French early nationwide idecabtagene vicleucel chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy experience in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (FENIX): A real-world IFM study from the DESCAR-T registry.

Idecabtagene vicleucel (ide-cel), a chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy targeting B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA), received early access program (EAP) authorization in France in April 2021 for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). We conducted a real-world registry-based multicentre observational study in 11 French hospitals to evaluate ide-cel outcomes. Data from 176 RRMM patients who underwent apheresis between June 2021 and November 2022 were collected from the French national DESCAR-T registry. Of these, 159 patients (90%) received ide-cel. Cytokine release syndrome occurred in 90% with 2% grade ≥3, and neurotoxicity occurred in 12% with 3% grade ≥3. Over the first 6 months, the best overall response and ≥complete response rates were 88% and 47% respectively. The median progression-free survival (PFS) from the ide-cel infusion was 12.5 months, the median overall survival (OS) was 20.8 months and the estimated OS rate at 12 months was 73.3%. Patients with extra-medullary disease (EMD) had impaired PFS (6.2 months vs. 14.8 months). On multivariable analysis, EMD and previous exposure to BCMA-targeted immunoconjugate or T-cell-redirecting GPRC5D bispecific antibody were associated with inferior PFS. Our study supports ide-cel's feasibility, safety and efficacy in real-life settings, emphasizing the importance of screening for EMD and considering prior treatments to optimize patient selection.

Targeting MYC in multiple myeloma.

Multiple myeloma (MM) is a plasma cell tumor marked by clonal evolution and preceded by a premalignant stage, which progresses via molecular pathway deregulation, including MYC activation. This activation relates to translocation or gain of the MYC locus and deregulation of upstream pathways such as IRF4, DIS3/LIN28B/let-7, or MAPK. Precision medicine is an approach to predict more accurately which treatment strategies for a particular disease will work in which groups of patients, in contrast to a "one-size-fits-all" approach. The knowledge of mechanisms responsible for MYC deregulation in MM enables identification of vulnerabilities and therapeutic targets in MYC-driven tumors. MYC can be targeted directly or indirectly, by interacting with several of its functions in cancer. Several such therapeutic strategies are evaluated in clinical trials in MM. In this review, we describe the mechanism of MYC activation in MM, the role of MYC in cancer progression, and the therapeutic options to targeting MYC.

Prevention and management of adverse events of Novel agents in multiple myeloma: A consensus of the european myeloma network.

During the last few years, several new drugs have been introduced for treatment of patients with multiple myeloma, which have significantly improved treatment outcome. All of these novel substances differ at least in part in their mode of action from similar drugs of the same drug class, or are representatives of new drugs classes, and as such present with very specific side effect profiles. In this review, we summarize these adverse events, provide information on their prevention, and give practical guidance for monitoring of patients and for management of adverse events.Leukemia accepted article preview online, 18 December 2017. doi:10.1038/leu.2017.353.

Benefit of continuous treatment for responders with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma in the randomized FIRST trial.

The phase 3, randomized Frontline Investigation of Revlimid and Dexamethasone Versus Standard Thalidomide (FIRST) trial investigating lenalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone until disease progression (Rd continuous) vs melphalan, prednisone and thalidomide for 12 cycles (MPT) and Rd for 18 cycles (Rd18) in transplant-ineligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) showed that Rd continuous prolonged progression-free survival and overall survival compared with MPT. A subanalysis of the FIRST trial was conducted to determine the benefits of Rd continuous in patients with NDMM based on depth of response. Patients randomized 1:1:1 to Rd continuous, Rd18 or MPT were divided into subgroups based on best response: complete response (CR; n=290), ⩾very good partial response (VGPR; n=679), ⩾partial response (PR; n=1 225) or ⩽stable disease (n=299). Over 13% of patients receiving Rd continuous who achieved ⩾VGPR as best response did so beyond 18 months of treatment. Rd continuous reduced the risk of progression or death by 67%, 51% and 35% vs MPT in patients with CR, ⩾VGPR and ⩾PR, respectively. Similarly, Rd continuous reduced the risk of progression or death by 61%, 54% and 38% vs Rd18 in patients with CR, ⩾VGPR and ⩾PR, respectively. In patients with CR, ⩾VGPR or ⩾PR, 4-year survival rates in the Rd continuous arm (81.1%, 73.1% or 64.6%, respectively) were higher vs MPT (70.8%, 59.8% or 57.2%, respectively) and similar vs Rd18 (76.5%, 67.7% and 62.5%, respectively). Rd continuous improved efficacy outcomes in all responding patients, including those with CR, compared with fixed duration treatment.

Carfilzomib-dexamethasone vs bortezomib-dexamethasone in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma by cytogenetic risk in the phase 3 study ENDEAVOR.

