Search

PURPOSE With the initial analysis of POLLUX at a median follow-up of 13.5 months, daratumumab in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone (D-Rd) significantly prolonged progression-free survival versus lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rd) alone in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). We report updated efficacy and safety results at the time of final analysis for overall survival (OS). METHODS POLLUX was a multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase III study during which eligible patients with ≥ 1 line of prior therapy were randomly assigned 1:1 to D-Rd or Rd until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. After positive primary analysis and protocol amendment, patients receiving Rd were offered daratumumab monotherapy after disease progression. RESULTS Significant OS benefit was observed with D-Rd (hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.91; P = .0044) at a median (range) follow-up of 79.7 months (0.0-86.5). The median OS was 67.6 months for D-Rd compared with 51.8 months for Rd. Prespecified analyses demonstrated an improved OS with D-Rd versus Rd in most subgroups, including patients age ≥ 65 years and patients with one, two, or three prior lines of therapy, International Staging System stage III disease, high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities, and refractoriness to their last prior line of therapy or a proteasome inhibitor. The most common (≥ 10%) grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events with D-Rd versus Rd were neutropenia (57.6% v 41.6%), anemia (19.8% v 22.4%), pneumonia (17.3% v 11.0%), thrombocytopenia (15.5% v 15.7%), and diarrhea (10.2% v 3.9%). CONCLUSION D-Rd significantly extended OS versus Rd alone in patients with RRMM. To our knowledge, for the first time, our findings, together with the OS benefit observed with daratumumab plus bortezomib and dexamethasone in the phase III CASTOR trial, demonstrate OS improvement with daratumumab-containing regimens in RRMM (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02076009 [POLLUX]).

What is this summary about? This is a summary of a clinical trial called MAIA. The trial tested 2 combinations of cancer drugs (daratumumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone compared with lenalidomide and dexamethasone) in people with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. None of the participants who took part in the study had been treated before or were eligible to receive stem-cell transplants. How was the study in this summary conducted? A total of 737 participants took part. Half of the participants took daratumumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone, while the other half of the participants took only lenalidomide and dexamethasone. Once participants started taking the drugs, the cancer was monitored for improvement (response to treatment), worsening (disease progression), or no change. Participants' blood and urine were tested for myeloma protein to measure response to the treatment. Participants were also monitored for side effects. What were the results of the study? After approximately 56 months of follow-up, more participants who took daratumumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone were alive and had decreased myeloma protein levels (indicating improvement of cancer) than participants who took only lenalidomide and dexamethasone. The most common side effects were abnormally low white and red blood cell counts and increased lung infections. What do the results of the study mean? In the MAIA study, participants with multiple myeloma who took daratumumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone lived longer and had decreased myeloma protein levels than participants who took only lenalidomide and dexamethasone, indicating survival could be more likely with daratumumab added. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02252172 (Phase 3 MAIA study)

Supplemental Methods, Supplementary Tables, Supplementary Figure Legends

Monocytes take up AF488-labeled daratumumab-CD38 complexes from PKH-26-stained UM9 cells.

Daratumumab-mediated CD38 reduction of MM cells in the presence of PBMCs as shown by Western blot analysis.

Loss of CD38 from the MM cell membrane is associated with reduced CDC and ADCC

Purpose: Daratumumab treatment results in a marked reduction of CD38 expression on multiple myeloma cells. The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical implications and the underlying mechanisms of daratumumab-mediated CD38 reduction.Experimental Design: We evaluated the effect of daratumumab alone or in combination with lenalidomide-dexamethasone, on CD38 levels of multiple myeloma cells and nontumor immune cells in the GEN501 study (daratumumab monotherapy) and the GEN503 study (daratumumab combined with lenalidomide-dexamethasone). In vitro assays were also performed.Results: In both trials, daratumumab reduced CD38 expression on multiple myeloma cells within hours after starting the first infusion, regardless of depth and duration of the response. In addition, CD38 expression on nontumor immune cells, including natural killer cells, T cells, B cells, and monocytes, was also reduced irrespective of alterations in their absolute numbers during therapy. In-depth analyses revealed that CD38 levels of multiple myeloma cells were only reduced in the presence of complement or effector cells, suggesting that the rapid elimination of CD38high multiple myeloma cells can contribute to CD38 reduction. In addition, we discovered that daratumumab–CD38 complexes and accompanying cell membrane were actively transferred from multiple myeloma cells to monocytes and granulocytes. This process of trogocytosis was also associated with reduced surface levels of some other membrane proteins, including CD49d, CD56, and CD138.Conclusions: Daratumumab rapidly reduced CD38 expression levels, at least in part, through trogocytosis. Importantly, all these effects also occurred in patients with deep and durable responses, thus excluding CD38 reduction alone as a mechanism of daratumumab resistance.The trials were registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT00574288 (GEN501) and NCT1615029 (GEN503). Clin Cancer Res; 23(24); 7498–511. ©2017 AACR.

Daratumumab-mediated CD38 reduction on NK cells is abrogated by depleting monocytes from PBMCs.

