Interventions and outcomes of patients with multiple myeloma receiving salvage therapy after BCMA-directed CAR T therapy.

B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA)-directed chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR T) therapy has demonstrated remarkable efficacy in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma, and now there are two US Food and Drug Administration-approved BCMA-directed CAR T products. However, despite high initial response rates, most patients eventually relapse. The outcomes of patients with disease recurrence after BCMA-directed CAR T have not been comprehensively studied, and such an analysis would help define optimal treatment strategies. We analyzed the salvage treatments and outcomes of 79 patients with multiple myeloma from two academic institutions, who had progression of disease after treatment with BCMA-directed CAR T. A total of 237 post-CAR T salvage treatment lines were used, and patients received a median of 2 (range, 1-10) treatment lines. The median overall survival from the date of relapse post-CAR T therapy was 17.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 14.0 non-estimable). The overall response rate to the first salvage regimen was 43.4%, with a median progression-free survival of 3.5 months (CI, 2.5-4.6). Thirty-five patients (44.3%) received a T-cell-engaging therapy (bispecific antibody or subsequent CAR T) as salvage treatment. The overall survival in patients who received subsequent T-cell-engaging therapy was not reached after a median follow up of 21.3 months. Patients with multiple myeloma who relapse after BCMA-directed CAR T have a limited prognosis but can be potentially treated with multiple lines of salvage therapy. T-cell-engaging therapies appear to maintain pronounced clinical activity in this setting.

T-cell redirection therapy after allogeneic stem cell transplantation in multiple myeloma: When the cure fails!

Allogeneic stem cell transplant remains an option for patients with myeloma. Given the unfortunate inevitability of the majority of patients, relapsing salvage therapy options are needed. Although there is a potential concern for subsequent T-cell redirection therapy in these patients, Hammons et al. provide a retrospective look at patients treated this way with no new significant adverse safety or efficacy signal. Commentary on: Hammons et al. Chimeric antigen receptor and bispecific T-cell engager therapies in multiple myeloma patients with prior allogeneic transplantation. Br J Haematol 2024;204:887-891.

Soluble B-cell maturation antigen in multiple myeloma.

B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA) has emerged as a promising immunotherapeutic target in multiple myeloma (MM) management, with the successive approval of antibody-drug conjugates, bispecific antibodies, and chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapies directed to this membrane receptor. Soluble BCMA (sBCMA), a truncated version produced through gamma-secretase cleavage, can be quantified in serum/plasma samples from patients with MM via electrochemiluminescence, fluorescence, or enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays, as well as through mass spectrometry-based proteomics. Besides its short serum half-life and independence from kidney function, sBCMA represents a reliable and convenient tool for MM monitoring in patients with nonsecretory or oligosecretory disease. Numerous studies have suggested a potential utility of this bioanalyte in the risk stratification of premalignant plasma cell disorders, diagnosis and prognostication of MM, and response evaluation following anti-myeloma therapies. In short, sBCMA might be the "Swiss army knife" of MM laboratory testing, but is it ready for prime time?

Thromboembolic risk of carfilzomib or bortezomib in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: A comparative systematic review and meta-analysis.

Thrombosis represents a frequent and potentially severe complication in individuals diagnosed with multiple myeloma (MM). These events can be driven by both the disease as well as the therapies themselves. Overall, available evidence is inconclusive about the differential thrombogenicity of carfilzomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone (KRd) and bortezomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone (VRd). This meta-analysis compares the risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE; including deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism) and arterial thromboembolism (ATE; including myocardial infarction and ischemic stroke) with KRd versus VRd as primary therapy for newly diagnosed MM (NDMM). Out of 510 studies identified after deduplication, one randomized controlled trial and five retrospective cohort studies were included. We analyzed 2304 patients (VRd: 1380; KRd: 924) for VTE events and 2179 patients (VRd: 1316; KRd: 863) for ATE events. Lower rates of VTE were observed in the VRd group when compared with the KRd group (6.16% vs. 8.87%; odds ratio [OR], 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.32-0.88; p = .01). Both treatment groups exhibited minimal ATE incidence, with no significant difference between them (0.91% vs. 1.16%; OR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.24-4.20; p = .99). In view of potential biases from retrospective studies, heterogeneity of baseline population characteristics, and limited access to patient-level data (e.g., VTE risk stratification and type of thromboprophylaxis regimen used) inherent to this meta-analysis, additional research is warranted to further validate our findings and refine strategies for thrombosis prevention in MM.

