Search

Key Points Quantitative evaluation of the tumor load in patients with IgM monoclonal gammopathies in tDNA and cfDNA samples., Visual Abstract, We describe a novel method for the detection of MYD88L265P mutation using a competitive allele-specific polymerase chain reaction (Cast-PCR) assay. This assay has a sensitivity of 1 × 10−3, is applicable in reactions containing very low amounts of DNA (as low as 20 pg), and allowed the detection of MYD88L265P somatic mutation in both tumor-derived DNA (tDNA) and cell-free DNA (cfDNA). In addition, using the Cast-PCR assay, we were able to determine the mutation allele fraction (MAF) in each tested sample. We then analyzed baseline tDNA and cfDNA samples from 163 patients (53 with immunoglobulin M monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance and 110 with Waldenström’s macroglobulinemia [WM], of whom 54 were asymptomatic and 56 were symptomatic) and also in sequential samples of 37 patients. MAF in both cfDNA and tDNA was higher among patients with symptomatic compared with asymptomatic WM and in those with asymptomatic WM compared with those with immunoglobulin M (IgM) monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance. In addition, the evaluation of sequential samples showed that MAF decreased after treatment, whereas it increased in patients who relapsed or progressed to symptomatic WM. Thus, Cast-PCR is a highly sensitive, cost-effective diagnostic tool for MYD88L265P detection, applicable in both tDNA and cfDNA samples, that also provides a quantitative evaluation of the tumor load in patients with IgM monoclonal gammopathies.

PURPOSE Proteasome inhibitors are effective in Waldenström's macroglobulinemia (WM) but require parenteral administration and are associated with polyneuropathy. We investigated efficacy and toxicity of the less neurotoxic oral proteasome inhibitor ixazomib combined with rituximab, in patients with relapsed WM. METHODS We conducted a multicenter phase I/II trial with ixazomib, rituximab, and dexamethasone (IRD). Induction consisted of eight cycles IRD wherein rituximab was started in cycle 3, followed by rituximab maintenance. Phase I showed feasibility of 4 mg ixazomib. Primary end point for phase II was overall response rate (ORR [≥ minimal response]) after induction. RESULTS A total of 59 patients were enrolled (median age, 69 years; range, 46-91 years). Median number of prior treatments was 2 (range, 1-7); 70% had an intermediate or high WM-IPSS (International Prognostic Scoring System for WM) score. After eight cycles, ORR was 71% (42 out of 59) (14% very good partial response [PR], 37% PR, and 20% minor response). Depth of response improved until month 12 (best ORR 85% [50 out of 59]: 15% very good PR, 46% PR, and 24% minor response). Median duration of response was 36 months. The average hematocrit level increased significantly (0.33-0.38 L/L) after induction ( P < .001). After two cycles of ixazomib and dexamethasone, immunoglobulin M levels decreased significantly (median 3,700-2,700 mg/dL, P < .0001). Median time to first response was 4 months. Median progression-free survival and overall survival were not reached. After median follow-up of 24 months (range, 7.4-54.3 months), progression-free survival and overall survival were 56% and 88%, respectively. Toxicity included mostly grade 2 or 3 cytopenias, grade 1 or 2 neurotoxicity, and grade 2 or 3 infections. No infusion-related reactions or immunoglobulin M flare occurred with use of subcutaneous rituximab. Quality of life improved significantly after induction. In total, 48 patients (81%) completed at least six cycles of IRD. CONCLUSION Combination of IRD shows promising efficacy with manageable toxicity in patients with relapsed or refractory WM.

Undoubtedly, the development of COVID-19 vaccines displays a critical step towards ending this devastating pandemic, considering their protective benefits in the general population. Yet, data regarding their efficacy and safety in cancer patients are limited. Herein we provide the initial analysis of immune responses after the first dose of vaccination in 21 breast cancer patients receiving cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors. The levels of neutralizing antibodies post vaccination were similar to the matched healthy controls, whereas no safety issues have been raised. Further exploration is needed to reduce the uncertainty of SARS-CoV-2 immunity among cancer patients under treatment.

Immunocompromised patients with hematologic malignancies are more susceptible to COVID-19 and at higher risk of severe complications and worse outcomes compared with the general population. In this context, we evaluated the humoral response by determining the titers of neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) against SARS-CoV-2 in patients with Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM) after vaccination with the BNT162b2 or AZD1222 vaccine. A US Food and Drug Administration–approved enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay–based methodology was implemented to evaluate NAbs on the day of the first vaccine shot, as well as on days 22 and 50 afterward. A total of 106 patients with WM (43% men; median age, 73 years) and 212 healthy controls (46% men; median age, 66 years) who were vaccinated during the same period at the same center were enrolled in the study (which is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT04743388). Our data indicate that vaccination with either 2 doses of the BNT162b2 or 1 dose of the AZD1222 vaccine leads to lower production of NAbs against SARS-CoV-2 in patients with WM compared with controls on days 22 and 50 (P < .001 for all comparisons). Disease-related immune dysregulation and therapy-related immunosuppression are involved in the low humoral response. Importantly, active treatment with either rituximab or Bruton’s tyrosine kinase inhibitors was proven as an independent prognostic factor for suboptimal antibody response after vaccination. In conclusion, patients with WM have low humoral response after COVID-19 vaccination, which underlines the need for timely vaccination ideally during a treatment-free period and for continuous vigilance on infection control measures.

