Search

The International Staging System for multiple myeloma recently underwent a second revision (R2-ISS) to include gain/amplification of 1q21 and account for the additive prognostic significance of multiple high-risk features. The phase 3 ICARIA-MM (isatuximab–pomalidomide–dexamethasone vs. pomalidomide–dexamethasone) and IKEMA (isatuximab–carfilzomib–dexamethasone vs. carfilzomib–dexamethasone) studies provide large datasets for retrospectively validating the prognostic value of the R2-ISS in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. Of 609 pooled patients, 68 (11.2%) were reclassified as R2-ISS stage I, 136 (22.3%) as R2-ISS stage II, 204 (33.5%) as R2-ISS stage III, 55 (9.0%) as stage IV, and 146 (24.0%) "Not classified". Median progression-free survival was shorter among those reclassified as R2-ISS stage II (HR 1.52, 95% CI 0.979–2.358), stage III (HR 2.59, 95% CI 1.709–3.923), and stage IV (HR 3.51, 95% CI 2.124–5.784) versus stage I. Adding isatuximab led to longer progression-free survival versus doublet therapy (adjusted HR 0.544 [95% CI 0.436–0.680]), with a consistent treatment effect observed across all R2-ISS stages. This is the first study to validate the R2-ISS with novel agents, including anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies, and to show that R2-ISS, as a prognostic scoring system, can be applied to patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Cluster of differentiation 38 (CD38) is a key target on multiple myeloma (MM) cells. This multi‐centre, Phase 1, single‐agent study (NCT04000282) investigated SAR442085, a novel fragment crystallisable (Fc)‐modified anti‐CD38 monoclonal antibody (mAb), with enhanced affinity towards Fc‐gamma receptor on effector cells in patients with relapsed and/or refractory (RR) MM. Methods: This study comprised two parts: Part‐A (dose‐escalation involving anti‐CD38 mAb pre‐treated and naïve patients) and Part‐B (dose expansion). Primary endpoints were maximum tolerated dose and recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D). Results: Thirty‐seven heavily pre‐treated patients were treated in Part A. Part‐B (dose‐expansion) was not studied. Seven dose‐limiting toxicities were reported at DL3, DL5, DL6, and DL7. RP2D was determined to be 5–7·5 mg/kg. Most common treatment‐emergent adverse events were infusion‐related reactions in 70·3% (26/37) patients. Grade ≥3 thrombocytopenia was reported in 48·6% (18/37). Overall response rate was 70% in anti‐CD38 mAb naïve and 4% in anti‐CD38 pre‐treated patients, with a median progression‐free survival of 7·62 (95%CI: 2·858; not calculable) months and 2·79 (95%CI: 1·150; 4·172) months and, respectively. Conclusions: The efficacy of SAR442085 was promising in anti‐CD38 mAb naïve patients but did not extend to the larger cohort of anti‐CD38 mAb pre‐treated patients. This observation, along with transient high‐grade thrombocytopenia, could potentially limit its clinical use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: The growing use of frontline lenalidomide treatment in multiple myeloma (MM) is increasing the proportion of lenalidomide‐refractory patients, which may limit the efficacy of subsequent lines of treatment (LOT). This systematic literature review (January 2008–October 2023) of clinical trials (CT) and real‐world studies (RW) assessed treatment outcomes in adults with relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM) who were previously treated with ≥1 LOT, progressed and were lenalidomide‐refractory. Medline, EMBASE and additional electronic databases were searched for articles published in English. Primary outcomes included progression‐free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and overall/objective response rate (ORR); 24 CT and 19 RW were included. For CT, the population‐weighted mean of median PFS (CT = 14) and OS (CT = 6) were shorter in the lenalidomide‐refractory cohort (months: 8.8 [n = 2699] and 21.7 [n = 1066], respectively) than the intent‐to‐treat population (months: 13.8 [n = 5380] and 35.9 [n = 2264], respectively); the population‐weighted (N = 2142) mean ORR for lenalidomide‐refractory patients (CT = 18) was 56.0%. RW reported considerable variation in PFS (RW = 7), OS (RW = 8) and ORR (RW = 8); and median PFS (RW = 2; months) was lower in lenalidomide/bortezomib‐refractory (5.5/5.5; n = 81/n = 25) versus lenalidomide‐refractory (7.3/8.0; n = 81/n = 61) patients. These data provide evidence that clinical trials and real‐world outcomes are suboptimal in lenalidomide‐refractory patients with RRMM, highlighting the need to improve treatment options for this population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To analyze the