Comparative efficacy of carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (KRd) versus bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRd) in newly-diagnosed multiple myeloma: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

In view of the increasing data evaluating carfilzomib-based induction for newly-diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM), we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the efficacy of carfilzomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone (KRd) versus bortezomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone (VRd). Three studies totaling 1597 patients (50% KRd-treated, 50% VRd-treated) were included. Despite similar survival outcomes and overall response rate compared with the VRd arm, KRd-treated subjects showed higher odds of achieving complete responses and measurable residual disease negativity. Among patients with high-risk cytogenetics (n = 348), KRd was associated with significant improvement in progression-free survival (HR = 0.70; 95% CI = 0.50-0.97; p = .03; I2 = 0%), suggesting carfilzomib-based induction may be preferable in this NDMM subpopulation.

In-class transition from bortezomib-based therapy to IRd is an effective approach in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.

Aim: To compare the effectiveness of in-class transition to all-oral ixazomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (IRd) following parenteral bortezomib (V)-based induction versus continued V-based therapy in US oncology clinics. Patients & methods: Non-transplant eligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) receiving in-class transition to IRd (N = 100; US MM-6), or V-based therapy (N = 111; INSIGHT MM). Results: Following inverse probability of treatment weighting, overall response rate was 73.2% with IRd versus 57.5% with V-based therapy (p < 0.0001). Median duration of treatment was 10.8 versus 5.3 months (p < 0.0001). Overall, 18/24% of patients discontinued IRd/V-based therapy due to adverse events. Conclusion: IRd after V-based induction was associated with significantly improved overall response rate and duration of treatment than continued V-based combination therapy. Clinical Trial Registration: US MM-6: NCT03173092; INSIGHT MM: NCT02761187 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Trial designs and endpoints for immune therapies in multiple myeloma.

Immune therapies, including CAR-T cells, bispecific antibodies, and antibody-drug conjugates, are revolutionizing the treatment of multiple myeloma. In this review, we discuss clinical trial design considerations relevant to immune therapies. We first examine issues pertinent to specific populations, including elderly, patients with renal impairment, high-risk/extramedullary disease, and prior immune therapies. We then highlight trial designs to optimize the selection of dose and schedule, explore rational combination therapies based on preclinical data, and evaluate the nuances of commonly used endpoints. By exploiting their pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profiles and utilizing novel translational insights, we can optimize the use of immune therapies in multiple myeloma.

Oral Selinexor-Dexamethasone for Triple-Class Refractory Multiple Myeloma.

BACKGROUND: Selinexor, a selective inhibitor of nuclear export compound that blocks exportin 1 (XPO1) and forces nuclear accumulation and activation of tumor suppressor proteins, inhibits nuclear factor κB, and reduces oncoprotein messenger RNA translation, is a potential novel treatment for myeloma that is refractory to current therapeutic options. METHODS: We administered oral selinexor (80 mg) plus dexamethasone (20 mg) twice weekly to patients with myeloma who had previous exposure to bortezomib, carfilzomib, lenalidomide, pomalidomide, daratumumab, and an alkylating agent and had disease refractory to at least one proteasome inhibitor, one immunomodulatory agent, and daratumumab (triple-class refractory). The primary end point was overall response, defined as a partial response or better, with response assessed by an independent review committee. Clinical benefit, defined as a minimal response or better, was a secondary end point. RESULTS: A total of 122 patients in the United States and Europe were included in the modified intention-to-treat population (primary analysis), and 123 were included in the safety population. The median age was 65 years, and the median number of previous regimens was 7; a total of 53% of the patients had high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities. A partial response or better was observed in 26% of patients (95% confidence interval, 19 to 35), including two stringent complete responses; 39% of patients had a minimal response or better. The median duration of response was 4.4 months, median progression-free survival was 3.7 months, and median overall survival was 8.6 months. Fatigue, nausea, and decreased appetite were common and were typically grade 1 or 2 (grade 3 events were noted in up to 25% of patients, and no grade 4 events were reported). Thrombocytopenia occurred in 73% of the patients (grade 3 in 25% and grade 4 in 33%). Thrombocytopenia led to bleeding events of grade 3 or higher in 6 patients. CONCLUSIONS: Selinexor-dexamethasone resulted in objective treatment responses in patients with myeloma refractory to currently available therapies. (Funded by Karyopharm Therapeutics; STORM ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02336815.).

