PORT: A Randomized, Cross-Over, Phase 2 Study of Melflufen Peripheral Versus Central Intravenous Administration in Patients With Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma.

BACKGROUND: Melflufen, a first-in-class alkylating peptide-drug conjugate, rapidly enters tumor cells and metabolizes to melphalan. In previous studies, melflufen was administered via central venous catheter (CVC). However, administration by peripheral venous catheter (PVC) may be preferable. PATIENTS AND METHODS: PORT was a two-period, phase 2 crossover study of CVC versus PVC melflufen administration in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. Adults with ≥ 2 prior therapies refractory to/intolerant of an immunomodulatory drug and a proteasome inhibitor were randomized 1:1 to weekly oral dexamethasone plus melflufen (40 mg) via CVC or PVC infusion on day 1 of 28-day cycle 1. In cycle 2, patients continued dexamethasone and crossed over to the other melflufen administration route. In cycle 3, all patients received melflufen until progression; PVC or CVC routes were allowed based upon investigator decision. Pharmacokinetic sampling was performed during and after melflufen infusion. Primary endpoints were melphalan pharmacokinetic parameters (Cmax, AUC(0-t), and AUC(0-∞)) and frequency and severity of PVC-related local reactions. RESULTS: The 90% CIs for adjusted geometric mean ratios for pharmacokinetic parameters following CVC versus PVC administration were within the 0.8-1.25 bioequivalence range (Cmax 0.946 [90% CI: 0.849, 1.053]; AUC(0-t) 0.952 [90% CI: 0.861, 1.053]; AUC(0-∞) 0.955 [90% CI: 0.863, 1.058]). In both arms, adverse events were primarily hematological and similar; no phlebitis or local infusion-related reactions occurred. CONCLUSION: Melflufen PVC and CVC administrations are bioequivalent based on melphalan pharmacokinetic parameters. Melflufen via PVC was well tolerated, with no infusion-related reactions or new safety signals and may represent an alternative route of administration.

Isatuximab-pomalidomide-dexamethasone versus pomalidomide-dexamethasone in patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma: final overall survival analysis.

The primary and pre-specified updated analyses of ICARIA-MM (NCT02990338) demonstrated improved progression-free survival and a benefit in overall survival (OS) was reported with the addition of isatuximab, an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody, to pomalidomide-dexamethasone (Pd) in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. Here, we report the final OS analysis. This multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase 3 study included patients who had received and failed ≥2 previous therapies, including lenalidomide and a proteasome inhibitor. Between January 10, 2017, and February 2, 2018, 307 patients were randomized (1:1) to isatuximab-pomalidomide- dexamethasone (Isa-Pd; n = 154) or Pd (n = 153), stratified based on age (3). At data cutoff for the final OS analysis after 220 OS events (January 27, 2022), median follow-up duration was 52.4 months. Median OS (95% confidence interval) was 24.6 months (20.3-31.3 months) with Isa-Pd and 17.7 months (14.4-26.2 months) with Pd (hazard ratio = 0.78; 95% CI, 0.59-1.02; 1-sided P = 0.0319). Despite subsequent daratumumab use in the Pd group and its potential benefit on PFS in the first subsequent therapy line, median PFS2 was significantly longer with Isa-Pd vs. Pd (17.5 vs. 12.9 months; log-rank 1-sided P = 0.0091). In this analysis, Isa-Pd continued to be efficacious and well tolerated after follow-up of approximately 52 months, contributing to a clinically meaningful, 6.9-month improvement in median overall survival in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.

Clinical characteristics and outcomes in risk-stratified patients with smoldering multiple myeloma: data from the Czech Republic Registry of Monoclonal Gammopathies.

Smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM) is an asymptomatic precursor to active multiple myeloma (MM). The aim of this study was to report clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with SMM stratified based on their risk of progression to MM using the Mayo 20/2/20 criteria. Data were leveraged from the Czech Myeloma Group Registry of Monoclonal Gammopathies (RMG). Key outcomes included progression-free survival from SMM diagnosis to active MM diagnosis or death (PFS), progression-free survival from SMM diagnosis to progression on first line (1 L) MM treatment or death (PFS2), and overall survival (OS). Of 498 patients, 174 (34.9%) were classified as high risk and 324 (65.1%) as non-high risk. Median follow-up was approximately 65 months. During follow-up, more patients in the high-risk vs non-high-risk group received 1 L MM treatment (76.4% vs 46.6%, p < 0.001). PFS, PFS2, and OS were significantly shorter in high-risk vs non-high-risk patients (13.2 vs 56.6 months, p < 0.001; 49.9 vs 84.9 months, p < 0.001; 93.2 vs 131.1 months, p = 0.012, respectively). The results of this study add to the growing body of evidence that patients with high-risk vs non-high-risk SMM have significantly worse outcomes, including OS.

