Deep and Durable Prostate-specific Antigen Response to Darolutamide with Androgen Deprivation Therapy and Docetaxel, and Association with Clinical Outcomes for Patients with High- or Low-volume Metastatic Hormone-sensitive Prostate Cancer: Analyses of the Randomized Phase 3 ARASENS Study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Addition of darolutamide to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and docetaxel significantly improved overall survival (OS) in ARASENS (NCT02799602). Here we report on prostate-specific antigen (PSA) responses and their association with outcomes. METHODS: ARASENS is an international, double-blind, phase 3 study in patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) randomized to darolutamide 600 mg orally twice daily (n = 651) or placebo (n = 654), both with ADT + docetaxel. The proportion of patients with undetectable PSA (<0.2 ng/ml) and time to PSA progression (≥25% relative and ≥2 ng/ml absolute increase from nadir) were compared between groups in prespecified exploratory analyses. PSA outcomes by disease volume and the association of undetectable PSA with OS and times to castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) and PSA progression were assessed in post hoc analyses. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: The proportion of patients with undetectable PSA at any time was more than doubled with darolutamide versus placebo, at 67% versus 29% in the overall population, 62% versus 26% in the high-volume subgroup, and 84% versus 38% in the low-volume subgroup. Darolutamide delayed time to PSA progression versus placebo, with hazard ratios of 0.26 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.21-0.31) in the overall population, 0.30 (95% CI 0.24-0.37) in the high-volume subgroup, and 0.093 (95% CI 0.047-0.18) in the low-volume subgroup. Undetectable PSA at 24 wk was associated with longer OS, with a hazard ratio of 0.49 (95% CI 0.37-0.65) in the darolutamide group, as well as longer times to CRPC and PSA progression, with similar findings in the disease volume subgroups. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Darolutamide + ADT + docetaxel led to deep and durable PSA responses in patients with high- or low-volume mHSPC. Achievement of undetectable PSA (<0.2 ng/ml) was correlated with better clinical outcomes. PATIENT SUMMARY: For patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer being treated with androgen deprivation therapy and docetaxel, PSA (prostate-specific antigen) became undetectable (below 0.2 ng/ml) in 67% of those also receiving darolutamide versus 29% of patients also receiving placebo. On average, patients achieving undetectable PSA lived longer than patients with detectable PSA.

Efficacy and Safety of Darolutamide in Combination With Androgen-Deprivation Therapy and Docetaxel in Black Patients From the Randomized ARASENS Trial.

BACKGROUND: In the ARASENS trial (NCT02799602), darolutamide in combination with androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) and docetaxel significantly reduced the risk of death by 32.5% (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.57-0.80; P < .0001) compared with placebo plus ADT with docetaxel in patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). We present efficacy and safety of darolutamide versus placebo in Black patients from ARASENS. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with mHSPC were randomized 1:1 to darolutamide 600 mg or placebo twice daily in combination with ADT and docetaxel. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Key secondary endpoints included time to castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) and safety. RESULTS: In ARASENS, 54 Black patients received darolutamide (n = 26) or placebo (n = 28) plus ADT and docetaxel. In Black patients, overall survival favored darolutamide versus placebo (median, not reached vs. 38.7 months; stratified HR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.17-1.02), with 4-year survival rates of 62% versus 41%. The darolutamide group also had longer time to CRPC compared with the placebo group (median, not reached vs .12.6 months; HR, 0.09; 95% CI, 0.02-0.30). The safety profile of darolutamide in Black patients was consistent with that observed for the overall ARASENS population (grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events, TEAEs: 61.5% vs. 66.1%; serious TEAEs: 42.3% vs. 44.8%). CONCLUSION: In this small population of Black patients with mHSPC from the ARASENS trial, darolutamide was associated with an improvement in survival and time to CRPC and was well tolerated. Efficacy and safety findings in Black patients were consistent with the overall ARASENS population.