Anti-CD38 antibody therapy for patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: differential mechanisms of action and recent clinical trial outcomes.

CD38 is a transmembrane glycoprotein that functions both as a receptor and an ectoenzyme, playing key roles in the regulation of calcium signaling and migration of immune cells to tumor microenvironments. High expression on multiple myeloma (MM) cells and limited expression on normal cells makes CD38 an ideal target for the treatment of MM patients. Two monoclonal antibodies directed at CD38, isatuximab and daratumumab, are available for use in patients with relapsed and/or refractory MM (RRMM); daratumumab is also approved in newly diagnosed MM and light-chain amyloidosis. Clinical experience has shown that anti-CD38 antibody therapy is transforming treatment of MM owing to its anti-myeloma efficacy and manageable safety profile. Isatuximab and daratumumab possess similarities and differences in their mechanisms of action, likely imparted by their binding to distinct, non-overlapping epitopes on the CD38 molecule. In this review, we present the mechanistic properties of these two antibodies and outline available evidence on their abilities to induce adaptive immune responses and modulate the bone marrow niche in MM. Further, we discuss differences in regulatory labeling between these two agents and analyze recent key clinical trial results, including evidence in patients with underlying renal impairment and other poor prognostic factors. Finally, we describe the limited existing evidence for the use of isatuximab or daratumumab after disease progression on prior anti-CD38 mono- or combination therapy, highlighting the need for additional clinical evaluations to define optimal anti-CD38 antibody therapy selection and sequencing in RRMM.

Real-world treatment patterns in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: Clinical and economic outcomes in patients treated with pomalidomide or daratumumab.

INTRODUCTION: Real-world evidence on later line treatment of relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) is sparse. We evaluated clinical outcomes among RRMM patients in the 1-year following treatment with pomalidomide or daratumumab and compared economic outcomes between RRMM patients and non-MM patients. PATIENT AND METHODS: Adult patients with ≥1 claim of pomalidomide or daratumumab were identified between January 2012 and February 2018 using IQVIA PharMetrics® Plus US claims database. Patients were required to have a diagnosis or treatment for MM and a claim of any immunomodulatory drugs and proteasome inhibitors before the index date. Mean time to new therapy, overall survival (OS) using Kaplan-Meier curve and adverse events (AEs) were reported over the 1-year post-index period. RRMM patients were also matched to a non-MM comparator cohort and economic outcomes were compared between the two cohorts. RESULTS: 289 RRMM patients were matched to 1,445 patients without MM. Most prevalent hematological AE was anemia (72.0%) and non-hematological AE was infections (75.4%). Mean (SD) time to a new treatment was 4.7 (5.3) months and median OS was 14.6 months. RRMM patients had significantly higher hospitalizations and physician office visits (Both P < .0001) compared to non-MM patients. Adjusting for baseline characteristics, patients with RRMM had 4.9 times (95% CI 3.8-6.4, P < .0001) the total healthcare costs compared with patients without MM. The major driver of total costs among RRMM patients was pharmacy costs (67.3%). CONCLUSION: RRMM patients showed a high frequency of AEs, low OS, and a substantial economic burden suggesting need for effective treatment options.

Phase 1b trial of isatuximab, an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody, in combination with carfilzomib as treatment of relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.

BACKGROUND: Isatuximab (Isa), an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody, and carfilzomib (K), a next-generation proteasome inhibitor (PI), both have potent single-agent activity in relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). METHODS: This phase 1b study evaluated the combination of Isa and K in 33 patients with RRMM. Isa was administered by intravenous infusion in 3 dosing cohorts: dose level 1 (Isa at 10 mg/kg biweekly), dose level 2 (DL2; Isa at 10 mg/kg weekly for 4 doses and then biweekly), and dose level 3 (Isa at 20 mg/kg weekly for 4 doses and then biweekly) and all patients received K (20 mg/m2 intravenously for cycle 1, days 1 and 2, and then 27 mg/m2 for all subsequent doses). A standard 3+3 dose-escalation design was used, no dose-limiting toxicity was observed, and the maximum tolerated dose was not reached. An expansion cohort of 18 patients was enrolled at DL2 to further evaluate safety and efficacy. Responses were assessed with the International Myeloma Working Group response criteria, and patients continued treatment until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 26.7 months, in this heavily pretreated population with a median of 3 prior lines (refractory to PIs and immunomodulatory drugs, 76%; refractory to K, 27%), the overall response rate was 70% (stringent complete response/complete response, 4; very good partial response, 8; partial response, 11). The median progression-free survival was 10.1 months, and the 2-year survival probability was 76%. The most common treatment-related adverse events (grade 2 or higher) were anemia, leukopenia, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, hypertension, and infection. Infusion reactions were common (55%) but did not limit dosing. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with Isa plus K was well tolerated with no unexpected toxicity. The combination was effective despite the enrollment of heavily pretreated patients with RRMM. LAY SUMMARY: This phase 1b study was designed to assess the safety, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary efficacy of isatuximab and carfilzomib in patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma. Thirty-three patients were treated: 15 in dose escalation and 18 in dose expansion. Patients received an average of 10 cycles. The treatment was safe and effective. No unexpected toxicity or drug-drug interactions were noted. Seventy percent of the subjects responded to therapy, and the progression-free survival was 10.1 months.

