Mezigdomide plus Dexamethasone in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma.

BACKGROUND: Despite recent progress, multiple myeloma remains incurable. Mezigdomide is a novel cereblon E3 ubiquitin ligase modulator with potent antiproliferative and tumoricidal activity in preclinical models of multiple myeloma, including those resistant to lenalidomide and pomalidomide. METHODS: In this phase 1-2 study, we administered oral mezigdomide in combination with dexamethasone to patients with relapsed and refractory myeloma. The primary objectives of phase 1 (dose-escalation cohort) were to assess safety and pharmacokinetics and to identify the dose and schedule for phase 2. In phase 2 (dose-expansion cohort), objectives included the assessment of the overall response (partial response or better), safety, and efficacy of mezigdomide plus dexamethasone at the dose and schedule determined in phase 1. RESULTS: In phase 1, a total of 77 patients were enrolled in the study. The most common dose-limiting toxic effects were neutropenia and febrile neutropenia. On the basis of the phase 1 findings, investigators determined the recommended phase 2 dose of mezigdomide to be 1.0 mg, given once daily in combination with dexamethasone for 21 days, followed by 7 days off, in each 28-day cycle. In phase 2, a total of 101 patients received the dose identified in phase 1 in the same schedule. All patients in the dose-expansion cohort had triple-class-refractory multiple myeloma, 30 patients (30%) had received previous anti-B-cell maturation antigen (anti-BCMA) therapy, and 40 (40%) had plasmacytomas. The most common adverse events, almost all of which proved to be reversible, included neutropenia (in 77% of the patients) and infection (in 65%; grade 3, 29%; grade 4, 6%). No unexpected toxic effects were encountered. An overall response occurred in 41% of the patients (95% confidence interval [CI], 31 to 51), the median duration of response was 7.6 months (95% CI, 5.4 to 9.5; data not mature), and the median progression-free survival was 4.4 months (95% CI, 3.0 to 5.5), with a median follow-up of 7.5 months (range, 0.5 to 21.9). CONCLUSIONS: The all-oral combination of mezigdomide plus dexamethasone showed promising efficacy in patients with heavily pretreated multiple myeloma, with treatment-related adverse events consisting mainly of myelotoxic effects. (Funded by Celgene, a Bristol-Myers Squibb Company; CC-92480-MM-001 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03374085; EudraCT number, 2017-001236-19.).

Loss of GABARAP mediates resistance to immunogenic chemotherapy in multiple myeloma.

ABSTRACT: Immunogenic cell death (ICD) is a form of cell death by which cancer treatments can induce a clinically relevant antitumor immune response in a broad range of cancers. In multiple myeloma (MM), the proteasome inhibitor bortezomib is an ICD inducer and creates durable therapeutic responses in patients. However, eventual relapse and resistance to bortezomib appear inevitable. Here, by integrating patient transcriptomic data with an analysis of calreticulin (CRT) protein interactors, we found that GABA type A receptor-associated protein (GABARAP) is a key player whose loss prevented tumor cell death from being perceived as immunogenic after bortezomib treatment. GABARAP is located on chromosome 17p, which is commonly deleted in patients with high risk MM. GABARAP deletion impaired the exposure of the eat-me signal CRT on the surface of dying MM cells in vitro and in vivo, thus reducing tumor cell phagocytosis by dendritic cells and the subsequent antitumor T-cell response. Low GABARAP was independently associated with shorter survival in patients with MM and reduced tumor immune infiltration. Mechanistically, we found that GABARAP deletion blocked ICD signaling by decreasing autophagy and altering Golgi apparatus morphology, with consequent defects in the downstream vesicular transport of CRT. Conversely, upregulating autophagy using rapamycin restored Golgi morphology, CRT exposure, and ICD signaling in GABARAPKO cells undergoing bortezomib treatment. Therefore, coupling an ICD inducer, such as bortezomib, with an autophagy inducer, such as rapamycin, may improve patient outcomes in MM, in which low GABARAP in the form of del(17p) is common and leads to worse outcomes.

BET bromodomain inhibition as a therapeutic strategy to target c-Myc.

