Search

Gain of chromosome 1q (+1q) is one of the most common recurrent cytogenetic abnormalities in multiple myeloma (MM), occurring in approximately 40% of newly diagnosed cases. Although it is often considered a poor prognostic marker in MM, +1q has not been uniformly adopted as a high-risk cytogenetic abnormality in guidelines. Controversy exists regarding the importance of copy number, as well as whether +1q is itself a driver of poor outcomes or merely a common passenger genetic abnormality in biologically unstable disease. Although the identification of a clear pathogenic mechanism from +1q remains elusive, many genes at the 1q21 locus have been proposed to cause early progression and resistance to anti-myeloma therapy. The plethora of potential drivers suggests that +1q is not only a causative factor or poor outcomes in MM but may be targetable and/or predictive of response to novel therapies. This review will summarize our current understanding of the pathogenesis of +1q in plasma cell neoplasms, the impact of 1q copy number, identify potential genetic drivers of poor outcomes within this subset, and attempt to clarify its clinical significance and implications for the management of patients with multiple myeloma.

Hamza Hashmi,1 Muhammad Husnain,2 Ali Khan,3 Saad Z Usmani3 1Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA; 2Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA; 3Division of Plasma Cell Disorders, Levine Cancer Institute/Atrium Health, Charlotte, NC, USACorrespondence: Saad Z UsmaniClinical Research in Hematologic Malignancies, Levine Cancer Institute/Atrium Health, Charlotte, NC, USATel +1 980-442-4363Email saad.usmani@atriumhealth.orgAbstract: The survival outcomes for multiple myeloma have improved several-fold in the past two decades, primarily due to the introduction of therapies with novel mechanisms of action including immunomodulatory agents, proteasome inhibitors, stem cell transplant and monoclonal antibodies in the schema of therapy. Antibody-based therapies targeting the surface marker CD38, namely daratumumab and isatuximab, have emerged as being highly effective as single agents as well as in combination regimens for both newly diagnosed and relapsed settings. Herein, the authors summarize the most recent data with both the current and emerging CD38-directed therapies in multiple myeloma.Keywords: multiple myeloma, daratumumab, isatuximab, CD38, bispecific antibody, antibody drug conjugate

Background Daratumumab is a human CD38‐directed monoclonal antibody indicated for the treatment of relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (MM). Methods A multicenter, open‐label treatment protocol provided early access to daratumumab for patients who had progressive MM after they received ≥3 prior lines of therapy that included a proteasome inhibitor and an immunomodulatory agent or if they were refractory to both a proteasome inhibitor and an immunomodulatory agent. Patients received daratumumab 16 mg/kg weekly for 8 weeks, every other week for 16 weeks, and monthly until they developed disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or 60 days after the drug gained US approval. Treatment‐emergent grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs), serious AEs, and AEs of special interest were collected. Results Three hundred forty‐eight patients were enrolled at 39 US sites between June and December 2015. Patients received study therapy for a median of 1.9 months (range, 0.03‐6.0 months). Fifty‐two percent of patients transitioned to commercially‐available daratumumab and 37% discontinued because of progressive disease. Grade ≥3 AEs occurred in 50% of patients, including thrombocytopenia (15%) and anemia (14%). Serious AEs occurred in 35% of patients (12% were drug‐related), including infections (11%). Infusion reactions occurred in 56%, 2%, and 2% of patients during the first, second, and all subsequent infusions, respectively; respiratory symptoms (cough, dyspnea, throat irritation, nasal congestion) were common. The infusion reaction rate for the first infusion was 38% in 50 patients at 2 sites who received montelukast as premedication for their first infusion and 59% in patients who did not receive montelukast. Conclusions The current findings are consistent with previously reported trials and confirm the safety profile of daratumumab in heavily pretreated US patients who have relapsed or refractory MM. Cancer 2018;124:000‐000., An early access treatment protocol confirms the safety profile of daratumumab in patients with relapsed or refractory myeloma. Findings from 2 study sites (60 patients) that used montelukast premedication indicate reduced infusion reactions and infusion time associated with the first dose of daratumumab.