Quality of life analyses in patients with multiple myeloma: results from the Selinexor (KPT-330) Treatment of Refractory Myeloma (STORM) phase 2b study.

BACKGROUND: Selinexor is an oral, selective nuclear export inhibitor. STORM was a phase 2b, single-arm, open-label, multicenter trial of selinexor with low dose dexamethasone in patients with penta-exposed relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) that met its primary endpoint, with overall response of 26% (95% confidence interval [CI], 19 to 35%). Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was a secondary endpoint measured using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Multiple Myeloma (FACT-MM). This study examines impact of selinexor treatment on HRQoL of patients treated in STORM and reports two approaches to calculate minimal clinically important differences for the FACT-MM. METHODS: FACT-MM data were collected at baseline, on day 1 of each 4-week treatment cycle, and at end of treatment (EOT). Changes from baseline were analyzed for the FACT-MM total score, FACT-trial outcome index (TOI), FACT-General (FACT-G), and the MM-specific domain using mixed-effects regression models. Two approaches for evaluating minimal clinically important differences were explored: the first defined as 10% of the instrument range, and the second based on estimated mean baseline differences between Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) scores. Post-hoc difference analysis compared change in scores from baseline to EOT for treatment responders and non-responders. RESULTS: Eighty patients were included in the analysis; the mean number of prior therapies was 7.9 (standard deviation [SD] 3.1), and mean duration of myeloma was 7.6 years (SD 3.4). Each exploratory minimal clinically important difference threshold yielded consistent results whereby most patients did not experience HRQoL decline during the first six cycles of treatment (range: 53.9 to 75.7% for the first approach; range: 52.6 to 72.9% for the second). Treatment responders experienced less decline in HRQoL from baseline to EOT than non-responders, which was significant for the FACT-G, but not for other scores. CONCLUSION: The majority of patients did not experience decline in HRQoL based on minimal clinically important differences during early cycles of treatment with selinexor and dexamethasone in the STORM trial. An anchor-based approach utilizing patient-level data (ECOG PS score) to define minimal clinically important differences for the FACT-MM gave consistent results with a distribution-based approach. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov under the trial-ID NCT02336815 on January 8, 2015.

Management of patients with difficult-to-treat multiple myeloma.

Newer treatments for multiple myeloma (MM) have improved response rates and survival for many patients. However, MM remains challenging to treat due to the propensity for multiple relapses, cumulative and emergent toxicities from prior therapies and increasing genomic complexity that arises due to clonal evolution. In particular, patients with relapsed/refractory MM often require increased complexity of treatment, yet still experience poorer outcomes compared with patients who are newly diagnosed. Additionally, several patient subgroups, including those with extramedullary disease and patients who are frail and/or have multiple comorbidities, have an unfavorable prognosis and remain undertreated. This review (based on an Updates-in-Hematology session at the 25th European Hematology Association Annual Congress 2020) discusses the management of these difficult-to-treat patients with MM.

Lay abstract New treatments have extended the lives of many patients with multiple myeloma (MM). Still, MM can sometimes be difficult to control. In some patients, their MM will return after a period of months or years (known as relapse). In others, treatment will need to be stopped or changed due to side effects. Changes to the myeloma cancer cells can sometimes cause a treatment to stop working (known as resistance). Other groups of patients with MM who can be hard to treat are those with a more aggressive type of myeloma called extramedullary disease, and those who are old or frail or have other illnesses. This paper summarizes a meeting of expert doctors at the 25th European Hematology Association Annual Congress 2020. They discussed how to select the best treatment for patients with MM whose condition is difficult to control. They also discussed new medicines that are being tested for the treatment of MM.

