Elotuzumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: a multicenter, retrospective, real-world experience with 200 cases outside of controlled clinical trials.

In the ELOQUENT-3 trial, the combination of elotuzumab, pomalidomide and dexamethasone (EloPd) proved to have a superior clinical benefit over pomalidomide and dexamethasone with a manageable toxicity profile, leading to its approval for the treatment of patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) who have received at least two prior therapies, including lenalidomide and a proteasome inhibitor. We report here a real-world experience of 200 cases of RRMM treated with EloPd in 35 Italian centers outside of clinical trials. In our dataset, the median number of prior lines of therapy was two, with 51% of cases undergoing autologous stem cell transplant and 73% having been exposed to daratumumab. After a median follow-up of 9 months, 126 patients had stopped EloPd, most of them (88.9%) because of disease progression. The overall response rate was 55.4%, a finding in line with the pivotal trial results. Regarding adverse events, the toxicity profile in our cohort was similar to that in the ELOQUENT-3 trial, with no significant differences between younger (<70 years) and older patients. The median progression-free survival was 7 months, which was shorter than that observed in ELOQUENT-3, probably because of the different clinical characteristics of the two cohorts. Interestingly, International Staging System stage III disease was associated with worse progression-free survival (hazard ratio=2.55). Finally, the median overall survival of our series was shorter than that observed in the ELOQUENT-3 trial (17.5 vs. 29.8 months). In conclusion, our real-world study confirms that EloPd is a safe and possible therapeutic choice for patients with RRMM who have received at least two prior therapies, including lenalidomide and a proteasome inhibitor.

Novel Immunotherapies and Combinations: The Future Landscape of Multiple Myeloma Treatment.

In multiple myeloma impressive outcomes have improved with the introduction of new therapeutic approaches, mainly those including naked monoclonal antibodies such as daratumumab and isatuximab. However, moving to earlier lines of therapy with effective anti-myeloma drugs led to an increase in the number of patients who developed multi-refractoriness to them early on. Currently, triple- or multi-refractory MM represents an unmet medical need, and their management remains a complicated challenge. The recent approval of new immunotherapeutic approaches such as conjugated monoclonal antibodies, bispecific antibodies, and CAR T cells could be a turning point for these heavily pretreated patients. Nevertheless, several issues regarding their use are unsolved, such as how to select patients for each strategy or how to sequence these therapies within the MM therapeutic landscape. Here we provide an overview of the most recent data about approved conjugated monoclonal antibody belantamab, mafodotin, bispecific antibody teclistamab, and other promising compounds under development, mainly focusing on the ongoing clinical trials with monoclonal antibody combination approaches in advanced and earlier phases of MM treatment.

