The role of upfront lenalidomide maintenance for primary central nervous system lymphoma following first-line methotrexate treatment: A retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Consolidation therapy improves the duration of response among patients with primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL). Lenalidomide maintenance has shown encouraging results in older patients with PCNSL. Herein, we performed a retrospective, single-center analysis to evaluate the effect of lenalidomide maintenance on the duration of response in patients with newly-diagnosed PCNSL. METHODS: Sixty-nine adult patients with PCNSL who achieved complete remission or partial remission (PR) after induction therapy were enrolled. The median age of patients was 58.0 years. The maintenance group (n = 35) received oral lenalidomide (25 mg/day) for 21 days, every 28 days for 24 months; the observation group did not undergo any further treatment. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 32.6 months, the maintenance group experienced fewer relapse events. However, the median progression-free survival (PFS) was similar between groups (36.1 vs. 30.6 months; hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% confidence interval, 0.446). Lenalidomide maintenance significantly improved PFS and overall survival (OS) only among patients who experienced PR after induction. The median duration of lenalidomide maintenance was 18 months; lenalidomide was well tolerated and minimally impacted the quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: The present study was the first to evaluate lenalidomide maintenance as a frontline treatment among patients with PCNSL, PFS and OS did not improve, although the safety profile was satisfactory.

Target trial emulation of carfilzomib safety among patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma using a nationwide observational data in Korea.

PURPOSE: Carfilzomib, commonly used for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM), has been associated with various adverse events in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). However, real-world safety data for a more diverse population are needed, as carfilzomib received expedited approval. This study aimed to evaluate carfilzomib's safety in Korea by comparing new users of KRd (carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone) to Rd (lenalidomide and dexamethasone) using a nationwide administrative claims database. METHODS: The retrospective cohort study utilized target trial emulation, focusing on adverse events in various organ systems similar to the ASPIRE trial. RESULTS: This study included 4,580 RRMM patients between 2007 and 2020, and the KRd group showed significantly higher risks of hematologic adverse events (anemia, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia) and some non-hematologic adverse events (cough, hypokalemia, constipation, hypertension, heart failure) compared to the Rd group. Among non-hematologic adverse events, cardiovascular events (heart failure [HR 2.04; 95% CI 1.24-3.35], hypertension [HR 1.58; 95% CI 1.15-2.17]) had the highest risk in the KRd group. CONCLUSION: The safety profile of carfilzomib in Korean patients was similar to previous RCTs. Therefore, caution should be exercised when using carfilzomib in Asian individuals with RRMM due to the increased risk of cardiovascular adverse events.

Efficacy Analysis of Bortezomib Combined with Lenalidomide in Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma with 1q21 Gain/Amp.

OBJECTIVE: 1q21 gain/Amp is one of the most common cytogenetic abnormalities. There are controversies about its effects on prognosis and may be associated with inferior outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). To explore the optimal induction treatment, we analyzed and compared the efficacy of combinations of bortezomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (VRD) and only bortezomib-based triplet regimens without lenalidomide (only bortezomib-based) as induction therapy in patients with NDMM with 1q21 gain/Amp. METHODS: Seventy-six NDMM patients with 1q21 gain/Amp who were admitted to our center from 2016 to 2022 were retrospectively analyzed in this study. The progression and efficacy of the patients were observed. RESULTS: Within our study group, the overall survival rate stood at 75.0%, and the progression-free survival (PFS) rate reached 40.8% in NDMM patients with 1q21 gain/Amp. The best outcome assessment was that 17.1% achieved complete response (CR) and 44.7% achieved very good partial response (VGPR). Patients in the VRD group had a deeper response (VGPR: 63.6% vs 37.0%, P = 0.034), lower disease progression rate (31.8% vs 70.3%, P = 0.002), longer sustained remission (median 49.7 months vs 18.3 months, P = 0.030), and longer PFS (median 61.9 months vs 22.9 months, P = 0.032) than those treated with only bortezomib-based induction therapy. No significant differences were found among patients with partial response or better (86.4% vs 77.8%, P = 0.532) or CR (27.3% vs 13.0%, P = 0.180). Multivariate analysis showed that only bortezomib-based induction therapy (P = 0.003, HR 0.246, 95% CI 0.097-0.620), International Staging System stage III (P = 0.003, HR 3.844, 95% CI 1.588-9.308) and LMR <3.6 (P = 0.032, HR 0.491, 95% CI 0.257-0.940) were significantly associated with adverse PFS. CONCLUSIONS: When compared with the sequential administration of bortezomib and lenalidomide or only bortezomib-based protocols, NDMM patients with 1q21 gain/Amp may benefit more from VRD as initial treatments.