Daratumumab with lenalidomide and dexamethasone in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma patients - real world evidence analysis.

We performed real world evidence (RWE) analysis of daratumumab, lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Dara-Rd) versus lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rd) treatment in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma patients (RRMM). In total, 240 RRMM patients were treated with Dara-Rd from 2016 to 2022 outside of clinical trials in all major Czech hematology centers. As a reference, 531 RRMM patients treated with Rd were evaluated. Patients' data were recorded in the Czech Registry of Monoclonal Gammopathies (RMG). Partial response (PR) or better response (ORR) was achieved in significantly more patients in Dara-Rd than in Rd group (91.2% vs. 69.9%; p < 0.001). The median progression free survival (PFS) was 26.9 months in the Dara-Rd and 12.8 months in the Rd group (p < 0.001). Median overall survival (OS) was not reached in the Dara-Rd compared to 27.2 months in the Rd group (p = 0.023). In patients with 1-3 previous treatment lines, there was significant PFS benefit of Dara-Rd compared to Rd (median PFS not reached vs. 13.2 months; p < 0.001). In patients with > 3 previous treatment lines, there was no significant PFS benefit of Dara-Rd treatment (7.8 months vs. 9.9 months; p = 0.874), similarly in patients refractory to PI + IMIDs (11.5 months vs. 9.2 months; p = 0.376). In RWE conditions, the median PFS in RRMM patients treated with Dara-Rd is shorter when compared to clinical trials. In heavily pretreated RRMM patients, efficacy of Dara-Rd treatment is limited; best possible outcomes of Dara-Rd are achieved in minimally pretreated patients.

Personalised progression prediction in patients with monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance or smouldering multiple myeloma (PANGEA): a retrospective, multicohort study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with precursors to multiple myeloma are dichotomised as having monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance or smouldering multiple myeloma on the basis of monoclonal protein concentrations or bone marrow plasma cell percentage. Current risk stratifications use laboratory measurements at diagnosis and do not incorporate time-varying biomarkers. Our goal was to develop a monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance and smouldering multiple myeloma stratification algorithm that utilised accessible, time-varying biomarkers to model risk of progression to multiple myeloma. METHODS: In this retrospective, multicohort study, we included patients who were 18 years or older with monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance or smouldering multiple myeloma. We evaluated several modelling approaches for predicting disease progression to multiple myeloma using a training cohort (with patients at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA; annotated from Nov, 13, 2019, to April, 13, 2022). We created the PANGEA models, which used data on biomarkers (monoclonal protein concentration, free light chain ratio, age, creatinine concentration, and bone marrow plasma cell percentage) and haemoglobin trajectories from medical records to predict progression from precursor disease to multiple myeloma. The models were validated in two independent validation cohorts from National and Kapodistrian University of Athens (Athens, Greece; from Jan 26, 2020, to Feb 7, 2022; validation cohort 1), University College London (London, UK; from June 9, 2020, to April 10, 2022; validation cohort 1), and Registry of Monoclonal Gammopathies (Czech Republic, Czech Republic; Jan 5, 2004, to March 10, 2022; validation cohort 2). We compared the PANGEA models (with bone marrow [BM] data and without bone marrow [no BM] data) to current criteria (International Myeloma Working Group [IMWG] monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance and 20/2/20 smouldering multiple myeloma risk criteria). FINDINGS: We included 6441 patients, 4931 (77%) with monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance and 1510 (23%) with smouldering multiple myeloma. 3430 (53%) of 6441 participants were female. The PANGEA model (BM) improved prediction of progression from smouldering multiple myeloma to multiple myeloma compared with the 20/2/20 model, with a C-statistic increase from 0·533 (0·480-0·709) to 0·756 (0·629-0·785) at patient visit 1 to the clinic, 0·613 (0·504-0·704) to 0·720 (0·592-0·775) at visit 2, and 0·637 (0·386-0·841) to 0·756 (0·547-0·830) at visit three in validation cohort 1. The PANGEA model (no BM) improved prediction of smouldering multiple myeloma progression to multiple myeloma compared with the 20/2/20 model with a C-statistic increase from 0·534 (0·501-0·672) to 0·692 (0·614-0·736) at visit 1, 0·573 (0·518-0·647) to 0·693 (0·605-0·734) at visit 2, and 0·560 (0·497-0·645) to 0·692 (0·570-0·708) at visit 3 in validation cohort 1. The PANGEA models improved prediction of monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance progression to multiple myeloma compared with the IMWG rolling model at visit 1 in validation cohort 2, with C-statistics increases from 0·640 (0·518-0·718) to 0·729 (0·643-0·941) for the PANGEA model (BM) and 0·670 (0·523-0·729) to 0·879 (0·586-0·938) for the PANGEA model (no BM). INTERPRETATION: Use of the PANGEA models in clinical practice will allow patients with precursor disease to receive more accurate measures of their risk of progression to multiple myeloma, thus prompting for more appropriate treatment strategies. FUNDING: SU2C Dream Team and Cancer Research UK.