Treatment of primary plasma cell leukaemia with carfilzomib and lenalidomide-based therapy (EMN12/HOVON-129): final analysis of a non-randomised, multicentre, phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Primary plasma cell leukaemia is a rare and aggressive plasma cell disorder with a poor prognosis. The aim of the EMN12/HOVON-129 study was to improve the outcomes of patients with primary plasma cell leukaemia by incorporating carfilzomib and lenalidomide in induction, consolidation, and maintenance therapy. METHODS: The EMN12/HOVON-129 study is a non-randomised, phase 2, multicentre study conducted at 19 academic centres and hospitals in seven European countries (Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, Italy, Norway, The Netherlands, and the UK) for previously untreated patients with primary plasma cell leukaemia aged 18 years or older. Inclusion criteria were newly diagnosed primary plasma cell leukaemia (defined as >2 ×109 cells per L circulating monoclonal plasma cells or plasmacytosis >20% of the differential white cell count) and WHO performance status 0-3. Patients aged 18-65 years (younger patients) and 66 years or older (older patients) were treated in age-specific cohorts and were analysed separately. Younger patients were treated with four 28-day cycles of carfilzomib (36 mg/m2 intravenously on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16), lenalidomide (25 mg orally on days 1-21), and dexamethasone (20 mg orally on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16, 22, and 23). Carfilzomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (KRd) induction was followed by double autologous haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT), four cycles of KRd consolidation, and then maintenance with carfilzomib (27 mg/m2 intravenously on days 1, 2, 15, and 16 for the first 12 28-day cycles, and then 56 mg/m2 on days 1 and 15 in all subsequent cycles) and lenalidomide (10 mg orally on days 1-21) until progression. Patients who were eligible for allogeneic HSCT, could also receive a single autologous HSCT followed by reduced-intensity conditioning allogeneic HSCT and then carfilzomib-lenalidomide maintenance. Older patients received eight cycles of KRd induction followed by maintenance therapy with carfilzomib and lenalidomide until progression. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival. The primary analysis population was the intention-to-treat population, irrespective of the actual treatment received. Data from all participants who received any study drug were included in the safety analyses. The trial was registered at www.trialregister.nl (until June 2022) and https://trialsearch.who.int/ as NTR5350; recruitment is complete and this is the final analysis. FINDINGS: Between Oct 23, 2015, and Aug 5, 2021, 61 patients were enrolled and received KRd induction treatment (36 patients aged 18-65 years [20 (56%) were male and 16 (44%) female], and 25 aged ≥66 years [12 (48%) were male and 13 (52%) female]). With a median follow-up of 43·5 months (IQR 27·7-67·8), the median progression-free survival was 15·5 months (95% CI 9·4-38·4) for younger patients. For older patients, median follow-up was 32·0 months (IQR 24·7-34·6), and median progression-free survival was 13·8 months (95% CI 9·2-35·5). Adverse events were most frequently observed directly after treatment initiation, with infections (two of 36 (6%) younger patients and eight of 25 (32%) older patients) and respiratory events (two of 36 [6%] younger patients and four of 25 [16%] older patients) being the most common grade 3 or greater events during the first four KRd cycles. Treatment-related serious adverse events were reported in 26 (72%) of 36 younger patients and in 19 (76%) of 25 older patients, with infections being the most common. Treatment-related deaths were reported in none of the younger patients and three (12%) of the older patients (two infections and one unknown cause of death). INTERPRETATION: Carfilzomib and lenalidomide-based therapy provides improved progression-free survival compared with previously published data. However, results remain inferior in primary plasma cell leukaemia compared with multiple myeloma, highlighting the need for new studies incorporating novel immunotherapies. FUNDING: Dutch Cancer Society, Celgene (a BMS company), and AMGEN.

Belantamab Mafodotin: From Clinical Trials Data to Real-Life Experiences.

Despite the recent approval of novel immunotherapies, such as immunomodulatory drugs, proteasome inhibitors and anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies, Multiple Myeloma (MM) remains incurable, and the acquisition of triple-refractoriness leads to really dismal outcomes in even earlier lines of therapy. More recently, innovative therapeutic strategies targeting B cell maturation antigen (BCMA), highly expressed on the plasma cell surface, are drawing different future landscapes in terms of effectiveness and outcomes. Belantamab Mafodotin, a first-in-class anti-BCMA antibody-drug conjugate, demonstrated good efficacy and safety profile in triple-refractory patients in the phase 2 DREAMM-2 trial, and it was approved for the treatment of MM triple-exposed patients with >4 prior lines of therapy. Here, starting from Belantamab Mafodotin clinical trials and also exploring combination studies and different schedules in order to improve its efficacy and toxicity, we focused on real-life experiences all over the world, which have confirmed clinical trial data and encourage further Belantamab Mafodotin investigations.

Current Main Topics in Multiple Myeloma.

Multiple Myeloma (MM) remains a difficult to treat disease mainly due to its biological heterogeneity, of which we are more and more knowledgeable thanks to the development of increasingly sensitive molecular methods that allow us to build better prognostication models. The biological diversity translates into a wide range of clinical outcomes from long-lasting remission in some patients to very early relapse in others. In NDMM transplant eligible (TE) patients, the incorporation of mAb as daratumumab in the induction regimens, followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) and consolidation/maintenance therapy, has led to a significant improvement of PFS and OS.; however, this outcome remains poor in ultra-high risk MM or in those who did not achieve a minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity. Several trials are exploring cytogenetic risk-adapted and MRD-driven therapies in these patients. Similarly, quadruplets-containing daratumumab, particularly when administered as continuous therapies, have improved outcome of patients not eligible for autologous transplant (NTE). Patients who become refractory to conventional therapies have noticeably poor outcomes, making their treatment a difficult challenge in need of novel strategies. In this review, we will focus on the main points regarding risk stratification, treatment and monitoring of MM, highlighting the most recent evidence that could modify the management of this still incurable disease.

Real-world assessment of treatment patterns and outcomes in patients with relapsed-refractory multiple myeloma in an Italian haematological tertiary care centre.