Daratumumab-based quadruplet therapy for transplant-eligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma with high cytogenetic risk.

In the MASTER study (NCT03224507), daratumumab+carfilzomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone (D-KRd) demonstrated promising efficacy in transplant-eligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). In GRIFFIN (NCT02874742), daratumumab+lenalidomide/bortezomib/dexamethasone (D-RVd) improved outcomes for transplant-eligible NDMM. Here, we present a post hoc analysis of patients with high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities (HRCAs; del[17p], t[4;14], t[14;16], t[14;20], or gain/amp[1q21]). Among 123 D-KRd patients, 43.1%, 37.4%, and 19.5% had 0, 1, or ≥2 HRCAs. Among 120 D-RVd patients, 55.8%, 28.3%, and 10.8% had 0, 1, or ≥2 HRCAs. Rates of complete response or better (best on study) for 0, 1, or ≥2 HRCAs were 90.6%, 89.1%, and 70.8% for D-KRd, and 90.9%, 78.8%, and 61.5% for D-RVd. At median follow-up (MASTER, 31.1 months; GRIFFIN, 49.6 months for randomized patients/59.5 months for safety run-in patients), MRD-negativity rates as assessed by next-generation sequencing (10-5) were 80.0%, 86.4%, and 83.3% for 0, 1, or ≥2 HRCAs for D-KRd, and 76.1%, 55.9%, and 61.5% for D-RVd. PFS was similar between studies and superior for 0 or 1 versus ≥2 HRCAs: 36-month PFS rates for D-KRd were 89.9%, 86.2%, and 52.4%, and 96.7%, 90.5%, and 53.5% for D-RVd. These data support the use of daratumumab-containing regimens for transplant-eligible NDMM with HCRAs; however, additional strategies are needed for ultra-high-risk disease (≥2 HRCAs). Video Abstract.

A real-world pharmacovigilance study of FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) events for Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitors (BTKis) single and its combination therapy.

BACKGROUND: Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitors (BTKis) are targeted treatments for B-cell tumors but have significant side effects. This study assesses and contrasts the side effects of BTKis alone and its four combination therapies. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The reporting odds ratio (ROR) was used to analyze the data on three BTKis monotherapies and combinations of ibrutinib with rituximab, obinutuzumab, venetoclax, and lenalidomide in the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database up to December 2022. RESULTS: We analyzed the top 20 PTs for each treatment regimen. In monotherapies, atrial fibrillation (ROR (95% CI): 9.88 (9.47-10.32)) in zanubrutinib and rash (6.97 (5.42-8.98)) in acalabrutinib had higher associations. In combinations, infection (6.86 (6.11-7.70)), atrial fibrillation (27.96 (22.61-34.58)) and myelosuppression (10.09 (8.89-11.46)) were vital signals when ibrutinib was combined with obinutuzumab, and pyrexia (4.22 (2.57-6.93)) had a high signal value when combined with lenalidomide. Hemorrhage had a lower signal value when combined with venetoclax compared to ibrutinib alone (2.50 (2.18-2.87) vs 3.60 (3.52-3.68)). CONCLUSIONS: The ibrutinib-obinutuzumab combo has the highest risk of infection, atrial fibrillation, and myelosuppression, and the ibrutinib-lenalidomide combo has the highest risk of pyrexia. However, the ibrutinib-venetoclax combo has a lower risk of hemorrhage than monotherapy.

Thromboembolic risk of carfilzomib or bortezomib in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: A comparative systematic review and meta-analysis.

