Effectiveness and safety of belantamab mafodotin in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma in real-world setting: The ALFA study.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this noninterventional, retrospective ALFA study was to describe belantamab mafodotin effectiveness and safety in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma in a real-world setting in France. METHODS: Response rate, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety were assessed. RESULTS: Among the 184 patients initiating belantamab mafodotin treatment, the overall response rate was 32.7% (≥very good partial response [VGPR] 20.4%, partial response [PR] 12.3%). The median PFS (mPFS) was 2.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.9, 3.3), and median OS (mOS) was 8.8 months (95% CI: 6.3, 11.6). According to best response, mPFS was 20.6 months (95% CI: 12.1, not reached [NR]) in patients with ≥VGPR and 7.1 months (95% CI: 4.6, 9.4) in patients with PR; mOS was NR in patients with ≥VGPR and 17.5 months (95% CI: 7.7, NR) in patients with PR. For both OS and PFS, no differences were found in subgroups of interest. The adverse events (AEs) reported in 159 patients (86.4%) were mostly ocular AEs. CONCLUSIONS: ALFA, the largest real-world cohort conducted so far, confirms the results of belantamab mafodotin as reported in the DREAMM-2 clinical trial. The clinical benefit is significant as long as the patient is a responder.

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.

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

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

Isatuximab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma in real-world: The retrospective IMAGE study.

BACKGROUND: IMAGE is a retrospective cohort study of patients enrolled in early access programs (EAPs) in France with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) receiving isatuximab with pomalidomide and dexamethasone (Isa-Pd). METHODS: Patients aged ≥18 years with RRMM who received ≥1 dose of Isa under the EAPs between July 29, 2019 and August 30, 2020 were included. Effectiveness endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and response rates. Verbatim terms for adverse events (AEs) were coded using the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities and not graded for severity. RESULTS: A total of 294 and 299 patients were included in the effectiveness and safety populations, respectively. IMAGE included patients who received one prior line of treatment (10.2%) and were daratumumab-refractory (19.1%). At median follow-up of 14.2 months, median PFS in the effectiveness population was 12.4 months (95% CI 9.0-15.0). Overall response and very good partial response rates were 46.3% and 27.9%, respectively. Subgroup analyses reflected similar results. In the safety population, 26.4% of patients reported at least one AE; the most common any-grade AE was neutropenia (9.4%). CONCLUSION: IMAGE demonstrated Isa-Pd had meaningful effectiveness in median PFS and depth of response and no new safety signals in a real-world context, consistent with clinical trial results.

RAS/RAFlandscape in monoclonal plasma cell conditions.

Multiple Myeloma (MM) is characterized by a huge heterogeneity at the molecular level. The RAS/RAF pathway is the most frequently mutated, in about 50% of the patients. However, these mutations are frequently subclonal, suggesting a secondary event. Since these genes are part of our routine next-generation sequencing (NGS) panel, we analyzed >10,000 patients with different plasma cell disorders in order to describe the RAS/RAF landscape. In this large cohort of patients, almost 61% of the patients presented a RAS/RAF mutation at diagnosis or relapse, but much lower frequencies in pre-symptomatic cases. Of note, the mutations were different from that observed in solid tumors (higher proportions of Q61 mutations). In 29 patients with two different mutations, we were able to perform single cell sequencing, showing that in most cases, mutations occurred in different subclones, suggesting an ongoing mutational process. These findings suggest that RAS/RAF pathway is not an attractive target, both on therapeutic and residual disease assessment points of vue.

Impact of prior lenalidomide or proteasome inhibitor exposure on the effectiveness of ixazomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: A pooled analysis from the INSURE study.