Despite significant improvements in therapeutic options, multiple myeloma (MM) patients experience a series of remissions and relapses requiring further lines of therapy (LOTs). We analysed treatment pathways, attrition rates (ARs) and refractoriness patterns across LOTs in 413 MM patients treated from 2011 and 2021. Across LOT-2 to LOT-5 ARs were 26%, 27%, 34% and 37.5%, being 50% for subsequent LOTs. In univariate analysis age over 65 years, international staging system (ISS) II/III, more than two comorbidities, no transplant and no maintenance therapy were significantly associated with AR but regression analysis selected only age over 65 years and more than 2 comorbidities. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 40.5, 19.5, 10.3, 6 and 4.7 months from LOT-1 to LOT-5. Lenalidomide-refractory patients, among those relapsed after LOT-1, were 26% and 64.5% respectively, in patients starting therapy before 2019 versus in or after 2021. In the two cohorts, 57.5% and 85.5% of patients relapsed after LOT-2 were lenalidomide-refractory. Among patients not relapsed from LOT-1, 80% are receiving continuous lenalidomide and could become lenalidomide-refractory, whereas 91% and 51.5% of patients in LOT-2 could become potential lenalidomide- and daratumumab-refractory respectively. In our analysis the rate of patients reaching subsequent LOTs was higher than previously reported and the increase in early refractoriness would require faster and more efficient treatment licensing processes.

Maintenance therapy in multiple myeloma: Two is not always better than one.

In multiple myeloma (MM) long-term therapy aims to control disease and delay progression for as long as possible. In this issue Jenner et al. failed to demonstrate a benefit of maintenance with lenalidomide plus vorinostat compared with lenalidomide in both transplant eligible (TE) and ineligible (NTE) patients enrolled in the Myeloma XI trial. Commentary on: Jenner et al. The addition of vorinostat to lenalidomide maintenance for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma of all ages: results from 'Myeloma XI', a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase III trial. Br J Haematol. 2023;201:276-288.

Association of IMWG frailty score with health-related quality of life profile of patients with relapsed refractory multiple myeloma in Italy and the UK: a GIMEMA, multicentre, cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: The clinical management of patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma is challenging and there is a paucity of tools to help clinicians make more informed decisions for the most suitable treatment options. We aimed to investigate the clinical utility of the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) frailty score in the setting of relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma, by examining its ability to capture different patient-reported health-related quality of life profiles. METHODS: We did a cross-sectional analysis of a prospective observational study of patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma in Italy and the UK (30 hospitals across northern, central, and southern Italy, and one hospital in London, UK). Inclusion criteria were age 18 years or older and patients who had received at least one previous line of therapy and no more than five lines. Participants were excluded if they had a psychiatric disorder or major cognitive dysfunction, or any grade 3 or higher adverse event within 2 weeks before study entry. On study initiation, physicians had to assess frailty according to the IMWG criteria, which included the Charlson Comorbidity Index, the Katz Activity of Daily Living, and the Lawton Instrumental Activities of Daily Living. Patients were asked to complete patient-reported outcome measures, including the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) and its validated multiple myeloma module (QLQ-MY20). A multivariable linear regression model was used to assess the mean differences in health-related quality of life scores between frailty groups to account for key potential confounding factors. FINDINGS: Overall, between Nov 13, 2017, and Nov 15, 2021, 415 patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma, with a median age of 69·8 years (IQR 62·8-75·2) were enrolled. The median time since diagnosis was 4·4 years (IQR 2·5-7·1) and most patients (351 [85%]) had received at least two previous lines of therapy. According to the IMWG frailty score, 200 (48%) were classified as fit, 112 (27%) were classified as intermediate-fit, and 103 (25%) patients were classified as frail. Each frailty group was associated with a distinct health-related quality of life profile, with most notable differences between fit and frail patients. The largest clinically meaningful adjusted differences between fit and frail patients by the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire were observed for physical functioning (Δ=-19·0 [95% CI -25·6 to -12·5; p<0·0001), fatigue (Δ=16·7 [9·7 to 23·7]; p<0·0001), insomnia (Δ=13·4 [4·1 to 22·6]; p=0·0047), and dyspnoea (Δ=12·5 [4·6 to 20·4]; p=0·0021). The most prevalent clinically important symptom in the overall population was pain; however, its prevalence varied between IMWG frailty groups at 70·9% in frail patients, 55·9% in intermediate-fit patients, and 50·5% in fit patients. INTERPRETATION: Our findings show the clinical utility of the IMWG frailty score in the setting of relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma, in helping to distinguish between groups of patients with distinct health-related quality of life profiles. Further research is needed to examine the value of patient-reported outcome data in improving assessment of frailty in the setting of relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. FUNDING: Fondazione GIMEMA Franco Mandelli Onlus and Amgen.

