI 8·9-13·9) in the isatuximab-pomalidomide-dexamethasone group versus 6·5 months (4·5-8·3) in the pomalidomide-dexamethasone group; hazard ratio 0·596, 95% CI 0·44-0·81; p=0·001 by stratified log-rank test. The most frequent treatment-emergent adverse events (any grade; isatuximab-pomalidomide-dexamethasone vs pomalidomide-dexamethasone) were infusion reactions (56 [38%] vs 0), upper respiratory tract infections (43 [28%] vs 26 [17%]), and diarrhoea (39 [26%] vs 29 [20%]). Adverse events with a fatal outcome were reported in 12 patients (8%) in the isatuximab-pomalidomide-dexamethasone group and 14 (9%) in the pomalidomide-dexamethasone group. Deaths due to treatment-related adverse events were reported for one patient (<1%) in the isatuximab-pomalidomide-dexamethasone group (sepsis) and two (1%) in the pomalidomide-dexamethasone group (pneumonia and urinary tract infection). INTERPRETATION: The addition of isatuximab to pomalidomide-dexamethasone significantly improves progression-free survival in patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma. Isatuximab is an important new treatment option for the management of relapsed and refractory myeloma, particularly for patients who become refractory to lenalidomide and a proteasome inhibitor. FUNDING: Sanofi. VIDEO ABSTRACT.

A phase I study of the HDM2 antagonist SAR405838 combined with the MEK inhibitor pimasertib in patients with advanced solid tumours.

BACKGROUND: This phase I, open-label, dose-escalation study evaluated the safety, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of combination therapy with the HDM2 inhibitor SAR405838 and the MEK1/2 inhibitor pimasertib administered orally once daily (QD) or twice daily (BID) in locally advanced or metastatic solid tumours (NCT01985191). METHODS: Patients with locally advanced or metastatic solid tumours with documented wild-type TP53 and RAS or RAF mutations were enroled. A 3 + 3 dose-escalation design was employed. The primary objective was to assess maximum tolerated dose (MTD). RESULTS: Twenty-six patients were treated with SAR405838 200 or 300 mg QD plus pimasertib 60 mg QD or 45 mg BID. The MTD was SAR405838 200 mg QD plus pimasertib 45 mg BID. The most common dose-limiting toxicity was thrombocytopenia. The most frequently occurring treatment-related adverse events were diarrhoea (81%), increased blood creatine phosphokinase (77%), nausea (62%) and vomiting (62%). No significant drug-drug interactions were observed. The biomarkers MIC-1 and pERK were, respectively, upregulated and downregulated in response to study treatment. In 24 efficacy-evaluable patients, one patient (4%) had a partial response and 63% had stable disease. CONCLUSIONS: The safety profile of SAR405838 and pimasertib combined was consistent with the safety profiles of both drugs. Preliminary antitumour activity was observed.

Prescribing of Electronic Activity Monitors in Cardiometabolic Diseases: Qualitative Interview-Based Study.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of noncommunicable diseases, including those such as type 2 diabetes, obesity, dyslipidemia, and hypertension, so-called cardiometabolic diseases, is high and is increasing worldwide. Strong evidence supports the role of physical activity in management of these diseases. There is general consensus that mHealth technology, including electronic activity monitors, can potentially increase physical activity in patients, but their use in clinical settings remains limited. Practitioners' requirements when prescribing electronic activity monitors have been poorly described. OBJECTIVE: The aims of this qualitative study were (1) to explore how specialist physicians prescribe electronic activity monitors to patients presenting with cardiometabolic conditions, and (2) to better understand their motivation for and barriers to prescribing such monitors. METHODS: We conducted qualitative semistructured interviews in March to May 2016 with 11 senior physicians from a public university hospital in France with expertise in management of cardiometabolic diseases (type 1 and type 2 diabetes, obesity, hypertension, and dyslipidemia). Interviews lasted 45 to 60 minutes and were audiotaped, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using directed content analysis. We report our findings following the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research (COREQ) checklist. RESULTS: Most physicians we interviewed had never prescribed electronic activity monitors, whereas they frequently prescribed blood glucose or blood pressure self-monitoring devices. Reasons for nonprescription included lack of interest in the data collected, lack of evidence for data accuracy, concern about work overload possibly resulting from automatic data transfer, and risk of patients becoming addicted to data. Physicians expected future marketing of easy-to-use monitors that will accurately measure physical activity duration and intensity and provide understandable motivating feedback. CONCLUSIONS: Features of electronic activity monitors, although popular among the general public, do not meet the needs of physicians. In-depth understanding of physicians' expectations is a first step toward designing technologies that can be widely used in clinical settings and facilitate physical activity prescription. Physicians should have a role, along with key health care stakeholders-patients, researchers, information technology firms, the public, and private payers-in developing the most effective methods for integrating activity monitors into patient care.

