Search

Background: Despite recent advances in therapeutic options, there remains an unmet need for treating patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma, especially in those previously exposed or refractory to lenalidomide. This updated efficacy and safety analysis from the phase 3 CANDOR study compared carfilzomib, daratumumab, and dexamethasone (KdD) with carfilzomib and dexamethasone (Kd) in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma., Methods: In this updated analysis of the randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 3 CANDOR study, patients (aged ≥18 years) with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma, at least a partial response to between one and three previous therapies, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, were recruited from 102 medical centres globally and randomly assigned (2:1) by interactive voice or web response software to receive KdD or Kd. Participants were stratified by disease stage, previous proteasome inhibitor or anti-CD38 antibody exposure, and number of previous therapies. All patients received intravenous infusions of carfilzomib twice per week at 56 mg/m 2 (20 mg/m 2 on days 1 and 2 during cycle 1) on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16 of each 28-day cycle. Daratumumab (8 mg/kg) was administered intravenously on days 1 and 2 of cycle 1 and at 16 mg/kg weekly for the remaining doses of the first two cycles, then every 2 weeks for four cycles (cycles 3-6), and every 4 weeks thereafter. Patients received 40 mg dexamethasone weekly (20 mg for patients >75 years old). This analysis was a preplanned interim analysis for overall survival; however, at the time of data cutoff, overall survival data were not mature. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival. Here, we provide updated progression-free survival data, assessed centrally by Onyx Response Computer Algorithm in the intention-to-treat population, with 11 months additional follow-up. Adverse events were assessed in the safety population, which included all participants who received at least one dose of trial treatment. CANDOR is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03158688, and is active but not recruiting., Findings: Between June 13, 2017, and June 25, 2018, 466 patients were enrolled, of whom 312 received KdD and 154 received Kd. At data cutoff (June 15, 2020), median follow-up was 27·8 months (IQR 25·6-29·5) for KdD and 27·0 months (13·2-28·6) for Kd. Median progression-free survival was 28·6 months (95% CI 22·7-not estimable [NE]) in the KdD group and 15·2 months (11·1-19·9) in the Kd group (hazard ratio 0·59 [95% CI 0·45-0·78], log-rank p<0·0001). Treatment-emergent adverse events in the safety population were consistent with the primary analysis. Grade 3 or worse treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 268 (87%) patients in the KdD group and 116 (76%) in the Kd group; most commonly thrombocytopenia (76 [25%] vs 25 [16%], respectively), hypertension (65 [21%] vs 23 [15%]), pneumonia (54 [18%] vs 14 [9%]), and anaemia (53 [17%] vs 23 [15%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 194 (63%) patients with KdD and 76 (50%) with Kd. Adverse events leading to death occurred in 27 (9%) patients in the KdD group and seven (5%) in the Kd group; most commonly septic shock (five [2%] vs one (1%]) and pneumonia (four [1%] vs none). No new treatment-related deaths have occurred since the primary analysis., Interpretation: A clear, maintained progression-free survival benefit of KdD over Kd with longer follow-up was confirmed, making KdD an emerging standard-of-care for patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma., Funding: Amgen and Janssen., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests SZU reports grants and personal fees from Amgen, Celgene, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, Janssen, Takeda, SkylineDX, Merck, and GlaxoSmithKline; personal fees from AbbVie, MundiPharma, and Oncopeptides; and grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pharmacyclics. HQ reports grants (to institution) from Celgene, Amgen, GlaxoSmithKline, and Karyopharm; consultancy or membership (or both) on an advisory committee from Takeda, GlaxoSmithKline, Karyopharm, Celgene, and Janssen; membership on an advisory committee from Takeda, GlaxoSmithKline, Karyopharm, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Janssen; leadership or fiduciary role for GlaxoSmithKine, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Amgen; and receipt of free drug for investigator-initiated study from GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi, Amgen, and Karyopharm. M-VM reports consulting fees from Janssen, Celgene, Amgen, Takeda, AbbVie, GlaxoSmithKline, Oncopeptides, Adaptive, Sanofi, Pfizer, Roche, and Bluebird-bio. OL reports honoraria or membership (or both) on the board of directors for Adaptive, Amgen, Celgene, Janssen, and Takeda; and membership on independent data monitoring committees for Merck and Theradex. XL reports honoraria from Sanofi, Takeda, Oncopeptide, Karyopharm, Amgen, Carsgen, Incyte, Novartis, Celgene, Janssen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, GlaxoSmithKline, and AbbVie. DS reports honoraria fees and speakers' bureau fees for Novartis, Karyopharm, Janssen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Takeda, Amgen, and Celgene; consulting fees and membership on the Board of Directors or advisory committees for Janssen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Takeda, Amgen, Celularity, and Celgene; research funding from Janssen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Takeda, Amgen, and Celgene. KW reports consultancy fees from Janssen, Adaptive Biotech, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Sanofi, Takeda, Oncopeptides, Karyopharm, GlaxoSmithKline, and Celgene; honoraria for speakers' bureaus from Janssen, Adaptive Biotech, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Sanofi, Takeda, and GlaxoSmithKline; and grants or contracts (to institution) from Janssen, Amgen, Celgene, and Sanofi. AO reports consultancy fees from Celgene/Bristol Myers Squibb, Sanofi, Amgen, and GlaxoSmithKline; speakers bureau fees from Celgene and Amgen; and fees for participation on advisory boards for Celgene/Bristol Myers Squibb, Sanofi, Amgen, and GlaxoSmithKline. NR reports consulting fees from Celgene, Amgen, Takeda, and Karyopharm; payment or honoraria for speakers' bureaus from Celgene, Janssen, and Takeda; travel support from Celgene, Janssen, and Takeda; and participation on advisory boards for Celgene, Amgen, Takeda, and Karyopharm. AN reports consultancy or membership (or both) on an advisory committee for Bristol Myers Squibb, Adaptive Biotech, Amgen, Celgene, Sanofi, Oncopep, Takeda, Karyopharm, GlaxoSmithKline, and Janssen. MQ reports employment with and stockholdings of Janssen R&D. MB reports advisory board or speakers bureau fees from Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Janssen, Oncopeptides, Sanofi, and Takeda. AJ reports honoraria for advisory board participation and consulting from AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Karyopharm, and Sanofi-Aventis. BD made contributions to this publication while employed by Amgen. AZ-K and AY report employment with and equity ownership in Amgen. MD reports consulting fees from Janssen, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Takeda, and Beigene; payment or honoraria for speakers bureaus from Beigene, Janssen, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Takeda; and grants or contracts from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen, Amgen, Takeda, and Beigene. MG declares no competing interests., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

