Search

Introduction: Melphalan flufenamide (melflufen) is a first-in-class peptide-drug conjugate that takes advantage of increased aminopeptidase activity inside tumor cells to rapidly release alkylating agents therein. Melflufen in combination with dexamethasone has been evaluated in multiple clinical trials in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (MM)., Areas Covered: This profile covers the unique mechanism of action of melflufen, the preclinical results supporting its activity in cellular models of resistance to chemotherapy, its activity in animal models of MM, and the clinical pharmacokinetics of melflufen. Findings from clinical trials evaluating melflufen, including the pivotal phase II HORIZON study and the phase III OCEAN study, are discussed., Expert Opinion: Although MM treatment has improved, patients with disease refractory to multiple standard-of-care drug classes face a dismal prognosis. Melflufen demonstrated efficacy and tolerability in select populations, with an initial approval in the United States in patients with ≥ four previous lines of therapy and triple-class-refractory MM. Results from the phase III OCEAN study - currently under discussion with regulatory agencies in the United States and Europe - are more complex and have been put into context herein. Lastly, melflufen provides a proof-of-concept for the utility of the peptide-drug conjugate platform in relapsed/refractory MM.

Purpose: To address the role of consolidation treatment for newly diagnosed, transplant eligible patients with multiple myeloma in a controlled clinical trial., Patients and Methods: The EMN02/HOVON95 trial compared consolidation treatment with two cycles of bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRD) or no consolidation after induction and intensification therapy, followed by continuous lenalidomide maintenance. Primary study end point was progression-free survival (PFS)., Results: Eight hundred seventy-eight eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive VRD consolidation (451 patients) or no consolidation (427 patients). At a median follow-up of 74.8 months, median PFS with adjustment for pretreatment was prolonged in patients randomly assigned to VRD consolidation (59.3 v 42.9 months, hazard ratio [HR] = 0.81; 95% CI, 0.68 to 0.96; P = .016). The PFS benefit was observed across most predefined subgroups, including revised International Staging System (ISS) stage, cytogenetics, and prior treatment. Revised ISS3 stage (HR, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.41 to 2.86) and ampl1q (HR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.37 to 2.04) were significant adverse prognostic factors. The median duration of maintenance was 33 months (interquartile range 13-86 months). Response ≥ complete response (CR) after consolidation versus no consolidation before start of maintenance was 34% versus 18%, respectively ( P < .001). Response ≥ CR on protocol including maintenance was 59% with consolidation and 46% without ( P < .001). Minimal residual disease analysis by flow cytometry in a subgroup of 226 patients with CR or stringent complete response or very good partial response before start of maintenance demonstrated a 74% minimal residual disease-negativity rate in VRD-treated patients. Toxicity from VRD was acceptable and manageable., Conclusion: Consolidation treatment with VRD followed by lenalidomide maintenance improves PFS and depth of response in newly diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma as compared to maintenance alone., Competing Interests: Pieter SonneveldConsulting or Advisory Role: Celgene, Janssen, Amgen, Karyopharm Therapeutics, CARsgen TherapeuticsResearch Funding: Janssen, Amgen, Skyline Diagnostics Meletios A. DimopoulosHonoraria: Amgen, Takeda, Janssen-Cilag, Bristol Myers Squibb, BeigeneConsulting or Advisory Role: Amgen, Janssen-Cilag, Takeda, Bristol Myers Squibb, Beigene Meral BeksacConsulting or Advisory Role: Amgen, Janssen, Sanofi, Oncopeptides, TakedaTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Amgen, Janssen, Takeda, Sanofi Meral BeksacConsulting or Advisory Role: Celgene, Janssen-Cilag, Amgen, Takeda, Sanofi Pasteur, OncopeptidesSpeakers' Bureau: Amgen, Celgene, Janssen-Cilag, Sanofi Pasteur Heinz LudwigConsulting or Advisory Role: Amgen, Janssen-Cilag, Sanofi, Seattle GeneticsSpeakers' Bureau: Celgene, Bristol Myers Squibb, Janssen-Cilag, Amgen, TakedaResearch Funding: Takeda, Amgen Sonja ZweegmanConsulting or Advisory Role: Janssen-Cilag, Takeda, Celgene, Sanofi, OncopeptidesResearch Funding: Janssen-Cilag, Takeda, CelgeneTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Janssen-Cilag, Takeda, Celgene Elena ZamagniHonoraria: Janssen-Cilag, Celgene, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Takeda, GlaxoSmithKline, Oncopeptides, SanofiConsulting