Background Tumor protein 53 (TP53) gene mutations are identified in up to 37% of breast tumors especially in HER-2 positive and basal-like subtype. Previous studies have indicated TP53 mutations as a prognostic biomarker in breast cancer. However, most of these studies performed immunohistochemistry (IHC) for the detection of TP53 mutations. Aim The purpose of our study is to evaluate the role of TP53 somatic mutations detected via next-generation sequencing (NGS) as a potential prognostic marker in patients with breast cancer. Materials and methods 82 female patients with Stage I-III breast cancer underwent NGS in paraffin blocks and blood samples during the period 25/09/2019 through 25/05/2021. 23 cases of somatic TP53 mutations and 23 cases of healthy controls were matched on age at diagnosis, menopausal status, histological subtype, histological grade, ki67 expression and disease stage. Results Mean age at diagnosis was 52.35 (SD; 11.47) years. The somatic TP53 mutation NM_000546.5:c.824G>A p.(Cys275Tyr) was most frequently detected. Co-existence of PIK3CA mutation was a common finding in somatic TP53-mutant tumors (4/23; 17.4%). Disease-free survival was shorter in TP53-mutated cases (16.3 months vs. 62.9 months). TP53 pathogenic somatic mutations were associated with a 8-fold risk of recurrence in the univariate Cox regression analysis (OR = 8.530, 95% CI: 1.81-40.117; p = 0.007). Conclusions Our case-control study suggests that TP53 somatic mutations detected by next-generation sequencing (NGS) are associated with an adverse prognosis in breast cancer.

BACKGROUND The utilization and clinical impact of beta-blockers (BBs) in cardiac amyloidosis (CA) is largely unexplored. METHODS We conducted a retrospective, single-center analysis of indications, timing of initiation, types and doses of BB used, reasons to discontinue BB and association between BB tolerance and outcomes in a cohort of patients with immunoglobulin light chain amyloidosis (AL). RESULTS We reviewed 236 patients with AL CA and identified 53 patients taking BB (22.5%). Most patients presented in New York Heart Association Class (NYHA) II or III (74.5%) and 24% presented in Mayo stage IIIB. The most frequent indications for BB initiation were atrial fibrillation (AF) and coronary artery disease (CAD). In most cases (59%) BB was started before the diagnosis of CA. The median duration of BB treatment was 9 months (interquartile range [IQR] 3-24 months). Among patients receiving BB, 28 tolerated BB during follow-up whereas 25 patients discontinued BB. The main causes of BB discontinuation were hypotension and heart failure (HF) exacerbation. Patients intolerant to BB presented with more advanced NYHA class, worse performance status and lower median left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) at baseline. At median follow-up duration of 17.7 months, patients who did not tolerate BB had a poor survival. CONCLUSIONS Although some patients with CA may have indications for treatment with BB, their use is uncommon and those with more advanced disease tolerate BB poorly. Intolerance to BB in patients with cardiac AL is an indicator of poorer outcome.

Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 is considered as the most important preventive strategy against COVID-19, but its efficacy in patients with hematological malignancies is largely unknown. We investigated the development of neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) against SARS-CoV-2 in patients with Waldenstrom Macroglobulinemia (WM), Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL) and Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma (NHL). After the first dose of the vaccine, on D22, WM/CLL/NHL patients had lower NAb titers compared to controls: the median NAb inhibition titer was 17% (range 0-91%, IQR 8-27%) for WM/CLL/NHL patients versus 32% (range 2-98%, IQR 19-48%) for controls (P

The continuous advances in the treatment landscape of multiple myeloma has led to the approval of several novel agents and their combinations that significantly improved patient outcomes. Despite their undoubtful effectiveness in the context of clinical trials, their impact on real-world (RW) clinical practice remains debatable. RW data on the role of novel agents and their combinations among patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma have confirmed the efficacy of proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulatory drugs, and monoclonal antibodies. However, the magnitude of the benefit and the safety profile may differ among RW studies and between RW and pivotal clinical trials. Several variables may pertain to these observations and include patient selection, ethnicity, age, comorbidities, disease stage at diagnosis and at relapse, number of prior lines of therapy, disease subtype, presence of renal impairment, extramedullary disease, and cytogenetic abnormalities. All these contribute to a varying degree of disease and patient heterogeneity among the studies that may result in a differential treatment effect. The expertise of each medical center and the treatment setting in terms of availability and drug access are particularly important as well. Interestingly, RW observations may serve as proof of concept for designing novel clinical trials, as is the case with retreatment studies. In conclusion, clinical trial and RW data are complementary, and they should be considered to improve both clinical trial design and clinical practice.