Patient Characteristics, Treatment Patterns, and Outcomes in Triple-Class Exposed Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma Patients, a Retrospective Observational Study Using Czech Registry Data.

BACKGROUND: Although novel therapies improved prognosis of multiple myeloma (MM) patients, clinical outcomes in the multi-refractory population are still poor. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We reviewed data from the Czech Registry of Monoclonal Gammopathies, identified and characterized triple-class exposed (3CE) relapsed/refractory MM patients, treatment patterns after 3CE, assessed overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), time to next treatment (TTNT), explored cohorts with and without triple- and penta-refractoriness. RESULTS: In 83 3CE patients who started subsequent therapies, the median OS was 14.2 months (95% CI, 8.5-19.9), PFS 6.2 months (95% CI, 3.9-8.5), and TTNT 7.2 months (95% CI, 4.6-9.8). Triple- and penta-class refractory patients had a significantly worse prognosis in all outcomes. Their life expectancy was shorter, the disease progression started earlier, and the TTNT was shorter, which increased likelihood of becoming refractory to more therapies. Time-to-event results from the first index date and all index dates analyses were very similar. CONCLUSION: Similar to previous studies from the US and Europe, our results show a high disease burden. Introduction of novel therapies, such as CAR-T cells, new bispecific and trispecific monoclonal antibodies, and other drugs, is expected to bring significant benefits to these patients.

Retinal oxygen saturation in monoclonal gammopathies patients: A pilot study.

PURPOSE: The aim of this pilot study was to assess oxygen saturation in retinal blood vessels in patients with monoclonal gammopathies (MGs). METHODS: Thirty-one patients with MGs (11 women and 20 men, mean age 65.9 ± 8.9 years) were enrolled during 2016-2020. The patients were diagnosed at the Haemato-Oncology Department and subsequently examined at the Ophthalmology Department before initiating systemic therapy. All patients were subjected to automatic retinal oximetry (Oxymap ehf.) and had their fundus photographed (Topcon TRC-50DX retinal camera). We assessed the association between retinal oxygen saturation (SatO2 ) - arterial SatO2 , venous SatO2 and arterio-venous (AV) difference-and MGs parameters: serum monoclonal immunoglobulin (M-protein) level and serum immunoglobulin-free light chains (FLC kappa and lambda), total protein, serum viscosity, haemoglobin, albumin, lactate dehydrogenase, C-reactive protein, creatinine and serum calcium level. Hyperviscosity-related retinopathy was also evaluated. RESULTS: Statistical analysis showed a significant positive correlation (r = 0.462; p = 0.009) between the AV difference and the haemoglobin level. A significant, medium strong negative correlation was found between the AV difference and the serum levels of the monoclonal light lambda chains (r = -0.450; p = 0.011). Contrary to expectations, no statistically significant correlation was found between retinal oxygen saturation and the total protein or viscosity. CONCLUSION: This study found correlation between retinal oxygen saturation and certain parameters in the blood of patients with MGs. Increasing levels of monoclonal immunoglobulin seem to reduce oxygen absorption in retinal arterioles, resulting in a lower AV difference, particularly in patients with a high free light chain level.