or Advisory Role: Celgene, Janssen-Cilag, Amgen, SanofiTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Janssen-Cilag, Celgene, Amgen Ruth WesterHonoraria: Sanofi Roman HajekConsulting or Advisory Role: Takeda, Amgen, Celgene, AbbVie, BMS, PharmaMar, Janssen-Cilag, NovartisSpeakers' Bureau: Takeda, AmgenResearch Funding: Novartis, BMS, Amgen, Celgene, Takeda Lucia PantaniHonoraria: Celgene, Janssen, Takeda, Amgen Francesca GayHonoraria: Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Takeda, AbbVie, Janssen, GlaxoSmithKlineConsulting or Advisory Role: AbbVie, Adaptive Biotechnologies, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Oncopeptides, Roche, Takeda, Janssen, Bluebird bio Stefania OlivaHonoraria: Amgen, Celgene/Bristol Myers Squibb, JanssenConsulting or Advisory Role: Adaptive Biotechnologies, Janssen, Amgen, Takeda Vincent van de VeldenResearch Funding: BD Biosciences, Pfizer, Janssen, Novartis/Navigate, Agilent/DAKOPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Patent EuroFlow MRD antibody tubes. No financial relationship KaLung WuConsulting or Advisory Role: Janssen Oncology Gerard BosEmployment: CiMaasLeadership: CiMaasStock and Other Ownership Interests: CIMaasHonoraria: CiMaas Mark-David LevinHonoraria: AbbVie, Celgene, Janssen, TakedaTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Takeda, Janssen Annemiek BroijlHonoraria: Amgen, Sanofi, Celgene, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, JanssenTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene Monique MinnemaConsulting or Advisory Role: Janssen-Cilag, Alnylam, Gilead SciencesSpeakers' Bureau: Celgene/Bristol Myers SquibbTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Celgene Anders WaageHonoraria: Janssen OncologySpeakers' Bureau: Janssen Oncology Cecilie BlimarkHonoraria: Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Janssen, Takeda, AmgenConsulting or Advisory Role: Adaptive Biotechnologies, Janssen, GlaxoSmithKline Niels W. C. J. van de DonkConsulting or Advisory Role: Janssen, Celgene, Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis, Amgen, Servier, Takeda, BayerSpeakers' Bureau: Janssen Research & Development, Celgene, Amgen, Bristol Myers SquibbResearch Funding: Janssen, Celgene, Amgen, Novartis, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cellectis Massimo OffidaniHonoraria: BMS, Janssen, CelgeneConsulting or Advisory Role: Janssen Giuseppe A. PalumboConsulting or Advisory Role: Novartis, Janssen Oncology, AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals, AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Celgene/Bristol Myers SquibbSpeakers' Bureau: Novartis, Celgene/Bristol Myers Squibb, AbbVieTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Takeda, Novartis Andrew SpencerHonoraria: Janssen-Cilag, BMSConsulting or Advisory Role: Janssen-Cilag, BMSSpeakers' Bureau: Janssen-CilagResearch Funding: Janssen-Cilag Mario BoccadoroHonoraria: Sanofi, Celgene, Amgen, Janssen, Novartis, Bristol Myers Squibb, AbbVieConsulting or Advisory Role: Janssen, GlaxoSmithKlineResearch Funding: Sanofi, Celgene, Amgen, Janssen, Novartis, Bristol Myers Squibb, Mundipharma Michele CavoHonoraria: Janssen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Sanofi, GlaxoSmithKline, Takeda, Amgen, Oncopeptides, AbbVie, Karyopharm Therapeutics, Adaptive BiotechnologiesConsulting or Advisory Role: Janssen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Sanofi, GlaxoSmithKline, Takeda, Amgen, Oncopeptides, AbbVie, Karyopharm Therapeutics, Adaptive BiotechnologiesSpeakers' Bureau: Janssen, CelgeneNo other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Vaccination is one of the most successful medical interventions that has saved the life of millions of people. Vaccination is particularly important in patients with multiple myeloma, who have an increased risk of infections due to the disease-inherent immune suppression, and because of the immune suppressive effects of therapy. Hence, all appropriate measures should be exploited, to elicit an effective immune response to common pathogens like influenza, pneumococci, varicella zoster virus, and to those bacteria and viruses (haemophilus influenzae, meningococci, and hepatitis) that frequently may pose a significant risk to patients with multiple myeloma. Patients after autologous, and specifically after allogeneic transplantation have severely reduced antibody titers, and therefore require a broader spectrum of vaccinations. Response to vaccination in myeloma often is less vigorous than in the general population, mandating either measurement of the postvaccination antibody titers and/or repeating the vaccination. Here, we compile the existing data on vaccination in multiple myeloma and provide recommendations for clinical practice.

