Search

Multiple myeloma (MM) is a cancer of terminally differentiated plasma cells. MM remains incurable, but overall survival of patients has progressively increased over the past two decades largely due to novel agents such as proteasome inhibitors (PI) and the immunomodulatory agents. While these therapies are highly effective, MM patients can be de novo resistant and acquired resistance with prolonged treatment is inevitable. There is growing interest in early, accurate identification of responsive versus non-responsive patients; however, limited sample availability and need for rapid assays are limiting factors. Here, we test dry mass and volume as label-free biomarkers to monitor early response of MM cells to treatment with bortezomib, doxorubicin, and ultraviolet light. For the dry mass measurement, we use two types of phase-sensitive optical microscopy techniques: digital holographic tomography and computationally enhanced quantitative phase microscopy. We show that human MM cell lines (RPMI8226, MM.1S, KMS20, and AMO1) increase dry mass upon bortezomib treatment. This dry mass increase after bortezomib treatment occurs as early as 1 h for sensitive cells and 4 h for all tested cells. We further confirm this observation using primary multiple myeloma cells derived from patients and show that a correlation exists between increase in dry mass and sensitivity to bortezomib, supporting the use of dry mass as a biomarker. The volume measurement using Coulter counter shows a more complex behavior; RPMI8226 cells increase the volume at an early stage of apoptosis, but MM.1S cells show the volume decrease typically observed with apoptotic cells. Altogether, this cell study presents complex kinetics of dry mass and volume at an early stage of apoptosis, which may serve as a basis for the detection and treatment of MM cells. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Multiple myeloma (MM) is an incurable hematologic malignancy requiring long‐term, continuous therapy. Despite its chronic and unrelenting course, studies examining quality of life (QOL), psychological distress, and perceptions of prognosis by line of therapy are lacking. Methods: The authors conducted a cross‐sectional, multisite study of patients undergoing treatment for MM (excluding maintenance) between June 2020 and January 2021. The authors conducted purposeful sampling and recruited patients to 3 cohorts based on lines of therapy: 1) newly diagnosed receiving first‐line therapy; 2) 2 to 3 lines; and 3) 4 or more lines. Patients completed validated questionnaires to assess their QOL, fatigue, psychological distress, and perceptions of prognosis. Results: A total of 180 patients with MM were enrolled (newly diagnosed [n = 60], 2 to 3 lines [n = 60], and ≥4 lines of therapy [n = 60]). QOL, symptom burden, and fatigue scores did not differ by lines of therapy. There were no statistically significant differences in psychological distress by line of therapy. The rates of clinically significant depression, anxiety, and post‐traumatic stress disorder symptoms were 23.9% (43 of 180), 23.9% (43 of 180), and 24.4% (44 of 180), respectively. Most patients (84.7%, 149 of 176) reported that their oncologist told them their cancer was incurable, but only 30.6% (53 of 173) acknowledged that they were terminally ill, and 42.0% (73 of 174) reported that they thought their cancer was incurable. Conclusions: Patients with MM undergoing treatment experience impaired QOL and elevated psychological distress across the disease continuum, regardless of line of therapy. A substantial proportion of patients with MM have significant misperceptions about their prognosis and the curability of their illness despite reporting being informed of the prognosis by their oncologist. Lay Summary: This study discusses 180 patients with MM (newly diagnosed [n = 60], 2‐3 lines [n = 60], and ≥4 lines of therapy [n = 60]). Quality of life, symptom burden, and fatigue scores do not differ by lines of therapy. There are also no statistically significant differences in psychological distress by line of therapy.The rates of clinically significant depression, anxiety, and post‐traumatic stress disorder symptoms are 23.9%, 23.9%, and 24.4%, respectively.Most patients (84.7%) report that their oncologist told them their cancer was incurable, but only 30.6% acknowledge that they are terminally ill, and 42.0% report that they thought their cancer was incurable. Patients with multiple myeloma undergoing treatment experience impaired quality of life and elevated psychological distress across the disease continuum. Although the majority reported that their oncologist had told them that their cancer is incurable, a substantial proportion still reported that they believed their cancer was curable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The primary analysis of the ICARIA-MM study showed significant improvement in progression-free survival with addition of isatuximab to pomalidomide-dexamethasone in relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma. Here, we report a prespecified updated overall survival analysis at 24 months after the primary analysis.Methods: In this randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 3 study adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma who had received at least two previous lines of therapy, including lenalidomide and a proteasome inhibitor, and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 were recruited from 102 hospitals in 24 countries across Europe, North America, and the Asia-Pacific regions. Patients were excluded if they had anti-CD38 refractory disease or previously received pomalidomide. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1), using an interactive response technology with permuted blocked randomisation (block size of four) and stratified by number of previous treatment lines (2-3 vs >3) and aged (<75 vs ≥75 years), to isatuximab-pomalidomide-dexamethasone (isatuximab group) or pomalidomide-dexamethasone (control group). In the isatuximab group, intravenous isatuximab 10 mg/kg was administered on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of the first 4-week cycle, and then on days 1 and 15 of subsequent cycles. Both groups received oral pomalidomide 4 mg on days 1-21 of each cycle, and weekly oral or intravenous dexamethasone 40 mg (20 mg if aged ≥75 years) on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of each cycle. Treatment was continued until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal of consent. Here' we report a prespecified second interim analysis of overall survival (time from randomisation to any-cause death), a key secondary endpoint, in the intention-to-treat population (ie, all patients who provided informed consent and allocated a randomisation number) at 24 months after the primary analysis. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose or part dose of study treatment. The prespecified stopping boundary for the overall survival analysis was when the derived p value was equal to or less than 0·0181. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02990338, and is active, but not recruiting.Findings: Between Jan 10, 2017, and Feb 2, 2018, 387 patients were screened and 307 randomly assigned to either the isatuximab (n=154) or control group (n=153). Median follow-up at data cutoff (Oct 1, 2020) was 35·3 months (IQR 33·5-37·4). Median overall survival was 24·6 months (95% CI 20·3-31·3) in the isatuximab group and 17·7 months (14·4-26·2) in the control group (hazard ratio 0·76 [95% CI 0·57-1·01]; one-sided log-rank p=0·028, not crossing prespecified stopping boundary). The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-emergent adverse events in the isatuximab group versus the control group were neutropenia (76 [50%] of 152 patients vs 52 [35%] of 149 patients), pneumonia (35 [23%] vs 31 [21%]), and thrombocytopenia (20 [13%] vs 18 [12%]). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events were observed in 111 (73%) patients in the isatuximab group and 90 (60%) patients in the control group. Two (1%) treatment-related deaths occurred in the isatuximab group (one due to sepsis and one due to cerebellar infarction) and two (1%) occurred in the control group (one due to pneumonia and one due to urinary tract infection).Interpretation: Addition of isatuximab plus pomalidomide-dexamethasone resulted in a 6·9-month difference in median overall survival compared with pomalidomide-dexamethasone and is a new standard of care for lenalidomide-refractory and proteasome inhibitor-refractory or relapsed multiple myeloma. Final overall survival analysis follow-up is ongoing.Funding: Sanofi. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Defining the specificity and biological sequalae induced by receptors differentiated expressed in multiple myeloma cells are critical for the development of effective immunotherapies based on monoclonal antibodies. Ongoing studies continue to discover new antigens with superior tumor selectivity and defined function in regulating the pathophysiology of myeloma cells directly or indirectly in the immunosuppressive bone marrow microenvironment. Meanwhile, it is urgent to identify mechanisms of immune resistance and design more potent immunotherapies, alone and/or with best combination partners to further prolong anti-MM immunity. The incorporation of novel agents in recent treatments in multiple myeloma (MM) has improved the clinical outcome of patients. Specifically, the approval of monoclonal antibody (MoAb) against CD38 (daratumumab) and SLAMF7 (elotuzumab) in relapsed and refractory MM (RRMM) represents an important milestone in the development of targeted immunotherapy in MM. These MoAb-based agents significantly induce cytotoxicity of MM cells via multiple effector-dependent mechanisms and can further induce immunomodulation to repair a dysfunctional tumor immune microenvironment. Recently, targeting B cell maturation antigen (BCMA), an even MM-specific antigen, has shown high therapeutic activities by chimeric antigen receptor T cells (CAR T), antibody-drug conjugate (ADC), bispecific T-cell engager (BiTE), as well as bispecific antibody (BiAb), with some already approved for heavily pretreated RRMM patients. New antigens, such as orphan G protein-coupled receptor class C group 5 member D (GPRC5D) and FcRH5, were identified and rapidly moved to ongoing clinical studies. We here summarized the pathobiological function of key MM antigens and the status of the corresponding immunotherapies. The potential challenges and emerging treatment strategies are also discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: In this review, two types of soft‐tissue involvement in multiple myeloma are defined: (i) extramedullary (EMD) with haematogenous spread involving only soft tissues and (ii) paraskeletal (PS) with tumour masses arising from skeletal lesions. The incidence of EMD and PS plasmacytomas at diagnosis ranges from 1·7% to 4·5% and 7% to 34·4% respectively. EMD disease is often associated with high‐risk cytogenetics, resistance to therapy and worse prognosis than in PS involvement. In patients with PS involvement a proteasome inhibitor‐based regimen may be the best option followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in transplant eligible patients. In patients with EMD disease who are not eligible for ASCT, a proteasome inhibitor‐based regimen such as lenalidomide‐bortezomib‐dexamethasone (RVD) may be the best option, while for those eligible for high‐dose therapy a myeloma/lymphoma‐like regimen such as bortezomib, thalidomide and dexamethasone (VTD)‐RVD/cisplatin, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide and etoposide (PACE) followed by SCT should be considered. In both EMD and PS disease at relapse many strategies have been tried, but this remains a high‐unmet need population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]