Search

There is limited information on the characteristics, prognostic factors, and outcomes of patients with multiple myeloma (MM) hospitalized with COVID-19. This retrospective case series investigated 167 patients reported from 73 hospitals within the Spanish Myeloma Collaborative Group network in March and April, 2020. Outcomes were compared with 167 randomly selected, contemporary, age-/sex-matched noncancer patients with COVID-19 admitted at six participating hospitals. Among MM and noncancer patients, median age was 71 years, and 57% of patients were male; 75 and 77% of patients, respectively, had at least one comorbidity. COVID-19 clinical severity was moderate–severe in 77 and 89% of patients and critical in 8 and 4%, respectively. Supplemental oxygen was required by 47 and 55% of MM and noncancer patients, respectively, and 21%/9% vs 8%/6% required noninvasive/invasive ventilation. Inpatient mortality was 34 and 23% in MM and noncancer patients, respectively. Among MM patients, inpatient mortality was 41% in males, 42% in patients aged >65 years, 49% in patients with active/progressive MM at hospitalization, and 59% in patients with comorbid renal disease at hospitalization, which were independent prognostic factors on adjusted multivariate analysis. This case series demonstrates the increased risk and identifies predictors of inpatient mortality among MM patients hospitalized with COVID-19.

© The Author(s) 2020., Detecting persistent minimal residual disease (MRD) allows the identification of patients with an increased risk of relapse and death. In this study, we have evaluated MRD 3 months after transplantation in 106 myeloma patients using a commercial next-generation sequencing (NGS) strategy (LymphoTrack®), and compared the results with nextgeneration flow (NGF, EuroFlow). The use of different marrow pulls and the need of concentrating samples for NGS biased the applicability for MRD evaluation and favored NGF. Despite that, correlation between NGS and NGF was high (R2 = 0.905). The 3-year progression-free survival (PFS) rates by NGS and NGF were longer for undetectable vs. positive patients (NGS: 88.7% vs. 56.6%; NGF: 91.4% vs. 50%; p < 0.001 for both comparisons), which resulted in a 3-year overall survival (OS) advantage (NGS: 96.2% vs. 77.3%; NGF: 96.6% vs. 74.9%, p < 0.01 for both comparisons). In the Cox regression model, NGS and NGF negativity had similar results but favoring the latter in PFS (HR: 0.20, 95% CI: 0.09–0.45, p < 0.001) and OS (HR: 0.21, 95% CI: 0.06–0.75, p = 0.02). All these results reinforce the role of MRD detection by different strategies in patient prognosis and highlight the use of MRD as an endpoint for multiple myeloma treatment.

Multiple myeloma is a heterogeneous disease whose pathogenesis has not been completely elucidated. Although B-cell receptors play a crucial role in myeloma pathogenesis, the impact of clonal immunoglobulin heavy-chain features in the outcome has not been extensively explored. Here we present the characterization of complete heavy-chain gene rearrangements in 413 myeloma patients treated in Spanish trials, including 113 patients characterized by next-generation sequencing. Compared to the normal B-cell repertoire, gene selection was biased in myeloma, with significant overrepresentation of IGHV3, IGHD2 and IGHD3, as well as IGHJ4 gene groups. Hypermutation was high in our patients (median: 8.8%). Interestingly, regarding patients who are not candidates for transplantation, a high hypermutation rate (≥7%) and the use of IGHD2 and IGHD3 groups were associated with improved prognostic features and longer survival rates in the univariate analyses. Multivariate analysis revealed prolonged progression-free survival rates for patients using IGHD2/IGHD3 groups (HR: 0.552, 95% CI: 0.361−0.845, p = 0.006), as well as prolonged overall survival rates for patients with hypermutation ≥7% (HR: 0.291, 95% CI: 0.137−0.618, p = 0.001). Our results provide new insights into the molecular characterization of multiple myeloma, highlighting the need to evaluate some of these clonal rearrangement characteristics as new potential prognostic markers., This work was partially supported by the Instituto de Salud Carlos III (ISCIII), Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness PI15/01956, CIBERONC-CB16/12/00233, and “Una manera de hacer Europa” (Innocampus; CEI-2010-1-0010)”. M.G.-A., I.P.-C., and C.J. are supported by the Fundación Española de Hematología y Hemoterapia (FEHH, co-funded by Fundación Cris in the latter case), A.M. by the European Social Fund and the Spanish Education Council through the University of Salamanca, and M.E.S. by the ISCIII (CPII18/00028). All Spanish funding is co-sponsored by the European Union FEDER program.

