Guidance for Use and dosing of Selinexor in Multiple Myeloma in 2021: Consensus From International Myeloma Foundation Expert Roundtable.

Selinexor is a first in class selective inhibitor of nuclear export (SINE), blocks exportin 1 (XPO1), a protein transporter, that among other actions, shuttles cargo proteins such as tumor suppressor proteins (TSPs), the glucocorticoid receptor (GR), and oncoprotein messenger RNAs (mRNAs) across the nuclear membrane to cytoplasm. By blocking XPO1, selinexor facilitates nuclear preservation and activation of TSPs, and prevents mRNA translation of the oncoproteins leading to induction of apoptosis. The therapeutic value of selinexor in combination with dexamethasone has been successfully demonstrated in treating relapsed and/or refractory myeloma (RRMM), leading to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of selinexor in combination with dexamethasone in 2019 for the treatment of adult patients with RRMM who received at least 4 prior therapies and whose disease is refractory to at least 2 proteasome inhibitors, at least 2 immunomodulatory agents, and an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody (mAb) - a pentarefractory myeloma. More recently, selinexor in combination with bortezomib and dexamethasone was approved by the FDA in December 2020, based on the BOSTON study among RRMM patients who had received at least one prior line of therapy. With more available safety and efficacy data supporting the increased interval between dosing of selinexor (and lesser cumulative weekly dosing) and schedule, contrary to the originally approved dose of 160 mg per week, the supportive care guidelines needed to be revisited. The current manuscript summarizes the supportive care solutions with weekly dosing of selinexor and identifies the ideal potential patient for selinexor treatment.

Correction: Pomalidomide, bortezomib, and low-dose dexamethasone in lenalidomide-refractory and proteasome inhibitor-exposed myeloma.

Following the publication of this article, the authors noted that the pomalidomide dose for the additional SC cohort in Fig. 1 was incorrectly listed. The correct dose for pomalidomide in the additional SC cohort should be the maximum tolerated dose of 4 mg/day, not 2 mg/day as listed in the original Fig. 1. The authors apologize for any inconvenience caused.

Pomalidomide, bortezomib and low-dose dexamethasone in lenalidomide-refractory and proteasome inhibitor-exposed myeloma.

This phase 1 dose-escalation study evaluated pomalidomide, bortezomib (subcutaneous (SC) or intravenous (IV)) and low-dose dexamethasone (LoDEX) in lenalidomide-refractory and proteasome inhibitor-exposed relapsed or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). In 21-day cycles, patients received pomalidomide (1-4 mg days 1-14), bortezomib (1-1.3 mg/m2 days 1, 4, 8 and 11 for cycles 1-8; days 1 and 8 for cycle ⩾9) and LoDEX. Primary endpoint was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). Thirty-four patients enrolled: 12 during escalation, 10 in the MTD IV bortezomib cohort and 12 in the MTD SC bortezomib cohort. Patients received a median of 2 prior lines of therapy; 97% bortezomib exposed. With no dose-limiting toxicities, MTD was defined as the maximum planned dose: pomalidomide 4 mg, bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2 and LoDEX. All patients discontinued treatment by data cutoff (2 April 2015). The most common grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events were neutropenia (44%) and thrombocytopenia (26%), which occurred more frequently with IV than SC bortezomib. No grade 3/4 peripheral neuropathy or deep vein thrombosis was reported. Overall response rate was 65%. Median duration of response was 7.4 months. Pomalidomide, bortezomib and LoDEX was well tolerated and effective in lenalidomide-refractory and bortezomib-exposed patients with RRMM.

Targeting glutamine metabolism in multiple myeloma enhances BIM binding to BCL-2 eliciting synthetic lethality to venetoclax.