Background Melphalan flufenamide (melflufen), an alkylating peptide-drug conjugate, plus dexamethasone showed clinical activity and manageable safety in the phase 2 HORIZON study. We aimed to determine whether melflufen plus dexamethasone would provide a progression-free survival benefit compared with pomalidomide plus dexamethasone in patients with previously treated multiple myeloma. Methods In this randomised, open-label, head-to-head, phase 3 study (OCEAN), adult patients (aged ≥18 years) were recruited from 108 university hospitals, specialist hospitals, and community-based centres in 21 countries across Europe, North America, and Asia. Eligible patients had an ECOG performance status of 0–2; must have had relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma, refractory to lenalidomide (within 18 months of randomisation) and to the last line of therapy; and have received two to four previous lines of therapy (including lenalidomide and a proteasome inhibitor). Patients were randomly assigned (1:1), stratified by age, number of previous lines of therapy, and International Staging System score, to either 28-day cycles of melflufen and dexamethasone (melflufen group) or pomalidomide and dexamethasone (pomalidomide group). All patients received dexamethasone 40 mg orally on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of each cycle. In the melflufen group, patients received melflufen 40 mg intravenously over 30 min on day 1 of each cycle and in the pomalidomide group, patients received pomalidomide 4 mg orally daily on days 1 to 21 of each cycle. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival assessed by an independent review committee in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. Safety was assessed in patients who received at least one dose of study medication. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03151811, and is ongoing. Findings Between June 12, 2017, and Sept 3, 2020, 246 patients were randomly assigned to the melflufen group (median age 68 years [IQR 60–72]; 107 [43%] were female) and 249 to the pomalidomide group (median age 68 years [IQR 61–72]; 109 [44%] were female). 474 patients received at least one dose of study drug (melflufen group n=228; pomalidomide group n=246; safety population). Data cutoff was Feb 3, 2021. Median progression-free survival was 6·8 months (95% CI 5·0–8·5; 165 [67%] of 246 patients had an event) in the melflufen group and 4·9 months (4·2–5·7; 190 [76%] of 249 patients had an event) in the pomalidomide group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·79, [95% CI 0·64–0·98]; p=0·032), at a median follow-up of 15·5 months (IQR 9·4–22·8) in the melflufen group and 16·3 months (10·1–23·2) in the pomalidomide group. Median overall survival was 19·8 months (95% CI 15·1–25·6) at a median follow-up of 19·8 months (IQR 12·0–25·0) in the melflufen group and 25·0 months (95% CI 18·1–31·9) in the pomalidomide group at a median follow-up of 18·6 months (IQR 11·8–23·7; HR 1·10 [95% CI 0·85–1·44]; p=0·47). The most common grade 3 or 4 treatment-emergent adverse events were thrombocytopenia (143 [63%] of 228 in the melflufen group vs 26 [11%] of 246 in the pomalidomide group), neutropenia (123 [54%] vs 102 [41%]), and anaemia (97 [43%] vs 44 [18%]). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 95 (42%) patients in the melflufen group and 113 (46%) in the pomalidomide group, the most common of which were pneumonia (13 [6%] vs 21 [9%]), COVID-19 pneumonia (11 [5%] vs nine [4%]), and thrombocytopenia (nine [4%] vs three [1%]). 27 [12%] patients in the melflufen group and 32 [13%] in the pomalidomide group had fatal treatment-emergent adverse events. Fatal treatment-emergent adverse events were considered possibly treatment related in two patients in the melflufen group (one with acute myeloid leukaemia, one with pancytopenia and acute cardiac failure) and four patients in the pomalidomide group (two patients with pneumonia, one with myelodysplastic syndromes, one with COVID-19 pneumonia). Interpretation Melflufen plus dexamethasone showed superior progression-free survival than pomalidomide plus dexamethasone in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma., Oncopeptides AB

In the phase 3 MAIA study of patients with transplant-ineligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM), daratumumab plus lenalidomide/dexamethasone (D-Rd) improved progression-free survival (PFS) versus lenalidomide/dexamethasone (Rd). We present a subgroup analysis of MAIA by frailty status. Frailty assessment was performed retrospectively using age, Charlson comorbidity index, and baseline Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score. Patients were classified as fit, intermediate, non-frail (fit + intermediate), or frail. Of the randomized patients (D-Rd, n = 368; Rd, n = 369), 396 patients were non-frail (D-Rd, 196 [53.3%]; Rd, 200 [54.2%]) and 341 patients were frail (172 [46.7%]; 169 [45.8%]). After a 36.4-month median follow-up, non-frail patients had longer PFS than frail patients, but the PFS benefit of D-Rd versus Rd was maintained across subgroups: non-frail (median, not reached [NR] vs 41.7 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.48; P P = 0.003). Improved rates of complete response or better and minimal residual disease (10–5) negativity were observed for D-Rd across subgroups. The most common grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse event in non-frail and frail patients was neutropenia (non-frail, 45.4% [D-Rd] and 37.2% [Rd]; frail, 57.7% and 33.1%). These findings support the clinical benefit of D-Rd in transplant-ineligible NDMM patients enrolled in MAIA, regardless of frailty status.

Background: In the primary analysis of the phase 3 MAIA trial (median follow-up 28·0 months), a significant improvement in progression-free survival was observed with daratumumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone versus lenalidomide and dexamethasone alone in transplantation-ineligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Here, we report the updated efficacy and safety results from a prespecified interim analysis for overall survival. Methods: MAIA is an ongoing, multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial that enrolled patients at 176 hospitals in 14 countries across North America, Europe, the Middle East, and the Asia-Pacific region. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0–2, and were ineligible for high-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem-cell transplantation because of their age (≥65 years) or comorbidities. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using randomly permuted blocks (block size 4) by an interactive web response system to receive 28-day cycles of intravenous daratumumab (16 mg/kg, once per week during cycles 1–2, once every 2 weeks in cycles 3–6, and once every 4 weeks thereafter) plus oral lenalidomide (25 mg on days 1–21 of each cycle) and oral dexamethasone (40 mg on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of each cycle; daratumumab group) or lenalidomide and dexamethasone alone (control group). Randomisation was stratified by International Staging System disease stage, geographical region, and age. Neither patients nor investigators were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, which was centrally assessed, and a secondary endpoint was overall survival (both assessed in the intention-to-treat population). The safety population included patients who received at least one dose of the study treatment. The results presented here are from a prespecified interim analysis for overall survival, for which the prespecified stopping boundary was p=0·0414. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02252172. Findings: Between March 18, 2015, and Jan 15, 2017, 952 patients were assessed for eligibility, of whom 737 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the daratumumab group (n=368) or the control group (n=369). At a median follow-up of 56·2 months (IQR 52·7–59·9), median progression-free survival was not reached (95% CI 54·8–not reached) in the daratumumab group versus 34·4 months (29·6–39·2) in the control group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·53 [95% CI 0·43–0·66]; p15%) grade 3 or higher treatment-emergent adverse events were neutropenia (197 [54%] patients in the daratumumab group vs 135 [37%] patients in the control group), pneumonia (70 [19%] vs 39 [11%]), anaemia (61 [17%] vs 79 [22%]), and lymphopenia (60 [16%] vs 41 [11%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 281 (77%) patients in the daratumumab group and 257 (70%) patients in the control group. Treatment-related deaths occurred in 13 (4%) patients in the daratumumab group and ten (3%) patients in the control group. Interpretation: Daratumumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone increased overall survival and progression-free survival in patients ineligible for stem-cell transplantation with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. There were no new safety concerns. Our results support the frontline use of daratumumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone for patients with multiple myeloma who are ineligible for transplantation. Funding: Janssen Research & Development.

In the phase 3 POLLUX trial, daratumumab in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone (D-Rd) significantly improved progression-free survival in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) compared with lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rd) alone. Here, we present patient-reported outcomes (PROs) from POLLUX, assessed using the validated European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30-item (EORTC QLQ-C30) and the EuroQol 5-dimensional descriptive system (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaires. Changes from baseline are presented as least-squares mean changes with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) derived from a mixed-effects model. PRO assessment compliance rates were high and similar in both D-Rd and Rd groups through cycle 40 (week 156). In this on-treatment analysis, mean changes from baseline were significantly greater in EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status, physical functioning, and pain scores in the D-Rd group versus the Rd group at multiple time points; however, magnitude of changes was low, suggesting no meaningful impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Subgroup results were similar to those in the overall population. In the POLLUX study, baseline HRQoL was maintained with prolonged D-Rd treatment. These findings complement the sustained and significant improvement in progression-free survival observed with D-Rd and supports its use in patients with RRMM. Clinical trial registration: NCT02076009.

Summary Background Multiple myeloma is an incurable haematological malignancy, representing over 10% of haematological cancers in the USA. We did a phase 1–2 study of melflufen and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma to determine the maximum tolerated dose of melflufen and to investigate its safety and efficacy. Methods We did a multicentre, international, dose-confirmation and dose-expansion, open-label, phase 1–2 study in seven centres in the USA and Europe. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma, had received two or more previous lines of therapy (including lenalidomide and bortezomib), were refractory to their last line of therapy, and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or less. In phase 1, patients received an intravenous infusion of melflufen at 15 mg, 25 mg, 40 mg, or 55 mg for 30 min on day 1 in 21-day cycles plus oral dexamethasone 40 mg weekly and did not receive melflufen as a single agent. Melflufen was also tested in a single-agent cohort late in phase 2 in a small number of patients at the maximum tolerated dose identified in phase 1. In phase 2, patients were enrolled at the maximum tolerated dose in the melflufen plus dexamethasone in the combination cohort.. The phase 1 primary objective was to determine the maximum tolerated dose. The phase 2 primary objective was to evaluate overall response rate and clinical benefit rate. This primary analysis was done per protocol, in the all-treated and efficacy-evaluable population (defined as patients who received at least two doses of melflufen and who had a response assessment after baseline). The single-agent melflufen cohort was closed on October 6, 2016, as per the recommendation by the data safety monitoring committee on the basis of interim data suggesting greater activity in the melflufen plus dexamethasone cohort. The study is completed but survival follow-up is ongoing. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT01897714 . Findings Patients were enrolled between July 4, 2013, and Dec 31, 2016: 23 patients in phase 1 and 58 in phase 2, including six patients from phase 1 treated at the maximum tolerated dose of melflufen 40 mg plus weekly dexamethasone. In phase 2, 45 patients were given a combination of melflufen plus dexamethasone and 13 patients were given single-agent melflufen. In phase 1, the established maximum tolerated dose was 40 mg of melflufen in combination with dexamethasone. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed in the first three dose cohorts (15 mg, 25 mg, and 40 mg). The highest dose cohort tested (55 mg) exceeded the maximum tolerated dose because four of six patients experienced grade 4 neutropenia with grade 4 thrombocytopenia also occurring in three of these patients; therefore, the planned highest dose of 70 mg was not tested. In phase 2, patients treated with combination therapy achieved an overall response rate of 31% (14 of 45 patients; 95% CI 18–47) and clinical benefit rate of 49% (22 of 45; 34–64) in the all-treated population, and 41% (14 of 34; 25–59) and 65% (22 of 34; 47–80) in the efficacy-evaluable population. In the phase 2 single-agent cohort, the overall response rate was 8% (one of 13 patients; 0·2–36·0) and the clinical benefit rate was 23% (three of 13; 5–54). Among the 45 patients given melflufen plus dexamethasone during phase 2, the most common grade 3–4 adverse events were clinically manageable thrombocytopenia (28 [62%] patients) and neutropenia (26 [58%]), and non-haematological toxicity was infrequent. 24 serious adverse events were reported in 17 (38%) of 45 patients, most commonly pneumonia (five [11%]). The most common grade 3–4 adverse events that occurred in the phase 2 single-agent cohort of 13 patients were neutropenia (nine [69%]) and thrombocytopenia (eight [62%]). Nine patients experienced serious adverse events in the single-agent cohort, most commonly thrombocytopenia (two [15%]). There were three deaths from adverse events within 30 days of treatment that were possibly related to treatment: one in the 25 mg cohort in phase 1 (due to bacteraemia) and two in the phase 2 combination cohort (one due to neutropenic sepsis and one due to Escherichia coli sepsis), each in the setting of progressive disease. Interpretation These data show that melflufen is active in patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma and tolerable in most patients. These results show the feasibility of this regimen and support the initiation of additional clinical studies of melflufen in multiple myeloma, both in combination with dexamethasone as well as in triplet regimens with additional classes of drugs. Funding Oncopeptides AB.

We explored minimal residual disease (MRD) in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) and transplant-ineligible (TIE) newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) using data from 4 phase 3 studies (POLLUX, CASTOR, ALCYONE, and MAIA). Each study previously demonstrated that daratumumab-based therapies improved MRD negativity rates and reduced the risk of disease progression or death by approximately half vs standards of care. We conducted a large-scale pooled analysis for associations between patients achieving complete response or better (≥CR) with MRD-negative status and progression-free survival (PFS). MRD was assessed via next-generation sequencing (10−5 sensitivity threshold). Patient-level data were pooled from all 4 studies and for patients with TIE NDMM and patients with RRMM who received ≤2 prior lines of therapy (≤2 PL). PFS was evaluated by response and MRD status. Median follow-up (months) was 54.8 for POLLUX, 50.2 for CASTOR, 40.1 for ALCYONE, and 36.4 for MAIA. Patients who achieved ≥CR and MRD negativity had improved PFS vs those who failed to reach CR or were MRD positive (TIE NDMM and RRMM hazard ratio [HR] 0.20, P < .0001; TIE NDMM and RRMM ≤2 PL HR 0.20, P < .0001). This benefit occurred irrespective of therapy or disease setting. A time-varying Cox proportional hazard model confirmed that ≥CR with MRD negativity was associated with improved PFS. Daratumumab-based treatment was associated with more patients reaching ≥CR and MRD negativity. These findings represent the first large-scale analysis with robust methodology to support ≥CR with MRD negativity as a prognostic factor for PFS in RRMM and TIE NDMM. These trials were registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02076009, #NCT02136134, #NCT02195479, and #NCT02252172., The studies were supported by Janssen Research & Development, LLC.

