The approach to the patient with relapsed or relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma requires a careful evaluation of the results of previous treatments, the toxicities associated with it, and an ...assessment of prognostic factors. The majority of patients will have received prior therapy with drug combinations, including a proteasome inhibitor and an immune-modulatory agent. It is the physician's task to choose the right moment for the start of therapy and decide with the patient which goals need to be achieved. The choice of regimen is usually based on prior response, drugs already received, adverse effects, comorbidities of the patient, and expected efficacy and tolerability. Many double and triple drug combinations are available. In addition, promising new drugs such as pomalidomide, carfilzomib, and monoclonal antibodies are or will be available shortly, and other options can be explored in clinical trials. Finally, supportive care and palliative options need to be considered in later relapsed disease. Increasingly, it becomes important to consider the therapeutic options for the whole duration of the disease and integrate a systematic approach for the patient.
The approach to the patient with relapsed or relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) requires a careful evaluation of the results of previous treatments, the toxicities associated with them and ...an assessment of prognostic factors. Since the majority of patients will have received prior therapy with drug combinations including a proteasome inhibitor and/or an immunomodulatory drug (IMiD), it is the physician's task to choose the right moment for the start of therapy and define with the patient which goals need to be achieved. The choice of regimen is usually based on prior responsiveness, drugs already received, prior adverse effects, the condition of the patient and expected effectiveness and tolerability. Many double and triple drug combinations are available. In addition, promising new drugs like pomalidomide, carfilzomib and monoclonal antibodies are, or will be, available shortly, while other options can be tried in clinical studies. Finally, supportive care and palliative options need to be considered in some patients. It is becoming increasingly more important to consider the therapeutic options for the whole duration of the disease rather than take a step by step approach, and to develop a systematic approach for each individual patient.
In a study involving patients with refractory multiple myeloma, the anti-CD38 antibody daratumumab in combination with bortezomib and dexamethasone resulted in longer progression-free survival and a ...higher rate of response than bortezomib and dexamethasone alone.
Multiple myeloma is associated with organ dysfunction, including bone lesions, anemia, renal insufficiency, and hypercalcemia.
1
,
2
Proteasome inhibitors (e.g., bortezomib) in combination with glucocorticoids are standard regimens for relapsed or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma
3
(definitions of these terms are provided in the Supplementary Appendix, available with the full text of this article at NEJM.org) and have contributed considerably to patient survival.
4
Nevertheless, almost all patients will have a relapse.
Daratumumab is a human IgGκ monoclonal antibody that targets CD38, which is highly expressed on myeloma cells and other hematopoietic cell types.
5
,
6
Daratumumab has direct and indirect antitumor activity and diverse . . .
Summary Treatment of multiple myeloma has substantially changed over the past decade with the introduction of several classes of new effective drugs that have greatly improved the rates and depth of ...response. Response criteria in multiple myeloma were developed to use serum and urine assessment of monoclonal proteins and bone marrow assessment (which is relatively insensitive). Given the high rates of complete response seen in patients with multiple myeloma with new treatment approaches, new response categories need to be defined that can identify responses that are deeper than those conventionally defined as complete response. Recent attempts have focused on the identification of residual tumour cells in the bone marrow using flow cytometry or gene sequencing. Furthermore, sensitive imaging techniques can be used to detect the presence of residual disease outside of the bone marrow. Combining these new methods, the International Myeloma Working Group has defined new response categories of minimal residual disease negativity, with or without imaging-based absence of extramedullary disease, to allow uniform reporting within and outside clinical trials. In this Review, we clarify several aspects of disease response assessment, along with endpoints for clinical trials, and highlight future directions for disease response assessments.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK, ZRSKP
Patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) show heterogeneous outcomes, and approximately 60% of them are at intermediate-risk according to the Revised International Staging system ...(R-ISS), the standard-of-care risk stratification model. Moreover, chromosome 1q gain/amplification (1q+) recently proved to be a poor prognostic factor. In this study, we revised the R-ISS by analyzing the additive value of each single risk feature, including 1q+.
The European Myeloma Network, within the HARMONY project, collected individual data from 10,843 patients with NDMM enrolled in 16 clinical trials. An additive scoring system on the basis of top features predicting progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) was developed and validated.
In the training set (N = 7,072), at a median follow-up of 75 months, ISS, del(17p), lactate dehydrogenase, t(4;14), and 1q+ had the highest impact on PFS and OS. These variables were all simultaneously present in 2,226 patients. A value was assigned to each risk feature according to their OS impact (ISS-III 1.5, ISS-II 1, del(17p) 1, high lactate dehydrogenase 1, and 1q+ 0.5 points). Patients were stratified into four risk groups according to the total additive score: low (Second Revision of the International Staging System R2-ISS-I, 19.2%, 0 points), low-intermediate (II, 30.8%, 0.5-1 points), intermediate-high (III, 41.2%, 1.5-2.5 points), high (IV, 8.8%, 3-5 points). Median OS was not reached versus 109.2 versus 68.5 versus 37.9 months, and median PFS was 68 versus 45.5 versus 30.2 versus 19.9 months, respectively. The score was validated in an independent validation set (N = 3,771, of whom 1,214 were with complete data to calculate R2-ISS) maintaining its prognostic value.
The R2-ISS is a simple prognostic staging system allowing a better stratification of patients with intermediate-risk NDMM. The additive nature of this score fosters its future implementation with new prognostic variables.
The clinical outcome of multiple myeloma (MM) is heterogeneous. A simple and reliable tool is needed to stratify patients with MM. We combined the International Staging System (ISS) with chromosomal ...abnormalities (CA) detected by interphase fluorescent in situ hybridization after CD138 plasma cell purification and serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) to evaluate their prognostic value in newly diagnosed MM (NDMM).
