Patients with multiple myeloma who are refractory to currently available effective therapies have short expected survival. Modalities harvesting the knowledge of the immune characteristics and ...microenvironment of myeloma such as chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T‐lymphocytes, bispecific antibodies (bsAbs), and antibody‐drug conjugates (ADCs) have shown potential in early phase trials. Based on data from phase 2 studies, idecabtagene vicleucel (ide cel), an anti‐B‐cell maturation antigen CAR T‐product and belantamab mafodotin (belamaf), an ADC are currently approved in the relapsed/refractory setting. bsAbs have shown promise with quick and deep responses. In this review, we summarize the available evidence on these treatments from clinical trials.
With the improving survival of patients with myeloma, there is a need for the development of multiple different drug combinations for continued treatment and disease control. Reusing previously used ...drugs, especially as part of new combinations, is an attractive strategy.
We conducted a pooled analysis of 869 individual newly diagnosed elderly patient data from 3 prospective trials. At diagnosis, a geriatric assessment had been performed. An additive scoring system ...(range 0-5), based on age, comorbidities, and cognitive and physical conditions, was developed to identify 3 groups: fit (score = 0, 39%), intermediate fitness (score = 1, 31%), and frail (score ≥2, 30%). The 3-year overall survival was 84% in fit, 76% in intermediate-fitness (hazard ratio HR, 1.61; P = .042), and 57% in frail (HR, 3.57; P < .001) patients. The cumulative incidence of grade ≥3 nonhematologic adverse events at 12 months was 22.2% in fit, 26.4% in intermediate-fitness (HR, 1.23; P = .217), and 34.0% in frail (HR, 1.74; P < .001) patients. The cumulative incidence of treatment discontinuation at 12 months was 16.5% in fit, 20.8% in intermediate-fitness (HR, 1.41; P = .052), and 31.2% in frail (HR, 2.21; P < .001) patients. Our frailty score predicts mortality and the risk of toxicity in elderly myeloma patients. The International Myeloma Working group proposes this score for the measurement of frailty in designing future clinical trials. These trials are registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01093196 (EMN01), #NCT01190787 (26866138MMY2069), and #NCT01346787 (IST-CAR-506).
•Elderly patients with myeloma are heterogeneous and assessment strategies are needed to define the frailty profile.•The proposed frailty score aims to better assess patients and provide them with more suitable therapies.
In light of major advances in immunoglobulin light chain (AL) amyloidosis, we evaluated the trends in presentation, management, and outcome among 1551 newly diagnosed AL amyloidosis patients seen in ...our institution from 2000 to 2014. As compared with the 2 intervals 2000-2004 and 2005-2009, patients diagnosed in 2010-2014 were less likely to have >2 involved organs. Utilization of autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) was similar across all periods, about one-third of patients, but there was an increase in the use of pre-ASCT bortezomib induction and of unattenuated melphalan conditioning in 2010-2014 compared with earlier periods. Non-ASCT first-line regimen changed with 65% of patients in 2010-2014 received bortezomib-based therapy, 79% of patients in 2005-2009 received melphalan-dexamethasone, and 64% of patients in 2000-2004 received melphalan-prednisone. The rate of better than very good partial response (VGPR) was higher in more recent periods (66% vs 58% vs 51%; P = .001), a change largely driven by improved VGPR rates in the non-ASCT population. Overall survival (OS) has improved, with inflection points for improvement differing for the ASCT and non-ASCT groups. In the ASCT population, the greatest gains were after 2010 (4-year OS, 91% compared with 73% and 65%). In the non-ASCT group, greatest gains were after 2005 (4-year OS, 38%, 32%, and 16%). Fewer patients died within 6 months of diagnosis in the 2 later periods (24% vs 25% vs 37%; P < .001). Overall, outcomes among patients with AL amyloidosis have improved with earlier diagnosis, higher rates of VGPR, lower early mortality, and improved OS.
•Significant improvement in outcome is a reality for newly diagnosed AL amyloidosis in the past decade.•Six-month mortality among transplant ineligible patients has declined since 2005.