Phase I dose-escalation study of pilaralisib (SAR245408, XL147), a pan-class I PI3K inhibitor, in combination with erlotinib in patients with solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: This phase I study evaluated the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), and pharmacodynamics of pilaralisib (SAR245408), an oral pan-class I phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K) inhibitor, in combination with erlotinib, an epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitor. METHODS: In a 3 + 3 dose-escalation study, patients with advanced solid tumors received pilaralisib capsules once daily (21 days per 28-day cycle; 50-600 mg) plus erlotinib tablets once daily (28 days per 28-day cycle; 100 or 150 mg). An MTD expansion cohort of patients with non-small cell lung cancer who had previously received treatment with an EGFR inhibitor was included. RESULTS: Thirty-five patients were enrolled. Only one patient had an EGFR activating mutation. One dose-limiting toxicity was reported (grade 4 drug reaction or rash with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms). MTD was pilaralisib 400 mg plus erlotinib 150 mg. The most commonly reported treatment-related adverse events were rash (62.9%), diarrhea (42.9%), and fatigue (40.0%). Pilaralisib PK findings were consistent with previous studies, suggesting erlotinib had no effect on pilaralisib pharmacokinetics. Pharmacodynamic analyses indicated moderate inhibition of PI3K, mitogen-activated protein kinase, and EGFR pathways. Of 27 evaluable patients, one had a partial response (3.7%) and 14 (51.9%) had stable disease. There was no association between molecular alterations of PI3K pathway components and clinical activity. CONCLUSION: Pilaralisib plus erlotinib had limited antitumor activity. Safety findings were similar to recent studies of single-agent pilaralisib or other PI3K inhibitors.

Phase I/II dose-escalation study of PI3K inhibitors pilaralisib or voxtalisib in combination with letrozole in patients with hormone-receptor-positive and HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer refractory to a non-steroidal aromatase inhibitor.

This phase I/II dose-escalation study evaluated the efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics of pilaralisib (SAR245408), a pan-class I phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K) inhibitor, or voxtalisib (SAR245409), a PI3K and mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor, in combination with letrozole in hormone-receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative, non-steroidal aromatase inhibitor-refractory, recurrent or metastatic breast cancer. Maximum tolerated doses (MTDs) were determined using a 3 + 3 design in phase I. Efficacy was evaluated at the MTDs in phase II. Twenty-one patients were enrolled in phase I; MTDs were determined to be pilaralisib tablets 400 mg once daily (QD) or voxtalisib capsules 50 mg twice daily in combination with letrozole tablets 2.5 mg QD. Fifty-one patients were enrolled in phase II; one patient had a partial response in the pilaralisib arm. Rates of progression-free survival at 6 months were 17 and 8 % in the pilaralisib and voxtalisib arms, respectively. The most frequently reported treatment-related grade ≥ 3 adverse events were aspartate aminotransferase increased (5 %) and rash (5 %) in the pilaralisib arm, and alanine aminotransferase increased (11 %) and rash (9 %) in the voxtalisib arm. Pilaralisib and voxtalisib did not interact pharmacokinetically with letrozole. Pilaralisib had a greater pharmacodynamic impact than voxtalisib, as demonstrated by its impact on glucose homeostasis. There was no association between molecular alterations in the PI3K pathway and efficacy. In summary, pilaralisib or voxtalisib, in combination with letrozole, was associated with an acceptable safety profile and limited efficacy in endocrine therapy-resistant HR+ , HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer.

Isatuximab-Specific Immunofixation Electrophoresis Assay to Remove Interference in Serum M-Protein Measurement in Patients with Multiple Myeloma.