Global DNA methylation and increased DNMT3A expression in multiple myeloma patients.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to compare the expression profile of selected DNA methyltransferases and global DNA methylation status in patients with different phases of multiple myeloma (MM) . For the analysis, different cellular populations including unsorted myeloma cells and a set of plasma cells purified by relevant antibodies were used. Consequently, laboratory data were compared to patients' clinical data. PATIENTS AND METHODS: For the analysis, unsorted bone marrow cell population of 44 MM patients (30 newly diagnosed, 9 relapsed and 5 patients in remission) and a set of 8 patients' samples of sorted plasma cells were used. We used commercially available RNA isolated from BM of 3 healthy individuals as control samples. Expression analysis of three DNA methyltransferases - DNMT1, DNMT3A, and DNMT3B was performed by quantitative RT-PCR and the patient global DNA methylation profiles were detected by colorimetric assay. RESULTS: Unchanged DNMT1 expression was detected in the selected cohort of patients. Normalized DNMT3A gene expression was globally higher in comparison with controls in unsorted and sorted cell populations. Low (0.08-1.81%) global DNA methylation status in unsorted samples of multiple myeloma patients did not correlate either with expression profiles of monitored DNA methyltransferases or with the stages of MM based on Durie-Salmon and International Staging System. CONCLUSION: This is the first comparative study between DNA methyltransferases expression profiles and global DNA methylation status in different phases of multiple myeloma patients. No significant correlation between the level of global methylation and the clinical stage of the unsorted cell population of patients with multiple myeloma was registered. Overexpression of the DNMT3A gene occurred in both sorted and unsorted cell populations of patients with multiple myeloma. This fact highlights the DNMT3A as a potential marker of multiple myeloma tumor progression. Moreover, we demonstrated comparable results in the expression of DNA methyltransferases in both sorted and unsorted cell populations. This is a promising result from the methodical point of view because when compared to samples of unsorted multiple myeloma cells, samples of sorted cells bring reduction of the number of possible analyses performed.

Involvement of Small Non-Coding RNA and Cell Antigens in Pathogenesis of Extramedullary Multiple Myeloma.

Extramedullary multiple myeloma (EMD) is an aggressive disease; malignant plasma cells lose their dependence in the bone marrow microenvironment and migrate into tissues. EMD is a negative prognostic factor of survival. Using flow cytometry and next-generation sequencing, we aimed to identify antigens and microRNAs (miRNAs) involved in EMD pathogenesis. Flow cytometry analysis revealed significant differences in the level of clonal plasma cells between MM and EMD patients, while the expression of CD markers was comparable between these two groups. Further, miR-26a-5p and miR-30e-5p were found to be significantly down-regulated in EMD compared to MM. Based on the expression of miR-26a-5p, we were able to distinguish these two groups of patients with high sensitivity and specificity. In addition, the involvement of deregulated miRNAs in cell cycle regulation, ubiquitin-mediated proteolysis and signaling pathways associated with infections or neurological disorders was observed using GO and KEGG pathways enrichment analysis. Subsequently, a correlation between the expression of analyzed miRNAs and the levels of CD molecules was observed. Finally, clinicopathological characteristics as well as CD antigens associated with the prognosis of MM and EMD patients were identified. Altogether, we identified several molecules possibly involved in the transformation of MM into EMD.

Immunomodulatory Agents for Multiple Myeloma.

The treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) has undergone a significant paradigm shift in the last 20 years, from conventional chemotherapy to more tumor-specific treatments, based on the interference with pathogenesis of the malignant clone as well as the bone microenvironment [...].

Unexpected Heterogeneity of Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Patients with Plasmacytomas.