PD1 expression in CD4+ and CD8+ T cells is increased after treatment in multiple myeloma patients with persistent disease. The GEM-Pembresid trial analyzed the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab as consolidation in patients achieving at least very good partial response but with persistent measurable disease after first- or second-line treatment. Moreover, the characteristics of the immune system were investigated to identify potential biomarkers of response to pembrolizumab. One out of the 17 evaluable patients showed a decrease in the amount of M-protein, although a potential late effect of high-dose melphalan could not be ruled out. Fourteen adverse events were considered related to pembrolizumab, two of which (G3 diarrhea and G2 pneumonitis) prompted treatment discontinuation and all resolving without sequelae. Interestingly, pembrolizumab induced a decrease in the percentage of NK cells at cycle 3, due to the reduction of the circulating and adaptive subsets (0.615 vs. 0.43, p = 0.007, 1.12 vs. 0.86, p = 0.02). In the early progressors, a significantly lower expression of PD1 in CD8+ effector memory T cells (MFI 1327 vs. 926, p = 0.03) was observed. In conclusion, pembrolizumab used as consolidation monotherapy shows an acceptable toxicity profile but did not improve responses in this MM patient population. The trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov with identifier NCT02636010 and with EUDRACT number 2015-003359-23.

Disease control at 5 years would be a desirable endpoint for elderly multiple myeloma (MM) patients, but biomarkers predicting this are not defined. Therefore, to gain further insights in this endpoint, a population of 498 newly diagnosed transplant-ineligible patients enrolled in two Spanish trials (GEM2005MAS65 and GEM2010MAS65), has been analyzed. Among the 435 patients included in this post-hoc study, 18.6% remained alive and progression free after 5 years of treatment initiation. In these patients, overall survival (OS) rate at 10 years was 60.8% as compared with 11.8% for those progressing within the first 5 years. Hemoglobin (Hb) >= 12 g/dl (OR 2.74, p = 0.001) and MGUS-like profile (OR 4.18, p = 0.005) were the two baseline variables associated with long-term disease-free survival. Upon including depth of response (and MRD), Hb >= 12 g/dl (OR 2.27) and MGUS-like signature (OR 7.48) retained their predictive value along with MRD negativity (OR 5.18). This study shows that despite the use of novel agents, the probability of disease control at 5 years is still restricted to a small fraction (18.6%) of elderly MM patients. Since this endpoint is associated with higher rates of OS, this study provides important information about diagnostic and post-treatment biomarkers helpful in predicting the likelihood of disease control at 5 years., This study was supported by the Centro de Investigacion Biomedica en Red-Area de Oncologia-del Instituto de Salud Carlos III (CIBERONC; CB16/12/00369 and CB16/12/00377), Instituto de Salud Carlos III/Subdireccion General de Investigacion Sanitaria (FIS no. PS09/01897/01370, PI12/01761, PI12/02311, PI13/01469, PI14/01867, G03/136, CD13/00340), Asociacion Espanola Contra el Cancer (GCB120981SAN) and the European Research Council (ERC) 2015 Starting Grant (MYELOMANEXT).