Despite improved treatments, most patients with multiple myeloma (MM) will experience relapse. Several novel agents have demonstrated activity and tolerability in early phase clinical trials. ...Venetoclax is a B-cell lymphoma 2 (Bcl-2) inhibitor with activity in patients with t(11;14) and/or Bcl-2 expression. Iberdomide and mezigdomide are cereblon E3 ligase modulators with higher potency, immunomodulatory, and antiproliferative activity compared with lenalidomide and pomalidomide. They have shown promising activity in heavily pretreated patients. Modakafusp alfa is an immunocytokine that targets interferons to CD38+ cells. It has demonstrated single agent activity in relapsed/refractory MM in the phase 1 setting.
Summary Background The combination of bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone is a highly effective therapy for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Ixazomib is an investigational, oral, proteasome ...inhibitor with promising anti-myeloma effects and low rates of peripheral neuropathy. In a phase 1/2 trial we aimed to assess the safety, tolerability, and activity of ixazomib in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Methods We enrolled patients newly diagnosed with multiple myeloma aged 18 years or older with measurable disease, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0–2, and no grade 2 or higher peripheral neuropathy, and treated them with oral ixazomib (days 1, 8, 15) plus lenalidomide 25 mg (days 1–21) and dexamethasone 40 mg (days 1, 8, 15, 22) for up to 12 28-day cycles, followed by maintenance therapy with ixazomib alone. In phase 1, we gave patients escalating doses of ixazomib (1·68–3·95 mg/m2 ) to establish the recommended dose for phase 2. The primary endpoints were maximum tolerated dose for phase 1, and the rate of very good partial response or better for phase 2. Safety analyses were done in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug; efficacy analyses were done in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug at the phase 2 dose, had measurable disease at baseline, and had at least one post-baseline response assessment. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT01217957. Findings Between Nov 22, 2010, and Feb 28, 2012, we enrolled 65 patients (15 to phase 1 and 50 to phase 2). Four dose-limiting toxic events were noted in phase 1: one at a dose of ixazomib of 2·97 mg/m2 and three at 3·95 mg/m2 . The maximum tolerated dose of ixazomib was established as 2·97 mg/m2 and the recommended phase 2 dose was 2·23 mg/m2 , which was converted to a 4·0 mg fixed dose based on population pharmacokinetic results. Grade 3 or higher adverse events related to any drug were reported in 41 (63%) patients, including skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders (11 patients, 17%), neutropenia (eight patients, 12%), and thrombocytopenia (five patients, 8%); drug-related peripheral neuropathy of grade 3 or higher occurred in four (6%) patients. Five patients discontinued because of adverse events. In 64 response-evaluable patients, 37 (58%, 95% CI 45–70) had a very good partial response or better. Interpretation The all-oral combination of weekly ixazomib plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone was generally well tolerated and appeared active in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. These results support the phase 3 trial development of this combination for multiple myeloma. Funding Millennium Pharmaceuticals, a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical International Company.
Substantial improvements in survival have been seen in multiple myeloma (MM) over recent years, associated with the introduction and widespread use of multiple novel agents and regimens, as well as ...the emerging treatment paradigm of continuous or long-term therapy. However, these therapies and approaches may have limitations in the community setting, associated with toxicity burden, patient burden, and other factors including cost. Consequently, despite improvements in efficacy in the rigorously controlled clinical trials setting, the same results are not always achieved in real-world practice. Furthermore, the large number of different treatment options and regimens under investigation in various MM settings precludes the feasibility of obtaining head-to-head clinical trial data, and there is a temptation to use cross-trial comparisons to evaluate data across regimens. However, multiple aspects, including patient-related, disease-related, and treatment-related factors, can influence clinical trial outcomes and lead to differences between studies that may confound direct comparisons between data. In this review, we explore the various factors requiring attention when evaluating clinical trial data across available agents/regimens, as well as other considerations that may impact the translation of these findings into everyday MM management. We also investigate discrepancies between clinical trial efficacy and real-world effectiveness through a literature review of non-clinical trial data in relapsed/refractory MM on novel agent-based regimens and evaluate these data in the context of phase 3 trial results for recently approved and commonly used regimens. We thereby demonstrate the complexity of interpreting data across clinical studies in MM, as well as between clinical studies and routine-care analyses, with the aim to help clinicians consider all the necessary issues when tailoring individual patients' treatment approaches.