In multiple myeloma (MM), malignant plasma cells infiltrate the bone marrow. In some cases, plasma cells migrate out of the bone marrow creating either para-skeletal plasmacytomas (PS) or infiltrating soft tissues as extramedullary plasmacytomas (EMD). The aim of this study was to define risk groups in newly diagnosed MM (NDMM) patients with PS and EMD plasmacytomas. In total, 523 NDMM patients with PS plasmacytomas and 196 NDMM patients with EMD plasmacytomas were diagnosed in the Czech Republic between 2004 and 2021 using modern imaging methods. Patients' data were analyzed from the Registry of Monoclonal Gammopathies of the Czech Myeloma Group. In NDMM patients with PS plasmacytomas, we found a subgroup with <5% of bone-marrow plasma cells to have the best prognosis (mPFS: 58.3 months (95% CI: 33.0−NA); mOS: not reached). The subgroup with >5% of bone-marrow plasma cells and ≥3 plasmacytomas had the worst prognosis (mPFS: 19.3 months (95% CI: 13.4−28.8), p < 0.001; mOS: 27.9 months (95% CI: 19.3−67.8), p < 0.001). Our results show association between tumor burden and prognosis of NDMM patients with plasmacytomas. In the case of PS plasmacytomas, NDMM patients with low BM PC infiltration have an excellent prognosis.

Ixazomib, Lenalidomide and Dexamethasone in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma in Routine Clinical Practice: Extended Follow-Up Analysis and the Results of Subsequent Therapy.

BACKGROUND: We confirmed the benefit of addition of ixazomib to lenalidomide and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) in unselected real-world population. We report the final analysis for overall survival (OS), second progression free survival (PFS-2), and the subanalysis of the outcomes in lenalidomide (LEN) pretreated and LEN refractory patients. METHODS: We assessed 344 patients with RRMM, treated with IRD (N = 127) or RD (N = 217). The data were acquired from the Czech Registry of Monoclonal Gammopathies (RMG). With prolonged follow-up (median 28.5 months), we determined the new primary endpoints OS, PFS and PFS-2. Secondary endpoints included the next therapeutic approach and the survival measures in LEN pretreated and LEN refractory patients. RESULTS: The final overall response rate (ORR) was 73.0% in the IRD cohort and 66.8% in the RD cohort. The difference in patients reaching ≥VGPR remained significant (38.1% vs. 26.3%, p = 0.028). Median PFS maintained significant improvement in the IRD cohort (17.5 vs. 12.5 months, p = 0.013) with better outcomes in patients with 1-3 prior relapses (22.3 vs. 12.7 months p = 0.003). In the whole cohort, median OS was for IRD vs. RD patients 40.9 vs. 27.1 months (p = 0.001), with further improvement within relapse 1-3 (51.7 vs. 27.8 months, p ˂ 0.001). The median PFS of LEN pretreated (N = 22) vs. LEN naive (N = 105) patients treated by IRD was 8.7 vs. 23.1 months (p = 0.001), and median OS was 13.2 vs. 51.7 months (p = 0.030). Most patients in both arms progressed and received further myeloma-specific therapy (63.0% in the IRD group and 53.9% in the RD group). Majority of patients received pomalidomide-based therapy or bortezomib based therapy. Significantly more patients with previous IRD vs. RD received subsequent monoclonal antibodies (daratumumab-16.3% vs. 4.3%, p = 0.0054; isatuximab 5.0% vs. 0.0%, p = 0.026) and carfilzomib (12.5 vs. 1.7%, p = 0.004). The median PFS-2 (progression free survival from the start of IRD/RD therapy until the second disease progression or death) was significantly longer in the IRD cohort (29.8 vs. 21.6 months, p = 0.016). There were no additional safety concerns in the extended follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The IRD regimen is well tolerated, easy to administer, and with very good therapeutic outcomes. The survival measures in unsorted real-world population are comparable to the outcomes of the clinical trial. As expected, patients with LEN reatment have poorer outcomes than those who are LEN-naive. The PFS benefit of IRD vs. RD translated into significantly better PFS-2 and OS, but the outcomes must be accounted for imbalances in pretreatment group characteristics (especially younger age and stem cell transplant pretreatment), and in subsequent therapies.

The epigenetic impact of suberohydroxamic acid and 5­Aza­2'­deoxycytidine on DNMT3B expression in myeloma cell lines differing in IL­6 expression.