Survival Risk Scores for Real-Life Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma Patients Receiving Elotuzumab or Carfilzomib In Combination With Lenalidomide and Dexamethasone as Salvage Therapy: Analysis of 919 Cases Outside Clinical Trials.

The present study aimed to develop two survival risk scores (RS) for overall survival (OS, SRS KRd/EloRd ) and progression-free survival (PFS, PRS KRd/EloRd ) in 919 relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) patients who received carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (KRd)/elotuzumab, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (EloRd). The median OS was 35.4 months, with no significant difference between the KRd arm versus the EloRd arm. In the multivariate analysis, advanced ISS (HR = 1.31; P = 0.025), interval diagnosis-therapy (HR = 1.46; P = 0.001), number of previous lines of therapies (HR = 1.96; P < 0.0001), older age (HR = 1.72; P < 0.0001), and prior lenalidomide exposure (HR = 1.30; P = 0.026) remained independently associated with death. The median PFS was 20.3 months, with no difference between the two strategies. The multivariate model identified a significant progression/death risk increase for ISS III (HR = 1.37; P = 0.002), >3 previous lines of therapies (HR = 1.67; P < 0.0001), older age (HR = 1.64; P < 0.0001), and prior lenalidomide exposure (HR = 1.35; P = 0.003). Three risk SRS KRd/EloRd categories were generated: low-risk (134 cases, 16.5%), intermediate-risk (467 cases, 57.3%), and high-risk categories (213 cases, 26.2%). The 1- and 2-year OS probability rates were 92.3% and 83.8% for the low-risk (HR = 1, reference category), 81.1% and 60.6% (HR = 2.73; P < 0.0001) for the intermediate-risk, and 65.5% and 42.5% (HR = 4.91; P < 0.0001) for the high-risk groups, respectively. Notably, unlike the low-risk group, which did not cross the median timeline, the OS median values were 36.6 and 18.6 months for the intermediate- and high-risk cases, respectively. Similarly, three PRS KRd/EloRd risk categories were engendered. Based on such grouping, 338 (41.5%) cases were allocated in the low-, 248 (30.5%) in the intermediate-, and 228 (28.0%) in the high-risk groups. The 1- and 2-year PFS probability rates were 71.4% and 54.5% for the low-risk (HR = 1, reference category), 68.9% and 43.7% (HR = 1.95; P < 0.0001) for the intermediate-risk, and 48.0% and 27.1% (HR = 3.73; P < 0.0001) for the high-risk groups, respectively. The PFS median values were 29.0, 21.0, and 11.7 months for the low-, intermediate-, and high-risk cases. This analysis showed 2.7- and 4.9-fold increased risk of death for the intermediate- and high-risk cases treated with KRd/EloRd as salvage therapy. The combined progression/death risks of the two categories were increased 1.3- and 2.2-fold compared to the low-risk group. In conclusion, SRS KRd/EloRd and PRS KRd/EloRd may represent accessible and globally applicable models in daily clinical practice and ultimately represent a prognostic tool for RRMM patients who received KRd or EloRd.

Thrombosis in multiple myeloma: risk stratification, antithrombotic prophylaxis, and management of acute events. A consensus-based position paper from an ad hoc expert panel.

The introduction of new therapeutic agents for multiple myeloma (MM), including proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulatory drugs, and monoclonal antibodies, has improved the outcomes of patients but, in parallel, has changed the frequency and epidemiology of thrombotic events. Thrombosis is now a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in MM patients, and optimal thromboprophylaxis is far from being reached. Moving from the recognition that the above issue represents an unmet clinical need, an expert panel assessed the scientific literature and composed a framework of recommendations for improving thrombosis control in patients who are candidates for active treatment for MM. The panel generated key clinical questions using the criterion of clinical relevance through a Delphi process. It explored four domains, i.e., thrombotic risk factors and risk stratification, primary thromboprophylaxis, management of acute thrombotic events, and secondary thromboprophylaxis. The recommendations issued may assist hematologists in minimizing the risk of thrombosis and guarantee adherence to treatment in patients with MM who are candidates for active treatment.