Treatment options in multiple myeloma (MM) are increasing with the introduction of complex multi-novel-agent-based regimens investigated in randomized clinical trials. However, application in the real-world setting, including feasibility of and adherence to these regimens, may be limited due to varying patient-, treatment-, and disease-related factors. Furthermore, approximately 40% of real-world MM patients do not meet the criteria for phase 3 studies on which approvals are based, resulting in a lack of representative phase 3 data for these patients. Therefore, treatment decisions must be tailored based on additional considerations beyond clinical trial efficacy and safety, such as treatment feasibility (including frequency of clinic/hospital attendance), tolerability, effects on quality of life (QoL), and impact of comorbidities. There are multiple factors of importance to real-world MM patients, including disease symptoms, treatment burden and toxicities, ability to participate in daily activities, financial burden, access to treatment and treatment centers, and convenience of treatment. All of these factors are drivers of QoL and treatment satisfaction/compliance. Importantly, given the heterogeneity of MM, individual patients may have different perspectives regarding the most relevant considerations and goals of their treatment. Patient perspectives/goals may also change as they move through their treatment course. Thus, the ‘efficacy’ of treatment means different things to different patients, and treatment decision-making in the context of personalized medicine must be guided by an individual’s composite definition of what constitutes the best treatment choice. This review summarizes the various factors of importance and practical issues that must be considered when determining real-world treatment choices. It assesses the current instruments, methodologies, and recent initiatives for analyzing the MM patient experience. Finally, it suggests options for enhancing data collection on patients and treatments to provide a more holistic definition of the effectiveness of a regimen in the real-world setting.

© The Author(s) 2021. Treatment options in multiple myeloma (MM) are increasing with the introduction of complex multi-novel-agent-based regimens investigated in randomized clinical trials. However, application in the real-world setting, including feasibility of and adherence to these regimens, may be limited due to varying patient-, treatment-, and disease-related factors. Furthermore, approximately 40% of real-world MM patients do not meet the criteria for phase 3 studies on which approvals are based, resulting in a lack of representative phase 3 data for these patients. Therefore, treatment decisions must be tailored based on additional considerations beyond clinical trial efficacy and safety, such as treatment feasibility (including frequency of clinic/hospital attendance), tolerability, effects on quality of life (QoL), and impact of comorbidities. There are multiple factors of importance to real-world MM patients, including disease symptoms, treatment burden and toxicities, ability to participate in daily activities, financial burden, access to treatment and treatment centers, and convenience of treatment. All of these factors are drivers of QoL and treatment satisfaction/compliance. Importantly, given the heterogeneity of MM, individual patients may have different perspectives regarding the most relevant considerations and goals of their treatment. Patient perspectives/goals may also change as they move through their treatment course. Thus, the ‘efficacy’ of treatment means different things to different patients, and treatment decision-making in the context of personalized medicine must be guided by an individual’s composite definition of what constitutes the best treatment choice. This review summarizes the various factors of importance and practical issues that must be considered when determining real-world treatment choices. It assesses the current instruments, methodologies, and recent initiatives for analyzing the MM patient experience. Finally, it suggests options for enhancing data collection on patients and treatments to provide a more holistic definition of the effectiveness of a regimen in the real-world setting. The authors acknowledge Steve Hill, Ph.D., of Ashfield MedComms, an Ashfield Health company, for professional medical writing support, which was funded by Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA, a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited, and complied with Good Publication Practice-3 (GPP3)104 guidelines, and Renda Ferrari, Ph.D. (Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.) for contributing to the editorial and scientific content of the manuscript.