Thrombosis represents a frequent and potentially severe complication in individuals diagnosed with multiple myeloma (MM). These events can be driven by both the disease as well as the therapies themselves. Overall, available evidence is inconclusive about the differential thrombogenicity of carfilzomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone (KRd) and bortezomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone (VRd). This meta-analysis compares the risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE; including deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism) and arterial thromboembolism (ATE; including myocardial infarction and ischemic stroke) with KRd versus VRd as primary therapy for newly diagnosed MM (NDMM). Out of 510 studies identified after deduplication, one randomized controlled trial and five retrospective cohort studies were included. We analyzed 2304 patients (VRd: 1380; KRd: 924) for VTE events and 2179 patients (VRd: 1316; KRd: 863) for ATE events. Lower rates of VTE were observed in the VRd group when compared with the KRd group (6.16% vs. 8.87%; odds ratio [OR], 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.32-0.88; p = .01). Both treatment groups exhibited minimal ATE incidence, with no significant difference between them (0.91% vs. 1.16%; OR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.24-4.20; p = .99). In view of potential biases from retrospective studies, heterogeneity of baseline population characteristics, and limited access to patient-level data (e.g., VTE risk stratification and type of thromboprophylaxis regimen used) inherent to this meta-analysis, additional research is warranted to further validate our findings and refine strategies for thrombosis prevention in MM.

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.

Lenalidomide in the treatment of anti-myelin-associated glycoprotein neuropathy: A phase 1 study to identify the maximum tolerated dose.

BACKGROUND: Anti-myelin-associated glycoprotein (MAG) neuropathy is a debilitating demyelinating polyneuropathy with no approved therapies. Our primary objective was to ascertain lenalidomide safety and maximum tolerated dose (MTD) in anti-MAG neuropathy. METHODS: This phase 1b, open-label, single-arm, dose-finding trial was conducted from 2019 through 2022. The original design included a dose-escalation/extension phase followed by a dose-expansion phase. Three doses of lenalidomide were evaluated: 10, 15, and 25 mg. The main outcome was the MTD. RESULTS: Eleven patients enrolled (10 men), with a mean age of 67.6 years (SD = 6.18, range 58-77 years) and mean disease duration of 8.5 years (SD = 10.9, range 1-40 years). The study terminated early due to higher-than-expected non-dose-limiting toxicity venous thromboembolism (VTE) events. The calculated MTD was 25 mg (posterior mean of toxicity probability was 0.01 with a 95% credible interval of 0.00, 0.06), but a recommended phase 2 dose of 15 mg was advised. For secondary exploratory outcomes, only EQ-5D (-0.95, 95% CI -1.81 to -0.09) and total IgM (-162 mg/dL, 95% CI -298 to -26) showed signs of improvement by month 12. CONCLUSIONS: Lenalidomide was associated with higher-than-expected VTE events in anti-MAG neuropathy patients, despite a calculated MTD of 25 mg. A recommended phase 2 dose of 15 mg was advised. Lenalidomide did not improve disability or impairment at 12 months, although this study was not powered for efficacy. The risks of long term lenalidomide may outweigh benefit for patients with anti-MAG neuropathy. Any future efficacy study should address VTE risk, as current myeloma guidelines appear inadequate. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Lenalidomide in Anti-MAG Neuropathy: Phase 1b Study, ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03701711, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03701711. First submitted October 10, 2018. First patient enrolled in January 2019.

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.).

Phase 1b dose-finding study of rituximab, lenalidomide, and ibrutinib (R2I) in patients with relapsed/refractory mantle cell lymphoma.

Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is a rare non-Hodgkin lymphoma that frequently becomes chemoresistant over time. The distinct mechanisms of ibrutinib and lenalidomide provided a judicious rationale to explore the combination with anti-CD20 immunotherapy. In this phase 1b study (NCT02446236), patients (n = 25) with relapsed/refractory MCL received rituximab with escalating doses of lenalidomide (days 1-21) and ibrutinib 560 mg (days 1-28) of 28-day cycles. The MTD for lenalidomide was 20 mg; most common grade ≥3 adverse events were skin rashes (32%) and neutropenic fever (24%). The best ORR was 88%, CR rate was 83%, and median duration of response (DOR) was 36.92 months (95% CI 33.77, 51.37). Responses were seen even in refractory patients or with high-risk features (e.g. blastoid variant, TP53 mutation, Ki-67 > 30%). R2I was safe and tolerable in patients with R/R MCL.