Long-term follow-up of cladribine treatment in hairy cell leukemia: 30-year experience in a multicentric Italian study.

Hairy cell leukemia (HCL) is a rare lymphoproliferative disease with an excellent prognosis after treatment with cladribine (2CDA), although relapse may occur during follow-up. The aim of the study is to review the efficacy, safety, long-term remission rate, and overall survival (OS) in those patients who received 2CDA as first-line treatment. We retrospectively reviewed data of HCL patients treated with 2CDA between March 1991 and May 2019 at 18 Italian Hematological centers: 513 patients were evaluable for study purpose. The median age was 54 years (range 24-88) and ECOG was 0 in 84.9% of cases. A total of 330 (64.3%) patients received 2CDA intravenously and 183 (35.7%) subcutaneously. ORR was 91.8%: CR was obtained in 335 patients (65.3%), PR in 96 (18.7%), and hematological response in 40 (7.8%) patients; in 42 (8.2%) no response was observed. Hemoglobin value (p = 0.044), frequency of circulating hairy cells (p = 0.039), recovery of absolute neutrophil count (p = 0.006), and normalization of spleen (p ≤ 0.001) were associated with CR compared to PR in univariable analysis. At a median follow-up of 6.83 years (range 0.04-28.52), the median time to relapse was 12.2 years. A significant difference in duration of response was identified between patients that obtained a CR and PR (19.4 years versus 4.8 years, p < 0.0001). Non-hematological grade 3 or higher early toxicity was reported in 103 (20.1%) patients. Median OS was not reached: 95.3%, 92.4%, and 81.8% of patients were estimated to be alive at 5, 10, and 15 years, respectively. Forty-nine patients died (9.5%), following an infection in 14 cases (2.7%), natural causes in 14 (2.7%), cardiovascular events in 13 (2.5%), a second neoplasm in 6 (1.2%), and progression of HCL in 2 cases (0.4%). Following treatment of HCL with 2CDA, 80% of patients are estimated to be alive 15 years after diagnosis.

An update on novel multiple myeloma targets.

INTRODUCTION: Despite therapeutic progress, leading to a significant improvement of outcome, multiple myeloma (MM) remains a difficult to treat hematologic disease due to its biological heterogeneity and clinical complexity. AREAS COVERED: Treatment of patients refractory and resistant to all classes of agents used in newly diagnosed MM is becoming a relevant problem for every hematologist. New generation immunotherapies, such as conjugated mAb, bispecific mAbs and CAR-T cells, targeting novel molecules as BCMA, have showed relevant results in very advanced MM. In the same setting, small molecules, such as selinexor and melflufen, also proved to be effective. We are currently waiting for the results of under evaluation personalized therapy, directed against specific gene mutations or signaling pathways, responsible for disease progression. EXPERT OPINION: In the near future, many therapeutic strategies will become available for MM and the challenge will be to position each approach in order to cure, maintaining a good quality of life in these patients.

Management of infectious risk of daratumumab therapy in multiple myeloma: A consensus-based position paper from an ad hoc Italian expert panel.

Daratumumab is approved for newly diagnosed or relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (MM). The use of daratumumab has improved patient outcomes but has changed the frequency and epidemiology of infections. However, the optimal approach to prophylaxis and supportive therapy for daratumumab-emergent infections is unknown and represents an unmet clinical need in MM. Consequently, an expert panel convened to compose recommendations for optimal infection control in patient candidates to or under daratumumab treatment for MM. Scientific evidence on infections secondary to daratumumab was evaluated, and a consensus was developed by group discussion for key questions selected according to the clinical relevance. The following key issues were addressed: infectious risk assessment and risk stratification, infection mitigation strategies, and management of infectious complications in patients with MM treated with daratumumab.

Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation in Multiple Myeloma: Where Are We and Where Do We Want to Go?