Background Obesity and high body mass index (BMI) are associated with increased incidence of multiple myeloma (MM). MM usually evolves from a precursor asymptomatic disease, namely monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS). MGUS progresses to MM at a 1% annual rate; however, risk factors predisposing to MGUS are not completely understood. We conducted a systematic review to assess the relationship between obesity and high BMI with MGUS prevalence and progression to MM. To our knowledge, this is the first systematic review evaluating the role of obesity in MGUS. Patients and Methods We searched the Medline database and ClinicalTrials.gov for studies investigating BMI and obesity association with MGUS incidence and progression. The algorithm consisted of a predefined combination of the words “obesity,” “obese,” “body mass index,” “overweight,” “diet,” “nutrition,” “food,” “dietary,” “adiponectin,” “monoclonal gammopathy,” and “MGUS”. Results Overall, 12 articles were retrieved, including 11 eligible articles and 1 clinical trial. More than 57,068 patients were evaluated in this systematic review. Discrepancies between the identified studies were noted. Multiple studies support the notion that obesity or high BMI are positively linked to MGUS prevalence and transition to MM. In contrast, other studies revealed no such association. Visceral adipose tissue metabolic activity and decreased adiponectin concentrations were identified as biomarkers of MGUS progression to MM. Conclusion Obesity and increased BMI seem to be implicated both in MGUS development and progression to MM. Further studies should be designed to confirm this hypothesis.

Carfilzomib (CFZ) improves survival in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma but is associated with cardiovascular adverse events (CVAEs). We prospectively investigated the effect of CFZ on endothelial function and associations with CVAEs. Forty-eight patients treated with Kd (CFZ 20/56 mg/m2 and dexamethasone) underwent serial endothelial function evaluation, using brachial artery flow-mediated dilatation (FMD) and 26S proteasome activity (PrA) measurement in PBMCs; patients were followed until disease progression or cycle 6 for a median of 10 months. FMD and PrA decreased acutely after the first dose (p 40% at the end of first cycle was also independently associated with CVAEs (HR = 3.91, 95% CI 1.29–11.83). Kd treatment impairs endothelial function which is associated with PrA inhibition and recovery. Both pre- and posttreatment FMD predicted CFZ-related CVAEs supporting its role as a possible cardiovascular toxicity biomarker.

Coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused an emergency in health systems worldwide. Apart from its apparent morbidity and mortality, COVID-19 has also imposed unique challenges in the management of cancer patients. We report here measures taken by a major oncology Unit in Greece to continue operation of the department while ensuring safety of the patients and health care professionals. The efficacy of these measures could serve as guidance for Oncology departments in view of a second wave of COVID-19 cases.

Introduction: Multiple myeloma (MM) is the second most common haematological malignancy and is characterized by bone marrow infiltration of monoclonal plasma cells and end-organ involvement. Smoldering MM (SMM) is an intermediate clinical entity between MGUS and MM, with a risk of progression to symptomatic disease at 10% per year. Bone disease is the most frequent related symptom of MM, with approximately 90% of patients developing bone lesions throughout their disease course. Therefore, imaging plays a crucial role in diagnosis and management of these patients. Conventional radiography was traditionally considered as the standard of care, however the limited sensitivity in detecting osteolytic bone lesions has led to more advanced imaging modalities. Imaging also is of high importance to discriminate MM from smoldering disease, since the presence of bone lesions establishes the diagnosis of active disease and requires treatment initiation. Computed tomography (CT) was found to be the most sensitive modality in detecting small osteolytic bone lesions less than 5 mm. Ionizing radiation exposure was one of the main limitations of this technique. Technological advances have made possible low dose assessment of the entire skeleton with effective radiation doses comparable to those of a whole-body plain radiographic skeletal survey. Furthermore, the low dose CT is widely available and has a very short scan time. Therefore, whole-body low dose CT (WBLDCT) has been incorporated in the latest diagnostic criteria of the IMWG. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the role of WBLDCT in the early identification of patients with asymptomatic MM who progress with bone disease only and who require immediate antimyeloma treatment. Patients and Methods: Our study was approved by the local IRB and all patients provided informed consent. All patients diagnosed with SMM based on the 2003 International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) definition of SMM were serially assessed with WBLDCT from July 2013 until March 2020 as part of our institutional workup. The assessments were performed at baseline, 1-year post diagnosis and every 1 year thereafter. The patients enrolled in the study were those who had at least 2 consecutive CT assessments at the above described time points. All WBLDCT exams were performed with a 16-detector CT scanner. The CTs were evaluated by two experienced radiologists, blinded to the clinical and laboratory data. RESULTS We prospectively evaluated 100 patients with SMM (median age at diagnosis 61 years, range 40-86 years, 52 female /48 male) who underwent WBLDCT at the above described time points. Median number of WBLDCTs exams performed was 2.5 (range 2-5). Totally, 31 patients progressed (either with CRAB criteria and/or at least one myeloma defining event). During a median follow up of 57 months 31 patients have progressed (with either CRAB criteria and/or at least one myeloma defininf event). Importantly, 10 of 31 patients progressed only with bone lesions that were identified on the scheduled WBLDCT as per protocol. Median time to progression from asymptomatic to symptomatic disease for all patients has not been reached, while median time for those who actually progressed was 22 months (95% CI:15,6-28,4). For the subgroup of patients who progressed with bone lesions only the median time was also 22 months (95%CI:3,4-40,6). Median time to progression was not statistically different between the two progressor subgroups. All patients were initiated with antimyeloma treatment immediately post evolution to symptomatic disease. PFS for all 31 patients at first line treatment was 52 months (95%CI:34,5-69,5) and median PFS for bone progressors has not yet been reached. Among the patients who progressed 29 were alive at the time of the analysis. The 2 deaths that occurred were one related (progressive disease) and one unrelated to multiple myeloma (cardiovascular event). Neither had progressed with isolated bone involvement. Conclusion: In conclusion, our strategy allowed early detection of bone lesions in 10% of our patients and these patients were immediately initiated with antimyeloma treatment to avoid further myeloma-related complications. Consecutive low-dose WBLDCT studies can identify early myeloma evolution to symptomatic disease and optimize the disease monitoring along with our therapeutic strategy. Disclosures Gavriatopoulou: Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria; Genesis Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Kastritis:Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Genesis Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel/accommodations/expenses; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel/accommodations/expenses, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel/accommodations/expenses. Terpos:Janssen: Honoraria, Other: travel expenses , Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: travel expenses , Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria; Medison: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Genesis: Honoraria, Other: travel expenses , Research Funding. Dimopoulos:Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Beigene: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria.