The randomized phase 3 study ENDEAVOR demonstrated a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) for carfilzomib and dexamethasone (Kd) vs bortezomib and dexamethasone (Vd) in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (MM). We conducted a preplanned subgroup analysis of ENDEAVOR to evaluate Kd vs Vd by cytogenetic risk. Of 785 patients with known cytogenetics, 210 (27%) had high-risk cytogenetics (Kd, n=97 (25%); Vd, n=113 (28%)) and 575 (73%) had standard-risk cytogenetics (Kd, n=284 (75%); Vd, n=291 (72%)). Median PFS in the high-risk group was 8.8 months for Kd vs 6.0 months for Vd (hazard ratio (HR), 0.65; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.45-0.92; P=0.0075). Median PFS in the standard-risk group was not estimable for Kd vs 10.2 months for Vd (HR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.33-0.58; P<0.0001). Overall response rates were 72.2% (Kd) vs 58.4% (Vd) in the high-risk group and 79.2% (Kd) vs 66.0% (Vd) in the standard-risk group. In the high-risk group, 15.5% (Kd) vs 4.4% (Vd) achieved a complete response (CR) or better. In the standard-risk group, 13.0% (Kd) vs 7.9% (Vd) achieved ⩾CR. This preplanned subgroup analysis found that Kd was superior to Vd in relapsed or refractory MM, regardless of cytogenetic risk.

Impact of prior treatment on patients with relapsed multiple myeloma treated with carfilzomib and dexamethasone vs bortezomib and dexamethasone in the phase 3 ENDEAVOR study.

The randomized phase 3 ENDEAVOR study (N=929) compared carfilzomib and dexamethasone (Kd) with bortezomib and dexamethasone (Vd) in relapsed multiple myeloma (RMM). We performed a subgroup analysis from ENDEAVOR in patients categorized by number of prior lines of therapy or by prior treatment. Median progression-free survival (PFS) for patients with one prior line was 22.2 months for Kd vs 10.1 months for Vd, and median PFS for patients with ⩾2 prior lines was 14.9 months for Kd vs 8.4 months for Vd. For patients with prior bortezomib exposure, the median PFS was 15.6 months for Kd vs 8.1 months for Vd, and for patients with prior lenalidomide exposure the median PFS was 12.9 months for Kd vs 7.3 months for Vd. Overall response rates (Kd vs Vd) were 81.9 vs 65.5% (one prior line), 72.0 vs 59.7% (⩾2 prior lines), 71.2 vs 60.3% (prior bortezomib) and 70.1 vs 59.3% (prior lenalidomide). The safety profile in the prior lines subgroups was qualitatively similar to that in the broader ENDEAVOR population. In RMM, outcomes are improved when receiving treatment with carfilzomib compared with bortezomib, regardless of the number of prior therapy lines or prior exposure to bortezomib or lenalidomide.

Evaluating results from the multiple myeloma patient subset treated with denosumab or zoledronic acid in a randomized phase 3 trial.

In a phase 3 trial of denosumab vs zoledronic acid in patients (n=1776) with bone metastases and solid tumors or multiple myeloma, denosumab was superior to zoledronic acid for the primary end point of prevention of skeletal-related events. There was no difference in overall survival between the two groups; however, an ad hoc overall survival analysis in the multiple myeloma subset of patients (n=180) favored zoledronic acid (hazard ratio (HR) 2.26; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.13-4.50; P=0.014). In the present analysis, we found imbalances between the groups with respect to baseline risk characteristics. HRs with two-sided 95% CIs were estimated using the Cox model. After adjustment in a covariate analysis, the CI crossed unity (HR 1.86; 95% CI 0.90-3.84; P=0.0954). Furthermore, we found a higher rate of early withdrawals for the reasons of lost to follow-up and withdrawal of consent in the zoledronic acid group; after accounting for these, the HR was 1.31 (95% CI 0.80-2.15; P=0.278). In conclusion, the survival results in multiple myeloma patients in this trial were confounded and will eventually be resolved by an ongoing phase 3 trial.

Safe and prolonged survival with long-term exposure to pomalidomide in relapsed/refractory myeloma.