Patients with multiple myeloma (MM) seem to be at increased risk for more severe COVID-19 infection and associated complications due to their immunocompromised state, the older age and comorbidities. The European Myeloma Network has provided an expert consensus statement in order to guide therapeutic decisions in the era of the COVID-19 pandemic. Patient education for personal hygiene and social distancing measures, along with treatment individualization, telemedicine and continuous surveillance for early diagnosis of COVID-19 are essential. In countries or local communities where COVID-19 infection is widely spread, MM patients should have a PCR test of nasopharyngeal swab for SARS-CoV-2 before hospital admission, starting a new treatment line, cell apheresis or ASCT in order to avoid ward or community spread and infections. Oral agent-based regimens should be considered, especially for the elderly and frail patients with standard risk disease, whereas de-intensified regimens for dexamethasone, bortezomib, carfilzomib and daratumumab should be used based on patient risk and response. Treatment initiation should not be postponed for patients with end organ damage, myeloma emergencies and aggressive relapses. Autologous (and especially allogeneic) transplantation should be delayed and extended induction should be administered, especially in standard risk patients and those with adequate MM response to induction. Watchful waiting should be considered for standard risk relapsed patients with low tumor burden, and slow biochemical relapses. The conduction of clinical trials should continue with appropriate adaptations to the current circumstances. Patients with MM and symptomatic COVID-19 disease should interrupt anti-myeloma treatment until recovery. For patients with positive PCR test for SARS-CoV-2, but with no symptoms for COVID-19, a 14-day quarantine should be considered if myeloma-related events allow the delay of treatment. The need for surveillance for drug interactions due to polypharmacy is highlighted. The participation in international COVID-19 cancer registries is greatly encouraged.

The introduction of novel agents in the management of multiple myeloma and related plasma cell dyscrasias has changed our treatment approaches and subsequently the outcome of patients. Due to current advances, the European Myeloma Network updated the diagnostic and therapeutic recommendations for patients with Waldenström's macroglobulinemia (WM), AL-amyloidosis, monoclonal immunoglobulin deposition disease (MIDD), POEMS syndrome, and primary plasma cell leukemia. For patients with WM, the combination of rituximab with chemotherapy remains the treatment cornerstone, while the Bruton-tyrosine kinase inhibitor ibrutinib has been introduced and approved for relapsed/refractory disease. The management of light chain amyloidosis depends on the presence and severity of heart disfunction. If present, intensification with an autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is not recommended. Further aggregation of misfolded light chains could be prevented by doxycycline or monoclonal antibodies targeting amyloid deposits. Initial treatment generally consists of melphalan/dexamethasone or bortezomib-based regimens. For relapsing patients, one can consider proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulatory agents, melphalan or daratumumab. Because intact or light-chain immunoglobulins are also the culprits for MIDD, the small monoclonal plasma cells' clones should be treated and generally respond well to bortezomib-based treatment. POEMS syndrome is a well-defined clinical entity that can present as solitary bone lesions or disseminated disease. Radiation therapy is used for patients with localized disease and result in long-lasting response. Systemic treatment should be proposed to patients with disseminated disease, but regimens that can worsen a pre-existing polyneuropathy should be avoided. PPCL is located at the other end of the spectrum of plasma cell disorders and is associated with an aggressive disease course and poor prognosis. It requires an imminent, multi-phase and novel agents-based therapy, including induction, ASCT, consolidation and maintenance, with short treatment-free intervals. Patients not eligible for transplant procedures require personalized, intensive therapeutic approach. Allogeneic stem cell transplantation can be used in selected patients.