Gene inactivation of the cyclin­dependent kinase inhibitors p16INK4a, p15INK4b and p21WAF is frequently mediated by promoter gene methylation, whereas histone deacetylases (HDACs) control gene expression through their ability to deacetylate proteins. The effect of suberohydroxamic acid (SBHA) and 5­Aza­2'­deoxycytidine (Decitabine) (DAC) treatments on the transcription of CDKN2A, CDKN2B and CDKN1A genes, and their effects on molecular biological behavior were examined in two myeloma cell lines, RPMI8226 and U266, which differ in p53­functionality and IL­6 expression. In both tested myeloma cell lines, a non­methylated state of the CDKN2B gene promoter region was detected with normal gene expression, and the same level of p15INK4b protein was detected by immunocytochemical staining. Furthermore, in myeloma cells treated with SBHA and DAC alone, the expression of both p15INK4b and p21WAF was significantly upregulated in RPMI8226 cells (p53­functional, without IL­6 expression), whereas in the U266 cell line (p53 deleted, expressing IL­6) only p21WAF expression was significantly increased. Moreover, the analysis revealed that treatment with DAC induced DNMT3B enhancement in U266 cells. In conclusion, in myeloma cells with IL­6 expression, significantly increased DNMT3B expression indicated the tumorigenic consequences of 5­Aza­2'deoxycytidine treatment, which requires careful use in diseases involving epigenetic dysregulation, such as multiple myeloma (MM).

Breakthrough COVID-19 in Vaccinated Patients with Haematologic Malignancies-The First Single-Centre Experience from the Czech Republic.

Vaccination is an important tool in the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic in patients with haematologic malignancies. The paper provides an analysis of the course of breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infection in a group of vaccinated patients with haematological malignancy and a comparison with a historical cohort of 96 non-vaccinated patients with haematologic malignancies and bone marrow failure syndromes (two patients) in the treatment of COVID-19. A severe or critical course of COVID-19 was significantly less frequent in the group of vaccinated patients (10.2% vs. 31.4%, p = 0.003). The need for hospitalisation due to COVID-19 was significantly lower in vaccinated patients (27.1% vs. 72.6%, p < 0.0001) and the duration of hospitalisation was significantly shorter (10 vs. 14 days, p = 0.045). Vaccinated patients were insignificantly less likely to require oxygen therapy during infection. COVID-19 mortality was significantly higher in non-vaccinated patients (15.6% vs. 5.1%, p = 0.047). The paper demonstrated a significant positive effect of vaccination against COVID-19 on a less severe clinical course of infection, lower need for hospitalisation and mortality. However, the results need to be evaluated even in the context of new antivirals and monoclonal antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 or virus mutations with different biological behaviour.

Bone metabolism parameters and their relation to cytogenetics in multiple myeloma.

OBJECTIVES: Our aim was to correlate serum levels of selected markers of bone metabolism and bone marrow microenvironment to cytogenetic changes in patients with multiple myeloma (MM). METHODS: We assed cytogenetic changes in 308 patients and correlated them with the following levels of bone marrow metabolism: thymidine kinase (TK), ß2-microglobulin (b-2-m), Dickkopf-1 protein (DKK-1), C-terminal telopeptide collagen-I (ICTP), N-terminal propeptide of type I procollagen (PINP), receptor for interleukin 6 (rIL-6), vascular cell adhesive molecule-1 (VCAM), soluble intercellular adhesion molecule-1, osteoprotegerin (OPG), hepatocyte growth factor (HGF), vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), syndecan-1 (SYN-1) and Fas antigen. RESULT: Individuals with delRB1 had lower levels of OPG (M = 7.39 vs. 5.46 pmol/L, p = .025) and VEGF (M = 304 vs. 196 pg/ml; p = .036). t(14;16) was associated with higher ß2m levels (M = 7.59 vs. 4.13 mg/L; p = .022) and lower DKK-1 levels (M = 4465 ng/L vs. 12,593). The presence of 1q21 gain was associated with higher levels of TK (M = 100.0 vs. 11.0 IU/L, p = .026) and lower levels of PINP (M = 49.3 vs. 67.4 mg/L, p = .030). CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis has shown, some cytogenetic changes, especially delRB1, t(14;16) and 1q21gain, which affect the components of the cytokine network in multiple myeloma.