The introduction of high-dose therapy in the 1990s as well as the development of drugs such as thalidomide, lenalidomide, and bortezomib in the 2000s led to an impressive improvement in outcome of patients with multiple myeloma (MM) eligible for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). Clinical trials conducted in the first ten years of the twenty-first century established as standard therapy for these patients a therapeutic approach including induction, single or double ASCT, consolidation, and maintenance therapy. More recently, incorporating second-generation proteasome inhibitors carfilzomib and monoclonal antibody daratumumab into each phase of treatment significantly improved the efficacy of ASCT in terms of measurable residual disease (MRD) negativity, Progression Free Survival (PFS), and Overall Survival (OS). The availability of techniques such as multiparameter flow cytometry (MFC) and next-generation sequencing (NGS) for MRD assessment allowed the design of MRD-based response-adjusted trials that will define, in particular, the role of consolidation and maintenance therapies. In this review, we will provide an overview of the most recent evidence and the future prospects of ASCT in MM patients.

Adjusted comparison between elotuzumab and carfilzomib in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone as salvage therapy for multiple myeloma patients.

The lack of a randomized trial comparing carfilzomib (K) versus elotuzumab (Elo) associated with lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rd) prompted us to assess the relative usefulness of one triplet over the other. Five independent retrospective cohorts of 883 relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) patients, including 300 EloRd and 583 KRd cases, outside clinical trials, entered this non-randomized comparison. KRd cohort accounted for a higher incidence of younger patients, cases with ≥3 lines of therapy, already exposed to lenalidomide, International Staging System (ISS) stage III, and abnormal lactic dehydrogenase (LDH) level compared with EloRd cohort. Moreover, cytogenetic risk categories, detected in roughly one-third of cases, were equally distributed between the two therapy arms. The probability of CR+VGPR response was significantly higher in KRd (n = 314, 53.9%) than in EloRd patients (n = 111, 37.0%). Likewise, the cumulative incidence function of CR+VGPR, taking into account the competitive risk of death, was significantly higher in KRd arm patients than those in the EloRd arm (p = .003). Moreover, KRd treatment significantly reduced the progression or death risk by 46% in an adjusted multivariate analysis (HR: 0.54, 95% CI 0.42-0.69, p < .0001). Finally, in an adjusted illness-progression/death model, the effect of KRd versus EloRd was of higher magnitude among those who achieved CR+VGPR (-39% hazard ratio reduction, p = .02) than among those who achieved < VGPR (-29% hazard ratio reduction, p = .007). With limitations characteristic to any retrospective analysis, this current clinical practice study's overall results demonstrated potential benefits of KRd therapy compared with EloRd. This observation may help the daily clinical practice.

Experts' consensus on the definition and management of high risk multiple myeloma.

High risk multiple myeloma (HRMM) at diagnosis is currently recognized according to the Revised International Staging System (R-ISS) which was set up in 2015. Since then, new clinical and biological prognostic factors have been developed, which could implement the definition of High Risk (HR) category. We conducted a survey in order to identify which additional parameters, both clinical and biological, are considered more useful for the clinical practice and to evaluate if the management of Multiple Myeloma (MM) should change on the basis of the risk category. A questionnaire, consisting of 8 statements, was submitted to 6 Italian experts, from the European Myeloma Network (EMN) Research Italy, using the Delphi method. The colleagues were asked to answer each question using a scale between 0 and 100. If a statement did not reach at least 75 out of 100 points from all the participants, it was rephrased on the basis of the proposal of the experts and resubmitted in a second or further round, until a consensus was reached among all. From the first round of the survey a strong consensus was reached regarding the opportunity to revise the R-ISS including chromosome 1 abnormality, TP53 mutation or deletion, circulating plasma cells by next generation flow and extramedullary plasmacytomas. No consensus was reached for the definition of "double hit" MM and for the application in clinical practice of treatment strategies based on the risk category. In the second round of the Delphi questionnaire, "double-hit" MM was recognized by the association of at least two high-risk cytogenetic or molecular abnormalities. Moreover, the experts agreed to reserve an intensified treatment only to specific conditions, such as plasma cell leukaemia or patients with multiple extramedullary plasmacytomas, while they admitted that there are not sufficient real word data in order to modify treatment on the basis of MRD assessment in clinical practice. This survey suggests that the definition of HRMM should be implemented by additional clinical and biological risk factors, that will be useful to guide treatment in the future.