Summary Background Pomalidomide and dexamethasone is a standard of care for patients with multiple myeloma in whom bortezomib and lenalidomide treatment has failed. KEYNOTE-183 assessed efficacy and safety of pomalidomide and dexamethasone with or without pembrolizumab in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. Here, we present the findings of an unplanned, ad-hoc interim analysis at the request of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Methods KEYNOTE-183 was a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial done at 97 medical centres across 11 countries (Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, Japan, New Zealand, Norway, Spain, and USA). Patients aged at least 18 years with multiple myeloma, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0 or 1, previously treated with at least two lines of therapy (excluding pomalidomide) and refractory to the last line were randomly assigned 1:1 to the pembrolizumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone group or the pomalidomide and dexamethasone group via an interactive voice response or integrated web response system. Patients received oral pomalidomide 4 mg daily on days 1–21 and oral low-dose dexamethasone 40 mg on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 in 28-day cycles, with or without intravenous pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks. The dual primary endpoints were progression-free survival and overall survival. Efficacy was assessed in all randomly assigned patients and safety was assessed in patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT02576977 , and it is closed for accrual. Findings Between Jan 18, 2016, and June 7, 2017, 249 patients were randomly assigned to either the pembrolizumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone group (n=125) or the pomalidomide and dexamethasone group (n=124). On July 3, 2017, the FDA established that risks associated with the triple combination outweighed benefits and halted the study. Median follow-up was 8·1 months (IQR 4·5–10·9). Median progression-free survival was 5·6 months (95% CI 3·7–7·5) in the pembrolizumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone group versus 8·4 months (5·9–not reached) in the pomalidomide and dexamethasone group; progression-free survival estimates at 6 months were 48% (95% CI 37–58) versus 60% (49–69) at 6 months (hazard ratio [HR] 1·53; 95% CI 1·05–2·22; p=0·98). Median overall survival was not reached (95% CI 12·9–not reached) versus 15·2 months (12·7–not reached; HR 1·61; 95% CI 0·91–2·85; p=0·95); overall survival estimates at 6 months were 82% (95% CI 74–88) versus 90% (82–95). Serious adverse events occurred in 75 (63%) of 120 patients in the pembrolizumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone group versus 56 (46%) of 121 patients in the pomalidomide and dexamethasone group. Four (3%) treatment-related deaths occurred in the pembrolizumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone group (one each of unknown cause, neutropenic sepsis, myocarditis, and Stevens–Johnson syndrome); myocarditis and Stevens-Johnson syndrome were considered related to pembrolizumab. No treatment-related deaths were reported in the pomalidomide and dexamethasone group. Interpretation The results from this unplanned, FDA-requested, interim analysis showed that the benefit–risk profile of pembrolizumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone is unfavourable for patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. Funding Merck Sharp & Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck & Co (Kenilworth, NJ, USA).

The phase 3 POLLUX and CASTOR studies demonstrated superior benefit of daratumumab plus lenalidomide/dexamethasone or bortezomib/dexamethasone in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. Efficacy and safety of daratumumab was analyzed according to age groups of 65 to 74 years and >= 75 years. Patients received >= 1 prior line of therapy. In POLLUX, patients received lenalidomide/dexamethasone +/- daratumumab (16 mg/kg weekly, cycles 1-2; every two weeks, cycles 3-6; monthly until progression). In CASTOR, patients received eight cycles of bortezomib/dexamethasone +/- daratumumab (16 mg/kg weekly, cycles 1-3; every three weeks, cycles 4-8; monthly until progression). Patients aged >75 years received dexamethasone 20 mg weekly. For patients aged >= 75 years in POLLUX (median follow-up: 25.4 months), daratumumab/lenalidomide/dexamethasone prolonged progression-free survival versus lenalidomide/dexamethasone (median: 28.9 versus 11.4 months; hazard ratio, 0.27; 95% confidence interval, 0.10-0.69; P=0.0042) and increased overall response rate (93.1% versus 76.5%; P=0.0740). Neutropenia was the most common grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse event (daratumumab: 44.8%; control: 31.4%). Infusion-related reactions occurred in 12 (41.4%) patients. For patients aged >= 75 years in CASTOR (median follow-up: 19.4 months), daratumumab/bortezomib/dexamethasone prolonged progression-free survival versus bortezomib/dexamethasone (median: 17.9 versus 8.1 months; hazard ratio, 0.26; 95% confidence interval, 0.10-0.65; P=0.0022) and increased overall response rate (95.0% versus 78.8%; P=0.1134). Thrombocytopenia was the most common grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse event (daratumumab: 45.0%; control: 37.1%). Infusion-related reactions occurred in 13 (65.0%) patients. Similar findings were reported for patients aged 65 to 74 years in both studies. Taken together, this subgroup analysis of efficacy and safety of daratumumab was largely consistent with the overall populations.

Additional file 1. Business rules to define line of treatment in multiple myeloma [17–19].