OBJECTIVES: To characterize the impact of prior exposure and refractoriness to lenalidomide or proteasome inhibitors (PIs) on the effectiveness and safety of ixazomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (IRd) in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). METHODS: INSURE is a pooled analysis of adult RRMM patients who had received IRd in ≥2 line of therapy from three studies: INSIGHT MM, UVEA-IXA, and REMIX. RESULTS: Overall, 391/100/68 were lenalidomide-naïve/-exposed/-refractory and 37/411/110 were PI-naïve/-exposed/-refractory. Median duration of therapy (DOT) was 15.3/15.6/4.7 months and median progression-free survival (PFS) was 21.6/25.8/5.6 months in lenalidomide-naïve/exposed/refractory patients. Median DOT and PFS in PI-naïve/exposed/refractory patients were 20.4/15.2/6.9 months and not reached/19.8/11.4 months, respectively. The proportion of lenalidomide-naïve/exposed/refractory patients in INSIGHT and UVEA-IXA who discontinued a study drug due to adverse events (AEs) was ixazomib, 31.6/28.2/28.0% and 18.6/6.7/10.5%; lenalidomide, 21.9/28.2/16.0% and 16.1/6.7/10.5%; dexamethasone, 18.4/20.5/16.0% and 10.6/0/10.5%, respectively. The proportion of PI-naïve/exposed/refractory patients in INSIGHT and UVEA-IXA who discontinued a study drug due to AEs was: ixazomib, 44.4/28.8/27.8% and 22.2/16.7/15.7%; lenalidomide, 33.3/22.0/19.4% and 16.7/15.9/11.8%; dexamethasone, 33.3/17.4/16.7% and 16.7/9.5/7.8%, respectively. REMIX AE discontinuation rates were unavailable. CONCLUSION: IRd appeared to be effective in RRMM patients in routine clinical practice regardless of prior lenalidomide or PI exposure, with better outcomes seen in lenalidomide- and/or PI-nonrefractory versus refractory patients.

Recent Developments in Convenience of Administration of the Anti-CD38 Antibody Isatuximab: Subcutaneous Delivery and Fast Intravenous Infusion in Patients With Multiple Myeloma.

Isatuximab-based combinations are among the accepted standard-of-care regimens for early-line treatment of patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM), based on the results of the Phase 3 ICARIA-MM and IKEMA trials. Further study findings have shown benefit with Isa-based combinations in patients with newly diagnosed MM, as reported from the randomized GMMG-HD7 and CONCEPT trials. Isa is currently approved in various countries for intravenous (IV) administration in patients with RRMM. A more convenient route of administration, such as subcutaneous (SC) injection, and faster IV infusion may substantially increase convenience of treatment. In this review, we outline evidence emerging from clinical trials that shows increasing clinical applicability of Isa across the MM therapeutic spectrum. We then review recent study results demonstrating that new treatment modalities, either SC Isa administration via an on-body delivery system (OBDS) or fast, 30-minute, fixed-volume IV infusion, are safe and effective, and enhance convenience of treatment with Isa for MM patients and healthcare providers. In the recently reported Phase 1b study, the safety profile and efficacy of Isa administered SC plus pomalidomide-dexamethasone were comparable to those observed with Isa administered IV plus pomalidomide-dexamethasone in the control arm and in the ICARIA-MM trial. Analysis of patient-reported outcomes indicated patient confidence in SC Isa administration and satisfaction with treatment delivery by OBDS. These findings point to SC administration as the preferred route for future treatment with Isa-based combinations, as well as to the use of fast, 30-minute IV infusions in settings where SC administration of Isa might not be available.

Long-term outcomes and renal responses following autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for light chain deposition disease: a retrospective study on behalf of the Chronic Malignancies Working Party of the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation.

There is little long-term outcome data on the efficacy of autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in light chain deposition disease (LCDD). We identified 51 LCDD patients in the EBMT registry who had undergone upfront ASCT between 1995 and 2021. The median serum creatinine was 280 µmol/L and 45% required renal replacement therapy (RRT) at time of transplant. The melphalan dose was 100mg/m2 in 23%, 140mg/m2 in 55% and 200 mg/m2 in 21%. The rate of very good partial response or better improved from 41% pre-transplant to 66% at Day +100 post-ASCT. In RRT-independent patients, there was a modest improvement in renal function within the first 3 months; the median eGFR increased from 44 to 51 ml/min/1.73 m2. There was no further change between 3 and 12 months post- ASCT. No patient who was RRT-independent at ASCT became RRT dependent by Day + 100 post-ASCT. Median follow-up post-ASCT was 84 months (IQR: 46-122). At 6-years post ASCT, overall survival (OS) was 88% (95% CI: 78-98%) and PFS was 44% (95% CI: 28-60%). The 2-year cumulative incidence of relapse and non-relapse mortality (NRM) was 17% (95% CI: 6-27%) and 2% (95% CI: 0-6%), respectively. The cumulative incidence of renal transplantation at 4 years after ASCT was 27% (95% CI 13-41) with renal transplantation performed between 6.3 and 52.9 months post-ASCT (median 24.7 months). ASCT represents a feasible option for LCDD patients even if RRT dependent at time of transplant. Outcomes are favourable with low NRM and good long-term OS.