MYC contributes to the pathogenesis of a majority of human cancers, yet strategies to modulate the function of the c-Myc oncoprotein do not exist. Toward this objective, we have targeted MYC transcription by interfering with chromatin-dependent signal transduction to RNA polymerase, specifically by inhibiting the acetyl-lysine recognition domains (bromodomains) of putative coactivator proteins implicated in transcriptional initiation and elongation. Using a selective small-molecule bromodomain inhibitor, JQ1, we identify BET bromodomain proteins as regulatory factors for c-Myc. BET inhibition by JQ1 downregulates MYC transcription, followed by genome-wide downregulation of Myc-dependent target genes. In experimental models of multiple myeloma, a Myc-dependent hematologic malignancy, JQ1 produces a potent antiproliferative effect associated with cell-cycle arrest and cellular senescence. Efficacy of JQ1 in three murine models of multiple myeloma establishes the therapeutic rationale for BET bromodomain inhibition in this disease and other malignancies characterized by pathologic activation of c-Myc.

Triplet Therapy, Transplantation, and Maintenance until Progression in Myeloma.

BACKGROUND: In patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, the effect of adding autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) to triplet therapy (lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone [RVD]), followed by lenalidomide maintenance therapy until disease progression, is unknown. METHODS: In this phase 3 trial, adults (18 to 65 years of age) with symptomatic myeloma received one cycle of RVD. We randomly assigned these patients, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive two additional RVD cycles plus stem-cell mobilization, followed by either five additional RVD cycles (the RVD-alone group) or high-dose melphalan plus ASCT followed by two additional RVD cycles (the transplantation group). Both groups received lenalidomide until disease progression, unacceptable side effects, or both. The primary end point was progression-free survival. RESULTS: Among 357 patients in the RVD-alone group and 365 in the transplantation group, at a median follow-up of 76.0 months, 328 events of disease progression or death occurred; the risk was 53% higher in the RVD-alone group than in the transplantation group (hazard ratio, 1.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.23 to 1.91; P<0.001); median progression-free survival was 46.2 months and 67.5 months. The percentage of patients with a partial response or better was 95.0% in the RVD-alone group and 97.5% in the transplantation group (P = 0.55); 42.0% and 46.8%, respectively, had a complete response or better (P = 0.99). Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred in 78.2% and 94.2%, respectively; 5-year survival was 79.2% and 80.7% (hazard ratio for death, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.65). CONCLUSIONS: Among adults with multiple myeloma, RVD plus ASCT was associated with longer progression-free survival than RVD alone. No overall survival benefit was observed. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and others; DETERMINATION ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01208662.).

High-dose melphalan treatment significantly increases mutational burden at relapse in multiple myeloma.

High-dose melphalan (HDM) improves progression-free survival in multiple myeloma (MM), yet melphalan is a DNA-damaging alkylating agent; therefore, we assessed its mutational effect on surviving myeloma cells by analyzing paired MM samples collected at diagnosis and relapse in the IFM 2009 study. We performed deep whole-genome sequencing on samples from 68 patients, 43 of whom were treated with RVD (lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone) and 25 with RVD + HDM. Although the number of mutations was similar at diagnosis in both groups (7137 vs 7230; P = .67), the HDM group had significantly more mutations at relapse (9242 vs 13 383, P = .005). No change in the frequency of copy number alterations or structural variants was observed. The newly acquired mutations were typically associated with DNA damage and double-stranded breaks and were predominantly on the transcribed strand. A machine learning model, using this unique pattern, predicted patients who would receive HDM with high sensitivity, specificity, and positive prediction value. Clonal evolution analysis showed that all patients treated with HDM had clonal selection, whereas a static progression was observed with RVD. A significantly higher percentage of mutations were subclonal in the HDM cohort. Intriguingly, patients treated with HDM who achieved complete remission (CR) had significantly more mutations at relapse yet had similar survival rates as those treated with RVD who achieved CR. This similarity could have been due to HDM relapse samples having significantly more neoantigens. Overall, our study identifies increased genomic changes associated with HDM and provides rationale to further understand clonal complexity.

Post hoc analysis of daratumumab plus lenalidomide, bortezomib and dexamethasone in Black patients from final data of the GRIFFIN study.