impact of prior therapies on outcomes with selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (SVd) versus bortezomib and dexamethasone (Vd) in 402 patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) in the phase 3 BOSTON trial. Methods: Post hoc analysis of progression‐free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety for lenalidomide‐refractory, proteasome inhibitor (PI)‐naïve, bortezomib‐naïve, and one prior line of therapy (1LOT) patient subgroups. Results: At a median follow‐up of over 28 months, clinically meaningful improvements in PFS were noted across all groups with SVd. The median SVd PFS was longer in all subgroups (lenalidomide‐refractory: 10.2 vs. 7.1 months, PI‐naïve: 29.5 vs. 9.7; bortezomib‐naïve: 29.5 vs. 9.7; 1LOT: 21.0 vs. 10.7; p <.05). The lenalidomide‐refractory subgroup had longer OS with SVd (26.7 vs. 18.6 months; HR 0.53; p =.015). In all subgroups, overall response and ≥very good partial response rates were higher with SVd. The manageable safety profile of SVd was similar to the overall patient population. Conclusions: With over 2 years of follow‐up, these clinically meaningful outcomes further support the use of SVd in patients who are lenalidomide‐refractory, PI‐naïve, bortezomib‐naïve, or who received 1LOT (including a monoclonal antibody) and underscore the observed synergy between selinexor and bortezomib. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Melphalan flufenamide (melflufen), a first‐in‐class alkylating peptide‐drug conjugate, plus dexamethasone demonstrated superior progression‐free survival (PFS), but not overall survival (OS), versus pomalidomide plus dexamethasone in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma in the OCEAN study. Time to progression (TTP) <36 months after a prior autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) was a negative prognostic factor for OS with melflufen. This post hoc exploratory analysis evaluated patients refractory to prior alkylators (e.g., cyclophosphamide and melphalan) in OCEAN. In 153 patients refractory to prior alkylators (melflufen, n = 78; pomalidomide, n = 75), the melflufen and pomalidomide arms had similar median PFS (5.6 months [95% CI, 4.2–8.3] vs. 4.7 months [95% CI, 3.1–7.3]; hazard ratio [HR], 0.92 [95% CI, 0.63–1.33]) and OS (23.4 months [95% CI, 14.4–31.7] vs. 20.0 months [95% CI, 12.0–28.7]; HR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.62–1.38]). Among alkylator‐refractory patients with a TTP ≥ 36 months after a prior ASCT or no prior ASCT (melflufen, n = 54; pomalidomide, n = 53), the observed median PFS and OS were longer in the melflufen arm than the pomalidomide arm. The safety profile of melflufen was consistent with previous reports. These results suggest that melflufen is safe and effective in patients with alkylator‐refractory disease, suggesting differentiated activity from other alkylators. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Elotuzumab is an approved monoclonal antibody targeting SLAMF7 on plasma and NK cells that enhances the activity of lenalidomide, pomalidomide, and bortezomib in multiple myeloma (MM). The OPTIMISMM study showed improved outcomes with the combination of pomalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (PVd) in relapsed/refractory MM. We therefore studied adding elotuzumab to PVd (elo-PVd) in relapsed/refractory MM in a multicenter phase 2 trial. The primary objective was to determine the overall response rate (ORR). Patients with relapsed/refractory disease and ≥1 prior line of treatment (including lenalidomide and a proteasome inhibitor) were eligible. For each 28 day cycle, elotuzumab was weekly for the first 2 cycles and then every other week; pomalidomide was on days 1-21; bortezomib was on days 1, 8, 15; and dexamethasone was weekly. The trial completed accrual in September 2018 with 48 patients receiving treatment. The median age was 64 (range 40-80) and the median number of prior lines was 3 (range 1-9); 25% had high risk FISH. Prior therapies included: pomalidomide (33%), daratumumab (25%), and isatuximab (4%). Best ORR was 56.3% and median PFS was 10 months. In patients with 1 prior line of therapy, ORR was 73.7% and median PFS was 23.4 months. Common grade ≥3 adverse events were neutropenia (33%); infections, any (33%); lung infection (27%); hypophosphatemia (19%); and thrombocytopenia (15%). Elo-PVd is one of the first trials of a quadruplet regimen in relapsed/refractory MM incorporating a monoclonal antibody to show efficacy across diverse prior treatments, including triple class exposed with prior anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody., (Copyright © 2024 American Society of Hematology.)