Efficacy and safety outcomes of darolutamide in patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer with comorbidities and concomitant medications from the randomised phase 3 ARAMIS trial.

PURPOSE: In patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) in the Androgen Receptor Antagonizing Agent for Metastasis-free Survival (ARAMIS) trial, darolutamide significantly improved median metastasis-free survival by nearly 2 years and reduced the risk of death by 31% versus placebo, with a favourable safety/tolerability profile. This post hoc analysis of ARAMIS evaluated efficacy and safety in patients by number of comorbidities and concomitant medications. METHODS: Patients with nmCRPC were randomised 2:1 to darolutamide (n = 955) or placebo (n = 554) while continuing androgen-deprivation therapy. Overall survival (OS) and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were evaluated in subgroups by median numbers of ongoing comorbidities and concomitant medications. HRs were determined from univariate analysis using Cox regression. FINDINGS: Median numbers of comorbidities and concomitant medications were 6 and 10, respectively, with 41.6% of patients having >6 comorbidities and 48.8% taking >10 concomitant medications. For patients with ≤ 6 and >6 comorbidities, darolutamide increased OS versus placebo (hazard ratio [HR] 0.65 and 0.73, respectively), and this benefit was consistent for cardiovascular, metabolic, and other comorbidities (HR range: 0.39-0.88). For patients taking ≤ 10 and >10 concomitant medications, increased OS was also observed with darolutamide versus placebo (HR 0.76 and 0.66, respectively), and the benefit was consistent across medication classes (HR range: 0.45-0.80). Incidences of TEAEs and TEAEs leading to treatment discontinuation with darolutamide were similar to placebo across subgroups by numbers of comorbidities and concomitant medications. CONCLUSIONS: The OS benefit and safety of darolutamide remained consistent with that observed in the overall ARAMIS population, even in patients with high numbers of comorbidities or concomitant medications. GOV REGISTRATION: NCT02200614. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Darolutamide increased overall survival versus placebo, and incidences of most adverse events were similar between treatments in patients with ≤ 6 or >6 comorbidities and those taking ≤ 10 or >10 concomitant medications.

Darolutamide in Spanish patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: ARAMIS subgroup analysis.

Aim: Darolutamide significantly prolonged metastasis-free survival (MFS) versus placebo in the Phase III ARAMIS study. We analyzed outcomes in Spanish participants in ARAMIS. Patients & methods: Patients with high-risk nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer were randomized 2:1 to darolutamide 600 mg twice daily or placebo, plus androgen-deprivation therapy. The primary end point was MFS. Descriptive statistics are reported for this post hoc analysis. Results: In Spanish participants, darolutamide (n = 75) prolonged MFS versus placebo (n = 42): hazard ratio 0.345, 95% confidence interval 0.175-0.681. The incidence and type of treatment-emergent adverse events were comparable between treatment arms. Conclusion: For Spanish participants in ARAMIS, efficacy outcomes favored darolutamide versus placebo, with a similar safety profile, consistent with the overall ARAMIS population. Clinical Trials Registration: NCT02200614 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Darolutamide is an oral treatment for a type of prostate cancer that has stopped responding to other treatments and is at risk of spreading to other parts of the body (termed "nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer" or "nmCRPC"). In the international ARAMIS study, patients treated with darolutamide lived longer without their cancer spreading than patients who were given placebo (sugar) pills. We wanted to know whether Spanish patients in ARAMIS had similar characteristics and treatment outcomes to other patients in the study. We found that the 75 Spanish patients who were treated with darolutamide had a significantly lower risk of their cancer spreading than the 42 Spanish patients who received placebo. The two groups of Spanish patients had similar side effects.

Darolutamide Plus Androgen-Deprivation Therapy and Docetaxel in Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer by Disease Volume and Risk Subgroups in the Phase III ARASENS Trial.