Once Monthly Elotuzumab and Lenalidomide Plus Dexamethasone for Multiple Myeloma: A Multicenter Observation Study.

INTRODUCTION: Elotuzumab and lenalidomide plus dexamethasone (ERd) is a standard salvage chemotherapy for multiple myeloma, and elotuzumab is commonly administered every 2 weeks after cycle 3 (conventional ERd). Alternatively, elotuzumab may often be used every 4 weeks (monthly ERd) in real-world practice. The purpose of this multicenter observational study was to investigate the efficacy and tolerability of monthly ERd. METHODS: We investigated the efficacy and tolerability between conventional and monthly ERd regimens for the myeloma patients in six institutes retrospectively. RESULTS: Seventy-five patients were included in this study. The median patient age was 68 years. The median number of prior chemotherapies was two (1-5). The number of patients with prior lenalidomide exposure was 57 (76.0%). The numbers of progressive disease (PD) and non-PD before ERd were 23 (30.7%) and 52 (69.3%), respectively. The frequency of PD before ERd was significantly lower in the monthly ERd group than in the conventional ERd group. In 26.9 months of median follow-up period, the 2-year progression-free survival (PFS) rate in the monthly ERd group was significantly longer than that in the conventional ERd group (95.0% and 62.0%, hazard ratio 0.082, p = 0.002). However, no significant difference in PFS between these two ERd groups was found using multivariate analysis. The complete response rates were similar between the monthly and conventional ERd groups (55.0% and 32.7%, p = 0.109). There was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse events between the monthly and conventional ERd groups (35.0% and 54.5%, p = 0.192). There was no significant difference in the kinetics of the mean absolute lymphocyte count, CD4, CD8, CD16, CD56, and CD57 positive lymphocyte counts, and CD4 to CD8 ratio between the monthly and conventional ERd groups. DISCUSSION: The efficacy and tolerability of monthly ERd were similar to those of conventional ERd. Thus, monthly ERd might be a reasonable option, considering the quality of life of patients and convenience.

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.).

Improved Efficacy of Tafasitamab plus Lenalidomide versus Systemic Therapies for Relapsed/Refractory DLBCL: RE-MIND2, an Observational Retrospective Matched Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: In RE-MIND2 (NCT04697160), patient-level outcomes from the L-MIND study (NCT02399085) of tafasitamab plus lenalidomide were retrospectively compared with patient-level matched observational cohorts treated with National Cancer Care Network (NCCN)/European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO)-listed systemic therapies for relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data were collected from health records of eligible patients aged ≥18 years with histologically confirmed DLBCL who had received ≥2 systemic therapies for DLBCL (including ≥1 anti-CD20 therapy). Patients from L-MIND were matched with patients from the RE-MIND2 observational cohort using estimated propensity score-based 1:1 nearest-neighbor matching, balanced for nine covariates. The primary analysis compared tafasitamab plus lenalidomide with patients who received any systemic therapy for R/R DLBCL (pooled in one cohort) or bendamustine plus rituximab (BR) or rituximab plus gemcitabine and oxaliplatin (R-GemOx; as two distinct cohorts). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints included treatment response and time-to-event outcomes. RESULTS: In RE-MIND2, 3,454 patients were enrolled from 200 sites in North America, Europe, and Asia-Pacific. Strictly matched pairs of patients consisted of tafasitamab plus lenalidomide versus systemic therapies pooled (n = 76 pairs), versus BR (n = 75 pairs), and versus R-GemOx (n = 74 pairs). Significantly prolonged OS was reported with tafasitamab plus lenalidomide versus systemic pooled therapies [hazard ratios (HR): 0.55; P = 0.0068], BR (HR: 0.42; P < 0.0001), and R-GemOx (HR: 0.47; P = 0.0003). CONCLUSIONS: RE-MIND2, a retrospective observational study, met its primary endpoint, demonstrating prolonged OS with tafasitamab plus lenalidomide versus BR and R-GemOx. See related commentary by Cherng and Westin, p. 3908.

Ibrutinib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma: Phase I trial results.