Multiple myeloma (MM) is a plasma cell malignancy that is largely incurable due to development of resistance to therapy-elicited cell death. Nutrients are intricately connected to maintenance of cellular viability in part by inhibition of apoptosis. We were interested to determine if examination of metabolic regulation of BCL-2 proteins may provide insight on alternative routes to engage apoptosis. MM cells are reliant on glucose and glutamine and withdrawal of either nutrient is associated with varying levels of apoptosis. We and others have demonstrated that glucose maintains levels of key resistance-promoting BCL-2 family member, myeloid cell leukemic factor 1 (MCL-1). Cells continuing to survive in the absence of glucose or glutamine were found to maintain expression of MCL-1 but importantly induce pro-apoptotic BIM expression. One potential mechanism for continued survival despite induction of BIM could be due to binding and sequestration of BIM to alternate pro-survival BCL-2 members. Our investigation revealed that cells surviving glutamine withdrawal in particular, enhance expression and binding of BIM to BCL-2, consequently sensitizing these cells to the BH3 mimetic venetoclax. Glutamine deprivation-driven sensitization to venetoclax can be reversed by metabolic supplementation with TCA cycle intermediate α-ketoglutarate. Inhibition of glucose metabolism with the GLUT4 inhibitor ritonavir elicits variable cytotoxicity in MM that is marginally enhanced with venetoclax treatment, however, targeting glutamine metabolism with 6-diazo-5-oxo-l-norleucine uniformly sensitized MM cell lines and relapse/refractory patient samples to venetoclax. Our studies reveal a potent therapeutic strategy of metabolically driven synthetic lethality involving targeting glutamine metabolism for sensitization to venetoclax in MM.

Dexamethasone treatment promotes Bcl-2 dependence in multiple myeloma resulting in sensitivity to venetoclax.

Venetoclax (ABT-199), a specific inhibitor of the anti-apoptotic protein Bcl-2, is currently in phase I clinical trials for multiple myeloma. The results suggest that venetoclax is only active in a small cohort of patients therefore we wanted to determine its efficacy when used in combination. Combining venetoclax with melphalan or carfilzomib produced additive or better cell death in four of the five cell lines tested. The most striking results were seen with dexamethasone (Dex). Co-treatment of human myeloma cell lines and primary patient samples, with Dex and venetoclax, significantly increased cell death over venetoclax alone in four of the five cell lines, and in all patient samples tested. The mechanism by which this occurs is an increase in the expression of both Bcl-2 and Bim upon addition of Dex. This results in alterations in Bim binding to anti-apoptotic proteins. Dex shifts Bim binding towards Bcl-2 resulting in increased sensitivity to venetoclax. These data suggest that knowledge of drug-induced alterations of Bim-binding patterns may help inform better combination drug regimens. Furthermore, the data indicate combining this novel therapeutic with Dex could be an effective therapy for a broader range of patients than would be predicted by single-agent activity.

Consolidation and maintenance therapy with lenalidomide, bortezomib and dexamethasone (RVD) in high-risk myeloma patients.

Prior studies have shown that myeloma patients exhibiting either genetically defined high-risk disease or plasma cell leukemia have a poor outcome with a median overall survival (OS) of ≤3 years. Results of IFM 2005-01 and 02 suggest that relatively limited bortezomib-containing induction regimens did not produce a major survival benefit among these patients. However, results of recent studies suggest that combination therapy may benefit these patients when given early and again later in the treatment. We evaluated a combination maintenance/consolidation regimen (RVD) following autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) for high-risk patients to evaluate the impact of this approach on outcome. Following initiation of RVD maintenance, 51% of patients achieved stringent complete response (sCR), with 96% achieving at least VGPR as best response. Median progression free survival (PFS) for all patients is 32 months with a 3-year OS of 93%. The regimen was well tolerated with no grade 3/4 neuropathy. Early ASCT followed by RVD maintenance is a promising strategy for high-risk myeloma patients and delivered excellent response rates, and promising PFS and OS.

Examination of the follicular lymphoma international prognostic index (FLIPI) in the National LymphoCare study (NLCS): a prospective US patient cohort treated predominantly in community practices.

BACKGROUND: Because follicular lymphoma (FL) patients have heterogeneous outcomes, the FL international prognostic index (FLIPI) was developed to risk-stratify patients and to predict survival. However, limited data exist regarding the role of FLIPI in the era of routine first-line rituximab (R) and R-chemotherapy regimens and in the setting of community oncology practices. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We evaluated the outcome data from the National LymphoCare Study (NLCS), a prospective, observational cohort study, which collects data on patients with FL in the United States (US) community practices. RESULTS: Among 1068 male and 1124 female patients with FLIPI data, most were treated in US community practices (79%); 35% were FLIPI good risk, 30% intermediate risk, and 35% poor risk. FLIPI risk groups were significant predictors of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) for patients who undergo watchful waiting (WW), and those who receive non-R-containing regimens, R-alone, and R-chemotherapy combinations. CONCLUSIONS: In the setting of contemporary practice with routine R use, stratifying patients into good, intermediate, and poor FLIPI risk groups predicts distinct outcomes in terms of OS and PFS. FLIPI remains an important prognostic index in the R era and should be used in clinical practices to support discussions about prognosis.