With improving outcomes in amyloid light-chain (AL) amyloidosis, there is a need to study novel agents in this setting. We report outcomes of 40 patients with relapsed AL amyloidosis treated with ixazomib + lenalidomide + dexamethasone (IRd). Haematological responses were assessed on an intention-to-treat basis at three months: complete response (CR) - 8 (20·5%), very good partial response (VGPR) - 8 (20·5%), partial response (PR) - 7 (17·9%) and no response (NR) - 16 (41·0%). One patient had missing data. Six patients subsequently improved response. Best responses were: CR - 10 (25·6%), VGPR - 8 (20·5%), PR - 7 (17·9%), NR - 14 (35·9%). Cardiac and renal organ responses occurred in 5·6% and 13·3% respectively. Median progession-free survival (PFS) was 17·0 months (95% CI 7·3-20·7 months), improving to 28·8 months (95% CI 20·6-37·0 months) in those achieving CR/VGPR. Median overall survival was 29·1 months (95% CI 24-33 months). Serious adverse events were seen in 14 (35·0%) patients inclusive of 15 admissions due to: infection (6/15, 40·0%), fluid overload (5/15, 33·3%), cardiac arrhythmia (2/15, 13·3%), renal dysfunction (1/15, 6·6%) and anaemia (1/15, 6·6%). In summary, IRd is an oral treatment option with a manageable toxicity profile leading to deep responses in 47% of patients with relapsed AL amyloidosis., (© 2020 British Society for Haematology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: KW-2478 is a novel non-ansamycin Hsp90 inhibitor with modest single-agent activity in relapsed/refractory myeloma but which shows synergistic antimyeloma activity with bortezomib (BTZ) in preclinical studies. This study determined the safety, preliminary clinical activity, and pharmacokinetics of KW-2478, an Hsp90 inhibitor, in combination with BTZ in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (MM)., Methods: Phase I dose escalation determined the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of KW-2478 plus BTZ, which was then used during phase II., Results: The maximum tolerated dose was not reached during phase I and the RP2D was KW-2478 175 mg m -2 plus BTZ 1.3 mg m -2 on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 every 3 weeks. In the efficacy evaluable phase I/II population treated at the RP2D (n=79), the objective response rate was 39.2% (95% confidence interval: 28.4-50.9%), clinical benefit rate 51.9% (40.4-63.3%), median progression-free survival 6.7 (5.9-not reached (NR)) months, and median duration of response 5.5 (4.9-NR) months. In the phase I/II safety population (n=95), the most frequently observed treatment-related grade 3/4 adverse events were diarrhoea, fatigue, and neutropenia (each in 7.4% of patients), and nausea and thrombocytopenia (each in 5.3%)., Conclusions: KW-2478 plus BTZ was well tolerated with no apparent overlapping toxicity in patients with relapsed/refractory MM. The antimyeloma activity of KW-2478 in combination with BTZ as scheduled in this trial appeared relatively modest; however, the good tolerability of the combination would support further exploration of alternate dosing schedules and combinations.