PURPOSE: For patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, metastatic burden affects outcome. We examined efficacy and safety from the ARASENS trial for subgroups by disease volume and risk. METHODS: Patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer were randomly assigned to darolutamide or placebo plus androgen-deprivation therapy and docetaxel. High-volume disease was defined as visceral metastases and/or ≥ 4 bone metastases with ≥ 1 beyond the vertebral column/pelvis. High-risk disease was defined as ≥ 2 risk factors: Gleason score ≥ 8, ≥ 3 bone lesions, and presence of measurable visceral metastases. RESULTS: Of 1,305 patients, 1,005 (77%) had high-volume disease and 912 (70%) had high-risk disease. Darolutamide increased overall survival (OS) versus placebo in patients with high-volume (hazard ratio [HR], 0.69; 95% CI, 0.57 to 0.82), high-risk (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.86), and low-risk disease (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.90), and in the smaller low-volume subgroup, the results were also suggestive of survival benefit (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.41 to 1.13). Darolutamide improved clinically relevant secondary end points of time to castration-resistant prostate cancer and subsequent systemic antineoplastic therapy versus placebo in all disease volume and risk subgroups. Adverse events (AEs) were similar between treatment groups across subgroups. Grade 3 or 4 AEs occurred in 64.9% of darolutamide patients versus 64.2% of placebo patients in the high-volume subgroup and 70.1% versus 61.1% in the low-volume subgroup. Among the most common AEs, many were known toxicities related to docetaxel. CONCLUSION: In patients with high-volume and high-risk/low-risk metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, treatment intensification with darolutamide, androgen-deprivation therapy, and docetaxel increased OS with a similar AE profile in the subgroups, consistent with the overall population.[Media: see text].

Impact of darolutamide on local symptoms: pre-planned and post hoc analyses of the ARAMIS trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess, the effect of darolutamide (a structurally distinct androgen receptor inhibitor) on urinary and bowel symptoms, using data from the phase III ARAMIS trial (NCT02200614) that showed darolutamide significantly reduced the risk of metastasis and death versus placebo. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) were randomised 2:1 to darolutamide (n = 955) or placebo (n = 554). Local symptom control was assessed by first prostate cancer-related invasive procedures and post hoc analyses of time to deterioration in quality of life (QoL) using total urinary and bowel symptoms, and individual questions for these symptoms from the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Prostate Cancer Module subscales and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate prostate cancer subscale. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) responses were correlated with urinary and bowel adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: Fewer patients receiving darolutamide (4.7%) versus placebo (9.6%) underwent invasive procedures, and time to first procedure was prolonged with darolutamide (hazard ratio 0.42, 95% confidence interval 0.28-0.62). Darolutamide significantly (P < 0.01) delayed worsening of QoL for total urinary and bowel symptoms versus placebo, mostly attributed by individual symptoms of urinary frequency, associated pain, and interference with daily activities. AEs of urinary retention and dysuria were less frequent with darolutamide, and greater PSA response (≥90%, ≥50% and <90%, <50%) among darolutamide-treated patients was associated with lower incidences of urinary retention (2.2%, 4.2%, 5.1%) and dysuria (0.5%, 3.2%, 5.1%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Darolutamide demonstrated a positive impact on local disease recurrence and symptom control in patients with nmCRPC, delayed time to deterioration in QoL related to urinary and bowel symptoms, and a favourable safety profile showing similar incidence of urinary- and bowel-related AEs compared with placebo.