Due in part to racial disparities and underrepresentation in clinical studies, optimal therapies for Black patients with multiple myeloma remain undefined. This final analysis of GRIFFIN by race showed that the addition of daratumumab (D) to lenalidomide/bortezomib/dexamethasone (RVd) provides clinical benefit among both Black and White transplant-eligible newly diagnosed patients compared with RVd alone. However, Black patients were more likely to discontinue ≥1 drug due to treatment-emergent adverse events. In summary, these findings suggest a benefit of D-RVd front-line therapy among Black and White patients and underscore the importance of equitable treatment access for all patients.

Cabotegravir for HIV Prevention in Cisgender Men and Transgender Women.

BACKGROUND: Safe and effective long-acting injectable agents for preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection are needed to increase the options for preventing HIV infection. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, noninferiority trial to compare long-acting injectable cabotegravir (CAB-LA, an integrase strand-transfer inhibitor [INSTI]) at a dose of 600 mg, given intramuscularly every 8 weeks, with daily oral tenofovir disoproxil fumarate-emtricitabine (TDF-FTC) for the prevention of HIV infection in at-risk cisgender men who have sex with men (MSM) and in at-risk transgender women who have sex with men. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive one of the two regimens and were followed for 153 weeks. HIV testing and safety evaluations were performed. The primary end point was incident HIV infection. RESULTS: The intention-to-treat population included 4566 participants who underwent randomization; 570 (12.5%) identified as transgender women, and the median age was 26 years (interquartile range, 22 to 32). The trial was stopped early for efficacy on review of the results of the first preplanned interim end-point analysis. Among 1698 participants from the United States, 845 (49.8%) identified as Black. Incident HIV infection occurred in 52 participants: 13 in the cabotegravir group (incidence, 0.41 per 100 person-years) and 39 in the TDF-FTC group (incidence, 1.22 per 100 person-years) (hazard ratio, 0.34; 95% confidence interval, 0.18 to 0.62). The effect was consistent across prespecified subgroups. Injection-site reactions were reported in 81.4% of the participants in the cabotegravir group and in 31.3% of those in the TDF-FTC group. In the participants in whom HIV infection was diagnosed after exposure to CAB-LA, INSTI resistance and delays in the detection of HIV infection were noted. No safety concerns were identified. CONCLUSIONS: CAB-LA was superior to daily oral TDF-FTC in preventing HIV infection among MSM and transgender women. Strategies are needed to prevent INSTI resistance in cases of CAB-LA PrEP failure. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and others; HPTN 083 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02720094.).

Adjusting for subsequent therapies in the TOURMALINE-MM1 study shows clinically meaningful improvement in overall survival with addition of ixazomib to lenalidomide and dexamethasone.

TOURMALINE-MM1, the only blinded randomized study in patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM; ≥1 prior therapy) in the last 10 years, investigated ixazomib+lenalidomide+dexamethasone (IRd) versus lenalidomide+dexamethasone (Rd). Final overall survival (OS) data were based on a median follow-up of 85 months. In RRMM trials where patients have had 1-3 relapses after initial treatment, a high proportion receive subsequent therapy. Application of salvage therapies in blinded trials and newer modes of therapy can increasingly complicate the interpretation of OS. This analysis explores the impact of subsequent therapies on OS outcomes in TOURMALINE-MM1. The inverse probability of censoring weights (IPCW) method, marginal structural model (MSM), and rank preserving structural failure time model (RPSFTM) were utilized to adjust for confounding on OS, introduced by subsequent therapies. Analyses were conducted for the intentto-treat (ITT) population and ≥2 prior lines subgroup. Unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) for IRd versus Rd was 0.94 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.78-1.13) in the ITT population. After adjusting for the impact of subsequent therapies by the RPSFTM method, estimated HR for IRd versus Rd in the ITT population was 0.89 (95% CI: 0.74-1.07). Adjusting with IPCW and MSM methods also showed an improvement in HR, favoring IRd. IRd may be particularly beneficial in patients with ≥2 prior lines of therapy (IPCW and MSM HR=0.52, 95% CI: 0.30-0.88; RPSFTM HR=0.68, 95% CI: 0.51-0.91). These analyses highlight the growing challenge of demonstrating OS benefit in multiple myeloma patients and the importance of assessing confounding introduced by subsequent therapies when interpreting OS.