Isatuximab plus pomalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone versus pomalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone in patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (ICARIA-MM): follow-up analysis of a randomised, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: The primary analysis of the ICARIA-MM study showed significant improvement in progression-free survival with addition of isatuximab to pomalidomide-dexamethasone in relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma. Here, we report a prespecified updated overall survival analysis at 24 months after the primary analysis. METHODS: In this randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 3 study adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma who had received at least two previous lines of therapy, including lenalidomide and a proteasome inhibitor, and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 were recruited from 102 hospitals in 24 countries across Europe, North America, and the Asia-Pacific regions. Patients were excluded if they had anti-CD38 refractory disease or previously received pomalidomide. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1), using an interactive response technology with permuted blocked randomisation (block size of four) and stratified by number of previous treatment lines (2-3 vs >3) and aged (<75 vs ≥75 years), to isatuximab-pomalidomide-dexamethasone (isatuximab group) or pomalidomide-dexamethasone (control group). In the isatuximab group, intravenous isatuximab 10 mg/kg was administered on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of the first 4-week cycle, and then on days 1 and 15 of subsequent cycles. Both groups received oral pomalidomide 4 mg on days 1-21 of each cycle, and weekly oral or intravenous dexamethasone 40 mg (20 mg if aged ≥75 years) on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of each cycle. Treatment was continued until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal of consent. Here' we report a prespecified second interim analysis of overall survival (time from randomisation to any-cause death), a key secondary endpoint, in the intention-to-treat population (ie, all patients who provided informed consent and allocated a randomisation number) at 24 months after the primary analysis. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose or part dose of study treatment. The prespecified stopping boundary for the overall survival analysis was when the derived p value was equal to or less than 0·0181. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02990338, and is active, but not recruiting. FINDINGS: Between Jan 10, 2017, and Feb 2, 2018, 387 patients were screened and 307 randomly assigned to either the isatuximab (n=154) or control group (n=153). Median follow-up at data cutoff (Oct 1, 2020) was 35·3 months (IQR 33·5-37·4). Median overall survival was 24·6 months (95% CI 20·3-31·3) in the isatuximab group and 17·7 months (14·4-26·2) in the control group (hazard ratio 0·76 [95% CI 0·57-1·01]; one-sided log-rank p=0·028, not crossing prespecified stopping boundary). The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-emergent adverse events in the isatuximab group versus the control group were neutropenia (76 [50%] of 152 patients vs 52 [35%] of 149 patients), pneumonia (35 [23%] vs 31 [21%]), and thrombocytopenia (20 [13%] vs 18 [12%]). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events were observed in 111 (73%) patients in the isatuximab group and 90 (60%) patients in the control group. Two (1%) treatment-related deaths occurred in the isatuximab group (one due to sepsis and one due to cerebellar infarction) and two (1%) occurred in the control group (one due to pneumonia and one due to urinary tract infection). INTERPRETATION: Addition of isatuximab plus pomalidomide-dexamethasone resulted in a 6·9-month difference in median overall survival compared with pomalidomide-dexamethasone and is a new standard of care for lenalidomide-refractory and proteasome inhibitor-refractory or relapsed multiple myeloma. Final overall survival analysis follow-up is ongoing. FUNDING: Sanofi.