Efficacy and Safety of Darolutamide in Patients with Nonmetastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer Stratified by Prostate-specific Antigen Doubling Time: Planned Subgroup Analysis of the Phase 3 ARAMIS Trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) have a high risk of progression to metastatic disease, particularly if their prostate-specific antigen doubling time (PSADT) is ≤6 mo. However, patients remain at a high risk with a PSADT of >6 mo. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of darolutamide versus placebo in patients stratified by PSADT >6 or ≤6 mo. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A planned subgroup analysis of a global multicenter, double-blind, randomized, phase 3 trial in men with nmCRPC and PSADT ≤10 mo was conducted. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomized 2:1 to oral darolutamide 600 mg twice daily or placebo, while continuing androgen-deprivation therapy. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary endpoint was metastasis-free survival (MFS). Secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and times to pain progression, first cytotoxic chemotherapy, and symptomatic skeletal events. Quality of life (QoL) was measured using validated prostate-relevant tools. Safety was recorded throughout the study. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Of 1509 patients enrolled, 469 had PSADT >6 mo (darolutamide n = 286; placebo n = 183) and 1040 had PSADT ≤6 mo (darolutamide n = 669; placebo n = 371). Baseline characteristics were balanced between subgroups. Darolutamide significantly prolonged MFS versus placebo in both subgroups (unstratified hazard ratio [95% confidence interval]: PSADT >6 mo, 0.38 [0.26-0.55]; PSADT ≤6 mo, 0.41 [0.33-0.52]). OS and other efficacy and QoL endpoints favored darolutamide with significant improvement over placebo in both subgroups. The incidence of adverse events, including events commonly associated with androgen receptor inhibitors (fractures, falls, hypertension, and mental impairment), and discontinuations due to adverse events were low and similar to placebo. Limitations include small subgroup populations. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with nmCRPC and PSADT >6 mo (maximum 10 mo), darolutamide provided a favorable benefit/risk ratio, characterized by significant improvements in MFS, OS, and other clinically relevant endpoints; maintenance of QoL; and favorable tolerability. PATIENT SUMMARY: In patients with prostate cancer that has stopped responding to standard hormonal therapy (indicated by an increase in prostate-specific antigen [PSA] levels), there is a risk that the cancer will spread to other parts of the body. This risk is highest when the time it takes for the PSA level to double (ie, "PSA doubling time" [PSADT]) is less than 6 mo. However, there is still a risk that the cancer will spread even if the PSADT is longer than 6 mo. In a group of patients whose PSADT was more than 6 mo but no more than 10 mo, treatment with darolutamide slowed the cancer spread and allowed them to live longer than patients who received placebo (inactive drug). Darolutamide treatment did not cause many side effects and helped maintain patients' quality of life without disruptions.

Implementation of an Active Screening Program for SARS-CoV2 - Experience at an Academic Medical Center.

BACKGROUND: This study documents the experience of an academic medical center implementing SARS-CoV2 screening of asymptomatic research personnel to support the "return-to-work" initiative and donor cadavers to support in-person student education. METHODS: Testing was performed on samples received June 1, 2020 (for the cadaver program) and July 20, 2020 (for the personnel screening program) through September 30, 2021. Data were evaluated to document the number of cases and the positivity rate. RESULTS: Approximately 3000 specimens were tested across both programs, with an overall positivity rate of 2.5% and 3.6% in the personnel and cadaver screening programs, respectively. DISCUSSION: This screening program serves as an example of institutional investment in the safety of its faculty, staff, and students alike to address specific needs of a global pandemic.

Obesity, Inflammation, and Mortality in COVID-19: An Observational Study from the Public Health Care System of New York City.

Severe obesity increases the risk for negative outcomes in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Our objectives were to investigate the effect of BMI on in-hospital outcomes in our New York City Health and Hospitals' ethnically diverse population, further explore this effect by age, sex, race/ethnicity, and timing of admission, and, given the relationship between COVID-19 and hyperinflammation, assess the concentrations of markers of systemic inflammation in different BMI groups. A retrospective study was conducted in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in the public health care system of New York City from 1 March 2020 to 31 October 2020. A total of 8833 patients were included in this analysis (women: 3593, median age: 62 years). The median body mass index (BMI) was 27.9 kg/m2. Both overweight and obesity were independently associated with in-hospital death. The association of overweight and obesity with death appeared to be stronger in men, younger patients, and individuals of Hispanic ethnicity. We did not observe higher concentrations of inflammatory markers in patients with obesity as compared to those without obesity. In conclusion, overweight and obesity were independently associated with in-hospital death. Obesity was not associated with higher concentrations of inflammatory markers.