Treatment of the plasma cell clone in monoclonal gammopathy of renal significance (MGRS) is necessary in order to reduce toxic immunoglobulin load to the kidneys and salvage renal function. There are limited data on the use of daratumumab in patients with MGRS. We summarize our experience with the use of daratumumab-based therapy in 25 MGRS patients, 12 of whom were previously untreated. The median follow-up of the cohort is 14 months. The best overall haematologic response in evaluable patients was complete response (CR) in five (22%), very good partial response (VGPR) in five (22%) and partial response (PR) in seven (30%) patients for an overall response rate of 74%. Two of five patients in CR and two patients with initially detectable clones, but non-measurable immunoglobulins, had undetectable minimal residual disease (MRD) with next-generation flow cytometry (NGF) after therapy. Haematologic response rate for previously untreated patients was 83% vs. 69% for previously treated and for daratumumab combinations it was 91% vs. 64%, and with CR/VGPR 82% vs. 29%, compared to daratumumab monotherapy. At six months, 12/22 (55%) patients not on dialysis achieved a reduction of proteinuria >30%, of at least 0·5 g/24 h, without an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) reduction. The toxicity was mild and predictable. In conclusion, daratumumab-based therapy is a new option for patients with MGRS.

The increasing lifespan of the world population and the novel therapeutic combinations for the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM), which are more efficacious and safer, make the question of how to manage the older patient with MM increasingly relevant. Clinical trial data come mostly from subgroup analysis, as no clinical trials have been designed for elderly patients with MM, particularly the octogenarian population. Age has been traditionally used as a surrogate marker of physiological decline but does not accurately reflect frailty on its own. Validated frailty assessment tools that accurately and sensitively risk-stratify older MM patients are needed. Such tools are being increasingly incorporated into clinical trial design. We should aim to use them to offer a tailored therapeutic approach to this heterogeneous subgroup of the MM population. Risk stratification based on disease-specific and patient-specific characteristics helps set the relevant outcome measures and therapeutic goals that will allow the right choice of treatment. The treatment goal for all patients should be to prolong survival and preserve quality of life. In the fit old MM patient, good responses can be achieved by carefully selecting candidates for autologous stem cell transplant and novel triplet or quadruplet combinations. At the other end of the spectrum, quality-of-life outcome measures and toxicity minimization with dose adaptation should be the focus.

A rapid and deep haematologic response is fundamental in order to improve outcomes of patients with AL amyloidosis. We evaluated the impact of timing and depth of haematologic response at early time points (at 1 and 3 months from the start of therapy) in 227 consecutive previously untreated AL patients, who received bortezomib-based primary therapy. After 1 month of therapy, 30.5% had ≥VGPR, 28% PR and 36% no response (NR), with 11% having iFLC

Patients relapsing early after autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) are a particular therapeutic challenge.This was a retrospective, single center study that included 297 consecutive patients that received first-line ASCT RESULTS: We identified 43 (14.5%) patients that relapsed within12 months. At diagnosis, these patients had more often elevated lactate dehydrogenase, lower estimated glomerular filtration rate, hypercalcemia, and high-risk cytogenetics; the International Staging System stage distribution was similar. Consolidation and maintenance were associated with lower rates of early relapses. Progression-free survival to second-line therapy was 5 months versus 19 months for those with an early versus late relapse (P .001), the median PFS to second-line therapy was 15.5 months versus5 years (P .001) and the median post-ASCT survival was 18 months versus6 years. The survival after an early relapse has not improved significantly over time. In multivariate analysis, early relapse (hazard ratio, 14; P .001) was the most important prognostic factor for poor survival after ASCT.Patients relapsing12 months after ASCT comprise an ultra-high-risk group, with poor outcomes even with the application of the more recent combinations, that urgently needs more effective therapies.