Promising new drugs are being evaluated for treatment of multiple myeloma (MM), but their impact should be measured against the expected outcome in patients failing current therapies. However, the natural history of relapsed disease in the current era remains unclear. We studied 286 patients with relapsed MM, who were refractory to bortezomib and were relapsed following, refractory to or ineligible to receive, an IMiD (immunomodulatory drug), had measurable disease, and ECOG PS of 0, 1 or 2. The date patients satisfied the entry criteria was defined as time zero (T-0). The median age at diagnosis was 58 years, and time from diagnosis to T-0 was 3.3 years. Following T-0, 213 (74%) patients had a treatment recorded with one or more regimens (median = 1; range 0-8). The first regimen contained bortezomib in 55 (26%) patients and an IMiD in 70 (33%). A minor response or better was seen to at least one therapy after T0 in 94 patients (44%) including >= partial response in 69 (32%). The median overall survival and event-free survival from T-0 were 9 and 5 months, respectively. This study confirms the poor outcome, once patients become refractory to current treatments. The results provide context for interpreting ongoing trials of new drugs. Leukemia (2012) 26, 149-157; doi:10.1038/leu.2011.196; published online 29 July 2011

On behalf of the PETHEMA/GEM Cooperative Group., Risk of developing myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) is significantly increased in both multiple myeloma (MM) and monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance, suggesting that it is therapy independent. However, the incidence and sequelae of dysplastic hematopoiesis at diagnosis are unknown. Here, we used multidimensional flow cytometry (MFC) to prospectively screen for the presence of MDS-associated phenotypic alterations (MDS-PA) in the bone marrow of 285 patients with MM enrolled in the PETHEMA/GEM2012MENOS65 trial (#NCT01916252). We investigated the clinical significance of monocytic MDS-PA in a larger series of 1252 patients enrolled in 4 PETHEMA/GEM protocols. At diagnosis, 33 (11.6%) of 285 cases displayed MDS-PA. Bulk and single-cell–targeted sequencing of MDS recurrently mutated genes in CD34+ progenitors (and dysplastic lineages) from 67 patients revealed clonal hematopoiesis in 13 (50%) of 26 cases with MDS-PA vs 9 (22%) of 41 without MDS-PA; TET2 and NRAS were the most frequently mutated genes. Dynamics of MDS-PA at diagnosis and after autologous transplant were evaluated in 86 of 285 patients and showed that in most cases (69 of 86 [80%]), MDS-PA either persisted or remained absent in patients with or without MDS-PA at diagnosis, respectively. Noteworthy, MDS-associated mutations infrequently emerged after high-dose therapy. Based on MFC profiling, patients with MDS-PA have altered hematopoiesis and T regulatory cell distribution in the tumor microenvironment. Importantly, the presence of monocytic MDS-PA at diagnosis anticipated greater risk of hematologic toxicity and was independently associated with inferior progression-free survival (hazard ratio, 1.5; P = .02) and overall survival (hazard ratio, 1.7; P = .01). This study reveals the biological and clinical significance of dysplastic hematopoiesis in newly diagnosed MM, which can be screened with moderate sensitivity using cost-effective MFC.

Background Therapeutic advancements following the introduction of autologous stem cell transplantation and ‘novel’ agents have significantly improved clinical outcomes for patients with multiple myeloma (MM). Increased life expectancy, however, has led to renewed concerns about the long-term risk of second primary malignancies (SPMs). This review outlines the most up-to-date knowledge of possible host-, disease-, and treatment-related risk factors for the development of SPMs in patients with MM, and provides practical recommendations to assist physicians. Design A Panel of International Myeloma Working Group members reviewed the most relevant data published in the literature as full papers, or presented at meetings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, American Society of Hematology, European Hematology Association, or International Myeloma Workshops, up to June 2016. Here, we present the recommendations of the Panel, based on this literature review. Results Overall, the risk of SPMs in MM is low, multifactorial, and partially related to the length of patients’ survival and MM intrinsic susceptibility. Studies suggest a significantly increased incidence of SPMs when lenalidomide is administered either following, or concurrently with, oral melphalan. Increased SPM incidence has also been reported with lenalidomide maintenance following high-dose melphalan, albeit to a lesser degree. In both cases, the risk of death from MM was significantly higher than the risk of death from SPMs, with lenalidomide possibly providing a survival benefit. No increase in SPM incidence was reported with lenalidomide plus dexamethasone (without melphalan), or with bortezomib plus oral melphalan, dexamethasone, or thalidomide. Conclusion In general, the risk of SPMs should not alter the current therapeutic decision-making process in MM. However, regimens such as lenalidomide plus dexamethasone should be preferred to prolonged exposure to lenalidomide plus oral melphalan. SPM risk should be carefully discussed with the patient in the context of benefits and risks of different treatment options.