The revised International Staging System (R-ISS) combines ISS with genetic markers and lactate dehydrogenase and can prognosticate newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM). Early relapse (

We compared postrelapse overall survival (OS) after autologous/allogeneic (auto/allo) versus tandem autologous (auto/auto) hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) in patients with multiple myeloma (MM). Postrelapse survival of patients receiving an auto/auto or auto/allo HCT for MM and prospectively reported to the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research between 2000 and 2010 were analyzed. Relapse occurred in 404 patients (72.4%) in the auto/auto group and in 178 patients (67.4%) in the auto/allo group after a median follow-up of 8.5 years. Relapse occurred before 6 months after a second HCT in 46% of the auto/allo patients, compared with 26% of the auto/auto patients. The 6-year postrelapse survival was better in the auto/allo group compared with the auto/auto group (44% versus 35%; P = .05). Mortality due to MM was 69% (n = 101) in the auto/allo group and 83% (n = 229) deaths in auto/auto group. In multivariate analysis, both cohorts had a similar risk of death in the first year after relapse (hazard ratio [HR], .72; P = .12); however, for time points beyond 12 months after relapse, overall survival was superior in the auto/allo cohort (HR for death in auto/auto =1.55; P = .005). Other factors associated with superior survival were enrollment in a clinical trial for HCT, male sex, and use of novel agents at induction before HCT. Our findings shown superior survival afterrelapse in auto/allo HCT recipients compared with auto/auto HCT recipients. This likely reflects a better response to salvage therapy, such as immunomodulatory drugs, potentiated by a donor-derived immunologic milieu. Further augmentation of the post-allo-HCT immune system with new immunotherapies, such as monoclonal antibodies, checkpoint inhibitors, and others, merit investigation.

The multicenter retrospective study conducted in 38 centers from 20 countries including 172 adult patients with CNS MM aimed to describe the clinical and pathological characteristics and outcomes of patients with multiple myeloma (MM) involving the central nervous system (CNS). Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify prognostic factors for survival. The median time from MM diagnosis to CNS MM diagnosis was 3 years. Thirty-eight patients (22%) were diagnosed with CNS involvement at the time of initial MM diagnosis and 134 (78%) at relapse/progression. Upon diagnosis of CNS MM, 97% patients received initial therapy for CNS disease, of which 76% received systemic therapy, 36% radiotherapy and 32% intrathecal therapy. After a median follow-up of 3.5 years, the median overall survival (OS) from the onset of CNS involvement for the entire group was 7 months. Untreated and treated patients had median OS of 2 and 8 months, respectively (p1 cytogenetic abnormality detected by FISH were independently associated with worse OS. The median OS for patients with 0, 1 and 2 of these risk factors were 25 months, 5.5 months and 2 months, respectively (p

Comparison of long-term outcomes in patients with refractory/relapsed grade 1-2 follicular lymphoma (FL) after allogeneic (allo-HCT) vs. autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (auto-HCT) in the rituximab-era.

The phase 3 POLLUX and CASTOR studies demonstrated superior benefit of daratumumab plus lenalidomide/dexamethasone or bortezomib/dexamethasone in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. Efficacy and safety of daratumumab was analyzed according to age groups of 65 to 74 years and ≥75 years. Patients received ≥1 prior line of therapy. In POLLUX, patients received lenalidomide/dexamethasone ± daratumumab (16 mg/kg weekly, cycles 1-2; every two weeks, cycles 3-6; monthly until progression). In CASTOR, patients received eight cycles of bortezomib/dexamethasone ± daratumumab (16 mg/kg weekly, cycles 1-3; every three weeks, cycles 4-8; monthly until progression). Patients aged >75 years received dexamethasone 20 mg weekly. For patients aged ≥75 years in POLLUX (median follow-up: 25.4 months), daratumumab/lenalido-mide/dexamethasone prolonged progression-free survival versus lenalido-mide/dexamethasone (median: 28.9 versus 11.4 months; hazard ratio, 0.27; 95% confidence interval, 0.10-0.69; P=0.0042) and increased overall response rate (93.1% versus 76.5%; P=0.0740). Neutropenia was the most common grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse event (daratumumab: 44.8%; control: 31.4%). Infusion-related reactions occurred in 12 (41.4%) patients. For patients aged ≥75 years in CASTOR (median follow-up: 19.4 months), daratumumab/bortezomib/dexamethasone prolonged progression-free survival versus bortezomib/dexamethasone (median: 17.9 versus 8.1 months; hazard ratio, 0.26; 95% confidence interval, 0.10-0.65; P=0.0022) and increased overall response rate (95.0% versus 78.8%; P=0.1134). Thrombocytopenia was the most common grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse event (daratumumab: 45.0%; control: 37.1%). Infusion-related reactions occurred in 13 (65.0%) patients. Similar findings were reported for patients aged 65 to 74 years in both studies. Taken together, this subgroup analysis of efficacy and safety of daratumumab was largely consistent with the overall populations.

The International Myeloma Working Group consensus aimed to provide recommendations for the optimal use of 18fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) PET/CT in patients with multiple myeloma and other plasma cell disorders, including smouldering multiple myeloma and solitary plasmacytoma. 18F-FDG PET/CT can be considered a valuable tool for the work-up of patients with both newly diagnosed and relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma because it assesses bone damage with relatively high sensitivity and specificity, and detects extramedullary sites of proliferating clonal plasma cells while providing important prognostic information. The use of 18F-FDG PET/CT is mandatory to confirm a suspected diagnosis of solitary plasmacytoma, provided that whole-body MRI is unable to be performed, and to distinguish between smouldering and active multiple myeloma, if whole-body X-ray (WBXR) is negative and whole-body MRI is unavailable. Based on the ability of 18F-FDG PET/CT to distinguish between metabolically active and inactive disease, this technique is now the preferred functional imaging modality to evaluate and to monitor the effect of therapy on myeloma-cell metabolism. Changes in FDG avidity can provide an earlier evaluation of response to therapy compared to MRI scans, and can predict outcomes, particularly for patients who are eligible to receive autologous stem-cell transplantation. 18F-FDG PET/CT can be coupled with sensitive bone marrow-based techniques to detect minimal residual disease (MRD) inside and outside the bone marrow, helping to identify those patients who are defined as having imaging MRD negativity.

Purpose: multiple myeloma is considered an incurable hematologic cancer but a subset of patients can achieve long-term remissions and survival. The present study examines the clinical features of long-term survival as it correlates to depth of disease response. Patients & Methods: this was a multi-institutional, international, retrospective analysis of high-dose melphalan-autologous stem cell transplant (HDM-ASCT) eligible MM patients included in clinical trials. Clinical variable and survival data were collected from 7291 MM patients from Czech Republic, France, Germany, Italy, Korea, Spain, the Nordic Myeloma Study Group and the United States. Kaplan–Meier curves were used to assess progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Relative survival (RS) and statistical cure fractions (CF) were computed for all patients with available data. Results: achieving CR at 1 year was associated with superior PFS (median PFS 3.3 years vs. 2.6 years, p p p = 0.002), IgA Isotype (OR 1.53, p = 0.004), low albumin p = 0.023), elevated beta 2 microglobulin ≥ 3.5 mg/dL (OR 1.86, p p = 0.005), hemoglobin levels p = 0.003), and platelet count p

This International Myeloma Working Group consensus updates the disease defi nition of multiple myeloma to include validated biomarkers in addition to existing requirements of attributable CRAB features (hypercalcaemia, renal failure, anaemia, and bone lesions). These changes are based on the identifi cation of biomarkers associated with near inevitable development of CRAB features in patients who would otherwise be regarded as having smouldering multiple myeloma. A delay in application of the label of multiple myeloma and postponement of therapy could be detrimental to these patients. In addition to this change, we clarify and update the underlying laboratory and radiographic variables that fulfi l the criteria for the presence of myeloma-defi ning CRAB features, and the histological and monoclonal protein requirements for the disease diagnosis. Finally, we provide specifi c metrics that new biomarkers should meet for inclusion in the disease defi nition. The International Myeloma Working Group recommends the implementation of these criteria in routine practice and in future clinical trials, and recommends that future studies analyse any diff erences in outcome that might occur as a result of the new disease defi nition.