Multiple myeloma (MM) is one the most common hematological malignancies, and despite the survival prolongation offered by proteasome inhibitors (PIs), immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs) and anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies, the need for novel agents is prominent. Selinexor is a first-in-class, oral, selective inhibitor of exportin-1 (XPO1), a vital protein for the exportation of more than 200 tumor suppressor proteins from the nucleus. Both in solid tumors and hematologic malignancies, selinexor-mediated inhibition of nucleus export seems to effectively lead to cancer cell death. Selinexor in combination with dexamethasone (Sd) received an accelerated FDA approval on July 2019 for heavily pretreated patients with relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM) based on the promising results of the Phase II STORM trial. The preliminary results of the randomized Phase III BOSTON trial have shown a 47% increase in progression-free survival among PI-sensitive, RRMM patients who received selinexor with bortezomib-dexamethasone compared with bortezomib-dexamethasone alone. Several different selinexor-containing triplet regimens are currently being tested in the RRMM setting in an umbrella trial, and the preliminary results seem promising. Furthermore, the addition of selinexor in other anti-myeloma agents seems to overcome drug-acquired resistance in preclinical studies. The main toxicities of selinexor are gastrointestinal disorders and hematologic toxicities (mainly thrombocytopenia); however, they are manageable with proper supportive measures. In conclusion, selinexor is a new anti-myeloma drug that seems to be effective in patients who have no other therapeutic options, including patients who have received novel cellular therapies such as CAR-T cells. Its potential role earlier in the therapeutic algorithm of MM is currently under clinical investigation.

COVID-19 has caused unprecedented societal turmoil, triggering a rapid, still ongoing, transformation of healthcare provision on a global level. In this new landscape, it is highly important to acknowledge the challenges this pandemic poses on the care of the particularly vulnerable cancer patients and the subsequent psychosocial impact on them. We have outlined our clinical experience in managing patients with gastrointestinal, hematological, gynaecological, dermatological, neurological, thyroid, lung and paediatric cancers in the COVID-19 era and have reviewed the emerging literature around barriers to care of oncology patients and how this crisis affects them. Moreover, evolving treatment strategies and novel ways of addressing the needs of oncology patients in the new context of the pandemic are discussed.

Treatment personalisation plays a key role in the current management of patients with cancer. Several biomarkers have shown clinical utility and may guide therapeutic decisions. Amongst patients with lung cancer, the level of expression of programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) has both prognostic and predictive values in terms of response to the inhibition of programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1). Depending on the clinical setting, the expression of PD-L1 ≥1% or ≥50% has been associated with improved outcomes amongst patients receiving pembrolizumab. Regarding patients with colorectal carcinoma, mutations in the KRAS oncogene predict the responsiveness to the inhibition of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). Only patients with wild-type KRAS tumours derive benefit from cetuximab and panitumumab in terms of response and survival. In conclusion, future research should aim in the optimisation of the use of biomarker in the clinical practice in order to provide the optimal drug combination to each individual patient.

Selinexor is an oral, small molecule inhibitor of the nuclear export protein exportin 1 with demonstrated activity in hematologic and solid malignancies. Side effects associated with selinexor include nausea, vomiting, fatigue, diarrhea, decreased appetite, weight loss, thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, and hyponatremia. We reviewed 437 patients with multiple myeloma treated with selinexor and assessed the kinetics of adverse events and impact of supportive care measures. Selinexor reduced both platelets and neutrophils over the first cycle of treatment and reached a nadir between 28 and 42 days. Platelet transfusions and thrombopoietin receptor agonists were effective at treating thrombocytopenia, and granulocyte colony stimulating factors were effective at resolving neutropenia. The onset of gastrointestinal side effects (nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea) was most common during the first 1–2 weeks of treatment. Nausea could be mitigated with 5-HT3 antagonists and either neurokinin 1 receptor antagonists, olanzapine, or cannbainoids. Loperamide and bismuth subsalicylate ameliorated diarrhea. The primary constitutional side effects of fatigue and decreased appetite could be managed with methylphenidate, megestrol, cannabinoids or olanzapine, respectively. Hyponatremia was highly responsive to sodium replacement. Selinexor has well-established adverse effects that mainly occur within the first 8 weeks of treatment, are reversible, and respond to supportive care.

Introduction: Multiple myeloma (MM) is characterized by the uncontrollable proliferation of plasma cells and the excessive production of a specific type of immunoglobulin. Immune system is deregula...