Introduction: Daratumumab (DARA) is a human monoclonal IgGκ monoclonal antibody targeting CD38 with a direct on-tumor and immunomodulatory mechanism of action. DARA is approved as monotherapy or in combination with standard-of-care regimens for the treatment of relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). The phase 1b 3-part PAVO study investigated subcutaneous delivery of DARA (DARA SC) in patients (pts) with RRMM. Part 1 demonstrated that a mix-and-deliver formula of DARA with recombinant human hyaluronidase PH20 (rHuPH20; ENHANZE ® drug delivery technology Halozyme, Inc.) was safe and effective (Usmani SZ, et al. Blood. 2019). In Part 2, a co-formulated DARA SC (DARA 1,800 mg + rHuPH20 30,000 U, in 15 mL) produced similar trough concentrations (C trough) to intravenous DARA (DARA IV) with no new safety concerns (San-Miguel J, et al. Haematologica. 2021). Here, we present the results from Part 3 of the PAVO study, which investigated the safety of pre- and post-dose corticosteroid tapering during DARA SC administration. Methods: Pts were aged ≥18 years and had RRMM with ≥2 prior treatment lines of anti-myeloma therapy including a proteosome inhibitor and immunomodulatory drug (IMiD). All pts received DARA SC (DARA 1,800 mg + rHuPH20 30,000 U, in 15 mL) QW in Cycles (28-day) 1 and 2, Q2W in Cycles 3-6 and Q4W thereafter. In conjunction, pts received either a 3-week (wk) tapering schedule (corticosteroid-free by Cycle 1 Day 22), with methylprednisolone (MP) given PO/IV pre-dose (100 mg, Cycle 1 Day 1; 60 mg, Cycle 1 Day 8; 30 mg, Cycle 1 Day 15) and PO post-dose (20 mg, Cycle 1 Day 1 for 2 days; 20 mg, Cycle 1 Day 8 for 1 day; 20 mg, Cycle 1 Day 15 for 1 day), a 2-wk tapering schedule (corticosteroid-free by Cycle 1 Day 15), with MP given PO/IV pre-dose (100 mg, Cycle 1 Day 1; 60 mg, Cycle 1 Day 8) and PO post-dose (20 mg, Cycle 1 Day 1 for 2 days; 20 mg, Cycle 1 Day 8 for 1 day), or a 1-wk tapering schedule (corticosteroid-free by Cycle 1 Day 8), with dexamethasone (d) given IV pre-dose (20 mg, Cycle 1 Day 1). Results: Pts (3-wk group, n=15; 2-wk group, n=15; 1-wk group, n=12) received a median of 3 (range, 2-7) prior lines of therapy, with 45.2% refractory to both a PI and an IMiD. In total, infusion-related reactions (IRRs) were reported in 5 (11.9%) pts (2-wk group, n=3; 1-wk group, n=2), of which 1 was grade 3 (2-wk group); all IRRs occurred on the first DARA SC administration and resolved, with none occurring after steroid tapering; median onset time was 79 minutes (range, 31-555). Overall, grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported in 21 (50.0%) pts (3-wk group, n=9; 2-wk group, n=8; 1-wk group, n=4); the most common (≥5%) grade ≥3 TEAEs were anemia (9.5%), lymphopenia, neutropenia, and bone pain (7.1% each). One (2.4%) pt discontinued treatment due to a TEAE (1-wk group; pulmonary embolism). In total, TEAEs led to death in 3 (7.1%) pts (2-wk group, n=1; 1-wk group, n=2) due to general health deterioration (2-wk group), pneumonia staphylococcal (1-wk group), and pulmonary embolism (1-wk group). Pharmacokinetic (PK) results were consistent with previous reports of DARA SC. The mean (SD) serum DARA concentrations at Cycle 3, Day 1 (pre-dose) were 604 (280) μg/mL for the 3-wk group, 731 (382) μg/mL for the 2-wk group, and 706 (270) for the 1-wk group following weekly dosing of DARA SC. None of the 41 evaluable pts tested positive for anti-DARA antibodies. Ten (24.4%) of the 41 evaluable pts tested positive for treatment-emergent anti-rHuPH20 antibodies; 6 pts in the 3-wk group, 3 pts in the 2-wk group, and 1 pt in the 1-wk group. None of the anti-rHuPH20 antibody positive samples were neutralizing or correlated with injection-site reactions. With a median follow-up of 9.2 months for the 3-wk group, 11.1 months for the 2-wk group, and 8.3 months for the 1-wk group, the overall response rate was 40.0% (95% CI, 16.3%-67.7%) for both the 3-wk and 2-wk groups, and 41.7% (95% CI, 15.2%-72.3%) for the 1-wk group; the rate of very good partial response or better was 20.0% (95% CI, 4.3%-48.1%), 33.3% (95% CI, 11.8%-61.6%), and 16.7% (95% CI, 2.1%-48.4%), respectively. Conclusion: Rapid corticosteroid tapering over 1 to 3 weeks is safe and tolerable in RRMM pts receiving DARA SC, with PK, immunogenicity, and safety results consistent with previous reports of DARA SC. These data will help guide treatment with future DARA SC combinations where limiting concurrent corticosteroids may be preferred (ie, T-cell redirectors, CAR-T, or checkpoint inhibitors). Disclosures Nahi: XNK Therapeutics AB: Consultancy. Usmani: Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; SkylineDX: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; EdoPharma: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen Oncology: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; GSK: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene/BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Array BioPharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Mateos: Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene - Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Regeneron: 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; Sea-Gen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Honoraria; Oncopeptides: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bluebird bio: Honoraria; GSK: Honoraria; Oncopeptides: Honoraria. van de Donk: Cellectis: Research Funding; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: 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; Bayer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Moreau: Sanofi: Honoraria; Celgene BMS: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Oncopeptides: Honoraria. Oriol: GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncopeptides: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS/Celgene: 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. Plesner: Janssen: Other: Advisor, Research Funding; Celgene: Other: Advisor, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Other: Advisor, Research Funding; Genentech: Other: Advisor, Research Funding; CSL Behring: Other: Advisor; AbbVie: Other: Advisor, Research Funding; Genmab: Research Funding. Bandyopadhyay: Janssen: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Hellemans: Janssen: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Tromp: Janssen: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Nnane: Janssen: Current Employment. Zemlickis: Janssen: Current Employment. Farnsworth: Janssen: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Chari: Secura Bio: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncopeptides: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millenium/Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi Genzyme: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Antengene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Shattuck Labs: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen Oncology: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Background: Current therapies for multiple myeloma (MM) delay disease progression and prolong survival but most patients (pts) eventually relapse or become refractory (RR). Daratumumab (D), an anti-CD38 antibody (Ab), plus bortezomib (V), a proteasome inhibitor (PI) and dexamethasone (d), is approved for the treatment of MM in pts who have received ≥1 prior line of therapy. Venetoclax (Ven), a potent and selective oral BCL-2 inhibitor, demonstrated anti-myeloma activity in pts with t(11;14) RRMM. This 3-part Phase 1/2 study is investigating the combination therapy VenDd +/- V in pts with RRMM. Treatment of pts with t(11;14) RRMM using VenDd (part 1) and pts with RRMM (irrespective of t(11;14) status; part 2) with VenDVd demonstrated a tolerable safety profile and an overall response rate (ORR) of 95.8% and 91.7%, respectively (Bahlis N et al. J Clin Oncol 2021). Part 3 further evaluates the safety and efficacy of VenDd vs DVd in pts with t(11;14) RRMM, with preliminary results presented here. Methods: Part 3 of this Phase 1/2, multicenter, dose-escalation and expansion study (NCT03314181) evaluates the safety and efficacy of VenDd vs DVd in pts with t(11;14) RRMM. The study was expanded to further interpret the pt safety profile in light of the increased incidence of infections in pts in the Ven arm of the BELLINI study (Kumar SK et al. Lancet Oncol 2020). Pts were randomized 4:2:5 to receive VenDd at 400 (Ven400Dd) or 800 mg (Ven800Dd), or DVd. Randomization was not stratified due to small sample size. Eligible pts must have received ≥1 prior line of therapy, including an immunomodulatory agent (IMiD), and be non-refractory to PIs or anti-CD38 Ab. This interim analysis was conducted to evaluate the safety profile of pts in part 3 only. No statistical comparisons were conducted for safety or efficacy. Treatments in Part 3 were as follows: VenDd cycles (C) were 28-day: daily, oral Ven (400 mg or 800 mg) + D (1800 mg SC [Cycle, C1, 2: Days 1, 8, 15, 22; C3-6: Days 1, 15; C7+: Day 1]) + d (40 mg total weekly); DVd C1 - 8 were 21-day, C9+ were 28-day: D (1800 mg SC [C1 - 3: Days 1, 8, 15; C4 - 8: Day 1; C9+: Day 1]) + V (1.3mg/m 2 [C1 - 8: Days 1, 4, 8 and 11]) + d (20 mg [C1 - 3: Days 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, 12 ,15; C4 - 8: Days 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11,12; C9+: Day 1]). Results: As of 10 May 2021, 11, 7 and 16 pts were enrolled in the Ven400Dd, Ven800Dd and DVd arms, respectively. The median age (range) was Ven400Dd: 58.0 (42 - 75); Ven800Dd: 57 (53 - 82); and DVd: 68.5 (51 - 77). Median prior lines of therapy (range) were 1.0 (1 - 6) in Ven400Dd; 1.0 (1 - 3) in Ven800Dd; and 2.0 (1 - 3) in DVd. Pts with ISS I%/II%/III% disease were Ven400Dd: 54.5/9.1/0; Ven800Dd: 57.1/14.3/0; DVd: 25.0/25.0/31.3. All pts in the Ven400Dd and Ven800Dd arms had an ECOG performance status of ≤1. In the DVd arm, 87.5% and 12.5% of pts had a ECOG performance status of ≤1 and 2, respectively. Prior PI%/IMiD%/anti-CD38 Ab% exposure were Ven400Dd: 100/90.9/0; Ven800Dd: 100/100/0; DVd: 93.8/100/0. The most common adverse events (AEs) occurring in ≥5% of pts in ≥2 treatment groups included insomnia, fatigue, diarrhea, and nausea (Table). Grade 3/4 AEs (≥5% of pts in ≥2 treatment groups) were mainly hematologic toxicities (Table). There were no grade 3/4 infections occurring in ≥2 treatment groups. Serious AEs were observed in a total of 6 pts. In the Ven400Dd arm, 1 pt had a femur fracture and 1 pt had non-cardiac chest pain. In the Ven800Dd arm, 1 pt had febrile neutropenia and 1 pt had tonsil cancer. In the DVd arm, 1 pt had pyrexia and upper respiratory tract infection, and a second pt had hyperglycemia, autonomic neuropathy, distributive shock, disseminated cryptococcosis, and cytomegalovirus infection. No deaths were reported in part 3 of the study. The median treatment duration based on D exposure at the time of data cut was 6.5, 5.6, and 3.9 months for the Ven400Dd, Ven800Dd, and DVd arms, respectively. The preliminary ORR was 72.7%, 100%, and 62.5% for the Ven400Dd, Ven800Dd, and DVd arms. The preliminary rate of very good partial response or better (≥VGPR) was 72.7%, 100%, and 31.3% for the Ven400Dd, Ven800Dd, and DVd arms. Follow-up is still immature, and responses may deepen with time. Conclusion: The preliminary results from part 3 of this novel randomized, phase 2 study of t(11;14)-selected RRMM pts treated with VenDd vs DVd demonstrate a tolerable safety profile. Updated analyses, including response rates with longer follow-up and minimal residual disease status, will be included at presentation. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Kaufman: Roche/Genetech, Tecnopharma: Consultancy, Honoraria; Heidelberg Pharma: Research Funding; Sutro, Takeda: Research Funding; Fortis Therapeutics: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Incyte, TG Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Tecnofarma SAS, AbbVie: Honoraria; Incyte, celgene: Consultancy; Janssen: Honoraria; Genentech, AbbVie, Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Quach: Janssen/Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; CSL: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Antengene: Consultancy, 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, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Baz: GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Honoraria; Oncopeptides: Consultancy; Merck: Research Funding; BMS, sanofi, Karyopharm, Janssen, AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding. Harrison: Janssen Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Eusa: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Terumo BCT: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene/ Juno/ BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Haemalogix: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Plesner: Janssen, Celgene, Takeda, Oncopeptides, AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genmab, Genentech, Roche: Research Funding. Moreau: Oncopeptides: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Celgene BMS: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria. Gibbs: AbbVie: Consultancy; Janssen, Celgene, Amgen, Takeda, BMS and Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria. Sehgal: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company. Kang: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company. Ross: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company. Lash-Fleming: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Luo: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Bahlis: Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria; Genentech: Consultancy; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria. OffLabel Disclosure: Venetoclax is a potent and selective oral BCL-2 inhibitor being investigated in the treatment of relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.

Background: Venetoclax (Ven) is a highly selective, potent, oral BCL-2 inhibitor that is currently being evaluated as a targeted therapy for the treatment of t(11;14) relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). The combination of Ven with daratumumab (D) and dexamethasone (d) has shown promising efficacy with a tolerable safety profile in the phase 1/2 study (NCT03314181). VenDd is hypothesized to have increased anti-myeloma activity based upon complementary mechanisms of pro-apoptotic effects on tumor cells as well as potentially enhanced T-cell activation and clonal expansion, which has been shown to be associated with achieving deep sustained response to D-based therapy in MM. Results presented herein describe the immunomodulatory effects observed upon VenDd treatment in t(11;14) RRMM patients, including effects on the T-cell repertoire. Methods: Peripheral blood samples from t(11;14) RRMM patients (n=18) treated with VenDd (NCT03314181) were collected at day 1 of cycles 1-5 to characterize effects on B-, T-, and NK-cell populations by multicolor flow cytometry. TCRβ sequencing (ImmunoSEQ, Adaptive Biotechnologies) was also conducted on peripheral blood samples collected from t(11;14) RRMM patients (n=31) treated with VenDd at day 1 of cycles 1, 3, 5, and 9 to assess changes in T-cell clonality, defined as the extent of mono- or oligoclonal expansion by Simpson clonality index, and T-cell richness, defined as the number of clones with unique TCRβ rearrangements after computationally down-sampling to a common number of T-cells. Results: Consistent with previous findings with Ven, rapid and sustained depletion of B-cells (CD19+/CD5-) was observed in patients treated with VenDd (median absolute count: 115 cells/ml at baseline vs 13 cells/ml at C2D1 (89% decrease), p Conclusions: Treatment of t(11;14) RRMM patients with VenDd resulted in selective depletion of B-cells, NK-cells, and immunosuppressive regulatory T-cells, but not CD8+ T-cell subsets. Increased T-cell clonality indicates focusing of the T-cell repertoire and generation of an adaptive anti-myeloma immune response upon treatment with VenDd. The study is continuing with a randomized, open-label expansion that will further evaluate the safety and efficacy of VenDd in patients with t(11;14) RRMM, including correlative studies between the observed immune modifications and patient outcome. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Bahlis: Genentech: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Kaufman: Fortis Therapeutics: Research Funding; Sutro, Takeda: Research Funding; Roche/Genetech, Tecnopharma: Consultancy, Honoraria; Heidelberg Pharma: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; Incyte, TG Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Tecnofarma SAS, AbbVie: Honoraria; Amgen: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Incyte, celgene: Consultancy; Genentech, AbbVie, Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Baz: BMS, sanofi, Karyopharm, Janssen, AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Honoraria; Oncopeptides: Consultancy. Quach: Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen/Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; CSL: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Antengene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Plesner: Genmab, Genentech, Roche: Research Funding; Janssen, Celgene, Takeda, Oncopeptides, AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding. Moreau: Celgene BMS: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Oncopeptides: Honoraria. Gibbs: AbbVie: Consultancy; Janssen, Celgene, Amgen, Takeda, BMS and Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria. Bueno: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Luo: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Mantis: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Vishwamitra: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Ross: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company. Harrison: Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Eusa: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Haemalogix: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Terumo BCT: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene/ Juno/ BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. OffLabel Disclosure: Venetoclax is a highly selective, potent, oral BCL-2 inhibitor that is being investigated as therapy for the treatment of relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.