Effect of t (11;14) Abnormality on Outcomes of Patients With Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma in the Connect MM Registry.

BACKGROUND: The t (11;14) (q13;32) translocation [t (11;14)] is present in ∼20% of patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM), but studies examining its prognostic ability have yielded divergent results, and data are lacking on outcomes from first-line therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data from the Connect MM Registry, a large US, multicenter, prospective observational cohort study of patients with NDMM were used to examine the effect of t (11;14) status on first-line therapy outcomes in the Overall population (n = 1574) and race groups (African American [AA] vs. non-African American [NAA]). RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were generally similar between patients with (n = 378) and without (n = 1196) t (11;14). Prevalence of t (11;14) was similar by race (AA, 27%; NAA, 24%). In the overall population, regardless of first-line therapy, t (11;14) status did not affect progression-free survival (hazard ratio, 1.02; P = 0.7675) or overall survival (hazard ratio, 0.99; P = .9417). AA patients with t (11;14) had higher likelihood of death (Nominal Cox regression P = .0298) vs. patients without t (11;14). CONCLUSIONS: Acknowledging observational study and inferential limitations, this exploratory analysis of a predominantly community-based population suggests that t (11;14) is a neutral prognostic factor in the general MM population but may be a negative factor for overall survival in AA patients.

Efficacy and safety of darolutamide in Black/African-American patients from the phase III ARAMIS study.

Aim: Darolutamide significantly improved metastasis-free survival (MFS) and overall survival (OS) versus placebo in the phase III ARAMIS study. We evaluated outcomes in Black/African-American patients in ARAMIS. Materials & methods: Patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer were randomized 2:1 to darolutamide (n = 955) or placebo (n = 554) plus androgen-deprivation therapy. The primary end point was MFS. Secondary end points included OS and safety. Results: In 52 (3.4%) Black/African-American patients, darolutamide improved MFS (median: not reached vs 12.4 months) and OS (3-year survival rates: 100 vs 71%) versus placebo. The safety profile of darolutamide in Black/African-American patients was consistent with that of all ARAMIS patients. Conclusion: In Black/African-American patients, darolutamide improved MFS and OS and was well tolerated, consistent with the overall ARAMIS population.

In patients with prostate cancer that has stopped responding to androgen-deprivation therapy, or 'ADT,' and has not spread to other parts of the body (known as nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, or 'nmCRPC'), darolutamide is an oral treatment option. Darolutamide added to ADT was tested in patients with nmCRPC in a large international study called ARAMIS and was found to prolong the time that patients were free from their cancer spreading compared with patients who received ADT alone. This report provides information on the effect of darolutamide in the 52 Black/African­American patients who took part in ARAMIS. In these patients, darolutamide showed similar effects on lowering the risk of their cancer spreading and was well tolerated.

Association of Morbid Progression With Overall Survival Among Patients With Multiple Myeloma: Validation of the Progression-free Survival Endpoint.

INTRODUCTION: Multiple myeloma (MM) is an incurable malignancy, marked by end-organ damage that is frequently irreversible. Progressive disease (PD) can be defined as morbid PD, associated with new-onset hypercalcemia, renal insufficiency, anemia, or lytic bone lesions (CRAB symptoms), or as asymptomatic biochemical progression. The frequency of morbid versus asymptomatic PD and its effect on survival is unknown. Our aim was to determine the incidence of morbid PD, and to evaluate if this influences survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data from 2 phase III trials of transplant-ineligible patients with newly diagnosed MM were included in a post hoc analysis. RESULTS: Of 2082 patients enrolled, 1243 (59.7%) experienced PD. At first progression, 543 (43.7%) patients had morbid PD; 12 (2.2%) had hypercalcemia, 271 (49.9%) had renal insufficiency, 370 (68.1%) developed anemia, and 79 (14.5%) developed new or enlarged bone lesions. A total of 700 (56.3%) patients had asymptomatic PD. Patients with morbid PD had worse second progression-free survival (PFS) versus patients with asymptomatic biochemical PD (median second PFS, 11.5 months vs. 20.0 months; hazard ratio, 1.63; 95% confidence interval, 1.43-1.85; P < .0001) and worse overall survival (OS) (median OS, 23.2 months vs 39.3 months; hazard ratio, 1.51; 95% confidence interval, 1.30, 1.74; P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Morbid PD occurs frequently and is associated with inferior second PFS and OS. As CRAB symptoms may not reverse with therapy, morbid PD is a meaningful event, and its association with a shortened PFS adds validity to PFS as a relevant endpoint in patients with MM.