Carfilzomib with cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone or lenalidomide and dexamethasone plus autologous transplantation or carfilzomib plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone, followed by maintenance with carfilzomib plus lenalidomide or lenalidomide alone for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (FORTE): a randomised, open-label, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Bortezomib-based induction followed by high-dose melphalan (200 mg/m2) and autologous stem-cell transplantation (MEL200-ASCT) and maintenance treatment with lenalidomide alone is the current standard of care for young and fit patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of different carfilzomib-based induction and consolidation approaches with or without transplantation and of maintenance treatment with carfilzomib plus lenalidomide versus lenalidomide alone in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. METHODS: UNITO-MM-01/FORTE was a randomised, open-label, phase 2 trial done in 42 Italian academic and community practice centres. We enrolled transplant-eligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma aged 65 years or younger with a Karnofsky Performance Status of 60% or higher. Patients were stratified according to International Staging System stage (I vs II/III) and age (<60 years vs 60-65 years) and randomly assigned (1:1:1) to KRd plus ASCT (four 28-day induction cycles with carfilzomib plus lenalidomide plus dexamethasone [KRd], melphalan at 200 mg/m2 and autologous stem-cell transplantation [MEL200-ASCT], followed by four 28-day KRd consolidation cycles), KRd12 (12 28-day KRd cycles), or KCd plus ASCT (four 28-day induction cycles with carfilzomib plus cyclophosphamide plus dexamethasone [KCd], MEL200-ASCT, and four 28-day KCd consolidation cycles). Carfilzomib 36 mg/m2 was administered intravenously on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16; lenalidomide 25 mg administered orally on days 1-21; cyclophosphamide 300 mg/m2 administered orally on days 1, 8, and 15; and dexamethasone 20 mg administered orally or intravenously on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16, 22, and 23. Thereafter, patients were stratified according to induction-consolidation treatment and randomly assigned (1:1) to maintenance treatment with carfilzomib plus lenalidomide or lenalidomide alone. Carfilzomib 36 mg/m2 was administered intravenously on days 1-2 and 15-16 every 28 days for up to 2 years; lenalidomide 10 mg was administered orally on days 1-21 every 28 days until progression or intolerance in both groups. The primary endpoints were the proportion of patients with at least a very good partial response after induction with KRd versus KCd and progression-free survival with carfilzomib plus lenalidomide versus lenalidomide alone as maintenance treatment, both assessed in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02203643. Study recruitment is complete, and all patients are in the follow-up or maintenance phases. FINDINGS: Between Feb 23, 2015, and April 5, 2017, 474 patients were randomly assigned to one of the induction-intensification-consolidation groups (158 to KRd plus ASCT, 157 to KRd12, and 159 to KCd plus ASCT). The median duration of follow-up was 50·9 months (IQR 45·7-55·3) from the first randomisation. 222 (70%) of 315 patients in the KRd group and 84 (53%) of 159 patients in the KCd group had at least a very good partial response after induction (OR 2·14, 95% CI 1·44-3·19, p=0·0002). 356 patients were randomly assigned to maintenance treatment with carfilzomib plus lenalidomide (n=178) or lenalidomide alone (n=178). The median duration of follow-up was 37·3 months (IQR 32·9-41·9) from the second randomisation. 3-year progression-free survival was 75% (95% CI 68-82) with carfilzomib plus lenalidomide versus 65% (58-72) with lenalidomide alone (hazard ratio [HR] 0·64 [95% CI 0·44-0·94], p=0·023). During induction and consolidation, the most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (21 [13%] of 158 patients in the KRd plus ASCT group vs 15 [10%] of 156 in the KRd12 group vs 18 [11%] of 159 in the KCd plus ASCT group); dermatological toxicity (nine [6%] vs 12 [8%] vs one [1%]); and hepatic toxicity (13 [8%] vs 12 [8%] vs none). Treatment-related serious adverse events were reported in 18 (11%) of 158 patients in the KRd-ASCT group, 29 (19%) of 156 in the KRd12 group, and 17 (11%) of 159 in the KCd plus ASCT group; the most common serious adverse event was pneumonia, in seven (4%) of 158, four (3%) of 156, and five (3%) of 159 patients. Treatment-emergent deaths were reported in two (1%) of 158 patients in the KRd plus ASCT group, two (1%) of 156 in the KRd12 group, and three (2%) of 159 in the KCd plus ASCT group. During maintenance, the most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (35 [20%] of 173 patients on carfilzomib plus lenalidomide vs 41 [23%] of 177 patients on lenalidomide alone); infections (eight [5%] vs 13 [7%]); and vascular events (12 [7%] vs one [1%]). Treatment-related serious adverse events were reported in 24 (14%) of 173 patients on carfilzomib plus lenalidomide versus 15 (8%) of 177 on lenalidomide alone; the most common serious adverse event was pneumonia, in six (3%) of 173 versus five (3%) of 177 patients. One patient died of a treatment-emergent adverse event in the carfilzomib plus lenalidomide group. INTERPRETATION: Our data show that KRd plus ASCT showed superiority in terms of improved responses compared with the other two treatment approaches and support the prospective randomised evaluation of KRd plus ASCT versus standards of care (eg, daratumumab plus bortezomib plus thalidomide plus dexamethasone plus ASCT) in transplant-eligible patients with multiple myeloma. Carfilzomib plus lenalidomide as maintenance therapy also improved progression-free survival compared with the standard-of-care lenalidomide alone. FUNDING: Amgen, Celgene/Bristol Myers Squibb. TRANSLATION: For the Italian translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Anticoagulation and Vessel Recanalization in Cirrhotic Patients with Splanchnic Vein Thrombosis: A Multidisciplinary "Real Life" Experience.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Splanchnic vein thrombosis (SVT) is a potentially life-threatening complication of liver cirrhosis. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of a multi-disciplinary approach and early anticoagulation therapy (AT) on bleeding/thrombotic events, recanalization rates and outcome of cirrhotic patients with SVT. METHODS: This is a single-center, registry-based cohort study. Over 17 years, 149 SVT patients were enrolled and prospectively evaluated. Regarding cirrhotic-SVT, a pre-specified algorithm, guiding initial posology of AT and follow-up visits schedule, was performed. Major bleeding (MB), thrombotic events, functional liver scores and all cause-mortality were investigated. Efficacy of AT was evaluated by radiological imaging. RESULTS: In cirrhotic-SVT, the incidence rate of MB was 8.4 per 100 patient-year (95% CI, 3.83-15.97), while the incidence rate of thrombosis was 5.6 per 100 patient-year (95% CI, 2.05-12.2). In incidental SVT treated with AT, MB incidence was 6.5 per 100 patient-year (95% CI: 2.8-12.82), while in symptomatic SVT was 2.2 per 100 patient-year (95% CI: 0.25-8.02). All thrombotic recurrences occurred in incidental SVT (7.7 per 100 patient-years; 95% CI, 3.71-14.26). Overall survival was significantly higher in patients who had at least a partial recanalization (p < 0.01) and partial/total recanalization was independently associated with improved MELD score at multivariate analysis (HR 2.62, 95% CI 1.1-6.47, p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: In cirrhotic SVT patients, partial or total resolution of thrombosis ameliorates liver function and is associated with higher overall survival. A multidisciplinary approach together with radiological follow-up at pre-fixed time improves patient selection and monitoring.