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.

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

Not available.

Real-life effectiveness of carfilzomib in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma receiving treatment in the context of early access: The CARMYN study.

The real-life retrospective observational study CARMYN aimed at investigating the long-term efficacy and safety of carfilzomib in combination with dexamethasone and lenalidomide (KRd, 159 patients). These patients (62% in first and 38% in second relapse, median age 62 yo) were treated between 02/2014 and 02/2017. Most had been pre-exposed to bortezomib (98.2%) and to an IMID (75.4%). At the time of collection, 90% had permanently discontinued carfilzomib. Data collection was conducted from January to July 2021 in 27 participating sites, after a median of 39 months follow-up. For patients treated with KRd, an overall response rate of 78.4% translated in a median progression free survival (PFS) of 24.0 months (95% CI 18.8-27.6) and a median overall survival (OS) of 51.1 months (95% CI 41.3-not reached). Results were poorer but difficult to interpret in the small cohort of Kd recipients. The study is one of the longest real-life studies of carfilzomib treatment in patients in first or second relapse. CARMYN confirmed the real-life long-term efficacy of carfilzomib in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone with results similar to those of clinical trials. The KRd regimen is thus an option to consider for late relapses in the current context of MM management.

Carfilzomib, daratumumab, and dexamethasone (KdD) vs. lenalidomide-sparing pomalidomide-containing triplet regimens for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: an indirect treatment comparison.

Nearly all patients with multiple myeloma eventually relapse or become refractory to treatment. Lenalidomide is increasingly administered in the frontline until disease progression or intolerance to therapy, resulting in the need for highly effective, lenalidomide-sparing options. In this study, carfilzomib plus daratumumab and dexamethasone were evaluated against lenalidomide-sparing, pomalidomide-containing triplets using matching-adjusted indirect comparison in the absence of head-to-head data. The analyses utilized long-term follow-up data from the CANDOR study (NCT03158688). Treatment with carfilzomib, daratumumab, and dexamethasone resulted in significantly longer progression-free survival (hazard ratio 0.60 [95% confidence interval: 0.37, 0.88])vs. pomalidomide plus bortezomib and dexamethasone, and numerically longer progression-free survival (hazard ratio 0.77 [95% confidence interval: 0.50, 1.08]) vs. daratumumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma and previous lenalidomide exposure, the majority of whom were lenalidomide refractory. Carfilzomib plus daratumumab and dexamethasone offers a highly effective, lenalidomide-sparing treatment option for this population.

Daratumumab, carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone with tandem transplant for high-risk newly diagnosed myeloma.

ABSTRACT: High-risk (HR) cytogenetics are associated with poor outcomes in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM), and dedicated studies should address this difficult-to-treat population. The phase 2 study 2018-04 from the Intergroupe Francophone du Myelome evaluated feasibility of an intensive strategy with quadruplet induction and consolidation plus tandem transplant in HR transplant-eligible (TE) NDMM. HR cytogenetics were defined by presence of del(17p), t(4;14), and/or t(14;16). Treatment consisted of daratumumab-carfilzomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (D-KRd) induction, autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT), D-KRd consolidation, second ASCT, and daratumumab-lenalidomide maintenance. The primary end point was feasibility. Fifty patients with previously untreated NDMM were included. Median age was 57. Del(17p), t(4;14), and t(14;16) were found in 40%, 52%, and 20% of patients, respectively. At data cutoff, the study met the primary end point with 36 patients completing second transplant. Twenty patients discontinued the study due to stem cell collection failure (n = 8), disease progression (n = 7), adverse event (n = 4), or consent withdrawal (n = 1). Grade 3 to 4 D-KRd induction/consolidation-related adverse events (>5% of patients) were neutropenia (39%), anemia (12%), thrombocytopenia (7%), and infection (6%). The overall response rate was 100% for patients completing second transplant, including 81% complete response. Premaintenance minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity rate (10-6) was 94%. After a median follow-up of 33 months, the 30-month progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival were 80% and 91%, respectively. In conclusion, D-KRd with tandem transplant is feasible in patients with HR TE-NDMM and resulted in high response rates and PFS. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT03606577.