Myeloma patients who become refractory to immunomodulatory agents (IMiDs) and bortezomib have poor survival, with limited therapeutic options. Pomalidomide has shown improved survival and good tolerability in this patient cohort in clinical trials, but real world data are scarce. We retrospectively analysed all patients treated with pomalidomide at five UK centres between 2013 and 2016. Of 85 patients identified, 70 had sufficient information for response assessments. Median age was 66 years [40-89], 96·5% were refractory to IMiDs, 72·9% were refractory to both an IMiD and bortezomib and 92·9% were refractory to their last treatment. Of 45 patients with fluorescence in situ hybridization results 64% had adverse risk, 19 patients (22·4%) had an estimated glomerular filtration rate <45 ml/min. Grade ≥3 non-haematological toxicities occurred in 42·4%, and grade ≥3 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia in 38% and 24% respectively, but only 18·8% had dose reductions. The overall response rate was 52·9%. At a median follow-up of 13·2 months, median progression-free survival was 5·2 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 4·150-6·238], and median overall survival was 13·7 months (95% CI 11·775-15·707). No significant difference was seen in response, survival or tolerability by renal function, age or cytogenetic risk. This real-world data support the results seen in published clinical trials., (© 2017 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Daratumumab showed promising efficacy alone and with lenalidomide and dexamethasone in a phase 1-2 study involving patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma., Methods: In this phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned 569 patients with multiple myeloma who had received one or more previous lines of therapy to receive lenalidomide and dexamethasone either alone (control group) or in combination with daratumumab (daratumumab group). The primary end point was progression-free survival., Results: At a median follow-up of 13.5 months in a protocol-specified interim analysis, 169 events of disease progression or death were observed (in 53 of 286 patients [18.5%] in the daratumumab group vs. 116 of 283 [41.0%] in the control group; hazard ratio, 0.37; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.27 to 0.52; P<0.001 by stratified log-rank test). The Kaplan-Meier rate of progression-free survival at 12 months was 83.2% (95% CI, 78.3 to 87.2) in the daratumumab group, as compared with 60.1% (95% CI, 54.0 to 65.7) in the control group. A significantly higher rate of overall response was observed in the daratumumab group than in the control group (92.9% vs. 76.4%, P<0.001), as was a higher rate of complete response or better (43.1% vs. 19.2%, P<0.001). In the daratumumab group, 22.4% of the patients had results below the threshold for minimal residual disease (1 tumor cell per 10 5 white cells), as compared with 4.6% of those in the control group (P<0.001); results below the threshold for minimal residual disease were associated with improved outcomes. The most common adverse events of grade 3 or 4 during treatment were neutropenia (in 51.9% of the patients in the daratumumab group vs. 37.0% of those in the control group), thrombocytopenia (in 12.7% vs. 13.5%), and anemia (in 12.4% vs. 19.6%). Daratumumab-associated infusion-related reactions occurred in 47.7% of the patients and were mostly of grade 1 or 2., Conclusions: The addition of daratumumab to lenalidomide and dexamethasone significantly lengthened progression-free survival among patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. Daratumumab was associated with infusion-related reactions and a higher rate of neutropenia than the control therapy. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; POLLUX ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02076009 .).