What Is This Summary About?: This summary describes the final analysis of the GRIFFIN study. In this study, participants were newly diagnosed with a type of blood and bone marrow cancer called multiple myeloma, had never received any treatment, and were able to undergo an autologous stem cell transplant. The GRIFFIN study looked at adding the drug daratumumab (D) to a combination of standard treatments called RVd (lenalidomide [R], bortezomib [V], and dexamethasone [d]) during the treatment phases induction and consolidation, followed by daratumumab and lenalidomide (D-R) maintenance. Participants also received an autologous stem cell transplant to further help reduce multiple myeloma. The GRIFFIN study looked at whether D-RVd followed by D-R maintenance was better at killing multiple myeloma cells compared with RVd on its own followed by R maintenance on its own, and if treatments were safe. This summary also describes results from 2 other GRIFFIN publications: one that looked at participants with certain multiple myeloma characteristics or demographic factors that are associated with worse outcomes, and another that looked at how treatments impacted the participants' quality of life., What Were the Results?: At the time of the final analysis of GRIFFIN, participants who were treated with D-RVd followed by D-R maintenance had very low (undetectable) levels of multiple myeloma cells and multiple myeloma markers (biological signs) and were more likely to be alive without the multiple myeloma getting worse or coming back compared with participants who received standard RVd treatment followed by R maintenance. There was also a pattern of similar benefits achieved by participants who were at risk for worse outcomes. Additionally, participants who received D-RVd treatment followed by D-R maintenance reported less pain, less fatigue (extreme tiredness), and greater improvements in their ability to conduct daily physical activities. While some side effects (unwanted or unexpected effects of treatment) were higher with D-RVd, side effects in both groups were as expected, and adding daratumumab did not reduce a participant's ability to handle treatment., What Do the Results of the Study Mean?: Results of the GRIFFIN study showed that D-RVd treatment followed by D-R maintenance was better at treating multiple myeloma than the standard treatment of RVd followed by R maintenance in adults with a new diagnosis of multiple myeloma who were able to receive an autologous stem cell transplant, with no unexpected side effects of treatment. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02874742 (GRIFFIN) (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Examination of the impact of race and ethnicity on multiple myeloma (MM) outcomes has yielded inconsistent results. This retrospective, real-world (RW) study describes patient, disease, and treatment characteristics (and associations with survival outcomes) among newly diagnosed MM patients of non-Hispanic (NH) Black/African American (AA) and NH White race/ethnicity in the US. We included patients from the nationwide Flatiron Health electronic health record-derived de-identified database who initiated first line of therapy (LOT) for MM between January 1, 2016 and March 31, 2022. Of 4,614 patients in our study cohort, 23.3% were NH Black/AA. Non-Hispanic Black/AA patients were younger than NH White patients at diagnosis (median 68 vs. 71 years) and more likely to be female (53.4% vs. 43.5%). Rates of high-risk cytogenetics and 1q21+ were similar between races/ethnicities. The most common primary regimen used was lenalidomide-bortezomib-dexamethasone (50.1% of NH Black/AA and 48.1% of NH White patients). Receipt of stem cell transplantation during first LOT was less common among NH Black/AA (16.5%) than NH White (21.9%) patients. Unadjusted RW progression-free survival (rwPFS) and overall survival (rwOS) were similar between races/ethnicities. After multivariable adjustment, NH Black/AA race/ethnicity was associated with slightly inferior rwPFS (hazard ratio [HR]=1.13; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01-1.27). The difference in rwOS (HR=1.12; 95% CI: 0.98-1.28) was not statistically significant. In general, associations between risk factors for rwPFS and rwOS were consistent between races/ethnicities. Findings from this analysis help to inform clinicians about the impact of race/ethnicity on MM treatment paradigms and outcomes in the US.