BACKGROUND: Isatuximab, an IgG-kappa (IgGκ) anti-cluster of differentiation 38 (CD38) monoclonal antibody approved for use in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (MM), can potentially interfere with the visualization of endogenous monoclonal protein (M-protein) on standard immunofixation electrophoresis (IFE) and lead to inaccurate classification of a patient's response to therapy. The Hydrashift 2/4 isatuximab IFE assay (Hydrashift isatuximab assay) removes isatuximab interference from IFE. Using samples from patients enrolled in clinical trials of isatuximab-based therapy for MM, we demonstrate how the Hydrashift isatuximab assay improves the ability to detect residual M-protein and offer recommendations for when the assay is most useful. METHODS: Samples from 141 patients with a variety of known M-protein isotypes were selected and analyzed by standard IFE and the Hydrashift isatuximab assay. A positive control containing isatuximab was run on every standard IFE and Hydrashift gel. RESULTS: The Hydrashift isatuximab assay reliably shifted the migration of isatuximab in patient samples. Standard IFE was adequate for determining 104 patients' M-protein status, and the Hydrashift isatuximab assay confirmed these results. In samples from 37 patients with a history of IgGκ MM and a single IgGκ band visible on standard IFE near the isatuximab migration site, the Hydrashift isatuximab assay was able to separate isatuximab from endogenous M-protein, identifying residual M-protein in 17 samples and preventing false-positive interpretations of standard IFE in 20 samples. CONCLUSIONS: The Hydrashift isatuximab assay is most useful in patients with known IgGκ MM when a single IgGκ band appears near the isatuximab migration site on standard IFE during isatuximab-based therapy. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV REGISTRATION NUMBERS: NCT03275285 and NCT03319667.

A sensitive high-resolution mass spectrometry method for quantifying intact M-protein light chains in patients with multiple myeloma.

To determine the disease status and the response to treatment for patients with multiple myeloma, measuring serum M-protein levels is a widely used alternative to invasive punctures to count malignant plasma cells in the bone marrow. However, the quantification of this monoclonal antibody, which varies from patient to patient, poses significant analytical challenges. This paper describes a sensitive and specific mass spectrometry assay that addresses two objectives: to overcome the potential interference of biotherapeutics in the measurement of M-proteins, and to determine the depth of response to treatment by assessing minimal residual disease. After immunocapture of immunoglobulins and free light chains in serum, heavy and light chains were dissociated by chemical reduction and separated by liquid chromatography. M-proteins were analyzed by high-resolution mass spectrometry using a method combining a full MS scan for isotyping and identification and a targeted single ion monitoring scan for quantification. This method was able to discriminate M-protein from the therapeutic antibody in all patient samples analyzed and allowed quantification of M-protein with a LLOQ of 2.0 to 3.5 µg/ml in 5 out of 6 patients. This methodology appears to be promising for assessing minimal residual disease with sufficient sensitivity, specificity, and throughput.

Isatuximab in combination with cemiplimab in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: A phase 1/2 study.

BACKGROUND: Given the incurable nature of multiple myeloma (MM), efforts are made to improve the efficacy of anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies via combinations with other potentially synergistic therapies. This Phase 1/2 trial (NCT03194867) was designed to determine whether cemiplimab (anti-PD-1) enhances the anti-myeloma activity of isatuximab (anti-CD38) in patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM), to confirm the feasibility of the combination, determine its efficacy, and further evaluate its safety. METHODS: Patients received isatuximab 10 mg/kg once weekly for 4 weeks followed by every 2 weeks (Isa), or isatuximab 10 mg/kg plus cemiplimab 250 mg every 2 (Isa + CemiQ2W) or every 4 weeks (Isa + CemiQ4W). RESULTS: Overall, 106 patients with RRMM treated with a median of 4 prior lines were included; 25.5% had high-risk cytogenetics, 63.2% were refractory to proteasome inhibitors and immunomodulatory agents, 26.4% were previously exposed to daratumumab, and 84.0% were refractory to their last treatment line. There were no major changes in the safety or pharmacokinetic profile of isatuximab with the addition of cemiplimab. As assessed by investigators, four patients (11.8%) in the Isa arm, nine patients (25.0%) in the Isa + CemiQ2W arm, and eight patients (22.2%) in the Isa + CemiQ4W arm were responders. Though response rates were numerically higher in cemiplimab-containing arms, differences were not statistically significant and did not translate to improved progression-free or overall survival after a median follow-up of 9.99 months. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest a marginal benefit by adding cemiplimab to isatuximab, despite demonstration of target engagement, without additional observed safety issues.