Venetoclax is a highly selective, potent, oral BCL-2 inhibitor, which induces apoptosis in multiple myeloma cells. Venetoclax plus bortezomib and dexamethasone has shown encouraging clinical efficacy ...with acceptable safety and tolerability in a phase 1 trial. The aim of this study was to evaluate venetoclax plus bortezomib and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma.
In this randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3 trial, patients aged 18 years or older with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or less, who had received one to three previous therapies were enrolled from 90 hospitals in 16 countries. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (2:1) centrally using an interactive response technology system and a block size of three to receive venetoclax (800 mg per day orally) or placebo with bortezomib (1·3 mg/m2 subcutaneously or intravenously and dexamethasone (20 mg orally). Treatment was given in 21-day cycles for the first eight cycles and 35-day cycles from the ninth cycle until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or patient withdrawal. Randomisation was stratified by previous exposure to a proteasome inhibitor and the number of previous therapies. Sponsors, investigators, study site personnel, and patients were masked to the treatment allocation throughout the study. The primary endpoint was independent review committee-assessed progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses were done in patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02755597.
Between July 19, 2016, and Oct 31, 2017, 291 patients were randomly assigned to receive venetoclax (n=194) or placebo (n=97). With a median follow-up of 18·7 months (IQR 16·6–21·0), median progression-free survival according to independent review committee was 22·4 months (95% CI 15·3–not estimable) with venetoclax versus 11·5 months (9·6–15·0) with placebo (hazard ratio HR 0·63 95% CI 0·44–0·90; p=0·010). The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-emergent adverse events were neutropenia (35 18% of 193 patients in the venetoclax group vs seven 7% of 96 patients in the placebo group), pneumonia (30 16% vs nine 9%), thrombocytopenia (28 15% vs 29 30%), anaemia (28 15% vs 14 15%), and diarrhoea (28 15% vs 11 11%). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 93 (48%) patients in the venetoclax group and 48 (50%) patients in the placebo group, with eight (4%) treatment-emergent fatal infections reported in the venetoclax group and none reported in the placebo group. Three deaths in the venetoclax group (two from pneumonia and one from septic shock) were considered treatment-related; no deaths in the placebo group were treatment-related.
The primary endpoint was met with a significant improvement in independent review committee-assessed progression-free survival with venetoclax versus placebo plus bortezomib and dexamethasone. However, increased mortality was seen in the venetoclax group, mostly because of an increased rate of infections, highlighting the importance of appropriate selection of patients for this treatment option.
AbbVie and Genentech.
Treatments for myeloma have expanded in the last decade, but it is not clear if the introduction of novel therapies and the increased use of high-dose therapy have translated into better outcome for ...patients with myeloma. We examined the outcome of 2 groups of patients seen at a single institution, one from time of diagnosis and the other from the time of relapse, to examine the survival trends over time. Among 387 patients relapsing after stem-cell transplantation, a clear improvement in overall survival from the time of relapse was seen, with those relapsing after 2000 having a median overall survival of 23.9 versus 11.8 months (P < .001) for those who relapsed prior to this date. This improvement was independent of other prognostic factors. Patients treated with one or more of the newer drugs (thalidomide, lenalidomide, bortezomib) had longer survival from relapse (30.9 vs 14.8 months; P < .001). In a larger group of 2981 patients with newly diagnosed myeloma, those diagnosed in the last decade had a 50% improvement in overall survival (44.8 vs 29.9 months; P < .001). In this study, we demonstrate improved outcome of patients with myeloma in recent years, both in the relapsed setting as well as at diagnosis.
PDF