Panobinostat represents a potent oral nonselective pan-histone deacetylase inhibitor (HDAC) with activity in myeloma patients. It has been approved by the FDA and EMA in combination with bortezomib and dexamethasone for the treatment of multiple myeloma, in patients who have received at least two prior regimens, including bortezomib and an immunomodulatory agent. In order to further explore its clinical potential, it is evaluated in different combinations in relapsed/refractory and newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. This review focuses on available data about panobinostat’s pharmacology and its role in clinical practice. This review will reveal panobinostat’s efficacy as antimyeloma treatment, describing drug evolution from preclinical experimental administration to administration in phase III trials, which established its role in current clinical practice. Based on the latest data, we will present its mechanism of action, its efficacy, and most important issues regarding its toxicity profile. We will further try to shed light on its role in current and future therapeutic landscape of myeloma patients. Panobinostat retains its role in therapy of multiple myeloma because of its manageable toxicity profile and its efficacy, mainly in heavily pretreated multiple myeloma patients. These characteristics make it valuable also for novel regimens in combination with second-generation proteasome inhibitors, IMiDs, and monoclonal antibodies. Results of ongoing trials are expected to shed light on drug introduction in different therapeutic combinations or even at an earlier level of disease course.

To gain insights into the characteristics of clinical resistance to lenalidomide, we evaluated the outcomes of 147 consecutive patients with multiple myeloma (MM) homogeneously treated with immunomodulatory imide drugs (IMiDs) pomalidomide and dexamethasone (Pd) for relapsed and/or refractory MM (median, 3 prior lines of treatment). We focused our analysis on the effect of the lenalidomide dose at which resistance was developed, the duration of lenalidomide exposure, and lenalidomide-free interval. On intent to treat, 33% of patients achieved ≥partial remission (PR) with Pd. When Pd was given immediately after lenalidomide, ≥PR was 32% (vs 37% after bortezomib). The response rates were similar for patients that received 5 to 15 mg vs 25 mg of lenalidomide (38.5% vs 30.5%, P = .329). Response rates were higher for patients that had received at least 12 months of lenalidomide (44% vs 27%) and for those with ≥18 months from last lenalidomide dose to pomalidomide dose (65% vs 23%). Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 5 and 12.1 months, respectively, which was similar for patients who received lenalidomide, bortezomib or other regimens just before Pd and similar for patients who were receiving different doses of lenalidomide. IMiD-free interval ≥18 months was associated with longer PFS (10.3 vs 3.9 months, P = .003) and OS (27.1 vs 9.3, P = .008) as well as duration of last lenalidomide therapy ≥12 months (PFS: 7.8 vs 3.2, P = .023; OS: 16.5 vs 7.9, P = .005) even after adjustment for the number of prior therapies, duration of disease, and last lenalidomide dose.

Testicular plasmacytoma is a rare extramedullary manifestation of plasma cell dyscrasia. We report a case of a 53-year-old man who presented with a metachronous testicular lesion originating from a soft tissue plasmacytoma of the oral cavity. He underwent radical orchiectomy and a year later, presented with testicular plasmacytoma in the contralateral testis. He received induction chemotherapy, autologous stem cell transplantation with high dose melphalan and maintenance with lenalidomide, as he refused orchiectomy and achieved complete remission. However, six months post-transplant, he relapsed with localized disease in his testis, received second-line chemotherapy, after refusing orchiectomy and still remains in partial remission and alive.

Introduction : The ubiquitination system is the most important cascade of protein degradation independently of lysosomal function. The proteasome system is actively involved in cell cycle regulation. Therefore, proteasome inhibition can lead to inhibition of tumor cell proliferation, and therefore it constitutes a potential therapeutic anticancer approach especially in the therapeutic algorithm of patients with multiple myeloma. Areas covered Three different proteasome inhibitors are currently approved, bortezomib, carfilzomib and ixazomib, and they have been investigated in multiple myeloma and other hematological malignancies. Multiple myeloma cells are extremely sensitive to this inhibition which leads to accumulation of proteins and endoplasmic reticulum stress, leading finally to apoptosis. However, these agents lack specificity, since they target both the constitutive proteasome and the immunoproteasome. Targeting the constitutive proteasome is the main reason for side toxicity due to the effect on normal tissues. In contrary, immunoproteasome inhibition may reduce the adverse events while maintaining the therapeutic efficacy. In this review the authors present the role of the available proteasome inhibitors in myeloma therapeutics and future perspectives of both selective and non-selective proteasome inhibitors. Expert opinion The available non-selective proteasome inhibitors have changed the therapeutics of multiple myeloma the last 10 years and have significantly improved the clinical outcomes of the patients. Furthermore, selective proteasome inhibitors are now under preclinical investigation and there is hope that their optimization will come with an improved safety profile with at least comparable efficacy.