Background: Treatment of multiple myeloma has evolved considerably in the past few years with availability of several news drugs as well as increasing use of multidrug combinations. These changes have no doubt led to the improved survival seen among patients with MM. We have previously shown that outcomes of patients intolerant or refractory to one of the IMiDs and bortezomib had a poor outcome. Since that time, other drugs of the same class as well as new classes of drugs have been introduced for the treatment of MM. We designed this retrospective study to estimate the outcomes in patients with relapsed myeloma, who have become refractory to the current generation IMiDs and proteasome inhibitors. Patients and Methods: Patients with relapsed multiple myeloma who have received at least 3 prior lines of therapy, is refractory to both an IMiD (lenalidomide or pomalidomide) AND a proteasome inhibitor (bortezomib or carfilzomib), and has been exposed to an alkylating agent were identified from multiple centers. The time patients met the above criteria was defined as T0, and details of all treatment regimens before and after T0 were collected using electronic CRFs. The study was approved by the IRB at the respective centers. Results: 543 patients were enrolled in this study; median age was 62 years (31-87) and 61% were males. Patients were enrolled from centers in North America (n=181), Europe (n=318), and Asia Pacific (n=44). Patients were diagnosed between 2006 and 2014, the median duration between diagnosis of myeloma and study entry (T0) was 3.1 years (0.3 to 9). The median (95% CI) estimated follow up from diagnosis and from T0 were 61 (57, 66) months and 13 (11, 15) months respectively. The median number of lines of therapy prior to T0 was 4 (3-13), 48% had a prior transplant. The median OS from T0 for the entire cohort was 13 (11, 15) months. For these 462 patients, the median number of recorded regimens was 2 (1-9). The overall response and the depth of response to each line of treatment following T0 are as shown in the table. The median (95% CI) PFS and OS from T0 was 5 (4, 6), and 15.2 (13, 17), respectively. The overall survival for the 81 patients with no treatment post T0 was only 2.1 months. In a multivariate analysis, duration from diagnosis to T0, ISS stage III and number of lines of therapy were all associated with inferior PFS, as well as OS, and in addition, serum creatinine>2 mg/dL at T0 also predicted inferior OS. Conclusions: The study provides the expected outcome following development of myeloma that is refractory to a PI and an IMiD. The outcomes of these patients appear to be better than we had seen historically in patients refractory/ intolerant to bortezomib and IMiDs, highlighting the increased treatment options available for these patients. However, there is decreasing response rate to sequential regimens highlighting the development of drug resistance. The data provides a bench mark for comparison of new therapies that are being evaluated in this disease. Table Table. Disclosures Dimopoulos: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genesis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kastritis:Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Genesis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Terpos:BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Genesis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria. Hillengass:Sanofi: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria. Leleu:TEVA: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria; LeoPharma: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Pierre Fabre: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria. Oriol:Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Expert board committee; Amgen: Honoraria, Other: Expert board committee. Cavo:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Millennium: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Mateos:Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Vij:Shire: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Jazz: Consultancy; Karyopharma: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Lokhorst:Genmab: Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. van de Donk:Amgen: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Mark:Onyx: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millenium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Ludwig:Amgen: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau. Jagannath:Novartis: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy. Usmani:Array: Research Funding; Britsol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Skyline: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BioPharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millenium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Dytfeld:Janssen Poland: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Moreau:Novartis: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Lee:Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Shustik:Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millenium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. de la Rubia:Celgene: Consultancy; Bristol Myers: Consultancy; Amgen,: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy. Durie:Takeda: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy.