Search

BACKGROUND Teclistamab is a T-cell-redirecting bispecific antibody that targets both CD3 expressed on the surface of T cells and B-cell maturation antigen expressed on the surface of myeloma cells. In the phase 1 dose-defining portion of the study, teclistamab showed promising efficacy in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. METHODS In this phase 1-2 study, we enrolled patients who had relapsed or refractory myeloma after at least three therapy lines, including triple-class exposure to an immunomodulatory drug, a proteasome inhibitor, and an anti-CD38 antibody. Patients received a weekly subcutaneous injection of teclistamab (at a dose of 1.5 mg per kilogram of body weight) after receiving step-up doses of 0.06 mg and 0.3 mg per kilogram. The primary end point was the overall response (partial response or better). RESULTS Among 165 patients who received teclistamab, 77.6% had triple-class refractory disease (median, five previous therapy lines). With a median follow-up of 14.1 months, the overall response rate was 63.0%, with 65 patients (39.4%) having a complete response or better. A total of 44 patients (26.7%) were found to have no minimal residual disease (MRD); the MRD-negativity rate among the patients with a complete response or better was 46%. The median duration of response was 18.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 14.9 to not estimable). The median duration of progression-free survival was 11.3 months (95% CI, 8.8 to 17.1). Common adverse events included cytokine release syndrome (in 72.1% of the patients; grade 3, 0.6%; no grade 4), neutropenia (in 70.9%; grade 3 or 4, 64.2%), anemia (in 52.1%; grade 3 or 4, 37.0%), and thrombocytopenia (in 40.0%; grade 3 or 4, 21.2%). Infections were frequent (in 76.4%; grade 3 or 4, 44.8%). Neurotoxic events occurred in 24 patients (14.5%), including immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome in 5 patients (3.0%; all grade 1 or 2). CONCLUSIONS Teclistamab resulted in a high rate of deep and durable response in patients with triple-class-exposed relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. Cytopenias and infections were common; toxic effects that were consistent with T-cell redirection were mostly grade 1 or 2. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; MajesTEC-1 ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT03145181 and NCT04557098.). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRd) is a preferred first-line treatment option for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Whether the addition of the anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody isatuximab to the VRd regimen would reduce the risk of disease progression or death among patients ineligible to undergo transplantation is unclear., Methods: In an international, open-label, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned, in a 3:2 ratio, patients 18 to 80 years of age with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were ineligible to undergo transplantation to receive either isatuximab plus VRd or VRd alone. The primary efficacy end point was progression-free survival. Key secondary end points included a complete response or better and minimal residual disease (MRD)-negative status in patients with a complete response., Results: A total of 446 patients underwent randomization. At a median follow-up of 59.7 months, the estimated progression-free survival at 60 months was 63.2% in the isatuximab-VRd group, as compared with 45.2% in the VRd group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.60; 98.5% confidence interval, 0.41 to 0.88; P<0.001). The percentage of patients with a complete response or better was significantly higher in the isatuximab-VRd group than in the VRd group (74.7% vs. 64.1%, P = 0.01), as was the percentage of patients with MRD-negative status and a complete response (55.5% vs. 40.9%, P = 0.003). No new safety signals were observed with the isatuximab-VRd regimen. The incidence of serious adverse events during treatment and the incidence of adverse events leading to discontinuation were similar in the two groups., Conclusions: Isatuximab-VRd was more effective than VRd as initial therapy in patients 18 to 80 years of age with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were ineligible to undergo transplantation. (Funded by Sanofi and a Cancer Center Support Grant; IMROZ ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03319667.)., (Copyright © 2024 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Objectives: The seroprevalence of antibodies against Cytomegalovirus (CMV) is an established poor prognostic factor for patients receiving an allogeneic stem cell transplantation. However, the impact of CMV serology on outcome after autologous stem cell transplantation remains unknown., Methods: Here, we analyzed the CMV immunoglobulin (Ig) serology of 446 newly-diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) patients of the GMMG-MM5 phase III trial with a median follow-up of 58 months., Results: CMV IgG and IgM positivity was seen in 51% and 6% of the patients, respectively. In multivariate analysis CMV IgG and CMV IgM serology show an age-depending effect for PFS. We identified positive CMV IgG/positive CMV IgM serology as an age-depending beneficial factor on PFS., Discussion: Younger patients with a positive CMV IgG/positive CMV IgM serology experienced a favorable effect on PFS, whereas a positive CMV IgG/positive CMV IgM serology at older age has a disadvantageous effect on PFS.

Teclistamab is a B‑cell maturation antigen (BCMA)-directed bispecific antibody approved for the treatment of patients with triple-class exposed relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. In the phase 1/2 MajesTEC-1 study, a cohort of patients who had prior BCMA-targeted therapy (antibody-drug conjugate [ADC] or CAR-T cell therapy) were enrolled to explore teclistamab in patients previously exposed to anti-BCMA treatment. At median follow-up of 28.0 months (range, 0.7-31.1), 40 patients with prior BCMA-targeted therapy had received subcutaneous 1.5 mg/kg weekly teclistamab. Median prior lines of treatment were 6 (range, 3-14). Prior anti-BCMA therapy included ADC (n = 29), CAR-T (n = 15), or both (n = 4). Overall response rate was 52.5%; 47.5% of patients achieved very good partial response or better and 30.0% achieved complete response or better. Median duration of response was 14.8 months, median progression-free survival was 4.5 months, and median overall survival was 15.5 months. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were neutropenia, infections, cytokine release syndrome, and anemia; cytopenias and infections were the most common grade ≥3 TEAEs. Infections occurred in 28 (70.0%) patients (n = 13 [32.5%] maximum grade 3/4; n = 4 [10%] grade 5). Prior to starting teclistamab, baseline BCMA expression and immune characteristics were unaffected by prior anti-BCMA treatment. The MajesTEC-1 trial cohort C results demonstrate favorable efficacy and safety of teclistamab in patients with heavily pretreated RRMM and prior anti-BCMA treatment. NCT03145181; NCT04557098., (Copyright © 2024 American Society of Hematology.)

Background: AL amyloidosis (AL) results from the misfolding of immunoglobulin light chains (IG LCs). Aim of this study was to comprehensively analyse kappa LC sequences from AL patients in comparison with multiple myeloma (MM)., Objective: We analysed IGKV/IGKJ usage and associated organ tropism and IGKV1/D-33 in terms of mutational analysis and theoretical biochemical properties., Material and Methods: cDNA and bulk RNA sequencing of the LCs of AL and MM patients., Results: We studied 41 AL and 83 MM patients showing that IGKV1 was most expressed among kappa AL and MM, with higher frequency in AL (80% vs. 53%, p  = .002). IGKV3 was underrepresented in AL (10% vs. 30%, p  = .014). IGKJ2 was more commonly used in AL than in MM (39% vs. 29%). Patients with IGKV1/D-33 were associated with heart involvement (75%, p  = .024). IGKV1/D-33 -segments of AL had a higher mutation count (AL = 12.0 vs. MM = 10.0). FR3 and CDR3 were most frequently mutated in both, with a median mutation count in FR3 being the highest (AL = 4.0; MM = 3.5) and one mutation hotspot (FR3 (83I)) for IGKV1/D-33/IGKJ2 was associated with cardiac involvement., Conclusion: This study confirmed that germline usage has an influence on AL amyloidosis risk and organ involvement.

Introduction: Patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) report significantly lower HRQoL compared with patients with newly diagnosed MM and experience further deterioration in HRQoL with each relapse and subsequent treatment. Therefore, consideration of the impact of treatment on HRQoL in addition to clinical outcomes is vital., Patients and Methods: In the phase I/II MajesTEC-1 (NCT03145181, NCT04557098) study, patients with RRMM who received teclistamab, an off-the-shelf, T-cell redirecting BCMA × CD3 bispecific antibody, had deep and durable responses with manageable safety. HRQoL was assessed using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire core 30-item and the EuroQol 5 Dimension 5 Level descriptive questionnaire. Changes over time from baseline were measured with a repeated measures mixed-effects model. Proportions of patients with clinically meaningful improvement after starting treatment and time to clinically meaningful worsening were assessed., Results: Compliance was maintained throughout the study. Compared with baseline, positive changes were observed for pain, global health status, and emotional functioning with treatment; other assessments were largely unchanged from baseline. Post hoc analysis showed patients with deeper clinical response generally reported improved HRQoL outcomes. Following an initial decline in HRQoL in some scales, the proportion of patients reporting clinically meaningful improvements increased, while the proportion reporting clinically meaningful worsening decreased over time. Clinically meaningful improvements in pain were reported in ≥40% of patients at most assessment time points., Conclusions: These results complement previously reported clinical benefits and support teclistamab as a promising therapeutic option for patients with RRMM., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Early morbidity and mortality affect patient outcomes in multiple myeloma. Thus, we dissected the incidence and causes of morbidity/mortality during induction therapy (IT) for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM), and developed/validated a predictive risk score. We evaluated 3700 transplant-eligible NDMM patients treated in 2005-2020 with novel agent-based triplet/quadruplet IT. Primary endpoints were severe infections, death, or a combination of both. Patients were divided in a training (n = 1333) and three validation cohorts (n = 2367). During IT, 11.8%, 1.8%, and 12.5% of patients in the training cohort experienced severe infections, death, or both, respectively. Four major, baseline risk factors for severe infection/death were identified: low platelet count (<150/nL), ISS III, higher WHO performance status (>1), and age (>60 years). A risk score (1 risk factor=1 point) stratified patients in low (39.5%; 0 points), intermediate (41.9%; 1 point), and high (18.6%; ≥2 points) risk. The risk for severe infection/death increased from 7.7% vs. 11.5% vs. 23.3% in the low- vs. intermediate- vs. high-risk groups (p < 0.001). The risk score was independently validated in three trials incorporating quadruplet IT with an anti-CD38 antibody. Our analyses established a robust and easy-to-use score to identify NDMM patients at risk of severe infection/death, covering the latest quadruplet induction therapies. Trial registrations: HOVON-65/GMMG-HD4: EudraCT No. 2004-000944-26. GMMG-MM5: EudraCT No. 2010-019173-16. GMMG-HD6: NCT02495922. EMN02/HOVON-95: NCT01208766. GMMG-HD7: NCT03617731., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: The aim of this trial was to investigate the addition of the anti-SLAMF7 monoclonal antibody elotuzumab to lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (RVd) in induction and consolidation therapy as well as to lenalidomide maintenance treatment in transplant-eligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma., Methods: GMMG-HD6 was a phase 3, randomised trial conducted at 43 main trial sites and 26 associated trial sites throughout Germany. Adult patients (aged 18-70 years) with previously untreated, symptomatic multiple myeloma, and a WHO performance status of 0-3, with 3 being allowed only if caused by myeloma disease and not by comorbid conditions, were randomly assigned 1:1:1:1 to four treatment groups. Induction therapy consisted of four 21-day cycles of RVd (lenalidomide 25 mg orally on days 1-14; bortezomib 1·3 mg/m 2 subcutaneously on days 1, 4, 8, and 11]; and dexamethasone 20 mg orally on days 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, 12, and 15 for cycles 1-2) or, RVd induction plus elotuzumab (10 mg/kg intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 for cycles 1-2, and on days 1 and 11 for cycles 3-4; E-RVd). Autologous haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation was followed by two 21-day cycles of either RVd consolidation (lenalidomide 25 mg orally on days 1-14; bortezomib 1·3 mg/m 2 subcutaneously on days 1, 8, and 15; and dexamethasone 20 mg orally on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16) or elotuzumab plus RVd consolidation (with elotuzumab 10 mg/kg intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15) followed by maintenance with either lenalidomide (10 mg orally on days 1-28 for cycles 1-3; thereafter, up to 15 mg orally on days 1-28; RVd/R or E-RVd/R group) or lenalidomide plus elotuzumab (10 mg/kg intravenously on days 1 and 15 for cycles 1-6, and on day 1 for cycles 7-26; RVd/E-R or E-RVd/E-R group) for 2 years. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival analysed in a modified intention-to-treat (ITT) population. Safety was analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of trial medication. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02495922, and is completed., Findings: Between June 29, 2015, and on Sept 11, 2017, 564 patients were included in the trial. The modified ITT population comprised 559 (243 [43%] females and 316 [57%] males) patients and the safety population 555 patients. After a median follow-up of 49·8 months (IQR 43·7-55·5), there was no difference in progression-free survival between the four treatment groups (adjusted log-rank p value, p=0·86), and 3-year progression-free survival rates were 69% (95% CI 61-77), 69% (61-76), 66% (58-74), and 67% (59-75) for patients treated with RVd/R, RVd/E-R, E-RVd/R, and E-RVd/E-R, respectively. Infections (grade 3 or worse) were the most frequently observed adverse event in all treatment groups (28 [20%] of 137 for RVd/R; 32 [23%] of 138 for RVd/E-R; 35 [25%] of 138 for E-RVd/R; and 48 [34%] of 142 for E-RVd/E-R). Serious adverse events (grade 3 or worse) were observed in 68 (48%) of 142 participants in the E-RVd/E-R group, 53 (39%) of 137 in the RVd/R, 53 (38%) of 138 in the RVd/E-R, and 50 (36%) of 138 in the E-RVd/R (36%) group. There were nine treatment-related deaths during the study. Two deaths (one sepsis and one toxic colitis) in the RVd/R group were considered lenalidomide-related. One death in the RVd/E-R group due to meningoencephalitis was considered lenalidomide and elotuzumab-related. Four deaths (one pulmonary embolism, one septic shock, one atypical pneumonia, and one cardiovascular failure) in the E-RVd/R group and two deaths (one sepsis and one pneumonia and pulmonary fibrosis) in the E-RVd/E-R group were considered related to lenalidomide or elotuzumab, or both., Interpretation: Addition of elotuzumab to RVd induction or consolidation and lenalidomide maintenance in patients with transplant-eligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma did not provide clinical benefit. Elotuzumab-containing therapies might be reserved for patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma., Funding: Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene and Chugai., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests EKM reports consulting or advisory role with Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS)/Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen-Cilag, Sanofi Aventis, Stemline, and Takeda; honoraria from BMS/Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen-Cilag, Sanofi Aventis, Stemline, and Takeda; research funding from Sanofi Aventis; and travel accommodation and expenses from BMS/Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen-Cilag, Sanofi Aventis, Stemline, and Takeda. HG reports support for the present manuscript from BMS/Celgene, Chugai, and HD6 funding; consulting or advisory role with Amgen, BMS, Janssen, Sanofi, and Adaptive Biotechnology; honoraria from Amgen, BMS, Chugai, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Novartis, Sanofi, and Pfizer; research funding from Amgen, BMS, Celgene, GlycoMimetics, GlaxoSmithKline, Heidelberg Pharma, Hoffmann-La Roche, Karyopharm, Janssen, Incyte Corporation, Millenium Pharmaceuticals, Molecular Partners, Merck Sharp and Dohme, MorphoSys, Pfizer, Sanofi, Takeda, and Novartis; travel accommodations and expenses from Amgen, BMS, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Novartis, Sanofi, and Pfizer; and grants or provision of Investigational Medicinal Products from Amgen, Array Biopharma/Pfizer, BMS/Celgene, Chugai, Dietmar-Hopp-Foundation, Janssen, Johns Hopkins University, Mundipharma, and Sanofi. MHä reports consulting or advisory role with Novartis, BMS/Celgene, Gilead Sciences, Sanofi/Aventis, Roche, Amgen, SOBI, Janssen, Takeda, GlaxoSmithKline, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Bayer Vital, and BMS. RF reports Honoraria from Amgen, BMS/Celgene, Janssen, Sanofi, and Takeda; and travel accommodations and expenses from BMS/Celgene, Janssen, and GSK. MM reports consulting or Advisory Role with Janssen, BMS, Abbvie, Sanofi, GlaxoSmithKline, Oncopeptides, Takeda, and Stemline; honoraria from Amgen, BMS, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, and Takeda; and travel accommodations and expenses from Amgen. JD reports honoraria from Sanofi, BMS, Janssen, AstraZeneca, Beigene; and travel accommodation and expenses from Amgen, BMS, Beigene, and Amgen. CM reports Consulting or Advisory Role from Celgene, BMS, and Janssen. CS reports consulting or advisory role from BMS, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Pfizer, Roche, and Takeda; honoraria from Amgen, BMS/GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, and Takeda; research funding from Janssen, and Takeda; and travel accommodation and expenses from BMS, Janssen, Sanofi Aventis, and Takeda. RS reports consulting or advisory role with BMS/Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Kite/Gilead, and Sanofi; and honoraria from Amgen, BMS/Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Kite/Gilead, Sanofi, and Takeda. IvM reports consulting or advisory role with Sanofi, Amgen, Janssen, Takeda, Stemline, GSK, BMS, Oncopeptides, Pfizer, and AstraZeneca. PR reports honoraria from BMS and travel accommodation and expenses from BMS. UG reports consulting or advisory role with Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Celtrion, Ipsen, Sanofi, and MSD; and honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, and Novartis. SK reports travel accommodation and expenses from AbbVie. UMM reports consulting or advisory role with Sanofi-Aventis, BMS, Roche, GSK, Novartis, Pierre Fabre, MSD, and Guardant Health; and travel accommodation and expenses from Pierre Fabre, Ipsen, and Janssen. CK reports travel accommodation and expenses from European Hematology Association. KCW reports consulting or advisory role with Abbvie, Amgen, Adaptive Biotech, BMS/Celgene, BeiGene, Janssen, GlaxoSmithKline, Karyopharm, Oncopeptides, Pfizer, Roche Pharma, Sanofi, Takeda, and Menarini; honoraria from Abbvie, Amgen, Adaptive Biotech, Astra Zeneca, BMS/Celgene, BeiGene, Janssen, GlaxoSmithKline, Karyopharm, Novartis, Oncopeptides, Pfizer, Roche Pharma, Sanofi, Stemline, Takeda, and Menarini; and research funding from Abbvie, Amgen, BMS/Celgene, Janssen, GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi, and Takeda. MSR reports consulting or advisory role with BMS, Amgen, GSK, Janssen, Sanofi, Pfizer, AbbVie, Novartis, and Roche; research funding from Sanofi; travel accommodation and expenses from BMS, AbbVie, Janssen, Sanofi, GSK; Honoraria from BMS, Janssen, GSK, AbbVie, and Sanofi; and receipt of equipment, materials, drugs, medical writing, gifts or other services from Novartis, Sanofi. HJS reports consulting or advisory role with Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS/Celgene, Genzyme, GSK, Janssen Cilag, Oncopeptides, Pfizer, Sanofi, and Stemline; honoraria from Abbvie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS/Celgene, Genzyme, GSK, Janssen Cilag, Oncopeptides, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, Stemline, and Takeda; and travel accommodation and expenses from Amgen, BMS/Celgene, Janssen Cilag, and Sanofi. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Teclistamab is the first approved B cell maturation antigen × CD3 bispecific antibody with precision dosing for the treatment of triple-class exposed (TCE) relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). We compared the effectiveness of teclistamab in MajesTEC-1 versus real-world physician's choice of therapy (RWPC) in patients from the prospective, non-interventional LocoMMotion and MoMMent studies., Methods: Patients treated with teclistamab from MajesTEC-1 (N = 165) were compared with an external control arm from LocoMMotion (N = 248) or LocoMMotion + MoMMent pooled (N = 302). Inverse probability of treatment weighting adjusted for imbalances in prognostic baseline characteristics. The relative effect of teclistamab versus RWPC for overall response rate (ORR), very good partial response or better (≥ VGPR) rate, and complete response or better (≥ CR) rate was estimated with an odds ratio using weighted logistic regression transformed into a response-rate ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Weighted proportional hazards regression was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS)., Results: Baseline characteristics were well balanced between treatment cohorts after reweighting. Patients treated with teclistamab had significantly improved outcomes versus RWPC in LocoMMotion: ORR (RR [95% CI], 2.44 [1.79-3.33]; p < 0.0001), ≥ VGPR (RR 5.78 [3.74-8.93]; p < 0.0001), ≥ CR (RR 113.73 [15.68-825.13]; p < 0.0001), DOR (HR 0.39 [0.24-0.64]; p = 0.0002), PFS (HR 0.48 [0.35-0.64]; p < 0.0001), and OS (HR 0.64 [0.46-0.88]; p = 0.0055). Teclistamab versus RWPC in LocoMMotion + MoMMent also had significantly improved outcomes: ORR (RR 2.41 [1.80-3.23]; p < 0.0001), ≥ VGPR (RR 5.91 [3.93-8.88]; p < 0.0001), ≥ CR (RR 132.32 [19.06-918.47]; p < 0.0001), DOR (HR 0.43 [0.26-0.71]; p = 0.0011), PFS (HR 0.49 [0.37-0.66]; p < 0.0001), and OS (HR 0.69 [0.50-0.95]; p = 0.0247)., Conclusion: Teclistamab demonstrated significantly improved effectiveness over RWPC in LocoMMotion ± MoMMent, emphasizing its clinical benefit as a highly effective treatment for patients with TCE RRMM., Trial Registration: MajesTEC-1, ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03145181 (phase 1) and NCT04557098 (phase 2); LocoMMotion, ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04035226; MoMMent, ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05160584., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Purpose: The GMMG-CONCEPT trial investigated isatuximab, carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (Isa-KRd) in transplant-eligible (TE) and transplant-noneligible (TNE) patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) with exclusively high-risk disease for whom prospective trials are limited, aiming to induce minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity., Methods: This academic, investigator-initiated, multicenter, phase II trial enrolled patients with high-risk NDMM (HRNDMM) defined by mandatory International Staging System stage II/III combined with del17p, t(4;14), t(14;16), or more than three 1q21 copies as high-risk cytogenetic aberrations (HRCAs). Patients received Isa-KRd induction/consolidation and Isa-KR maintenance. TE patients received high-dose melphalan. TNE patients received two additional Isa-KRd cycles postinduction. This prespecified interim analysis (IA) reports the primary end point, MRD negativity (<10 -5 , next-generation flow), at the end of consolidation. The secondary end point was progression-free survival (PFS)., Results: Among 125 patients with HRNDMM (TE-intention-to-treat [ITT]-IA, 99; TNE-ITT, 26) of the IA population for the primary end point, the median age was 58 (TE-ITT-IA) and 74 (TNE-ITT) years. Del17p was the most common HRCA (TE, 44.4%; TNE, 42.3%); about one third of evaluable TE/TNE patients presented two or more HRCAs, respectively. The trial met its primary end point with MRD negativity rates after consolidation of 67.7% (TE) and 54.2% (TNE) of patients. Eighty-one of 99 TE-ITT-IA patients reached MRD negativity at any time point (81.8%). MRD negativity was sustained for ≥1 year in 62.6% of patients. With a median follow-up of 44 (TE) and 33 (TNE) months, median PFS was not reached in either arm., Conclusion: Isa-KRd effectively induces high rates of sustainable MRD negativity in the difficult-to-treat HRNDMM population, regardless of transplant status, translating into a median PFS that was not yet reached after 44/33 months.

In the setting of a first relapse of multiple myeloma (MM), a second autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) following carfilzomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (KRd) is an option, although there is scarce data concerning this approach. We performed a retrospective study involving 22 EBMT-affiliated centers. Eligible MM patients had received a second-line treatment with KRd induction followed by a second ASCT between 2016 and 2018. Primary objective was to estimate progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Secondary objectives were to assess the response rate and identify significant variables affecting PFS and OS. Fifty-one patients were identified, with a median age of 62 years. Median PFS after ASCT was 29.5 months while 24- and 36-months OS rates were 92.1% and 84.5%, respectively. Variables affecting PFS were an interval over four years between transplants and the achievement of a very good partial response (VGPR) or better before the relapse ASCT. Our study suggests that a relapse treatment with ASCT after KRd induction is an effective strategy for patients with a lenalidomide-sensitive first relapse. Patients with at least four years of remission after a frontline ASCT and who achieved at least a VGPR after KRd induction appear to benefit the most from this approach., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Objectives: In multiple myeloma and its precursor stages, plasma cell infiltration (PCI) and cytogenetic aberrations are important for staging, risk stratification, and response assessment. However, invasive bone marrow (BM) biopsies cannot be performed frequently and multifocally to assess the spatially heterogenous tumor tissue. Therefore, the goal of this study was to establish an automated framework to predict local BM biopsy results from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)., Materials and Methods: This retrospective multicentric study used data from center 1 for algorithm training and internal testing, and data from center 2 to 8 for external testing. An nnU-Net was trained for automated segmentation of pelvic BM from T1-weighted whole-body MRI. Radiomics features were extracted from these segmentations, and random forest models were trained to predict PCI and the presence or absence of cytogenetic aberrations. Pearson correlation coefficient and the area under the receiver operating characteristic were used to evaluate the prediction performance for PCI and cytogenetic aberrations, respectively., Results: A total of 672 MRIs from 512 patients (median age, 61 years; interquartile range, 53-67 years; 307 men) from 8 centers and 370 corresponding BM biopsies were included. The predicted PCI from the best model was significantly correlated ( P ≤ 0.01) to the actual PCI from biopsy in all internal and external test sets (internal test set: r = 0.71 [0.51, 0.83]; center 2, high-quality test set: r = 0.45 [0.12, 0.69]; center 2, other test set: r = 0.30 [0.07, 0.49]; multicenter test set: r = 0.57 [0.30, 0.76]). The areas under the receiver operating characteristic of the prediction models for the different cytogenetic aberrations ranged from 0.57 to 0.76 for the internal test set, but no model generalized well to all 3 external test sets., Conclusions: The automated image analysis framework established in this study allows for noninvasive prediction of a surrogate parameter for PCI, which is significantly correlated to the actual PCI from BM biopsy., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Renal function impairment (RI) is a common complication in multiple myeloma (MM). However, limited data exist on the safety and efficacy of anti-MM regimens in patients with severe RI, as these patients are frequently excluded from clinical trials. This investigator-initiated multicentric phase II GMMG-DANTE trial evaluated daratumumab, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (DVd) in relapsed or refractory (r/r) MM patients with severe RI. r/rMM patients with ≥1 prior treatment line and a GFR <30 mL/min/1.73 m 2 or undergoing hemodialysis were eligible and received eight cycles of DVd followed by daratumumab maintenance. The trial closed prematurely after 22/36 planned patients. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR). Median age of patients was 70 (range 55-89) years, with a median GFR of 20.1 mL/min/1.73 m 2 (interquartile range, 9.4-27.3 mL/min/1.73 m 2 ), and eight patients under hemodialysis. Median number of prior lines was two (range 1-10). The trial was successful, albeit with premature termination, as it met its primary endpoint, with an ORR of 67% (14/21). The rates of partial response, very good partial response, and complete response were 29%, 29%, and 10%, respectively ( n = 6, 6, and 2). Fourteen patients (67%) achieved renal response. After median follow-up of 28 months, median progression-free survival was 10.4 months; median overall survival was not reached. Higher-grade toxicity was mainly hematologic, and non-hematologic toxicities ≥Grade 3 were mostly infections (24%). The prospective GMMG-DANTE trial investigating DVd exclusively in r/rMM patients with severe RI showed efficacy and safety to be comparable to data from patients without RI.

Introduction: Patients with triple-class-exposed relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (TCE-RRMM) have a poor prognosis and limited treatment options. Teclistamab, a B-cell maturation antigen × CD3 bispecific antibody, was studied in patients with TCE-RRMM in the single-arm MajesTEC-1 study. To assess the relative effectiveness of teclistamab versus real-world physician's choice of therapy (RWPC), adjusted comparisons were performed using individual patient data from MajesTEC-1 and LocoMMotion, a prospective study of patients with TCE-RRMM., Methods: An external control arm for MajesTEC-1 was created from patients in LocoMMotion (n = 248; clinical cut-off: November 2, 2021) and compared with treated patients (n = 165) from MajesTEC-1 (teclistamab 1.5 mg/kg weekly; clinical cut-off: March 16, 2022). Inverse probability weighting was used to adjust for imbalances in baseline covariates. For binary endpoints [overall response rate (ORR), very good partial response or better (≥ VGPR) rate, complete response or better (≥ CR)], relative effect of teclistamab versus RWPC was estimated with an odds ratio and relative response rate and 95% confidence interval (CI), derived from weighted logistic regression. Weighted Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% CIs for time-to-event endpoints [duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS)]., Results: After weighting, baseline characteristics were balanced across cohorts. In adjusted comparisons, teclistamab-treated patients were 2.3-fold, 5.2-fold and 148.3-fold, more likely to reach ORR [response-rate ratio (RR) = 2.31, 95% CI 1.77-2.85, p < 0.0001], ≥ VGPR (RR = 5.19, 95% CI 3.26-7.12, p < 0.0001) and ≥ CR (RR = 148.25, 95% CI 20.63-1065.40, p < 0.0001), respectively, versus patients receiving RWPC. Following adjustment, DOR (HR 0.32, 95% CI 0.19-0.54, p < 0.0001) and PFS (HR 0.48, 95% CI 0.35-0.65, p < 0.0001) were significantly longer with teclistamab versus RWPC. OS was numerically better with teclistamab versus RWPC [HR 0.77 (0.55-1.09), p = 0.1419]., Conclusion: Teclistamab demonstrated improved effectiveness versus RWPC, highlighting its clinical benefit as a novel and effective treatment for patients with TCE-RRMM., Trial Registration: Majest TEC-1, ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04557098; LocoMMotion, ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04035226., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Activating BRAF mutations are found in a small subset of patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, but prevalence increases in late-stage, refractory disease, and the mutations are associated with adverse outcome. This prospective single-arm, open-label, multicenter phase 2 trial assessed the efficacy and safety of combined BRAF/MEK inhibition, using encorafenib and binimetinib, in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) carrying a BRAFV600E mutation. Patients received 450 mg encorafenib once daily and binimetinib 45 mg twice daily. The primary end point was the overall response rate achieved within the first year after start of treatment according to International Myeloma Working Group criteria. Twelve RRMM patients with a median of 5 prior lines of therapy were enrolled. The overall response rate was 83.3%, with 10 patients achieving at least a partial response. The median progression-free survival was 5.6 months, and overall survival was 55% at 24 months. Emerging resistance to therapy was driven by RAS mutations and structural variants involving the BRAF locus. This is the first prospective clinical trial to demonstrate that combined BRAF/MEK inhibition is highly effective in patients with BRAFV600E-mutated RRMM, and it represents a successful targeted precision medicine approach in this disease. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02834364., (© 2023 by The American Society of Hematology.)

Background: Anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies have consistently shown increased efficacy when added to standard of care for patients with multiple myeloma. We aimed to assess the efficacy of isatuximab in addition to lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone in patients with newly diagnosed transplantation-eligible multiple myeloma., Methods: This open-label, multicentre, randomised, active-controlled, phase 3 trial was done at 67 academic and oncology practice centres in Germany. This study is ongoing and divided into two parts; herein, we report results from part 1. Eligible patients were aged 18-70 years; had a confirmed diagnosis of untreated multiple myeloma requiring systemic treatment and a WHO performance status of 0-2; and were eligible for induction therapy, high-dose melphalan and autologous haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation, and maintenance treatment. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive three 42-day cycles of induction therapy either with isatuximab plus lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (isatuximab group) or lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone alone (control group) using a web-based system and permuted blocks. Patients in both groups received lenalidomide (25 mg orally on days 1-14 and 22-35), bortezomib (1·3 mg/m 2 subcutaneously on days 1, 4, 8, 11, 22, 25, 29, and 32), and dexamethasone (20 mg orally on days 1-2, 4-5, 8-9, 11-12, 15, 22-23, 25-26, 29-30, and 32-33). Isatuximab was given as 10 mg/kg intravenously on days 1, 8, 15, 22, and 29 of cycle 1 and on days 1, 15, and 29 of cycles 2 and 3. The primary endpoint was minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity assessed by flow cytometry, in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03617731., Findings: Between Oct 23, 2018, and Sep 22, 2020, 660 patients were included in the ITT analysis (331 in the isatuximab group and 329 in the control group). 654 (99%) patients were White, two were African, one was Arabic, and three were Asian. 250 (38%) were women and 410 (62%) were men. The median age was 59 years (IQR 54-64). MRD negativity after induction therapy was reached in 166 (50%) patients in the isatuximab group versus 117 (36%) in the control group (OR 1·82 [95% CI 1·33-2·48]; p=0·00017). Median follow-up time from start to end of induction therapy was 125 days (IQR 125-131) versus 125 days (125-132). At least one grade 3 or 4 adverse event occurred in 208 (63%) of 330 patients versus 199 (61%) of 328 patients. Neutropenia of grade 3 or 4 occurred in 77 (23%) versus 23 (7%) patients and infections of grade 3 or 4 occurred in 40 (12%) versus 32 (10%) patients. Among 12 deaths during induction therapy, one death due to septic shock in the isatuximab group and four deaths (one cardiac decompensation, one hepatic and renal failure, one cardiac arrest, and one drug-induced enteritis) in the control group were considered treatment-related., Interpretation: Addition of isatuximab to lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone for induction therapy improved rates of MRD negativity with no new safety signals in patients with newly diagnosed transplantation-eligible multiple myeloma., Funding: Sanofi and Bristol Myers Squibb (Celgene)., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests HG reports financial and trial medication support for this GMMG-HD7 trial from Bristol Myers Squibb and Sanofi; consulting from Adaptive Biotechnology, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Janssen; honoraria from Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Chugai, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, and Novartis; research funding from Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Chugai, Incyte, Janssen, Molecular Partner, MSD, Mundipharma, and Novartis; grants from Amgen, Celgene, Chugai, Janssen, and Johns Hopkins University. EKM reports consulting or advisory role, honoraria, research funding, travel accommodation, and expenses from Bristol Myers Squibb (Celgene), GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen-Cilag, Sanofi, Stemline, and Takeda. RF reports consulting or advisory role, honoraria, travel accommodation, and expenses from Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb (Celgene), GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, and Takeda. BB reports honoraria from Amgen, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Sanofi, and Takeda; and travel accommodation, and expanses from Janssen. JD reports honoraria from Celgene, Janssen, and Roche; advisory role, travel accommodation, and expenses from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Abbvie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Janssen, and Takeda; and speakers bureau from Celgene and Janssen. RS reports consulting for Bristol Myers Squibb, Gilead (Kite), Janssen, and Novartis; and honoraria from Bristol Myers Squibb, Gilead (Kite), Janssen, Roche, and Sanofi. IvM reports consulting for Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Pfizer, Sanofi, and Takeda; honoraria from Sanofi; and travel accommodation and expenses from Takeda. MHa reports consulting for Amgen, Bayer Vital, Celgene, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Takeda; and honoraria from Novartis. CM reports consulting for Celgene. AMA reports honoraria from Bristol Myers Squibb (Celgene), GlaxoSmithKline, and Pfizer. BH reports consulting for Sanofi-Aventis. NW reports an advisory role for Glaxo Smith Kline; and research Funding from Bristol Myers Squibb. KK reports honoraria from Sanofi. TAWH reports a consulting or advisory role for Celgene, Gilead Sciences, GlaxoSmithKline, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, and Sanofi; speakers bureau for Amgen and MSD; and travel accommodation and expenses from AbbVie, Daiichi Sankyo, Eurocept Pharmaceuticals, Janssen, Medac, and Therakos. KT-G reports consulting, an advisory role, honoraria, travel accommodation, and expenses from GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, and Takeda. DG reports consulting and honoraria from Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, and Takeda. MK-H reports honoraria from Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Janssen-Cilag, Roche, and Takeda; and an advisory role for Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Janssen, and Sanofi. CK reports honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Pfizer, Sanofi, and Takeda; and research funding from AstraZeneca and Sanofi. WK reports consulting for AstraZeneca, BeiGene, and Janssen; honoraria from AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Janssen, and Sanofi. CS reports honoraria from AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Glaxo Smith Kline, Janssen, Pfizer, Oncopeptides, Sanofi, and Takeda; travel accommodation and expanses from Bristol Myers Squibb, Janssen, Novartis, and Takeda; and research funding from Janssen, Novartis, and Takeda. MMun reports consulting for AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Glaxo Smith Kline, Janssen, Sanofi, and Takeda; honoraria from Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Janssen, and Takeda; research funding from Incyte; and travel accommodation and expenses from Amgen. MHo reports consulting for Sanofi-Aventis. MSR reports consulting or an advisory role for AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Novartis, Roche, and Sanofi; honoraria from AbbVie and GlaxoSmithKline; and research funding from Novartis and Sanofi. HJS reports honoraria and an advisory role from AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb (Celgene), Chugai, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen-Cilag, Oncopeptides, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, Sebia, TAD Pharma, and Takeda; travel accommodation and expenses from Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb (Celgene), GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen-Cilag, and Sanofi. KCW reports consulting for AbbVie, Adaptive Biotech, Amgen, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Karyopharm, Novartis, Oncopeptides, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, Stemline, and Takeda; honoraria from AbbVie, Adaptive Biotech, Amgen, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Karyopharm, Novartis, Oncopeptides, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, Stemline, and Takeda; research funding from Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Glaxo Smith Kline, Janssen, and Sanofi; travel accommodation and expenses from AbbVie, Adaptive Biotech, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Janssen, Glaxo Smith Kline, Karyopharm, Oncopeptides, Roche, Sanofi, Stemline, and Takeda. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

We investigated the prognostic impact of time-dependent serum free light chain ratio (FLCr) normalization in 590 patients with secretory multiple myeloma (MM) during first-line treatment within the German-Speaking Myeloma Multicenter Group MM5 trial. Serum free light chains (sFLC) were assessed by the Freelite test at baseline, after induction, mobilization, autologous blood stem cell transplantation, consolidation and every three months during maintenance or follow up within two years after the start of maintenance. The proportion of patients with a normal or normalized FLCr increased from 3.6% at baseline to 23.2% after induction and 64.7% after consolidation. The achievement of FLCr normalization at any one time before the start of maintenance was associated with significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) ( p < 0.01, hazard ratio (HR) = 0.61, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) = 0.47-0.79) and overall survival (OS) ( p = 0.02, HR = 0.67, 95% CI = 0.48-0.93) in multivariable time-dependent Cox regression analyses. Furthermore, reaching immune reconstitution, defined as the normalization of uninvolved immunoglobulins, before maintenance was associated with superior PFS ( p = 0.04, HR = 0.77, 95% CI = 0.60-0.99) and OS ( p = 0.01, HR = 0.59, 95% CI = 0.41-0.86). We conclude that FLCr normalization during therapy is an important favorable prognostic factor in MM. Therefore, we recommend serial measurements of sFLC during therapy until achieving FLCr normalization, even in patients with secretory MM., Competing Interests: E.-M.K.: travel, accommodations, expenses: AMGEN, BMS, Janssen. D.T.: no COI. H.J.S.: honoraria: Janssen Cilag, Takeda, Amgen, BMS/Celgene, Sanofi, Oncopeptides, Abbvie, GSK, Chugai, Pfizer; travel, accommodations, expenses: Janssen, Takeda, Amgen, BMS/Celgene, Sanofi, GSK. E.K.M.: honoraria: Janssen, Celgene, Takeda, GSK; consulting or advisory role: Janssen, Celgene, Takeda, GSK; research funding: Takeda, Celgene/BMS, GSK; travel, accommodations, expenses: Janssen, Takeda, Celgene/BMS, Onyx, Mundipharma, GSK. J.D.: consulting or advisory role: Celgene; speakers bureau: Celgene; travel, accommodations, expenses: Celgene. K.C.W.: honoraria: AMGEN, BMS, Celgene, Novartis, Janssen, Takeda; consulting or advisory role: AMGEN, BMS, Celgene, Juno, Janssen, Adaptive, Sanofi, Takeda; research funding: AMGEN, Celgene, Sanofi, Janssen. A.B.: no COI. U.B.: travel, accommodations, expenses: Sanofi. M.A.: no COI. B.B.: no COI. M.M.: honoraria: Janssen, BMS, Takeda, Celgene, Amgen; consulting or advisory role: Janssen, BMS, Takeda, Celgene, Amgen; research funding: BMS, Incyte; travel, accommodations, expenses: Janssen, BMS, Takeda, Amgen. H.-W.L.: no COI. D.H.: consulting or advisory role: I. Lamkap Bio AG, Discoveric AG; research funding: Celgene AG, Sanofi, Engmab AG; travel, accommodations, expenses: Celgene. A.S.: consulting or advisory role: I. Lamkap Bio AG, Discoveric AG; research funding: Celgene AG, Sanofi, Engmab AG. S.L.: no COI. A.J.: no COI. A.E.: consulting or advisory role: Amgen; travel, accommodations, expenses: Janssen, Amgen. S.F.: consulting or advisory role: Sanofi, BMS, Amgen. P.B.: consulting or advisory role: BMS, AMGEN, Roche, MSD; research funding: BMS; travel, accommodations, expenses: BMS. M.G.: no COI. H.B.: no COI. M.S.R.: honoraria: Celgene, BMS, Novartis, Janssen, Takeda; consulting or advisory role: Celgene, BMS, Novartis, Janssen, Takeda; research funding: Celgene, Novartis, AMGEN; travel, accommodations, expenses: Janssen, BMS, Takeda. I.W.B.: research funding: Celgene, BMS, Janssen. M.H.: honoraria: Novartis, Amgen, Roche, Takeda; consulting or advisory role: Celgene. C.S.: honoraria: BMS, Janssen, Celgene, Novartis, Amgen, Takeda; consulting or advisory role: BMS, Janssen, Celgene, Novartis, Amgen, Takeda; speakers bureau: Takeda; research funding: Takeda, Novartis; travel, accommodations, expenses: BMS, Janssen, Celgene, Novartis, Amgen, Takeda. H.G.: honoraria: Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Chugai, Janssen, Novartis, Takeda; consulting or advisory role: Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Chugai, Janssen, Novartis, Takeda; speakers bureau: Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Novartis, Takeda; research funding: Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Chugai, Janssen, Novartis, Takeda; travel, accommodations, expenses: BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Novartis, Takeda. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results.

The role of salvage high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation (sHDCT/ASCT) for relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) in the era of continuous novel agent treatment has not been defined. This randomized, open-label, phase III, multicenter trial randomized patients with 1st-3rd relapse of multiple myeloma (MM) to a transplant arm (n = 139) consisting of 3 Rd (lenalidomide 25 mg, day 1-21; dexamethasone 40 mg, day 1, 8, 15, and 22; 4-week cycles) reinduction cycles, sHDCT (melphalan 200 mg/m 2 ), ASCT, and lenalidomide maintenance (10 mg/day) or to a control arm (n = 138) of continuous Rd. Median PFS was 20.7 months in the transplant and 18.8 months in the control arm (HR 0.87; 95% CI 0.65-1.16; p = 0.34). Median OS was not reached in the transplant and 62.7 months in the control arm (HR 0.81; 95% CI 0.52-1.28; p = 0.37). Forty-one patients (29%) did not receive the assigned sHDCT/ASCT mainly due to early disease progression, adverse events, and withdrawal of consent. Multivariate landmark analyses from the time of sHDCT showed superior PFS and OS (p = 0.0087/0.0057) in patients who received sHDCT/ASCT. Incorporation of sHDCT/ASCT into relapse treatment with Rd was feasible in 71% of patients and did not significantly prolong PFS and OS on ITT analysis while patients who received sHDCT/ASCT may have benefitted.

Lenalidomide (LEN) maintenance (MT) post autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is standard of care in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) but has not been compared to other agents in clinical trials. We retrospectively compared bortezomib (BTZ; n = 138) or LEN (n = 183) MT from two subsequent GMMG phase III trials. All patients received three cycles of BTZ-based triplet induction and post-ASCT MT. BTZ MT (1.3 mg/m 2 i.v.) was administered every 2 weeks for 2 years. LEN MT included two consolidation cycles (25 mg p.o., days 1-21 of 28 day cycles) followed by 10-15 mg/day for 2 years. The BTZ cohort more frequently received tandem ASCT (91% vs. 33%) due to different tandem ASCT strategies. In the LEN and BTZ cohort, 43% and 46% of patients completed 2 years of MT as intended (p = 0.57). Progression-free survival (PFS; HR = 0.83, p = 0.18) and overall survival (OS; HR = 0.70, p = 0.15) did not differ significantly with LEN vs. BTZ MT. Patients with

In order to meet the challenges in data evaluation and comparability between studies in multiple myeloma (MM) minimal residual disease (MRD) assessment, the goal of the current study was to provide a step-by-step evaluation of next-generation sequencing (NGS) and multicolor flow cytometry (MFC) data. Bone marrow (BM) sample pairs from 125 MM patients were analyzed by NGS and MFC MM MRD methods. Tumor load (TL) and limit of detection (LOD) and quantification (LOQ) were calculated. The best-fit MRD cut-off was chosen as 1 × 10 -5 , resulting in an overall 9.6% ( n overall = 12 (NGS n = 2, MFC n = 10)) nonassessable cases. The overall concordance rate between NGS and MFC was 68.0% ( n = 85); discordant results were found in 22.4% (11.2% ( n = 14) of cases in each direction. Overall, 55.1% ( n = 60/109) and 49.5% ( n = 54/109) of patients with a serological response ≥ very good partial response (VGPR) showed BM MRD negativity by NGS and MFC, respectively. A good correlation in the TL assessed by both techniques was found (correlation coefficient = 0.8, n = 40, p < 0.001). Overall, our study shows good concordance between MM BM MRD status and TL when comparing NGS and MFC at a threshold of 10 -5 . However, a sufficient number of analyzed events and calculation of MRD key metrics are essential for the comparison of methods and evaluability of data at a specific MRD cut-off.

The B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA) is currently being evaluated as promising tumor-associated surface antigen for T-cell-based immunotherapy approaches, such as CAR T cells and bispecific antibodies, in multiple myeloma (MM). Cytotoxic T cells bearing BCMA-specific T-cell receptors might further allow targeting HLA-presented antigens derived from the intracellular domain of BCMA. By analyzing a mass spectrometry-acquired immunopeptidome dataset of primary MM samples and MM cell lines for BCMA-derived HLA ligands, we identified the naturally presented HLA-B*18-restricted ligand P(BCMA) B*18 . Additionally, P(BCMA) B*18 was identified on primary CLL samples, thereby expanding the range for possible applications. P(BCMA) B*18 induced multifunctional BCMA-specific cells de novo from naïve CD8 + T cells of healthy volunteers. These T cells exhibited antigen-specific lysis of autologous peptide-loaded cells. Even in the immunosuppressive context of MM, we detected spontaneous memory T-cell responses against P(BCMA) B*18 in patients. By applying CTLA-4 and PD-1 inhibition in vitro we induced multifunctional P(BCMA) B*18 -specific CD8 + T cells in MM patients lacking preexisting BCMA-directed immune responses. Finally, we could show antigen-specific lysis of autologous peptide-loaded target cells and even MM.1S cells naturally presenting P(BCMA) B*18 using patient-derived P(BCMA) B*18 -specific T cells. Hence, this BCMA-derived T-cell epitope represents a promising target for T-cell-based immunotherapy and monitoring following immunotherapy in B-cell malignancy patients.

The measurement of serum-free light chains (FLC) is standard of care in the diagnosis and management of multiple myeloma (MM). The revised international myeloma working group (IMWG) implemented the involved FLC/noninvolved FLC (iFLC/niFLC) ratio as a biomarker for MM requiring treatment. Recently, a new definition of high-risk smoldering MM (SMM) including iFLC/niFLC ratio was published. These recommendations were solely based on a single assay method (Freelite assay). Today, two additional assays, N Latex FLC and ELISA-based Sebia FLC, are available. Here, we report on a single-center-study comparing results of all three different assays for FLC correlation and its potential implications for diagnostic and clinical use. In total, 187 samples from 47 MM patients were examined, and determination of FLC was performed. Comparison analyses showed similar FLC results for Sebia FLC and N Latex FLC assay with markedly lower absolute values for κ/λ ratio compared with Freelite. Values of λ FLC exhibited high variability. The ratio of iFLC/niFLC showed significant discrepancies among these assays. Our data demonstrate that the three available assays may result in markedly discrepant results, and should not be used interchangeably to monitor patients. Furthermore, modifications of the assay-specific diagnostic (iFLC/niFLC) thresholds for SMM and MM are recommended.

History and Admission Findings: A 54-year-old female patient is admitted for evaluation of her thyroid function after two cycles of ipilimumab therapy. The decision for the anti-cytotoxic-T-lymphocyte-antigen-4-therapy (anti-CTLA-4) was made two months earlier because of malignant melanoma with pulmonary metastases. The patient was euthyroid before initiation of treatment and without known thyroid disease., Investigations: The laboratory reveals thyrotoxicosis with elevated anti-thyroid peroxidase and anti-thyroglobulin antibody levels. The anti-thyroid stimulating hormone receptor antibody levels are within the normal range. Thyroid ultrasound shows a normal-sized, inhomogenous, hypoechogenic thyroid gland, consistent with autoimmune thyroiditis., Diagnosis, Treatment and Course: Diagnosis of hyperthyroidism due to ipilimumab-induced autoimmune thyroiditis is made. The patient does not receive any thyroid-specific medication, with regular control of the thyroid hormone levels. When the patient becomes euthyroid, the ipilimumab therapy is continued. Three weeks later, the patient develops hypothyroidism and a supplementation with L-thyroxine is initiated., Conclusions: An anti-CTLA-4 therapy may cause thyroid dysfunction. Therefore, before initiation and in the course of the treatment, regular controls of the thyroid hormone levels are required., (© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.)

History and Admission Findings: We report on a 24-year-old male patient who presented with worsening of the general condition and abdominal pain., Investigations: On physical examination, gynecomastia was noted. Laboratory tests showed manifest hyperthyroidism. The beta-hCG levels were markedly increased. By ultrasound, the thyroid gland was hyperperfused without thyroid nodules. Several large echo mixed lesions were found in the liver. The testes appeared normal., Diagnosis: In light of the typical laboratory findings, a non-seminomatous extragonadal germ cell tumor was diagnosed. Hyperthyroidism was most probably HCG induced., Treatment and Course: Initially the patient was treated with thyreostatic drugs. After initiation of chemotherapy and a marked decrease in beta-hCG, thyreostatic therapy could be terminated., Conclusions: Germ cell tumors may cause an increase in beta-hCG concentration. By cross-reacting with the TSH-receptor this could induce hyperthyroidism. Germ cell tumors are therefore a rare differential diagnosis of hyperthyreoidism., (© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.)