Introduction: The phase 3 MAIA study (NCT02252172) evaluated the addition of daratumumab (D) to lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rd) in patients (pts) with transplant-ineligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). At a median follow-up of 56.2 months, D-Rd prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) versus Rd alone, despite almost half of the pts in the Rd arm who received subsequent therapy receiving a daratumumab-containing regimen as any subsequent line of therapy (Facon T, et al. Presented at: European Hematology Association 2021 Virtual Congress. Abstract LB1901). Approximately 20% to 50% of pts with MM have baseline renal impairment that can affect the choice and efficacy of therapy (Dimopoulos MA, et al. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2016;34[13]:1544-1557). Here, we report results from MAIA for D-Rd vs Rd in pts with impaired renal function based on lenalidomide starting dose at a median follow-up of 56.2 months. Methods: Pts with NDMM ineligible for high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem-cell transplantation due to age ≥65 years or comorbidities were randomized 1:1 to receive D-Rd or Rd. Pts in both arms received 28-day cycles of oral Rd (R: 25 mg [10 mg recommended if creatinine clearance (CrCl) was 30-50 mL/min] on Days 1-21; d: 40 mg [20 mg if aged >75 years or body-mass index Results: 737 pts were randomized (D-Rd, n=368; Rd, n=369); 162 (44%) pts in the D-Rd arm and 142 (38%) pts in the Rd arm had renal impairment as defined. At a median follow-up of 56.2 months, in pts with renal impairment who received a lenalidomide starting dose of 25 mg (25 mg subgroup; D-Rd, n=60 [37%]; Rd, n=62 [44%]), a PFS and OS advantage was observed with D-Rd versus Rd (Table). In pts with renal impairment who received a lenalidomide starting dose of Conclusion: After ~5 years of follow-up, D-Rd showed a PFS improvement versus Rd in transplant-ineligible pts with NDMM and renal impairment regardless of lenalidomide starting dose. An OS advantage for D-Rd versus Rd was observed in pts with renal impairment who received a lenalidomide starting dose of 25 mg; in pts with renal impairment who received a lenalidomide starting dose of Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Usmani: Abbvie: Consultancy; Array BioPharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene/BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; GSK: Consultancy, Research Funding; EdoPharma: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; SkylineDX: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen Oncology: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Kumar: Novartis: Research Funding; KITE: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Beigene: Consultancy; Antengene: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Carsgen: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Tenebio: Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Consultancy; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy; Roche-Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Adaptive: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding. Plesner: CSL Behring: Other: Advisor; Genentech: Other: Advisor, Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Other: Advisor, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Other: Advisor, Research Funding; AbbVie: Other: Advisor, Research Funding; Janssen: Other: Advisor, Research Funding; Genmab: Research Funding. Orlowski: Amgen, Inc., BioTheryX, Inc., Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, EcoR1 Capital LLC, Genzyme, GSK Biologicals, Janssen Biotech, Karyopharm Therapeutics, Inc., Neoleukin Corporation, Oncopeptides AB, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Sanofi-Aventis, and Takeda P: Consultancy, Honoraria; CARsgen Therapeutics, Celgene, Exelixis, Janssen Biotech, Sanofi-Aventis, Takeda Pharmaceuticals North America, Inc.: Other: Clinical research funding; Asylia Therapeutics, Inc., BioTheryX, Inc., and Heidelberg Pharma, AG.: Other: Laboratory research funding; Asylia Therapeutics, Inc.: Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company, Patents & Royalties; Amgen, Inc., BioTheryX, Inc., Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Forma Therapeutics, Genzyme, GSK Biologicals, Janssen Biotech, Juno Therapeutics, Karyopharm Therapeutics, Inc., Kite Pharma, Neoleukin Corporation, Oncopeptides AB, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, I: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Moreau: Abbvie: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Celgene BMS: Honoraria; Oncopeptides: Honoraria. Bahlis: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Genentech: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria. Nahi: XNK Therapeutics AB: Consultancy. Hulin: Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene/BMS: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; abbvie: Honoraria. Quach: GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen/Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; CSL: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Antengene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Goldschmidt: Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Grants and/or Provision of Investigational Medicinal Product, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Dietmar-Hopp-Foundation: Other: Grant; Mundipharma: Research Funding; MSD: Research Funding; Molecular Partners: Research Funding; Johns Hopkins University: Other: Grant; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Grants and/or Provision of Investigational Medicinal Product, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Grants and/or Provision of Investigational Medicinal Product, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Grants and/or Provision of Investigational Medicinal Product, Research Funding; Chugai: Honoraria, Other: Grants and/or Provision of Investigational Medicinal Product, Research Funding; GSK: Honoraria; Incyte: Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnology: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Grants and/or Provision of Investigational Medicinal Product, Research Funding. O'Dwyer: ONK Therapeutics: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy. Perrot: Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria, Research Funding; GSK: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS Celgene: 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; Abbvie: Honoraria. Venner: Janssen: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Celgene: Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Amgen: Research Funding. Weisel: Novartis: Honoraria; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Consultancy; Roche: Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GSK: 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, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria. Raje: Celgene, Amgen, Bluebird Bio, Janssen, Caribou, and BMS: Other. Macro: Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Travel accomodation, Research Funding; GSK: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Celgen/BMS: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel accomodation, Research Funding. Leleu: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Carsgen Therapeutics Ltd: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Gilead Sciences: Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Honoraria; Merck: Honoraria; Mundipharma: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Oncopeptides: Honoraria; Pierre Fabre: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; AbbVie: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Non-financial support. Pei: Janssen: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Van Rampelbergh: Janssen: Current Employment. Tromp: Janssen: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Delioukina: Janssen: Current Employment.

