Search

Background: To date, the only potential curative treatment for multiple myeloma (MM) remains allogeneic (allo) hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT), although, most patients will eventually relapse. In relapsed patients, donor lymphocyte infusions (DLIs) have been reported to control disease, but the optimal strategy prior to and doses of DLIs remain unclear. With this study (NCT03413800), we aimed to investigate the efficacy and toxicity of lenalidomide and dexamethasome (Len/Dex) followed by escalating pre-determined doses of DLIs in MM patients who relapsed after allo HCT., Methods: Patients aged 18-65 years with relapsed MM following upfront tandem autologous (auto)/allo HCT were eligible. Treatment consisted of six cycles of Len/Dex followed by three standardized doses of DLIs: 5 × 10 6 CD3+/kg, 1 × 10 7 /kg and 5 × 10 7 /kg every 6 weeks. Bone marrow minimal measurable disease (MRD) using flow cytometry (10 -5 ) was performed at enrolment, then every 3 months for 2 years or until disease progression, in a subset of patients. The primary endpoint was efficacy as measured by progression-free survival (PFS) at 2 years following Len/Dex/DLIs. Secondary objectives were safety including GVHD, response including MRD status and overall survival (OS)., Results: A total of 22 patients participated in this study, including 62% with high-risk cytogenetics. With a median follow-up of 5.3 years (range: 4.1-6.1), PFS and OS were 26.5% (95% CI: 10.4-45.9%) and 69.2% (95% CI: 43.3-85.1%), respectively. Overall, the best responses achieved post-Len/Dex + DLIs were complete remission in 9.1%, very good partial response in 50%, and progressive disease in 40.9%. Among the nine patients tested for MRD, only two achieved a negative status after receiving DLIs. Six patients died, all due to disease progression. No acute GVHD was observed after DLIs. We report a very low incidence of moderate/severe chronic GVHD of 18.2% with no need for systemic immunosuppressants one year after diagnosis. No unexpected adverse events were observed. Interestingly, a positive correlation between response to Len/Dex re-induction and response to DLIs was found ( p = 0.0032)., Conclusions: Our findings suggest that Len/Dex/DLIs in second line treatment after upfront tandem auto/allo HCT in relapsed MM patients remains feasible and safe. With a potential correlation between induction chemotherapy and DLI responses, more potent induction regimens together with higher doses of DLIs should be considered in the future.

Lenalidomide is an important component of initial therapy in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, either as maintenance therapy post-autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) or as first-line therapy with dexamethasone for patients' ineligible for ASCT (non-ASCT). This retrospective study investigated treatment patterns and outcomes for ASCT-eligible and -ineligible patients who relapsed after lenalidomide as part of first-line therapy, based on data from the Canadian Myeloma Research Group Database for patients treated between January 2007 and April 2019. Among 256 patients who progressed on lenalidomide maintenance therapy, 28.5% received further immunomodulatory derivative-based (IMiD-based) therapy (lenalidomide/pomalidomide) without a proteasome inhibitor (PI) (bortezomib/carfilzomib/ixazomib), 26.2% received PI-based therapy without an IMiD, 19.5% received both an IMiD plus PI, 13.5% received daratumumab-based regimens, and 12.1% underwent salvage ASCT. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was longest for daratumumab-based therapy (22.7 months) and salvage ASCT (23.4 months) and ranged from 6.6 to 7.3 months for the other treatments (P < .0001). Median overall survival (OS) was also longest for daratumumab and salvage ASCT. A total of 87 non-ASCT patients received subsequent therapy, with 66.7% receiving bortezomib-based therapy and 13.8% receiving other PI-based therapy. Median PFS was 15.4 and 24.8 months for bortezomib-based and other PI-based therapy, respectively (P = .404). During most of the study period, daratumumab was not funded; in this setting, switching to a different therapeutic class following relapse on lenalidomide produced the longest remissions for non-ASCT patients. Further prospective studies are warranted to determine optimum treatment following relapse on lenalidomide, especially in the light of increased access to daratumumab., (© 2021 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objectives: To understand the impact of therapy sequencing on progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM). The