Consolidation and Maintenance in Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma.

PURPOSE: To address the role of consolidation treatment for newly diagnosed, transplant eligible patients with multiple myeloma in a controlled clinical trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The EMN02/HOVON95 trial compared consolidation treatment with two cycles of bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRD) or no consolidation after induction and intensification therapy, followed by continuous lenalidomide maintenance. Primary study end point was progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Eight hundred seventy-eight eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive VRD consolidation (451 patients) or no consolidation (427 patients). At a median follow-up of 74.8 months, median PFS with adjustment for pretreatment was prolonged in patients randomly assigned to VRD consolidation (59.3 v 42.9 months, hazard ratio [HR] = 0.81; 95% CI, 0.68 to 0.96; P = .016). The PFS benefit was observed across most predefined subgroups, including revised International Staging System (ISS) stage, cytogenetics, and prior treatment. Revised ISS3 stage (HR, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.41 to 2.86) and ampl1q (HR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.37 to 2.04) were significant adverse prognostic factors. The median duration of maintenance was 33 months (interquartile range 13-86 months). Response ≥ complete response (CR) after consolidation versus no consolidation before start of maintenance was 34% versus 18%, respectively (P < .001). Response ≥ CR on protocol including maintenance was 59% with consolidation and 46% without (P < .001). Minimal residual disease analysis by flow cytometry in a subgroup of 226 patients with CR or stringent complete response or very good partial response before start of maintenance demonstrated a 74% minimal residual disease-negativity rate in VRD-treated patients. Toxicity from VRD was acceptable and manageable. CONCLUSION: Consolidation treatment with VRD followed by lenalidomide maintenance improves PFS and depth of response in newly diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma as compared to maintenance alone.