PURPOSE Venetoclax is an oral BCL-2 inhibitor with single-agent activity in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) with t(11;14) translocation. Venetoclax efficacy in RRMM may be potentiated through combination with agents including bortezomib, dexamethasone, and daratumumab. METHODS This phase I study ( NCT03314181 ) evaluated venetoclax with daratumumab and dexamethasone (VenDd) in patients with t(11;14) RRMM and VenDd with bortezomib (VenDVd) in cytogenetically unselected patients with RRMM. Primary objectives included expansion-phase dosing, safety, and overall response rate. Secondary objectives included further safety analysis, progression-free survival, duration of response, time to progression, and minimal residual disease negativity. RESULTS Forty-eight patients were enrolled, 24 each in parts 1 (VenDd) and 2 (VenDVd). There was one dose-limiting toxicity in part 1 (grade 3 febrile neutropenia, 800 mg VenDd). Common adverse events with VenDd and VenDVd included diarrhea (63% and 54%) and nausea (50% and 50%); grade ≥ 3 adverse events were observed in 88% in the VenDd group and 71% in the VenDVd group. One treatment-emergent death occurred in part 2 (sepsis) in the context of progressive disease, with no other infection-related deaths on study with medians of 20.9 and 20.4 months of follow-up in parts 1 and 2, respectively. The overall response rate was 96% with VenDd (all very good partial response or better [≥ VGPR]) and 92% with VenDVd (79% ≥ VGPR). The 18-month progression-free survival rate was 90.5% (95% CI, 67.0 to 97.5) with VenDd and 66.7% (95% CI, 42.5 to 82.5) with VenDVd. CONCLUSION VenDd and VenDVd produced a high rate of deep and durable responses in patients with RRMM. These results support continued evaluation of venetoclax with daratumumab regimens to treat RRMM, particularly in those with t(11;14).

Summary An updated survival analysis was conducted for the Phase II study O‐12‐M1 of melphalan flufenamide (melflufen) plus dexamethasone in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) with two or more prior lines of therapy (including bortezomib and lenalidomide). Partial response or better was seen in 31%. After a 46‐month median overall survival (OS) follow‐up, melflufen plus dexamethasone had a median OS of 20·7 months (75th percentile OS, 47·5 months). The median time‐to‐next treatment for melflufen plus dexamethasone was 7·9 months. In summary, melflufen plus dexamethasone resulted in sustained long‐term clinical benefit in patients with RRMM.

Introduction: Daratumumab (DARA) is a human, CD38-targeting, IgG1κ monoclonal antibody approved as monotherapy in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) and in combination with standard of care for RRMM and NDMM. The addition of DARA to standard-of-care regimens in phase 3 studies has consistently improved progression-free survival (PFS) and led to deep and durable responses, including higher rates of minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity compared with standard of care. In the primary analysis of the phase 3 MAIA study (median follow-up, 28.0 mo), D-Rd vs Rd significantly improved PFS and MRD-negativity rates in transplant-ineligible NDMM (Facon T, N Engl J Med 2019). With longer follow-up (36.4 mo), D-Rd maintained a PFS benefit and deeper and more durable responses vs Rd alone (Bahlis N, Blood 2019. 134[Suppl 1]:1875). Here, we report updated efficacy and safety findings from MAIA after approximately 4 years of follow-up. Methods: Patients with NDMM ineligible for high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation due to age ≥65 years or comorbidities were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive Rd ± DARA. Stratification factors included International Staging System stage (ISS [I vs II vs III]), region (North America vs other), and age ( Results: A total of 737 patients were randomized (D-Rd, n = 368; Rd, n = 369). Patient baseline characteristics were well balanced between the two treatment arms. Median (range) age was 73 (45-90) years, with 44% of patients ≥75 years of age. 27%, 43%, and 29% of all patients were ISS stage I, II, and III, respectively. Among 642 patients evaluable for FISH/karyotyping analysis, 86% had standard and 14% had high cytogenetic risk. After a median follow-up of 47.9 months, 176 (48%) and 273 (75%) patients discontinued study treatment in the D-Rd vs Rd groups, respectively, with 85 (23%) and 113 (31%) patients discontinuing treatment due to progressive disease. PFS remained improved for D-Rd vs Rd (median, not reached [NR] vs 34 mo; HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.43-0.67; P Grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs; D-Rd/Rd) occurring in ≥10% of patients were neutropenia (53%/37%), pneumonia (18%/11%), anemia (16%/21%), lymphopenia (16%/11%), hypokalemia (12%/10%), leukopenia (11%/6%), and cataract (11%/10%); grade 3/4 infection rates were 40%/29%. The most common serious TEAE was pneumonia (17%/11%). 11% of patients in the D-Rd arm and 22% in the Rd arm discontinued treatment due to an adverse event. The complete updated data set will be presented at the meeting with additional efficacy endpoints, including MRD-negativity rate. Conclusion : After 48 months follow up, the addition of DARA to Rd continues to demonstrate a superior PFS benefit. More patients continued to have deeper and more durable responses with D-Rd vs Rd alone. No new safety concerns were observed with longer follow-up. These results continue to support the use of D-Rd in the first line of treatment for patients with transplant-ineligible NDMM. Disclosures Kumar: Sanofi: Research Funding; Carsgen: Other, Research Funding; Cellectar: Other; Celgene/BMS: Other: Research funding for clinical trials to the institution, Consulting/Advisory Board participation with no personal payments; Genentech/Roche: Other: Research funding for clinical trials to the institution, Consulting/Advisory Board participation with no personal payments; Takeda: Other: Research funding for clinical trials to the institution, Consulting/Advisory Board participation with no personal payments; Janssen Oncology: Other: Research funding for clinical trials to the institution, Consulting/Advisory Board participation with no personal payments; Novartis: Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Consultancy, Other: Independent Review Committee; IRC member; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Other: Research funding for clinical trials to the institution, Consulting/Advisory Board participation with no personal payments; Tenebio: Other, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; MedImmune: Research Funding; Genecentrix: Consultancy; Dr. Reddy's Laboratories: Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Other: Research funding for clinical trials to the institution, Consulting/Advisory Board participation with no personal payments, Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy. Facon:Celgene, Janssen, Takeda, Amgen, Roche, Karyopharm, Oncopeptides, BMS, Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Usmani:Abbvie: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Speaking Fees, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Speaking Fees, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Other; GSK: Consultancy, Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS, Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Speaking Fees, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Speaking Fees, Research Funding; SkylineDX: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Array Biopharma: Research Funding. Plesner:Janssen: Consultancy. Orlowski:Founder of Asylia Therapeutics, Inc., with associated patents and an equity interest, though this technology does not bear on the current submission.: Current equity holder in private company, Patents & Royalties; STATinMED Research: Consultancy; Laboratory research funding from BioTheryX, and clinical research funding from CARsgen Therapeutics, Celgene, Exelixis, Janssen Biotech, Sanofi-Aventis, Takeda Pharmaceuticals North America, Inc.: Research Funding; Amgen, Inc., AstraZeneca, BMS, Celgene, EcoR1 Capital LLC, Forma Therapeutics, Genzyme, GSK Biologicals, Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Janssen Biotech, Juno Therapeutics, Kite Pharma, Legend Biotech USA, Molecular Partners, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.,: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi-Aventis, Servier, Takeda Pharmaceuticals North America, Inc.: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Touzeau:Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Honoraria, Research Funding. Bahlis:BMS/Celgene and Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accomodations, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria. Goldschmidt:Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Grants and/or provision of Investigational Medicinal Product:, Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Johns Hopkins University: Other: Grants and/or provision of Investigational Medicinal Product; Incyte: Research Funding; University Hospital Heidelberg, Internal Medicine V and National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany: Current Employment; GlaxoSmithKline (GSK): Honoraria; Adaptive Biotechnology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Grants and/or provision of Investigational Medicinal Product, Research Funding; Mundipharma GmbH: Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Chugai: Honoraria, Other: Grants and/or provision of Investigational Medicinal Product:, Research Funding; Dietmar-Hopp-Foundation: Other: Grants and/or provision of Investigational Medicinal Product:; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Grants and/or provision of Investigational Medicinal Product:, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Grants and/or provision of Investigational Medicinal Product:, Research Funding; Molecular Partners: Research Funding; Merck Sharp and Dohme (MSD): Research Funding. O'Dwyer:Celgene: Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); BMS: Research Funding; Carrick Therapeutics: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Janssen: Consultancy, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); AbbVie: Consultancy; ONK Therapeutics: Consultancy, Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding. Venner:Celgene, Amgen: Research Funding; Janssen, BMS/Celgene, Sanofi, Takeda, Amgen: Honoraria. Weisel:Adaptive: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria; GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria. Hulin:Celgene/Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen, GlaxoSmithKline, and Takeda: Honoraria. Karlin:GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support, personal fees; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support, personal fees; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support, personal fees; Celgene: Other: Personal fees; Sanofi: Honoraria; AbbVie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support; Celgene/Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support. Preis:Janssen: Other: for factor XI inhibitor. Broyl:Janssen, Celgene, Takeda, Amgen: Honoraria. Hansson:Amgen, Celgene, Takeda, Janssen Cilag: Consultancy. Krevvata:Janssen: Current Employment. Wang:Janssen: Current Employment. Van Rampelbergh:Janssen: Current Employment. Ukropec:Janssen: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Uhlar:Janssen: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Kobos:Janssen: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Perrot:Amgen, BMS/Celgene, Janssen, Sanofi, Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding.