ANCHOR: melflufen plus dexamethasone and daratumumab or bortezomib in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: final results of a phase I/IIa study.

Melphalan flufenamide (melflufen), a first-in-class, alkylating peptide-drug conjugate, demonstrated clinical benefit in combination with dexamethasone in triple-class refractory multiple myeloma (MM). The phase I/IIa ANCHOR study evaluated melflufen (30 or 40 mg) and dexamethasone (40 mg with daratumumab; 20 mg followed by 40 mg with bortezomib; dose reduced if aged ≥75 years) in triplet combination with daratumumab (16 mg/kg; daratumumab arm) or bortezomib (1.3 mg/m2; bortezomib arm) in patients with relapsed/refractory MM refractory to an immunomodulatory agent and/or a proteasome inhibitor and who had received one to four prior lines of therapy. Primary objectives were to determine the optimal dose of melflufen in triplet combination (phase I) and overall response rate (phase IIa). In total, 33 patients were treated in the daratumumab arm and 23 patients received therapy in the bortezomib arm. No dose-limiting toxicities were reported at either melflufen dose level with either combination. With both triplet regimens, the most common grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events were thrombocytopenia and neutropenia; thrombocytopenia was the most common treatment-emergent adverse event leading to treatment discontinuation. In the daratumumab arm, patients receiving melflufen 30 mg remained on treatment longer than those receiving the 40-mg dose. In the daratumumab arm, the overall response rate was 73% and median progression-free survival was 12.9 months. Notably, in the bortezomib arm, the overall response rate was 78% and median progression-free survival was 14.7 months. Considering the totality of the data, melflufen 30 mg was established as the recommended dose for use with dexamethasone and daratumumab or bortezomib for future studies in relapsed/refractory MM.

Efficacy and safety of melflufen plus daratumumab and dexamethasone in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: results from the randomized, open-label, phase III LIGHTHOUSE study.

Melphalan flufenamide (melflufen), a first-in-class alkylating peptide-drug conjugate, plus dexamethasone was approved in Europe for use in patients with triple-class refractory relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) with ≥3 prior lines of therapy and without prior autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) or with a time to progression >36 months after prior ASCT. The randomized LIGHTHOUSE study (NCT04649060) assessed melflufen plus daratumumab and dexamethasone (melflufen group) versus daratumumab in patients with RRMM with disease refractory to an immunomodulatory agent and a proteasome inhibitor or who had received ≥3 prior lines of therapy including an immunomodulatory agent and a proteasome inhibitor. A partial clinical hold issued by the US Food and Drug Administration for all melflufen studies led to financial constraints and premature study closure on February 23rd 2022 (data cut-off date). In total, 54 of 240 planned patients were randomized (melflufen group, N=27; daratumumab group, N=27). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was not reached in the melflufen group versus 4.9 months in the daratumumab group (Hazard Ratio: 0.18 [95% Confidence Interval, 0.05-0.65]; P=0.0032) at a median follow-up time of 7.1 and 6.6 months, respectively. Overall response rate (ORR) was 59% in the melflufen group versus 30% in the daratumumab group (P=0.0300). The most common grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events in the melflufen group versus daratumumab group were neutropenia (50% vs. 12%), thrombocytopenia (50% vs. 8%), and anemia (32% vs. 19%). Melflufen plus daratumumab and dexamethasone demonstrated superior PFS and ORR versus daratumumab in RRMM and a safety profile comparable to previously published melflufen studies.