Treatment options are limited in myeloma relapsed or refractory to both bortezomib and lenalidomide (double-relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma; DRMM). Bendamustine is an antitumour agent that has efficacy in relapsed myeloma. We retrospectively analysed data from 30 DRMM patients who received a combination of bendamustine, thalidomide and dexamethasone (BTD) in 28-day treatment cycles. Bendamustine was administered with a cumulative dose of up to 200 mg/m(2). Thalidomide (50-150 mg) was given daily as tolerated, and dexamethasone was given at an equivalent dose of up to 160 mg per cycle. A median of 5 (2-9) treatment cycles were administered per patient. Twenty-six patients (87 %) achieved stable disease or better. At a median follow-up time of 12.1 (2.3-21.5) months, median (95 % CI) progression-free survival and overall survival were 4.0 (2.6-5.3) months and 7.2 (5.2-9.2) months, respectively. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were haematological: anaemia (n = 8, 34.8 %), neutropenia (n = 16, 69.6 %) and thrombocytopenia (n = 10, 43.5 %). Non-haematological toxicities included pain (n = 3, 13.0 %), infection (n = 7, 30.4 %) and sensory neuropathy (n = 1, 4.3 %). We propose that BTD is a viable salvage treatment option for DRMM patients.

Therapeutic advances and the availability of novel agents have significantly improved outcomes in myeloma; yet, it remains incurable and strategies to improve survival continue to be sought. One approach is to prolong the duration of response and increase progression-free survival (PFS) through consolidation or maintenance treatment with regimens that have low toxicity profiles, and do not negatively impact on quality of life. Data from several studies with thalidomide, lenalidomide and bortezomib consistently show improvements in response and PFS, although results have still to be confirmed with respect to overall survival (OS). Despite the promising data, the optimal use of consolidation and maintenance treatment in terms of regimen, dose and duration has yet to be defined. Given the evidence to date, the UK Myeloma Forum believes that both maintenance and consolidation therapy should be considered as treatment options for patients with myeloma. Patients should be encouraged to enrol in clinical studies. This document reviews the current position of maintenance and consolidation for patients with myeloma treated in the UK., (© 2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

The use of consolidation or maintenance to improve disease response, and hence clinical outcome, following autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) remains the subject of intense clinical research. We carried out a single-arm study to assess the toxicity and efficacy of a short block of consolidation therapy with cyclophosphamide, low dose thalidomide and dexamethasone (CTD) in patients within 6 months following ASCT, as part of frontline therapy for symptomatic multiple myeloma. Forty-five patients who had not progressed were enrolled on the study, and 43 completed treatment on protocol. This regimen was well tolerated soon after ASCT, with only grade 1/2 toxicity apart from neutropenia, and no long-term sequelae. Importantly, CTD consolidation improved the depth of response in treated patients, increasing the complete/very good partial response rate from 44% at 3 months, to 72% at 12 months, which was significantly higher compared with a historical group of control patients (P = 0·002). There was a trend to longer progression-free survival that favoured the study group. Consolidation therapy did not adversely affect subsequent disease response to salvage therapies at relapse. We conclude that CTD consolidation may be a useful, non-toxic and cost-effective strategy to deepen disease response following ASCT, and deserves further study in a randomized trial., (© 2012 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.)

We report the case of a 46-year-old male who developed dermatomyositis and a sarcoid-like reaction in association with testicular relapse of multiple myeloma. The myositis progressed despite chemotherapy directed at the underlying malignant disorder and immunosuppressive treatment. There was, however, a dramatic and sustained response to high-dose chemotherapy and autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation which resulted in resolution of the myopathy and partial resolution of the sarcoid-like reaction. This case report highlights the potential of autologous stem cell transplantation as treatment for para-neoplastic disorders associated with haematological malignancies.