BACKGROUND: Lenalidomide plus dexamethasone is a standard treatment for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who are ineligible for autologous stem-cell transplantation. We sought to determine whether the addition of daratumumab would significantly reduce the risk of disease progression or death in this population.METHODS: We randomly assigned 737 patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were ineligible for autologous stem-cell transplantation to receive daratumumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone (daratumumab group) or lenalidomide and dexamethasone alone (control group). Treatment was to continue until the occurrence of disease progression or unacceptable side effects. The primary end point was progression-free survival.RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 28.0 months, disease progression or death had occurred in 240 patients (97 of 368 patients [26.4%] in the daratumumab group and 143 of 369 patients [38.8%] in the control group). The estimated percentage of patients who were alive without disease progression at 30 months was 70.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 65.0 to 75.4) in the daratumumab group and 55.6% (95% CI, 49.5 to 61.3) in the control group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.73; PCONCLUSIONS: Among patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were ineligible for autologous stem-cell transplantation, the risk of disease progression or death was significantly lower among those who received daratumumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone than among those who received lenalidomide and dexamethasone alone. A higher incidence of neutropenia and pneumonia was observed in the daratumumab group. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; MAIA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02252172.).

8044 Background: In the phase 3 MAIA study, adding DARA to Rd improved progression-free survival (primary endpoint), overall survival, duration of response, and PROs in transplant-ineligible pts with NDMM. We report a MAIA subgroup analysis of time to response, duration of response, and PROs. Methods: Transplant-ineligible pts with NDMM received 28-day cycles of Rd (R 25 mg PO on Days 1-21; d 40 mg PO QW) ± DARA (16 mg/kg IV QW in Cycles 1-2, Q2W in Cycles 3-6, and Q4W thereafter) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Secondary endpoints included time to response and duration of response. PROs were measured using the EORTC QLQ-C30, with treatment effects assessed via mixed-effects model with repeated measures. Results: In total, 368 pts were assigned to the D-Rd group and 369 pts to the Rd group; 162 (44%) D-Rd pts and 142 (38%) Rd pts had renal impairment (defined as baseline CrCl ≤60 mL/min). At a 56.2-mo median follow-up, median times to very good partial response or better (≥VGPR) and complete response or better (≥CR) were shorter with D-Rd vs Rd in the overall study population and in the subgroups of pts with and without renal impairment (Table). Among pts who achieved ≥CR or partial response or better (≥PR), higher proportions of D-Rd vs Rd pts had not experienced disease progression at 48 mo (Table). Among pts with renal impairment, greater improvements from baseline in pt-reported pain, fatigue, and nausea and vomiting symptom scores were observed with D-Rd vs Rd across most timepoints; a notably greater meaningful reduction in pain symptom score was seen with D-Rd vs Rd as early as Cycle 6 Day 1 (least squares mean change from baseline, −14.9 vs −7.0; P=0.0241). Analyses for additional pt subgroups will be presented. Conclusions: In transplant-ineligible pts with NDMM, D-Rd showed more rapid deep responses as well as more durable responses vs Rd, regardless of renal function. Improvements in pt-reported symptoms were generally greater with D-Rd vs Rd in pts with renal impairment. Our results support the use of D-Rd in transplant-ineligible pts with NDMM. Clinical trial information: NCT02252172. [Table: see text]