Use of defibrotide in COVID-19 pneumonia: comparison of a phase II study and a matched real-world cohort control.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic led to an unprecedented burden on healthcare systems around the world and a severe global socioeconomic crisis, with more than 750 million confirmed cases and at least 7 million deaths reported by 31st December 2023. The DEFI-VID19 study (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04335201), a phase II, single-arm, multicenter, open-label trial was designed in mid-2020 to assess the safety and efficacy of defibrotide in treating patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Defibrotide was administered at a dose of 25 mg/kg/d intravenously, divided into four daily doses over a planned 14-day period for patients with COVID-19 pneumonia receiving non-invasive ventilation. The primary endpoint was Respiratory Failure Free Survival (RFFS); Overall Survival (OS), the number of post-recovery days, and adverse events were the secondary endpoints. For comparison, a contemporaneous control cohort receiving standard of care only was retrospectively selected by applying the eligibility criteria of the DEFI-VID19 trial. To adjust for the imbalance between the two cohorts in terms of baseline variable distributions, an outcome regression analysis was conducted. In adjusted analysis, patients receiving defibrotide reported a trend towards higher RFFS (HR=0.71[0.95CI: 0.34 to 1.29, P= .138]) and OS (HR=0.78[0.95CI: 0.33 to 1.53, P= .248]) and showed a significantly increased number of post-recovery days (difference in means: 3.61[ 0.95CI: 0.97 to 6.26, P= .0037]). Despite concomitant thromboprophylaxis with low molecular weight heparin, the safety profile of defibrotide proved to be favorable. Taken together, our findings suggest that defibrotide may represent a valuable addition to the COVID-19 therapeutic options.

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.

Melflufen in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma refractory to prior alkylators: A subgroup analysis from the OCEAN study.

Melphalan flufenamide (melflufen), a first-in-class alkylating peptide-drug conjugate, plus dexamethasone demonstrated superior progression-free survival (PFS), but not overall survival (OS), versus pomalidomide plus dexamethasone in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma in the OCEAN study. Time to progression (TTP) <36 months after a prior autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) was a negative prognostic factor for OS with melflufen. This post hoc exploratory analysis evaluated patients refractory to prior alkylators (e.g., cyclophosphamide and melphalan) in OCEAN. In 153 patients refractory to prior alkylators (melflufen, n = 78; pomalidomide, n = 75), the melflufen and pomalidomide arms had similar median PFS (5.6 months [95% CI, 4.2-8.3] vs. 4.7 months [95% CI, 3.1-7.3]; hazard ratio [HR], 0.92 [95% CI, 0.63-1.33]) and OS (23.4 months [95% CI, 14.4-31.7] vs. 20.0 months [95% CI, 12.0-28.7]; HR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.62-1.38]). Among alkylator-refractory patients with a TTP ≥ 36 months after a prior ASCT or no prior ASCT (melflufen, n = 54; pomalidomide, n = 53), the observed median PFS and OS were longer in the melflufen arm than the pomalidomide arm. The safety profile of melflufen was consistent with previous reports. These results suggest that melflufen is safe and effective in patients with alkylator-refractory disease, suggesting differentiated activity from other alkylators.

Impact of prior treatment on selinexor, bortezomib, dexamethasone outcomes in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: Extended follow-up subgroup analysis of the BOSTON trial.

OBJECTIVES: To analyze the impact of prior therapies on outcomes with selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (SVd) versus bortezomib and dexamethasone (Vd) in 402 patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) in the phase 3 BOSTON trial. METHODS: Post hoc analysis of progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety for lenalidomide-refractory, proteasome inhibitor (PI)-naïve, bortezomib-naïve, and one prior line of therapy (1LOT) patient subgroups. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of over 28 months, clinically meaningful improvements in PFS were noted across all groups with SVd. The median SVd PFS was longer in all subgroups (lenalidomide-refractory: 10.2 vs. 7.1 months, PI-naïve: 29.5 vs. 9.7; bortezomib-naïve: 29.5 vs. 9.7; 1LOT: 21.0 vs. 10.7; p < .05). The lenalidomide-refractory subgroup had longer OS with SVd (26.7 vs. 18.6 months; HR 0.53; p = .015). In all subgroups, overall response and ≥very good partial response rates were higher with SVd. The manageable safety profile of SVd was similar to the overall patient population. CONCLUSIONS: With over 2 years of follow-up, these clinically meaningful outcomes further support the use of SVd in patients who are lenalidomide-refractory, PI-naïve, bortezomib-naïve, or who received 1LOT (including a monoclonal antibody) and underscore the observed synergy between selinexor and bortezomib.