Melflufen or pomalidomide plus dexamethasone for patients with multiple myeloma refractory to lenalidomide (OCEAN): a randomised, head-to-head, open-label, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Melphalan flufenamide (melflufen), an alkylating peptide-drug conjugate, plus dexamethasone showed clinical activity and manageable safety in the phase 2 HORIZON study. We aimed to determine whether melflufen plus dexamethasone would provide a progression-free survival benefit compared with pomalidomide plus dexamethasone in patients with previously treated multiple myeloma. METHODS: In this randomised, open-label, head-to-head, phase 3 study (OCEAN), adult patients (aged ≥18 years) were recruited from 108 university hospitals, specialist hospitals, and community-based centres in 21 countries across Europe, North America, and Asia. Eligible patients had an ECOG performance status of 0-2; must have had relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma, refractory to lenalidomide (within 18 months of randomisation) and to the last line of therapy; and have received two to four previous lines of therapy (including lenalidomide and a proteasome inhibitor). Patients were randomly assigned (1:1), stratified by age, number of previous lines of therapy, and International Staging System score, to either 28-day cycles of melflufen and dexamethasone (melflufen group) or pomalidomide and dexamethasone (pomalidomide group). All patients received dexamethasone 40 mg orally on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of each cycle. In the melflufen group, patients received melflufen 40 mg intravenously over 30 min on day 1 of each cycle and in the pomalidomide group, patients received pomalidomide 4 mg orally daily on days 1 to 21 of each cycle. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival assessed by an independent review committee in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. Safety was assessed in patients who received at least one dose of study medication. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03151811, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between June 12, 2017, and Sept 3, 2020, 246 patients were randomly assigned to the melflufen group (median age 68 years [IQR 60-72]; 107 [43%] were female) and 249 to the pomalidomide group (median age 68 years [IQR 61-72]; 109 [44%] were female). 474 patients received at least one dose of study drug (melflufen group n=228; pomalidomide group n=246; safety population). Data cutoff was Feb 3, 2021. Median progression-free survival was 6·8 months (95% CI 5·0-8·5; 165 [67%] of 246 patients had an event) in the melflufen group and 4·9 months (4·2-5·7; 190 [76%] of 249 patients had an event) in the pomalidomide group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·79, [95% CI 0·64-0·98]; p=0·032), at a median follow-up of 15·5 months (IQR 9·4-22·8) in the melflufen group and 16·3 months (10·1-23·2) in the pomalidomide group. Median overall survival was 19·8 months (95% CI 15·1-25·6) at a median follow-up of 19·8 months (IQR 12·0-25·0) in the melflufen group and 25·0 months (95% CI 18·1-31·9) in the pomalidomide group at a median follow-up of 18·6 months (IQR 11·8-23·7; HR 1·10 [95% CI 0·85-1·44]; p=0·47). The most common grade 3 or 4 treatment-emergent adverse events were thrombocytopenia (143 [63%] of 228 in the melflufen group vs 26 [11%] of 246 in the pomalidomide group), neutropenia (123 [54%] vs 102 [41%]), and anaemia (97 [43%] vs 44 [18%]). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 95 (42%) patients in the melflufen group and 113 (46%) in the pomalidomide group, the most common of which were pneumonia (13 [6%] vs 21 [9%]), COVID-19 pneumonia (11 [5%] vs nine [4%]), and thrombocytopenia (nine [4%] vs three [1%]). 27 [12%] patients in the melflufen group and 32 [13%] in the pomalidomide group had fatal treatment-emergent adverse events. Fatal treatment-emergent adverse events were considered possibly treatment related in two patients in the melflufen group (one with acute myeloid leukaemia, one with pancytopenia and acute cardiac failure) and four patients in the pomalidomide group (two patients with pneumonia, one with myelodysplastic syndromes, one with COVID-19 pneumonia). INTERPRETATION: Melflufen plus dexamethasone showed superior progression-free survival than pomalidomide plus dexamethasone in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. FUNDING: Oncopeptides AB.

Real-world evidence of efficacy and safety of pomalidomide and dexamethasone in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma patients: Czech registry data.

We assessed the outcomes of pomalidomide and dexamethasone treatment in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) patients with ≥1 prior line of therapy. We analyzed the data of all RRMM patients treated with pomalidomide and dexamethasone at nine Czech centers between 2013 and 2018. The source of the data was the Registry of Monoclonal Gammopathies of the Czech Republic. Primary endpoints included response rates based on International Myeloma Working Group criteria and survival measures, including progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints were toxicities and previous treatment patterns, including refractory to lenalidomide, and their impact on final outcomes. The overall response rate was 51.8% and the clinical benefit rate (including patients with minimal response) was 67.1%, with 0.6% of complete responses, 8.5% of very good partial responses, and 42.1% of partial responses (PR). Overall, 16.5% of patients had a minimal response, and 32.3% had stable disease /progression. Median PFS was 8.8 months and the median OS was 14.2 months. In patients who achieved ≥PR, the median PFS and OS were significantly longer compared to non-responders (median PFS (12.1 vs. 4.5 months, p≤0.001 respectively), median OS (22.1 vs. 7.7 months, p≤0.001, respectively). The most frequent adverse events (AEs) were neutropenia (29.9%) and anemia (18.9%), non-hematological AEs included infections (14.6%) and fatigue (7.3%). Our analysis confirmed the effectiveness of pomalidomide and dexamethasone in a real-world setting. This therapy achieved reasonable outcomes comparable to the data from clinical trials even though this was an unbiased cohort of patients.