Coronavirus disease 19 (COVID‐19) is considered a multisystemic disease. Several studies have reported persistent symptoms or late‐onset complications after acute COVID‐19, including post‐COVID‐19 hematological disorders. COVID‐19‐induced coagulopathy, an immunothrombotic state, has been linked to thromboembolic and hemorrhagic events. Late‐onset thrombocytopenia related to immune system dysregulation has also been reported as a rare manifestation post COVID‐19. Close monitoring of laboratory dynamics is considered essential to identify timely abnormal values that need further investigation, providing supportive care whenever indicated. The role of hematologists is essential in terms of the multidisciplinary approach of long COVID‐19. This review summarizes all the available evidence on post‐acute COVID‐19 hematological complications.

Since the onset of the COVID‐19 pandemic, a substantial proportion of COVID‐19 patients had documented thrombotic complications and ischemic stroke. Several mechanisms related to immune‐mediated thrombosis, the renin angiotensin system and the effect of SARS‐CoV‐2 in cardiac and brain tissue may contribute to the pathogenesis of ischemic stroke in patients with COVID‐19. Simultaneously, significant strains on global healthcare delivery, including ischemic stroke management, have made treatment of stroke in the setting of COVID‐19 particularly challenging. In this review, we summarize the current knowledge on epidemiology, clinical manifestation, and pathophysiology of ischemic stroke in patients with COVID‐19 to bridge the gap from bench to bedside and clinical practice during the most challenging global health crisis of the last decades., Ischemic stroke among COVID‐19 patients correlates with increased disability and mortality. Hypercoagulopathy, angiotensin‐converting enzyme 2 inhibition, and cardioembolism are potential stroke mechanisms in COVID‐19. SARS‐CoV‐2–specific vaccinations and immunomodulatory agents may affect stroke prevention and treatment in COVID‐19 patients.

Recently, immunotherapy has shown promising results in solid tumors. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first systematic review of published literature synthesizing all the available data and evaluating both the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab in endometrial cancer. The present study was performed in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Eligible articles were identified by searching the MEDLINE and ClinicalTrials.gov databases, using a predefined combination of the terms 'endometrial cancer' and 'pembrolizumab'. Overall, nine articles incorporating data from 712 patients were eligible. Pembrolizumab was demonstrated to be an effective and safe therapeutic option for the management of advanced/metastatic endometrial cancer. Results of ongoing trials evaluating either pembrolizumab alone or in combination with other antineoplastic regimens are expected to confirm its efficacy in this setting of patients. Pembrolizumab appears to be both durable and robust in endometrial cancer. However, there is an emerging need for novel predictive biomarkers to guide clinical practice.

Background The pattern of peripheral vascular involvement in the wild type transthyretin-related cardiac amyloidosis (ATTRwt) and its diagnostic utility in differentiating this infiltrating cardiomyopathy from light chain (AL) cardiac amyloidosis (AL-CA) and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) of different origin have not been explored. Aims To characterize the pattern of peripheral vascular involvement in ATTRwt and evaluate its value in differentiating ATTRwt from AL-CA and HFpEF. Methods Newly diagnosed patients with ATTRwt (n=42) were consecutively recruited from our amyloidosis center. These patients were matched 1:1 for age and sex to patients with AL-CA (n=32) and subjects without amyloidosis (n=32) and also matched 2:1 to HFpEF patients (n=16). All subjects underwent a series of non-invasive vascular examinations for the assessment of: 1. subclinical carotid atherosclerosis with B-mode ultrasonography, 2. Arterial stiffness with measurement of carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity, 3. Reactive vasodilation with flow-mediated dilation (FMD) and 4. Aortic blood pressures and arterial wave reflections with augmentation index (AI) and return time of reflected wave (Tr). Results ATTRwt patients had lower peripheral (pBP) and aortic blood pressure (aBP) markers compared to non-AL controls (p Conclusion ATTRwt patients present differential characteristics of peripheral vascular function and aortic hemodynamics as compared to AL, HFpEF and healthy controls. The clinical value of these characteristics merit further investigation since differential diagnosis among amyloidosis types is clinically challenging, while it may have prognostic implications. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None.

Multiple myeloma (MM) is a hematologic malignancy arising from the clonal proliferation of malignant plasma cells. tRNA-derived RNA fragments (tRFs) constitute a class of small non-coding RNAs, deriving from specific enzymatic cleavage of tRNAs. To the best of our knowledge, this is one of few studies to uncover the potential clinical significance of tRFs in MM. Total RNA was extracted from CD138+ plasma cells of MM and smoldering MM patients, and in vitro polyadenylated. First-strand cDNA synthesis was performed, priming from an oligo-dT-adaptor sequence. Next, real-time quantitative PCR (qPCR) assays were developed for the quantification of six tRFs. Biostatistical analysis was performed to assess the results and in silico analysis was conducted to predict the function of one of the tRFs. Our results showed that elevated levels of five out of six tRFs are indicators of favorable prognosis in MM, predicting prolonged overall survival (OS), while two of them constitute potential molecular biomarkers of favorable prognosis in terms of disease progression. Moreover, three tRFs could be used as surrogate prognostic biomarkers along with the R-ISS staging system to predict OS. In conclusion, tRFs show molecular biomarker utility in MM, while their mechanisms of function merit further investigation.