THE SYMBIOTIC RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HEALTH INFORMATION MANAGEMENT AND HEALTH INFORMATICS: OPPORTUNITIES FOR GROWTH AND COLLABORATION.

Health information management (HIM) and health informatics (HI) are two similar but distinct disciplines. They share a common goal in terms of using information technologies and information power to improve the quality and efficiency of patient care; contribute to disease prevention and treatment; and improve overall population health. HIM professionals are primarily focused on managing health information, and HI professionals are primarily focused on the technologies and systems that make health information management possible. The right combination of the breadth of knowledge HIM professionals possess and the depth of knowledge HI professionals bring into the various areas constituting the scopes of the two disciplines can strengthen an organization's potential and growth in a complex, fast-changing healthcare environment.

Pomalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone for multiple myeloma previously treated with lenalidomide (OPTIMISMM): outcomes by prior treatment at first relapse.

In the phase 3 OPTIMISMM trial, pomalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (PVd) demonstrated superior efficacy vs bortezomib and dexamethasone (Vd) in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma previously treated with lenalidomide, including those refractory to lenalidomide. This analysis evaluated outcomes in patients at first relapse (N = 226) by lenalidomide-refractory status, prior bortezomib exposure, and prior stem cell transplant (SCT). Second-line PVd significantly improved PFS vs Vd in lenalidomide-refractory (17.8 vs 9.5 months; P = 0.0276) and lenalidomide-nonrefractory patients (22.0 vs 12.0 months; P = 0.0491), patients with prior bortezomib (17.8 vs 12.0 months; P = 0.0068), and patients with (22.0 vs 13.8 months; P = 0.0241) or without (16.5 vs 9.5 months; P = 0.0454) prior SCT. In patients without prior bortezomib, median PFS was 20.7 vs 9.5 months (P = 0.1055). Significant improvement in overall response rate was also observed with PVd vs Vd in lenalidomide-refractory (85.9% vs 50.8%; P < 0.001) and lenalidomide-nonrefractory (95.7% vs 60.0%; P < 0.001) patients, with similar results regardless of prior bortezomib or SCT. No new safety signals were observed. These data demonstrate the benefit of PVd at first relapse, including immediately after upfront lenalidomide treatment failure and other common first-line treatments.

Effect of initial treatment on health-related quality of life in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma without immediate stem cell transplant intent: results from the Connect® MM Registry.

Although new multiple myeloma (MM) therapies are effective in alleviating some disease-associated symptoms (e.g. bone pain, fatigue, functional decline), they can result in additional toxicities, further impacting health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Here, we compared HRQoL and safety of lenalidomide-bortezomib-dexamethasone [RVd (n = 445)], bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone [VMP (n = 77)] and Vd or VMP (n = 588) in patients with newly diagnosed MM (NDMM) from the Connect® MM Registry, a large, USA, multicentre, prospective observational cohort study. Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Multiple Myeloma subscale, EuroQol-5D overall score and Bone Pain Inventory HRQoL scores were significantly improved with RVd versus Vd/VMP. Serious adverse event rates were similar in all groups. Treatment with RVd maintained HRQoL in this real-world, largely community-based population of patients with NDMM.

Continuous lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone in patients with transplant-ineligible newly diagnosed MM: FIRST trial subanalysis of Canadian/US patients.