INSURE: a pooled analysis of ixazomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone for relapsed/refractory myeloma in routine practice.

Aim: We pooled data from three observational studies (INSIGHT MM, UVEA-IXA and REMIX) to investigate the real-world effectiveness of ixazomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (IRd) in relapsed/refractory myeloma. Materials & methods: INSIGHT MM was a prospective study conducted in countries across Europe, Asia and North/Latin America while UVEA-IXA and REMIX were multicenter, retrospective/prospective studies conducted in Europe. Patients who had received IRd as ≥2nd line of therapy were analyzed. Primary outcomes were time-to-next treatment (TTNT) and progression-free survival (PFS). Results: Overall, 564 patients were included (median follow-up: 18.5 months). Median TTNT and PFS were 18.4 and 19.9 months; both outcomes were numerically longer for earlier versus later lines. Median treatment duration was 14.0 months. Overall response rate was 64.6%. No new safety concerns were noted. Conclusion: The effectiveness of IRd in routine practice appears similar to the efficacy observed in TOURMALINE-MM1. IRd benefit in earlier versus later lines was consistent with previous reports.

How I treat multiple myeloma in geriatric patients.

ABSTRACT: Multiple myeloma (MM) is primarily a disease of older patients. Until recently, geriatric aspects in the context of MM have been poorly investigated. Treatment outcomes for geriatric patients with MM are often compromised by comorbidities and an enhanced susceptibility to adverse events from therapy. Assessment of patient frailty has become more frequent and will be useful in the context of significant and continuous advances in therapy. The recent emergence of immunotherapy with CD38 monoclonal antibodies and upcoming immunooncology drugs, such as bispecific antibodies, will lead to additional therapeutic progress. The applicability of these new molecules to older and frail patients is a key clinical question. Here, we present 2 patient cases derived from clinical practice. We review current frailty scores and standards of care for older, newly diagnosed patients with MM, including frail subgroups, and discuss ways to tailor treatment, as well as treatment perspectives in this population.

Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis and multiple myeloma patients in real-life: Results of a large survey and clinical guidance recommendations from the IFM group.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) remains a critical issue in the management of patients with multiple myeloma (MM), particularly when immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs) combined with dexamethasone therapy are being prescribed as first-line and relapse therapy. One possible explanation for the persistent high rates of VTE, is the use of inappropriate thromboprophylaxis strategies for patients starting antimyeloma treatment. To tackle the issue, the Intergroupe francophone du myélome (IFM) offered convenient guidance for VTE thromboprophylaxis in MM patients initiating systemic therapy. This guidance is mainly supported by the results of a large survey on the clinical habits regarding VTE of physicians who are substantially involved in daily care of MM patients. VTE prophylaxis should be considered for all patients treated with IMiDs in combination with dexamethasone, in the absence of significant comorbidities, such as renal failure or bleeding risk. Anticoagulant should be preferred to antiplatelet agents for thromboprophylaxis. Despite the absence of large randomized controlled trials comparing those attitudes/options, available data on direct oral anticoagulants, which are already used in daily management of MM patients, are consistent with their potential usefulness for VTE prophylaxis in such patients. However, in order to implement a personalized continuous improvement strategy, clinicians must to be organized to collect all the data regarding this management. In other situations, thromboprophylaxis should be evaluated by using risk models and after careful evaluation of the risk/benefit ratio.

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.).

Isatuximab plus carfilzomib and dexamethasone in patients with early versus late relapsed multiple myeloma: IKEMA subgroup analysis.