BACKGROUND: The IFM2009-02 trial studied pomalidomide (4 mg daily, 21/28 versus 28/28) and dexamethasone in very advanced relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). We observed that 40% of patients had a prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) and subsequently overall survival (OS). We sought to analyze the characteristics of these patients and study the effect of long exposure to pomalidomide. DESIGN: We separated the studied population into two groups: 3 months to 1 year (<1 year) and more than 1 year (≥1 year) of treatment with pomalidomide and dexamethasone based on clinical judgment and historical control studies. We then analyzed the characteristics of patients according to duration of treatment. RESULTS: The overall response rate (ORR) for the <1-year group was 43%, the median PFS 4.6 months [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 3.8-6.4] with only 6% at 12 months, and the median OS was 15 months (11.7-20.3) and 40% at 18 months. For the ≥1-year group, the response rate and survival were strikingly different, ORR at 83%, median PFS 20.7 months (14.7-35.4), median OS not reached, and 91% at 18 months. CONCLUSION: Pomalidomide and dexamethasone favored prolonged and safe exposure to treatment in 40% of heavily treated and end-stage RRMM, a paradigm shift in the natural history of RRMM characterized with a succession of shorter disease-free intervals and ultimately shorter survival. Although an optimization of pomalidomide-dexamethasone regimen is warranted in advanced RRMM, we claim that pomalidomide has proven once more to change the natural history of myeloma in this series, which should be confirmed in a larger study.

Cost-effectiveness of lenalidomide plus dexamethasone vs. bortezomib plus melphalan and prednisone in transplant-ineligible U.S. patients with newly-diagnosed multiple myeloma.

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a cost-effectiveness assessment of lenalidomide plus dexamethasone (Rd) vs bortezomib plus melphalan and prednisone (VMP) as initial treatment for transplant-ineligible patients with newly-diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM), from a U.S. payer perspective. METHODS: A partitioned survival model was developed to estimate expected life-years (LYs), quality-adjusted LYs (QALYs), direct costs and incremental costs per QALY and LY gained associated with use of Rd vs VMP over a patient's lifetime. Information on the efficacy and safety of Rd and VMP was based on data from multinational phase III clinical trials and a network meta-analysis. Pre-progression direct costs included the costs of Rd and VMP, treatment of adverse events (including prophylaxis) and routine care and monitoring associated with MM. Post-progression direct costs included costs of subsequent treatment(s) and routine care and monitoring for progressive disease, all obtained from published literature and estimated from a U.S. payer perspective. Utilities were obtained from the aforementioned trials. Costs and outcomes were discounted at 3% annually. RESULTS: Relative to VMP, use of Rd was expected to result in an additional 2.22 LYs and 1.47 QALYs (discounted). Patients initiated with Rd were expected to incur an additional $78,977 in mean lifetime direct costs (discounted) vs those initiated with VMP. The incremental costs per QALY and per LY gained with Rd vs VMP were $53,826 and $35,552, respectively. In sensitivity analyses, results were found to be most sensitive to differences in survival associated with Rd vs VMP, the cost of lenalidomide and the discount rate applied to effectiveness outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Rd was expected to result in greater LYs and QALYs compared with VMP, with similar overall costs per LY for each regimen. Results of this analysis indicated that Rd may be a cost-effective alternative to VMP as initial treatment for transplant-ineligible patients with MM, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio well within the levels for recent advancements in oncology.

[Monoclonal gammopathies of undetermined significance do not systematically require a specialized consultation]. / Les gammapathies monoclonales de signification indéterminée ne nécessitent pas systématiquement un recours à une consultation spécialisée.

INTRODUCTION: Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) is a frequent entity in the general population. The incidence rate of fortuitous discovery of a monoclonal component in asymptomatic patients is increasing nowadays. The majority of MGUS is being addressed to a hematologist for diagnosis or follow-up by their generalist practitioners. The management of MGUS consists of a clinical and biological surveillance as per published and validated international guidelines available for MGUS diagnosis and follow-up. MGUS thus may not necessarily need a specialized consultation and follow-up in a hematology ward, as we believe it could be performed by generalist practitioners. METHODS: We studied 190 patients addressed to our hematology department of Lille for diagnosis or follow-up of MGUS. RESULTS: Among the patients, 9.5% developed a malignant hemopathy (multiple myeloma or Waldenström macroglobulinemia). Among patients diagnosed with MGUS of IgG isotype and a monoclonal component <15 g/L, 96.2% showed no pejorative outcome: these represent simple and routine prognostic factors that can be assessed at diagnosis in order to predict the risk of progression. Those patients could have easily been followed by their generalist practitioner from the diagnosis of MGUS. CONCLUSION: A specialist's consultation would still be recommended for patients with pejorative factors at diagnosis, or if a clinical or biological event that could suggest progression occurs during follow-up, or in case of MGUS with complication, in which cases patients would need a specialized management in a hematology department.

Expert panel consensus statement on the optimal use of pomalidomide in relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma.