An open-label, first-in-human, single agent, dose escalation study for the evaluation of safety and efficacy of SAR442085 in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma.

OBJECTIVES: Cluster of differentiation 38 (CD38) is a key target on multiple myeloma (MM) cells. This multi-centre, Phase 1, single-agent study (NCT04000282) investigated SAR442085, a novel fragment crystallisable (Fc)-modified anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody (mAb), with enhanced affinity towards Fc-gamma receptor on effector cells in patients with relapsed and/or refractory (RR) MM. METHODS: This study comprised two parts: Part-A (dose-escalation involving anti-CD38 mAb pre-treated and naïve patients) and Part-B (dose expansion). Primary endpoints were maximum tolerated dose and recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D). RESULTS: Thirty-seven heavily pre-treated patients were treated in Part A. Part-B (dose-expansion) was not studied. Seven dose-limiting toxicities were reported at DL3, DL5, DL6, and DL7. RP2D was determined to be 5-7·5 mg/kg. Most common treatment-emergent adverse events were infusion-related reactions in 70·3% (26/37) patients. Grade ≥3 thrombocytopenia was reported in 48·6% (18/37). Overall response rate was 70% in anti-CD38 mAb naïve and 4% in anti-CD38 pre-treated patients, with a median progression-free survival of 7·62 (95%CI: 2·858; not calculable) months and 2·79 (95%CI: 1·150; 4·172) months and, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of SAR442085 was promising in anti-CD38 mAb naïve patients but did not extend to the larger cohort of anti-CD38 mAb pre-treated patients. This observation, along with transient high-grade thrombocytopenia, could potentially limit its clinical use.

Health-related quality of life in transplant-eligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma treated with daratumumab, lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone: Patient-reported outcomes from GRIFFIN.

In the phase 2 GRIFFIN trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02874742), daratumumab added to lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (D-RVd) improved depth of response and progression-free survival (PFS) versus lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (RVd) alone in transplant-eligible (TE) patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). Here, we present patient-reported outcomes (PROs) collected using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30-item (QLQ-C30), EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire Multiple Myeloma Module 20-item (QLQ-MY20), and EuroQol 5-Dimension 5-Level (EQ-5D-5L) tools on day 1 of cycles 1, 2, and 3; on day 21 of cycle 4 (end of induction therapy); on day 1 of cycle 5; on day 21 of cycle 6 (end of posttransplant consolidation therapy); and at months 6, 12, 18, and 24 of maintenance therapy. Meaningful improvements from baseline were seen in most of the PRO scales with both treatments after consolidation and were sustained for at least 2 years of maintenance treatment. Large reductions from baseline (~20 points) were especially observed in pain symptoms for both treatment groups, although these were numerically higher for patients receiving D-RVd during the majority of the time points. In addition, improvements in key scales, such as global health status, fatigue symptoms, and physical functioning, were also seen with both D-RVd and RVd. These improvements in health-related quality of life contribute to the totality of evidence supporting the improvement in clinical outcomes such as response rates and PFS with D-RVd in induction, consolidation, and maintenance therapy in TE patients with NDMM.

Process Mass Intensity (PMI): A Holistic Analysis of Current Peptide Manufacturing Processes Informs Sustainability in Peptide Synthesis.

Small molecule therapeutics represent the majority of the FDA-approved drugs. Yet, many attractive targets are poorly tractable by small molecules, generating a need for new therapeutic modalities. Due to their biocompatibility profile and structural versatility, peptide-based therapeutics are a possible solution. Additionally, in the past two decades, advances in peptide design, delivery, formulation, and devices have occurred, making therapeutic peptides an attractive modality. However, peptide manufacturing is often limited to solid-phase peptide synthesis (SPPS), liquid phase peptide synthesis (LPPS), and to a lesser extent hybrid SPPS/LPPS, with SPPS emerging as a predominant platform technology for peptide synthesis. SPPS involves the use of excess solvents and reagents which negatively impact the environment, thus highlighting the need for newer technologies to reduce the environmental footprint. Herein, fourteen American Chemical Society Green Chemistry Institute Pharmaceutical Roundtable (ACS GCIPR) member companies with peptide-based therapeutics in their portfolio have compiled Process Mass Intensity (PMI) metrics to help inform the sustainability efforts in peptide synthesis. This includes PMI assessment on 40 synthetic peptide processes at various development stages in pharma, classified according to the development phase. This is the most comprehensive assessment of synthetic peptide environmental metrics to date. The synthetic peptide manufacturing process was divided into stages (synthesis, purification, isolation) to determine their respective PMI. On average, solid-phase peptide synthesis (SPPS) (PMI ≈ 13,000) does not compare favorably with other modalities such as small molecules (PMI median 168-308) and biopharmaceuticals (PMI ≈ 8300). Thus, the high PMI for peptide synthesis warrants more environmentally friendly processes in peptide manufacturing.