use of daily, low-dose, lenalidomide maintenance (LM) has raised concern for fostering resistance, preventing its use in the relapsed setting., Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of survival outcomes from the Canadian Myeloma Research Group Database. Patients were grouped based on receipt of LM after autologous stem cell transplant and receipt of lenalidomide in second-line therapy, 575 patients were included., Results: Patients treated with LM had statistically similar 2nd PFS when re-exposed to lenalidomide in second-line therapy compared to those receiving non-lenalidomide-containing regimens (10.2 vs 14.0 months, P =.53). This cohort also had the longest 2nd OS, 18 months longer than patients treated with LM who did not receive lenalidomide at relapse (55.3 vs 37 months, P =.004). Patients treated with LM also demonstrated deeper responses to second-line therapy than their non-LM counterparts., Conclusion: Our data suggest that patients progressing on LM who receive lenalidomide-containing therapy at first relapse have comparable 2nd PFS and better 2nd OS compared to non-lenalidomide-containing second-line regimens. Identification of patients mostly likely to benefit from further lenalidomide-containing therapy is paramount., (© 2021 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Lenalidomide and dexamethasone has been a standard of care in transplant-ineligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. The addition of a third drug to the combination is likely to improve treatment efficacy. KEYNOTE-185 assessed the efficacy and safety of lenalidomide and dexamethasone with and without pembrolizumab in patients with previously untreated multiple myeloma. Here, we present the results of an unplanned interim analysis done to assess the benefit-risk of the combination at the request of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)., Methods: KEYNOTE-185 was a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial done at 95 medical centres across 15 countries (Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, New Zealand, Norway, Russia, South Africa, Spain, UK, and USA). Transplantation-ineligible patients aged 18 years and older with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, and who were treatment naive were enrolled, and randomly assigned 1:1 to receive either pembrolizumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone or lenalidomide and dexamethasone alone using an interactive voice or integrated web response system. Patients received oral lenalidomide 25 mg on days 1-21 and oral dexamethasone 40 mg on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of repeated 28-day cycles, with or without intravenous pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, which was investigator-assessed because of early trial termination. Efficacy was analysed in all randomly assigned patients and safety was analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02579863, and it is closed for accrual., Findings: Between Jan 7, 2016, and June 9, 2017, 301 patients were randomly assigned to the pembrolizumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone group (n=151) or the lenalidomide and dexamethasone group (n=150). On July 3, 2017, the FDA decided to halt the study because of the imbalance in the proportion of death between groups. At database cutoff (June 2, 2017), with a median follow-up of 6·6 months (IQR 3·4-9·6), 149 patients in the pembrolizumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone group and 145 in the lenalidomide and dexamethasone group had received their assigned study drug. Median progression-free survival was not reached in either group; progression-free survival estimates at 6-months were 82·0% (95% CI 73·2-88·1) versus 85·0% (76·8-90·5; hazard ratio [HR] 1·22; 95% CI 0·67-2·22; p=0·75). Serious adverse events were reported in 81 (54%) patients in the pembrolizumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone group versus 57 (39%) patients in the lenalidomide and dexamethasone group; the most common serious adverse events were pneumonia (nine [6%]) and pyrexia (seven [5%]) in the pembrolizumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone group and pneumonia (eight [6%]) and sepsis (two [1%]) in the lenalidomide and dexamethasone group. Six (4%) treatment-related deaths occurred in the pembrolizumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone group (cardiac arrest, cardiac failure, myocarditis, large intestine perforation, pneumonia, and pulmonary embolism) and two (1%) in the lenalidomide and dexamethasone group (upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage and respiratory failure)., Interpretation: The results from this unplanned, FDA-requested, interim analysis showed that the benefit-risk profile of pembrolizumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone is unfavourable for patients with newly diagnosed, previously untreated multiple myeloma. Long-term safety and survival follow-up is ongoing., Funding: Merck Sharp & Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck & Co, Inc (Kenilworth, NJ, USA)., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Using the Canadian Myeloma Research Group Database, a retrospective study of 167 newly diagnosed, transplant‐ineligible patients with multiple myeloma (MM) that received lenalidomide‐dexamethasone as front‐line treatment was conducted to understand the impact of lenalidomide dosing. Starting dose modifications were common, 42% of patients started on lenalidomide <25 mg with normal renal function. During treatment course, 35% of patients required further dose reduction. Dose reductions in the first year did not have an impact on progression free survival or overall survival. Further studies need to be conducted to understand the impact of dosing strategies of anti‐MM agents in the real world. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Daratumumab, a monoclonal antibody directed against CD38 is a recent class of drugs introduced into the multiple myeloma therapeutic landscape. While clinical trial data have shown a remarkable impact on outcomes, the efficacy of daratumumab combination therapies in specific clinically relevant subgroups including among patients refractory to lenalidomide maintenance remains unknown. Methods: In this study, retrospective data were reviewed from the Canadian Myeloma Research Group and the German Munster Myeloma databases to identify patients that received daratumumab in combination with pomalidomide (DPd), lenalidomide (DRd), and bortezomib (DVd) in a population that had relapsed on lenalidomide maintenance postautologous stem cell transplant. The primary aim of the study was to look at outcomes of these patients in different daratumumab combinations. Results: A total of 73 patients were identified. The median age of the patients at the time of daratumumab initiation was 60 (38-72) and 64.4% (n = 47) were men. In the selected cohort, 43.8% (n = 32) were treated with DRd, 31.5% (n = 23) with DVd, and 24.7% (n = 18) with DPd regimen. The median progression-free survival (PFS) of the entire cohort was 15.8 months (95% CI, 12.9–37.1 months). The median PFS of the individual regimens was as follows: DPd 18.9 months (95% CI, 13.7-not reached), DRd 21.7 months (95% CI, 11.6-not reached), and DVd 12.9 months (95% CI, 3.1-not reached). Conclusions: Daratumumab-containing therapies are effective regimens in patients progressing on lenalidomide maintenance. Additional studies are required to decide the optimal regimen post-lenalidomide maintenance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: Bortezomib‐containing regimens (BCRs) represented standard, first‐line therapy for transplant‐ineligible multiple myeloma (TIMM) in Canada until the introduction of lenalidomide and low‐dose dexamethasone (Ld). However, little comparative data exist to inform the selection of regimens. We assessed the outcomes for TIMM patients treated with cyclophosphamide, bortezomib and dexamethasone or prednisone (CyBorD/P), bortezomib, melphalan and prednisone (VMP), bortezomib and dexamethasone or prednisone (VD/P) and lenalidomide and low‐dose dexamethasone (Ld) using the Canadian Myeloma Research Group database. Of 1156 TIMM patients evaluated, 82% received bortezomib combinations while 18% received Ld. Median progression‐free survival (PFS) was 21·0, 21·1, 13·2 and 28·5 months (P = 0·0002) and median overall survival (OS) was 52·0, 63·6, 30·8 and 65·7 months (P < 0·0001) in the CyBorD/P, VMP, VD/P and Ld groups respectively. There was no significant difference in PFS and OS between the two triplet bortezomib regimens (VMP and CyBorD/P). Ld was associated with a longer PFS but not a significantly superior OS to date. Outcomes with the bortezomib‐steroid doublet were inferior (VD/P). However, multivariable analysis identified features related to disease biology as the most important prognostic factors for PFS and OS. Such factors, as well as those affecting the physician's choice of regimen, are likely to influence the results observed with different regimens. This study demonstrated real‐world outcomes in TIMM similar to those reported in clinical trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]