Patients with multiple myeloma (MM) who experience early relapse within 12 months of therapy initiation are considered functional high-risk and represent an unmet need, needing better therapies to improve outcomes. The final IKEMA (clinicaltrials gov. identifier: NCT03275285) progression-free survival (PFS) analysis confirmed the significant PFS improvement reported at interim analysis with isatuximab (Isa) plus carfilzomib and dexamethasone (Kd; Isa-Kd) versus Kd in patients with relapsed MM (updated median PFS: 35.7 vs. 19.2 months; hazard ratio [HR] =0.58, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.42- 0.79). This IKEMA subgroup analysis examined efficacy and safety of Isa-Kd versus Kd in patients who experienced early (n=61 [Isa-Kd], n=46 [Kd]) vs. late relapse (n=104 [Isa-Kd], n=72 [Kd]). As expected, more aggressive features in baseline characteristics were observed in early relapse patients. Consistent with IKEMA overall population results, median PFS (early relapse: 24.7 vs. 17.2 months, HR=0.662, 95% CI: 0.407-1.077; late relapse: 42.7 vs. 21.9 months, HR=0.542, 95% CI: 0.355- 0.826), minimal residual disease negativity (MRD-) (early relapse: 24.6% vs. 15.2%; late relapse: 37.5% vs. 16.7%), and MRD- complete response (≥CR) rates (early relapse: 18.0% vs. 10.9%; late relapse: 30.8% vs. 13.9%) were higher with Isa-Kd versus Kd, respectively, in both early and late relapse patients. Grade ≥3, serious treatment-emergent adverse events, and death rates were higher in the late relapse Isa-Kd arm. However, the numbers of deaths were low and treatment exposure was significantly longer in Isa-Kd versus Kd late relapse patients. These results support the addition of Isa to Kd as standardof- care therapy for relapsed and/or refractory MM regardless of relapse timing.

Comparative Effectiveness of Teclistamab Versus Real-World Physician's Choice of Therapy in LocoMMotion and MoMMent in Triple-Class Exposed Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma.

INTRODUCTION: Teclistamab is the first approved B cell maturation antigen × CD3 bispecific antibody with precision dosing for the treatment of triple-class exposed (TCE) relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). We compared the effectiveness of teclistamab in MajesTEC-1 versus real-world physician's choice of therapy (RWPC) in patients from the prospective, non-interventional LocoMMotion and MoMMent studies. METHODS: Patients treated with teclistamab from MajesTEC-1 (N = 165) were compared with an external control arm from LocoMMotion (N = 248) or LocoMMotion + MoMMent pooled (N = 302). Inverse probability of treatment weighting adjusted for imbalances in prognostic baseline characteristics. The relative effect of teclistamab versus RWPC for overall response rate (ORR), very good partial response or better (≥ VGPR) rate, and complete response or better (≥ CR) rate was estimated with an odds ratio using weighted logistic regression transformed into a response-rate ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Weighted proportional hazards regression was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were well balanced between treatment cohorts after reweighting. Patients treated with teclistamab had significantly improved outcomes versus RWPC in LocoMMotion: ORR (RR [95% CI], 2.44 [1.79-3.33]; p < 0.0001), ≥ VGPR (RR 5.78 [3.74-8.93]; p < 0.0001), ≥ CR (RR 113.73 [15.68-825.13]; p < 0.0001), DOR (HR 0.39 [0.24-0.64]; p = 0.0002), PFS (HR 0.48 [0.35-0.64]; p < 0.0001), and OS (HR 0.64 [0.46-0.88]; p = 0.0055). Teclistamab versus RWPC in LocoMMotion + MoMMent also had significantly improved outcomes: ORR (RR 2.41 [1.80-3.23]; p < 0.0001), ≥ VGPR (RR 5.91 [3.93-8.88]; p < 0.0001), ≥ CR (RR 132.32 [19.06-918.47]; p < 0.0001), DOR (HR 0.43 [0.26-0.71]; p = 0.0011), PFS (HR 0.49 [0.37-0.66]; p < 0.0001), and OS (HR 0.69 [0.50-0.95]; p = 0.0247). CONCLUSION: Teclistamab demonstrated significantly improved effectiveness over RWPC in LocoMMotion ± MoMMent, emphasizing its clinical benefit as a highly effective treatment for patients with TCE RRMM. TRIAL REGISTRATION: MajesTEC-1, ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03145181 (phase 1) and NCT04557098 (phase 2); LocoMMotion, ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04035226; MoMMent, ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05160584.