Clinical and laboratory data from 4,445 patients with NDMM enrolled onto 11 international trials were pooled together. The K-adaptive partitioning algorithm was used to define the most appropriate subgroups with homogeneous survival.
ISS, CA, and LDH data were simultaneously available in 3,060 of 4,445 patients. We defined the following three groups: revised ISS (R-ISS) I (n = 871), including ISS stage I (serum β2-microglobulin level < 3.5 mg/L and serum albumin level ≥ 3.5 g/dL), no high-risk CA del(17p) and/or t(4;14) and/or t(14;16), and normal LDH level (less than the upper limit of normal range); R-ISS III (n = 295), including ISS stage III (serum β2-microglobulin level > 5.5 mg/L) and high-risk CA or high LDH level; and R-ISS II (n = 1,894), including all the other possible combinations. At a median follow-up of 46 months, the 5-year OS rate was 82% in the R-ISS I, 62% in the R-ISS II, and 40% in the R-ISS III groups; the 5-year PFS rates were 55%, 36%, and 24%, respectively.
The R-ISS is a simple and powerful prognostic staging system, and we recommend its use in future clinical studies to stratify patients with NDMM effectively with respect to the relative risk to their survival.
Understanding the profile of oncogene and tumor suppressor gene mutations with their interactions and impact on the prognosis of multiple myeloma (MM) can improve the definition of disease subsets ...and identify pathways important in disease pathobiology. Using integrated genomics of 1273 newly diagnosed patients with MM, we identified 63 driver genes, some of which are novel, including IDH1, IDH2, HUWE1, KLHL6, and PTPN11. Oncogene mutations are significantly more clonal than tumor suppressor mutations, indicating they may exert a bigger selective pressure. Patients with more driver gene abnormalities are associated with worse outcomes, as are identified mechanisms of genomic instability. Oncogenic dependencies were identified between mutations in driver genes, common regions of copy number change, and primary translocation and hyperdiploidy events. These dependencies included associations with t(4;14) and mutations in FGFR3, DIS3, and PRKD2; t(11;14) with mutations in CCND1 and IRF4; t(14;16) with mutations in MAF, BRAF, DIS3, and ATM; and hyperdiploidy with gain 11q, mutations in FAM46C, and MYC rearrangements. These associations indicate that the genomic landscape of myeloma is predetermined by the primary events upon which further dependencies are built, giving rise to a nonrandom accumulation of genetic hits. Understanding these dependencies may elucidate potential evolutionary patterns and lead to better treatment regimens.
•Using the largest set of patients with newly diagnosed myeloma, we identified 63 mutated driver genes.•We identified oncogenic dependencies, particularly relating to primary translocations, indicating a nonrandom accumulation of genetic hits.
Display omitted
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UILJ, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK, ZAGLJ, ZRSKP
Patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) with high-risk disease are in need of new treatment strategies to improve the outcomes. Multiple clinical, cytogenetic, or gene expression ...features have been used to identify high-risk patients, each of which has significant weaknesses. Inclusion of molecular features into risk stratification could resolve the current challenges. In a genome-wide analysis of the largest set of molecular and clinical data established to date from NDMM, as part of the Myeloma Genome Project, we have defined DNA drivers of aggressive clinical behavior. Whole-genome and exome data from 1273 NDMM patients identified genetic factors that contribute significantly to progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) (cumulative R
= 18.4% and 25.2%, respectively). Integrating DNA drivers and clinical data into a Cox model using 784 patients with ISS, age, PFS, OS, and genomic data, the model has a cumlative R
of 34.3% for PFS and 46.5% for OS. A high-risk subgroup was defined by recursive partitioning using either a) bi-allelic TP53 inactivation or b) amplification (≥4 copies) of CKS1B (1q21) on the background of International Staging System III, comprising 6.1% of the population (median PFS = 15.4 months; OS = 20.7 months) that was validated in an independent dataset. Double-Hit patients have a dire prognosis despite modern therapies and should be considered for novel therapeutic approaches.
Full text
Available for:
EMUNI, FIS, FZAB, GEOZS, GIS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, MFDPS, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, SBMB, SBNM, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK, VKSCE, ZAGLJ
With advent of several treatment options in multiple myeloma (MM), a selection of effective regimen has become an important issue. Use of gene expression profile (GEP) is considered an important tool ...in predicting outcome; however, it is unclear whether such genomic analysis alone can adequately predict therapeutic response. We evaluated the ability of GEP to predict complete response (CR) in MM. GEP from pretreatment MM cells from 136 uniformly treated MM patients with response data on an IFM, France led study were analyzed. To evaluate variability in predictive power due to microarray platform or treatment types, additional data sets from three different studies (n=511) were analyzed using same methods. We used several machine learning methods to derive a prediction model using training and test subsets of the original four data sets. Among all methods employed for GEP-based CR predictive capability, we got accuracy range of 56-78% in test data sets and no significant difference with regard to GEP platforms, treatment regimens or in newly diagnosed or relapsed patients. Importantly, permuted P-value showed no statistically significant CR predictive information in GEP data. This analysis suggests that GEP-based signature has limited power to predict CR in MM, highlighting the need to develop comprehensive predictive model using integrated genomics approach.
Full text
Available for:
DOBA, EMUNI, FIS, FZAB, GEOZS, GIS, IJS, IMTLJ, IZUM, KILJ, KISLJ, MFDPS, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, SBMB, SBNM, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK, VKSCE, ZAGLJ
PDF