Therapeutic strategies that target novel pathways are urgently needed for patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Ibrutinib is an oral covalent inhibitor of Bruton tyrosine kinase, which is overexpressed in MM cells. This phase 1 dose-escalation study examined various doses of ibrutinib in combination with standard doses of lenalidomide (25 mg) and dexamethasone (40 mg) using a standard 3 + 3 design in RRMM patients. The primary objective was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of ibrutinib in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone. Patients (n = 15) had received a median of 4 prior regimens, 53% were triple-class exposed, 33% were penta-exposed, and 54% were lenalidomide-refractory. The MTD of ibrutinib was 840 mg (n = 6) and only 1 dose-limiting toxicity; a grade 3 rash possibly related to ibrutinib was noted. The most common ≥ grade 3 adverse events were rash in 2 (13%), lymphopenia in 2 (13%), leukopenia, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and anemia all occurring in 3 (20%) patients each. One patient achieved a partial response for an overall response rate of 7%. The clinical benefit rate was 80%. The median time to progression was 3.8 months. Ibrutinib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone appears to be a safe and well-tolerated regimen with reasonable efficacy in heavily pretreated RRMM patients.

Follicular Lymphoma: a Focus on Current and Emerging Therapies

Follicular lymphoma (FL) is the most common indolent lymphoma and is characterized by a relapsing and remitting course. In addition to significant biologic heterogeneity, the clinical trajectory for patients is variable, with some being observed for many years, and others having aggressive disease requiring multiple treatment courses. Unfortunately, FL remains incurable, and continues to cause early mortality. Improved understanding of the genetic and immune biology of FL has led to several FDA-approved therapies in the relapsed and refractory setting, including PI3K inhibitors; immunomodulatory agents; the EZH2 inhibitor, tazemetostat; and anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy, axicabtagene ciloleucel. This review outlines the current approach to the diagnosis and treatment of FL with a focus on emerging investigational therapies, including targeted protein inhibitors, antibody-drug conjugates, monoclonal antibodies, bispecific antibodies, and novel combination strategies.

Evaluation of the frailty characteristics and clinical outcomes according to the new frailty-based outcome prediction model (Myeloma Risk Profile-MRP) in a UK real-world cohort of elderly newly diagnosed Myeloma patients.

The management of myeloma in the elderly is shifting its focus towards reducing the risk of under-treating fit patients and the risk of over-treating frail patients. Frailty assessment is required in this patient group in order to individualise treatment decisions. In addition to the proven prognostic values of the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) frailty score and the revised Myeloma Co-morbidity Index (R-MCI), a new easy-to-use frailty-based risk profile score (high-risk (i.e. frail), medium risk (i.e. intermediate-fitness) and low-risk (i.e. fit)) named Myeloma Risk Profile (MRP) was shown to be predictive of survival in the clinical trial setting. In this retrospective real-world study, we set out to evaluate the frailty characteristics and clinical outcomes according to the different MRP scoring algorithm categories (frail vs. intermediate vs fit), in a high risk cohort of elderly newly diagnosed myeloma patients treated with the fixed-duration triplet therapy VCD (bortezomib with cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone). Clinical outcomes included: reason for treatment discontinuation, overall response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and adverse events (AEs). Out of 100 patients, 62 were frail, 27 were intermediate and 11 were fit, according to MRP scores. To enable meaningful comparisons between comparable numbers, subgroups analyses for ORR, OS, PFS, and AEs focused on frail (n = 62) versus intermediate or fit (n = 38) patients. The proportion of patients in each subgroup who were able to complete the planned course of treatment was (frail: 43.5% vs. intermediate or fit: 55.3%). A higher proportion in the frail subgroup discontinued therapy due to progressive disease (19.4% vs. 2.6%). Discontinuation due to toxicity was comparable across subgroups (14.5% vs. 15.8%), ORR in the total cohort was 75%, and this was comparable between subgroups (frail: 74.2% vs. intermediate or fit: 76.3%). There was a trend for a shorter median OS in the frail subgroup but without a statistical significance: (frail vs. intermediate or fit): (46 months vs. not reached, HR: 1.94, 95% CI 0.89-4.2, p = 0.094). There was no difference in median PFS between subgroups: (frail vs. intermediate or fit): (11.8 vs. 9.9 months, HR: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.61-1.61, P = 0.982). This cohort demonstrated a higher incidence rate of AEs in frail patients compared to those in the intermediate or fit group: patients with at least one any grade toxicity (85.5% vs. 71.1%), patients with at least one ≥G3 AE (37.1% vs. 21.1%). In conclusion, our study is to the first to evaluate clinical outcomes according to MRP in a high risk real-world cohort of patients treated exclusively with the proteasome inhibitor-based VCD therapy. Our study demonstrated a trend for worse OS in addition to worse AE outcomes in the frail group, but no difference in PFS with this fixed-duration therapy. MRP is an easy-to-use tool in clinical practice; its prognostic value was validated in the real-world in a large cohort of patients from the Danish Registry. Further evaluation of MRP in the real-world when continuous therapies are used, can further support the generalisability of its prognostic value in elderly myeloma patients.