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.

Single-agent belantamab mafodotin in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: Final analysis of the DREAMM-2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) have a high unmet treatment need. Belantamab mafodotin (belamaf), a first-in-class, B-cell maturation antigen-binding antibody-drug conjugate, eliminates myeloma cells through direct cell killing and an anti-myeloma immune response. METHODS: DREAMM-2 (NCT03525678) was a phase 2, two-arm, open-label trial in patients with heavily pretreated RRMM who had three or more prior therapies, were refractory to an immunomodulatory agent and a proteasome inhibitor, and refractory or intolerant to an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody. Belamaf was given at 2.5 or 3.4 mg/kg every 3 weeks. The primary end point was overall response rate (ORR); secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), safety, ocular symptoms, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL). RESULTS: This final analysis (cutoff date, March 31, 2022), N = 223, with median follow-up of 12.5 and 13.8 months, demonstrated an ORR of 32% and 35%, median PFS of 2.8 and 3.9 months, and median OS of 15.3 and 14.0 months in the 2.5 mg/kg and 3.4 mg/kg cohorts, respectively. Median duration of response was 12.5 and 6.2 months. No new safety signals were observed; the most common Grade 3 and 4 adverse events were keratopathy (29% vs. 25%), thrombocytopenia (22% vs. 29%), and anemia (21% vs. 28%). HRQOL outcomes suggest that overall global health status/quality of life, physical and role functioning, and overall disease symptoms were maintained or improved during treatment. CONCLUSIONS: This final analysis of DREAMM-2 confirms that in patients with triple-class refractory RRMM, single-agent belamaf results in durable and clinically meaningful responses with a manageable safety profile.

Oral ixazomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone for transplant-ineligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.

Continuous lenalidomide-dexamethasone (Rd)-based regimens are among the standards of care in transplant-ineligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients. The oral proteasome inhibitor ixazomib is suitable for continuous dosing, with predictable, manageable toxicities. In the double-blind, placebo-controlled TOURMALINE-MM2 trial, transplant-ineligible NDMM patients were randomized to ixazomib 4 mg (n = 351) or placebo (n = 354) plus Rd. After 18 cycles, dexamethasone was discontinued and treatment was continued using reduced-dose ixazomib (3 mg) and lenalidomide (10 mg) until progression/toxicity. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Median PFS was 35.3 vs 21.8 months with ixazomib-Rd vs placebo-Rd, respectively (hazard ratio [HR], 0.830; 95% confidence interval, 0.676-1.018; P = .073; median follow-up, 53.3 and 55.8 months). Complete (26% vs 14%; odds ratio [OR], 2.10; P < .001) and ≥ very good partial response (63% vs 48%; OR, 1.87; P < .001) rates were higher with ixazomib-Rd vs placebo-Rd. In a prespecified high-risk cytogenetics subgroup, median PFS was 23.8 vs 18.0 months (HR, 0.690; P = .019). Overall, treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were mostly grade 1/2. With ixazomib-Rd vs placebo-Rd, 88% vs 81% of patients experienced grade ≥3 TEAEs, 66% vs 62% serious TEAEs, and 35% vs 27% TEAEs resulting in regimen discontinuation; 8% vs 6% died on study. Addition of ixazomib to Rd was tolerable with no new safety signals and led to a clinically meaningful PFS benefit of 13.5 months. Ixazomib-Rd is a feasible option for certain patients who can benefit from an all-oral triplet combination. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01850524.