The phase 3 FIRST trial demonstrated significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) with an immune-stimulatory agent, lenalidomide, in combination with low-dose dexamethasone until disease progression (Rd continuous) vs melphalan +prednisone + thalidomide (MPT) in transplant-ineligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). Rd continuous similarly extended PFS vs fixed-duration Rd for 18 cycles (Rd18). Outcomes in the Canadian/US subgroup (104 patients per arm) are reported in this analysis. Rd continuous demonstrated a significant improvement in PFS vs MPT (median, 29.3 vs 20.2 months; HR, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.49-0.97]; p = 0.03326) and an improvement vs Rd18 (median, 21.9 months). Median OS was 56.9 vs 46.8 months with Rd continuous vs MPT (p = 0.15346) and 59.5 months with Rd18. The overall response rate was higher with Rd continuous and Rd18 (78.8% and 79.8%) vs MPT (65.4%). In the 49.0%, 52.9%, and 29.8% of patients with at least very good partial response in the Rd continuous, Rd18, and MPT arms, respectively, the median PFS was 56.0, 30.9, and 40.2 months, respectively. The most common grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events were neutropenia (28.4%, 30.1%, and 52.0%), anemia (23.5%, 21.4%, and 23.5%), and infections (37.3%, 30.1%, and 24.5%) with Rd continuous, Rd18, and MPT, respectively. These results were consistent with those in the intent-to-treat population, confirming the benefit of Rd continuous vs MPT in the Canadian/US subgroup and supporting the role of Rd continuous as a standard of care for transplant-ineligible patients with NDMM.

Pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone in relapsed refractory multiple myeloma after lenalidomide treatment failure.

Patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) for whom the benefits of lenalidomide have been exhausted in early treatment lines need effective therapies. In cohort A of the phase 2 MM-014 trial, we examined the safety and efficacy of pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone immediately after lenalidomide-based treatment failure in patients with RRMM and two prior lines of therapy. Pomalidomide 4 mg was given on days 1 to 21 of 28-day cycles. Dexamethasone 40 mg (20 mg for patients aged >75 years) was given on days 1, 8, 15 and 22 of 28-day cycles. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR), and secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and safety. The intention-to-treat population comprised 56 patients; all received prior lenalidomide (87·5% lenalidomide refractory) and 39 (69·6%) received prior bortezomib. ORR was 32·1% (28·2% in the prior-bortezomib subgroup). Median PFS was 12·2 months (7·9 months in the prior-bortezomib subgroup). Median OS was 41·7 months (38·6 months in the prior-bortezomib subgroup). The most common grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events were anaemia (25·0%), pneumonia (14·3%) and fatigue (14·3%). These findings support earlier sequencing of pomalidomide-based therapy in lenalidomide-pretreated patients with RRMM, including those who have become refractory to lenalidomide. Trial registration: www.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01946477.

Development of a prognostic model for overall survival in multiple myeloma using the Connect® MM Patient Registry.

Median overall survival (OS) has improved for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM), but prognosis varies depending on baseline patient characteristics. Current models use data from selected clinical trial populations, which prevent application to patients in an unselected community setting that reflects routine clinical practice. Using data from the Connect® MM Registry, a large, US, multicentre, prospective observational cohort study (Cohort 1: 2009-2011; Cohort 2: 2012-2016) of 3011 patients with NDMM, we identified prognostic variables for OS via the multivariable analysis of baseline patient characteristics in Cohort 1 (n = 1493) and developed a tool to examine individual outcomes. Factors associated with OS (n = 1450 treated patients; P < 0·05) were age, del(17p), triplet therapy use, EQ-5D mobility, International Staging System stage, solitary plasmacytoma, history of diabetes, platelet count, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status and serum creatinine, which were used to create survival matrices for 3- and 5-year OS. The model was internally and externally validated using Connect MM Cohort 2 (Harrell's concordance index, 0·698), MM-015 (0·649), and the phase 3 FIRST (0·647) clinical trials. This novel prognostic tool may help inform outcomes for NDMM in the era of triplet therapy use with novel agents.