Oral ixazomib-dexamethasone vs oral pomalidomide-dexamethasone for lenalidomide-refractory, proteasome inhibitor-exposed multiple myeloma: a randomized Phase 2 trial.

Multiple myeloma (MM) patients typically receive several lines of combination therapy and first-line treatment commonly includes lenalidomide. As patients age, they become less tolerant to treatment, requiring convenient/tolerable/lenalidomide-free options. Carfilzomib and/or bortezomib-exposed/intolerant, lenalidomide-refractory MM patients with ≥2 prior lines of therapy were randomized 3:2 to ixazomib-dexamethasone (ixa-dex) (n = 73) or pomalidomide-dexamethasone (pom-dex) (n = 49) until progression/toxicity. Median progression-free survival (mPFS) was 7.1 vs 4.8 months with ixa-dex vs pom-dex (HR 0.847, 95% CI 0.535-1.341, P = 0.477; median follow-up: 15.3 vs 17.3 months); there was no statistically significant difference between arms. In patients with 2 and ≥3 prior lines of therapy, respectively, mPFS was 11.0 vs 5.7 months (HR 1.083, 95% CI 0.547-2.144) and 5.7 vs 3.7 months (HR 0.686, 95% CI 0.368-1.279). Among ixa-dex vs pom-dex patients, 69% vs 81% had Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), 51% vs 53% had serious TEAEs, 39% vs 36% had TEAEs leading to drug discontinuation, 44% vs 32% had TEAEs leading to dose reduction, and 13% vs 13% died on study. Quality of life was similar between arms and maintained during treatment. Ixa-dex represents an important lenalidomide-free, oral option for this heavily pretreated, lenalidomide-refractory, proteasome inhibitor-exposed population.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03170882.

A 65-Year-Old Man With Weight Loss, Peripheral Neuropathy, and Lower Extremity Swelling.

CASE PRESENTATION: A 65-year-old man with no past medical history sought treatment at the hospital with lower extremity swelling, pain, tingling in a stocking-glove distribution, and syncope. He reported a 23-pound unintentional weight loss. He felt unsteady walking with a couple of falls, and his exercise tolerance was limited to several hundred feet. He did not report vision changes, dysphagia, bowel or bladder problems, tremor, orthopnea, lightheadedness, or chest pain. He did not report any history of substance misuse, high-risk sexual behavior, or concerning exposures. The patient was admitted for further workup.

Comparison of venous thromboembolism incidence in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients receiving bortezomib, lenalidomide, dexamethasone (RVD) or carfilzomib, lenalidomide, dexamethasone (KRD) with aspirin or rivaroxaban thromboprophylaxis.

Incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) varies across different regimens in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients. Limited data exist on the use of direct oral anticoagulants as thromboprophylaxis in the setting of haematologic malignancies, specifically multiple myeloma. In this retrospective study of 305 NDMM patients, VTE rates in those treated with carfilzomib, lenalidomide, dexamethasone (KRD) + aspirin (ASA), bortezomib, lenalidomide, dexamethasone (RVD) + ASA, and KRD + rivaroxaban were statistically significant, 16·1%, 4·8%, and 4·8%, respectively. The findings confirm a higher incidence of VTE when using KRD induction compared to RVD induction and reveal that the use of low-dose rivaroxaban thromboprophylaxis can mitigate this risk without an observable increase in bleeding rates.