In this report, a panel of European myeloma experts discuss the role of pomalidomide in the treatment of relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Based on the available evidence, the combination of pomalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone is a well-tolerated and effective treatment option for patients with RRMM who have exhausted treatment with lenalidomide and bortezomib. The optimal starting dose of pomalidomide is 4 mg given on days 1-21 of each 28-day cycle, whereas dexamethasone is administered at a dose of 40 mg weekly (reduced to 20 mg for patients aged >75 years). The treatment should continue until evidence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Dose-modification schemes have been established for patients who develop neutropenia, thrombocytopaenia and other grade 3-4 adverse events during pomalidomide therapy. Guidance on the prevention and management of infections and venous thromboembolism is provided, based on the available clinical evidence and the experience of panel members. The use of pomalidomide in special populations, such as patients with advanced age, renal impairment or unfavourable cytogenetic features, is also discussed.

Deletion of the 1p32 region is a major independent prognostic factor in young patients with myeloma: the IFM experience on 1195 patients.

Deletions of the 1p region appear as a pejorative prognostic factor in multiple myeloma patients (especially 1p22 and 1p32 deletions) but there is a lack of data on the real impact of 1p abnormalities on an important and homogeneous group of patients. To address this issue we studied by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) the incidence and prognostic impact of 1p22 and 1p32 deletions in 1195 patients from the IFM (Institut Francophone du Myélome) cell collection. Chromosome 1p deletions were present in 23.3% of the patients (271): 15.1% (176) for 1p22 and 7.3% (85) for 1p32 regions. In univariate analyses, 1p22 and 1p32 appeared as negative prognostic factors for progression-free survival (PFS): 1p22: 19.8 months vs 33.6 months (P<0.001) and 1p32: 14.4 months vs 33.6 months (P<0.001); and overall survival (OS): 1p22: 44.2 months vs 96.8 months (P=0.002) and 1p32: 26.7 months vs 96.8 months (P<0.001). In multivariate analyses, 1p22 and 1p32 deletions still appear as independent negative prognostic factors for PFS and OS. In conclusion, our data show that 1p22 and 1p32 deletions are major negative prognostic factors for PFS and OS for patients with MM. We thus suggest that 1p32 deletion should be tested for all patients at diagnosis.

Minor clone provides a reservoir for relapse in multiple myeloma.

Recent studies have provided direct evidence for genetic variegation in subclones for various cancer types. However, little is known about subclonal evolutionary processes according to treatment and subsequent relapse in multiple myeloma (MM). This issue was addressed in a cohort of 24 MM patients treated either with conventional chemotherapy or with the proteasome inhibitor, bortezomib. As MM is a highly heterogeneous disease associated with a large number of chromosomal abnormalities, a subset of secondary genetic events that seem to reflect progression, 1q21 gain, NF-κB-activating mutations, RB1 and TP53 deletions, was examined. By using high-resolution single-nucleotide polymorphism arrays, subclones were identified with nonlinear complex evolutionary histories. Such reordering of the spectrum of genetic lesions, identified in a third of MM patients during therapy, is likely to reflect the selection of genetically distinct subclones, not initially competitive against the dominant population but which survived chemotherapy, thrived and acquired new anomalies. In addition, the emergence of minor subclones at relapse appeared to be significantly associated with bortezomib treatment. These data support the idea that new strategies for future clinical trials in MM should combine targeted therapy and subpopulations' control to eradicate all myeloma subclones in order to obtain long-term remission.

Incidence, risk factors, and outcomes of osteonecrosis of the jaw: integrated analysis from three blinded active-controlled phase III trials in cancer patients with bone metastases.

BACKGROUND: Osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) has been reported in patients receiving bisphosphonates for metastatic bone disease. ONJ incidence, risk factors, and outcomes were evaluated in a combined analysis of three phase III trials in patients with metastatic bone disease receiving antiresorptive therapies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with bone metastases secondary to solid tumors or myeloma were randomly assigned to receive either s.c. denosumab (120 mg) or i.v. zoledronic acid (4 mg) every 4 weeks. On-study oral examinations were conducted by investigators at baseline and every 6 months. Oral adverse events were adjudicated by an independent blinded committee of dental experts. RESULTS: Of 5723 patients enrolled, 89 (1.6%) patients were determined to have ONJ: 37 (1.3%) received zoledronic acid and 52 (1.8%) received denosumab (P = 0.13). Tooth extraction was reported for 61.8% of patients with ONJ. ONJ treatment was conservative in >95% of patients. As of October 2010, ONJ resolved in 36.0% of patients (29.7% for zoledronic acid and 40.4% for denosumab). CONCLUSIONS: In this combined analysis of three prospective trials, ONJ was infrequent, management was mostly conservative, and healing occurred in over one-third of the patients. Educating physicians about oral health before and during bone-targeted therapy may help reduce ONJ incidence and improve outcomes.