Cardiovascular disease in patients with multiple myeloma may derive from factors unrelated to the disease (age, diabetes, dyslipidemia, obesity, prior cardiovascular diseases), related to the disease (cardiac AL-amyloidosis, hyperviscosity, high-output failure, arteriovenous shunting, anemia, renal dysfunction) and/or related to anti-myeloma treatment (anthracyclines, corticosteroids, alkylating agents, immunomodulatory drugs, proteasome inhibitors). Good knowledge of cardiovascular events, effective dose reductions, prevention and management of early and late cardiovascular side effects of chemotherapeutic agents are essential in current clinical practice. Myeloma experts are obliged to carefully balance the efficacy and toxicity of drugs for each individual patient. This review summarizes current data and novel insights into cardiovascular adverse events of today's anti-myeloma treatment, focusing on carfilzomib, as a starting point for developing consensus recommendations on preventing and managing cardiovascular side effects in patients with multiple myeloma., (Copyright© 2018 Ferrata Storti Foundation.)

Multiple myeloma is a disease typical of the elderly, and, because of the increase in life expectancy of the general population, its incidence is expected to grow in the future. Elderly patients represent a particular challenge due to their marked heterogeneity. Many new and highly effective drugs have been introduced in the last few years and results from clinical trials are promising. Besides the availability of novel agents, a careful evaluation of elderly patients showed to be a key factor for the success of therapy. A geriatric assessment is a valid strategy to better stratify patients. In particular, different scores are available today to appropriately assess elderly patients and define their fitness/frailty status. The choice of treatment-transplantation, triplets, doublets, or reduced-dose therapies including novel agents-should depend on the patient's fitness status (fit, intermediate-fit or frail). Second-generation novel agents have also been evaluated as salvage therapy in the elderly, and these new agents certainly represent a further step forward in the treatment armamentarium for elderly patients with multiple myeloma.

Survival of myeloma patients has greatly improved with the use of autologous stem cell transplantation and novel agents, such as proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulatory drugs and monoclonal antibodies. Compared to bortezomib- and lenalidomide-based regimens alone, the addition of high-dose melphalan followed by autologous transplantation significantly improves progression-free survival, although an overall survival benefit was not observed in all trials. Moreover, follow up of recent trials is still too short to show any difference in survival. In the light of these findings, novel agent-based induction followed by autologous transplantation is considered the standard upfront treatment for eligible patients (level of evidence: 1A). Post-transplant consolidation and maintenance treatment can further improve patient outcome (1A). The availability of several novel agents has led to the development of multiple combination regimens such as salvage treatment options. In this context, the role of salvage autologous transplantation and allotransplant has not been extensively evaluated. In the case of prolonged remission after upfront autologous transplantation, another autologous transplantation at relapse can be considered (2B). Patients who experience early relapse and/or have high-risk features have a poor prognosis and may be considered as candidates for clinical trials that, in young and fit patients, may also include an allograft in combination with novel agents (2B). Ongoing studies are evaluating the role of novel cellular therapies, such as inclusion of antibody-based triplets and quadruplets, and chimeric antigen receptor-T cells. Despite encouraging preliminary results, longer follow up and larger patient numbers are needed before the clinical use of these novel therapies can be widely recommended., (Copyright© 2018 Ferrata Storti Foundation.)