Melphalan flufenamide (melflufen), a first-in-class alkylating peptide-drug conjugate, plus dexamethasone was approved in Europe for use in patients with triple-class refractory relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) with ≥3 prior lines of therapy and without prior autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) or with a time to progression >36 months after prior ASCT. The randomized LIGHTHOUSE study (NCT04649060) assessed melflufen plus daratumumab and dexamethasone (melflufen group) versus daratumumab in patients with RRMM with disease refractory to an immunomodulatory agent and a proteasome inhibitor or who had received ≥3 prior lines of therapy including an immunomodulatory agent and a proteasome inhibitor. A partial clinical hold issued by the US Food and Drug Administration for all melflufen studies led to financial constraints and premature study closure on February 23rd 2022 (data cut-off date). In total, 54 of 240 planned patients were randomized (melflufen group, N=27; daratumumab group, N=27). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was not reached in the melflufen group versus 4.9 months in the daratumumab group (Hazard Ratio: 0.18 [95% Confidence Interval, 0.05-0.65]; P=0.0032) at a median follow-up time of 7.1 and 6.6 months, respectively. Overall response rate (ORR) was 59% in the melflufen group versus 30% in the daratumumab group (P=0.0300). The most common grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events in the melflufen group versus daratumumab group were neutropenia (50% vs. 12%), thrombocytopenia (50% vs. 8%), and anemia (32% vs. 19%). Melflufen plus daratumumab and dexamethasone demonstrated superior PFS and ORR versus daratumumab in RRMM and a safety profile comparable to previously published melflufen studies.

Melphalan flufenamide (melflufen), a first-in-class, alkylating peptide-drug conjugate, demonstrated clinical benefit in combination with dexamethasone in triple-class refractory multiple myeloma (MM). The phase I/IIa ANCHOR study evaluated melflufen (30 or 40 mg) and dexamethasone (40 mg with daratumumab; 20 mg followed by 40 mg with bortezomib; dose reduced if aged ≥75 years) in triplet combination with daratumumab (16 mg/kg; daratumumab arm) or bortezomib (1.3 mg/m2; bortezomib arm) in patients with relapsed/refractory MM refractory to an immunomodulatory agent and/or a proteasome inhibitor and who had received one to four prior lines of therapy. Primary objectives were to determine the optimal dose of melflufen in triplet combination (phase I) and overall response rate (phase IIa). In total, 33 patients were treated in the daratumumab arm and 23 patients received therapy in the bortezomib arm. No dose-limiting toxicities were reported at either melflufen dose level with either combination. With both triplet regimens, the most common grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events were thrombocytopenia and neutropenia; thrombocytopenia was the most common treatment-emergent adverse event leading to treatment discontinuation. In the daratumumab arm, patients receiving melflufen 30 mg remained on treatment longer than those receiving the 40-mg dose. In the daratumumab arm, the overall response rate was 73% and median progression-free survival was 12.9 months. Notably, in the bortezomib arm, the overall response rate was 78% and median progression-free survival was 14.7 months. Considering the totality of the data, melflufen 30 mg was established as the recommended dose for use with dexamethasone and daratumumab or bortezomib for future studies in relapsed/refractory MM.