Selinexor: a first-in-class SINE compound for treatment of relapsed refractory multiple myeloma.

The progression of multiple myeloma is accompanied by complex cytogenetic and epigenetic alterations that include mutation or functional inactivation of tumor suppressor proteins and overexpression of oncoproteins. Patients whose myeloma is refractory to the three major classes of drugs including immunomodulatory agents, proteasome inhibitors and anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies have a very poor prognosis. Drugs with novel mechanisms of action that can bypass resistance mechanisms are sorely needed for this group of patients. Selinexor represents a novel, oral agent with an innovative mechanism of action that offers a significant therapeutic advance in this group of heavily treated patients. Moreover, this novel mechanism may provide additional options for patients with less refractory disease.

A phase IIb trial of vorinostat in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone in patients with multiple myeloma refractory to previous lenalidomide-containing regimens.

Clinical trials of vorinostat, a Class I/II histone deacetylase inhibitor, in combination with proteasome inhibitors and immunomodulatory agents have shown activity in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. This phase IIb, open-label, single-institution study evaluated the efficacy of vorinostat in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone in lenalidomide-refractory patients. Patients were considered lenalidomide-refractory if they had no clinical response (

Safety and tolerability of pomalidomide-based regimens (pomalidomide-carfilzomib-dexamethasone with or without cyclophosphamide) in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma and severe renal dysfunction: a case series.

Renal dysfunction negatively impacts outcomes in patients with multiple myeloma (MM). Few treatment options are currently available for patients with MM and comorbid renal dysfunction, and as they are generally excluded from clinical trials, data on the use of immunomodulatory drugs in this population are scarce. In this paper, we describe a case series of five women with MM and severe renal dysfunction or dialysis dependency who were refractory to both bortezomib and either lenalidomide or thalidomide and were treated with full-dose (4 mg) pomalidomide. As part of their treatment regimen, these patients also received carfilzomib and dexamethasone with or without cyclophosphamide. All five patients achieved at least a partial response to pomalidomide-based therapy, which was relatively well tolerated. Our findings suggest that pomalidomide may represent a valuable and tolerable treatment option for MM patients with severe renal impairment. The fact that pomalidomide is extensively metabolized prior to urinary excretion may explain the improved tolerability of pomalidomide versus lenalidomide in such patients. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

A Phase I/II Study of Escalating Doses of Bortezomib in Conjunction with High-Dose Melphalan as a Conditioning Regimen for Salvage Autologous Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Transplantation in Patients with Multiple Myeloma.

Escalating doses of bortezomib with high-dose melphalan was evaluated as as a conditioning regimen for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (MM). MM patients with less than a partial remission (PR) (or 50% reduction) compared to their pretransplantation paraprotein parameters after a prior ASCT with melphalan conditioning, or who were in relapse after a prior autologous transplantation, were eligible for study. Bortezomib was dose escalated in steps of 1, 1.3, and 1.6 mg/m2 (3 × 3 design) on days -4 and -1 before transplantation with melphalan 200 mg/m2 given on day -2. Thirty-two patients were enrolled: 12 in the phase I dose escalation phase and an additional 20 in phase II to gain additional experience with the regimen. Twenty-four (75%) patients were Durie Salmon stage III, and 12 (37.5%) had >2 prior lines of therapy. The overall response rate (≥PR) was 44% with 22% complete remission. Two-year overall survival and progression-free survival were 76% and 39%, respectively, with a median follow-up of 31.7 months. The most common grade 3 and 4 nonhematologic adverse events were neutropenic fever (25%), nausea (18.8%), and mucositis (9.4%). Serious adverse events included intensive care unit admission (9.4%), seizure (3.1%), prolonged diarrhea (3.1%), and Guillain-Barre syndrome (3.1%). Two patients (6%) died of sepsis. There was no emergent peripheral neuropathy nor increase in any pre-existing peripheral neuropathy. The addition of bortezomib to melphalan as conditioning for salvage ASCT was well tolerated. More importantly, it can provide durable remission for patients who have a suboptimal response to prior single-agent melphalan conditioning for ASCT, without requiring a reduction in the dose of melphalan. Larger randomized prospective studies to determine the effect of combination conditioning are being conducted.