Background: Carfilzomib is a first-line proteasome inhibitor indicated for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (MM), with its clinical use being hampered by cardiotoxic phenomena. We have previously established a translational model of carfilzomib cardiotoxicity in young adult mice, in which metformin emerged as a prophylactic therapy. Considering that MM is an elderly disease and that age is an independent risk factor for cardiotoxicity, herein, we sought to validate carfilzomib’s cardiotoxicity in an in vivo model of aging. Methods: Aged mice underwent the translational two- and four-dose protocols without and with metformin. Mice underwent echocardiography and were subsequently sacrificed for molecular analyses in the blood and cardiac tissue. Results: Carfilzomib decreased proteasomal activity both in PBMCs and myocardium in both protocols. Carfilzomib induced mild cardiotoxicity after two doses and more pronounced cardiomyopathy in the four-dose protocol, while metformin maintained cardiac function. Carfilzomib led to an increased Bip expression and decreased AMPKα phosphorylation, while metformin coadministration partially decreased Bip expression and induced AMPKα phosphorylation, leading to enhanced myocardial LC3B-dependent autophagy. Conclusion: Carfilzomib induced cardiotoxicity in aged mice, an effect significantly reversed by metformin. The latter possesses translational importance as it further supports the clinical use of metformin as a potent prophylactic therapy.

Background Carfilzomib (CFZ) is a second generation irreversible proteasome inhibitor that has been shown to improve overall survival in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (MM) but is associated with cardiac toxicity in MM. Because ubiquitin-proteasome system (UPS) is involved in cardiovascular homeostasis exploring the effects of proteasome inhibition on cardiac mechanics, in a clinical setting, would provide novel insight of the clinical role of UPS in cardiovascular disease. Aim To gain a thorough understanding of proteasome inhibition on myocardial mechanics in a clinical setting. Methods We prospectively evaluated 48 patients with relapsed or refractory MM and an indication to receive CFZ treatment [median age: 67.5, interquartile range (64–73), 66.7% men]. All patients underwent cardiac ultrasonography at an initial visit, at the first day of the 3rd month (C3D1, n=25) and at the last day of cycle 6 (C6D16, n=48). Pulse wave velocity (PWV) was used to assess arterial stiffness and calculate arterial-ventricular coupling (VAC) by the ratio (PWV/global longitudinal strain (GLS)). Carfilzomib was administered at 27mg/m2 on days 1 (C1D1) and 2 (C1D2) of cycle 1 and at 56mg/m2 thereafter. Blood was drawn at baseline, C3D1 and C6D16 to measure proteasome activity (PrA). Patients were followed up for carfilzomib–related cardiovascular adverse events. Results Regarding systolic function, between baseline and C6D16, we noticed deterioration in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (57.7±5.4% vs 56.1±7.19%, p=0.022), GLS (−20.51±2.78 vs −18.88±3.45%, p=0.003), S wave of LV longitudinal strain rate and radial strain (p Conclusion CFZ treatment was associated with global deterioration of markers of myocardial systolic and diastolic function and VAC. The observed association of changes in proteasome activity with VAC and left atrial function and structure supports a direct effect of proteasome inhibition on the cross-talk between LV and arterial function and LV diastolic function. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: Private company. Main funding source(s): Amgen

Emerging data suggest suboptimal antibody responses to COVID-19 vaccination in patients with hematological malignancies. We evaluated the humoral response following the BNT162b2 vaccine in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL), and Hodgkin’s lymphoma (HL). An FDA-approved, ELISA-based methodology was implemented to evaluate the titers of neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) against SARS-CoV-2 on day 1 of the first vaccine, and afterwards on day 22 and 50. One hundred and thirty-two patients with CLL/lymphomas and 214 healthy matched controls vaccinated during the same period, at the same center were enrolled in the study (NCT04743388). Vaccination with two doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine led to lower production of NAbs against SARS-CoV-2 in patients with CLL/lymphomas compared with controls both on day 22 and on day 50 (p &lt, 0.001 for all comparisons). Disease-related immune dysregulation and therapy-related immunosuppression are involved in the low humoral response. Importantly, active treatment with Rituximab, Bruton’s tyrosine kinase inhibitors, or chemotherapy was an independent prognostic factor for suboptimal antibody response. Patients with HL showed superior humoral responses to the NHL/CLL subgroups. In conclusion, patients with CLL/lymphomas have low humoral response following COVID-19 vaccination, underlining the need for timely vaccination ideally during a treatment-free period and for continuous vigilance on infection control measures.

Endocrine system plays a vital role in controlling human homeostasis. Understanding the possible effects of COVID-19 on endocrine glands is crucial to prevent and manage endocrine disorders before and during hospitalization in COVID-19-infected patients as well as to follow them up properly upon recovery. Many endocrine glands such as pancreas, hypothalamus and pituitary, thyroid, adrenal glands, testes, and ovaries have been found to express angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 receptors, the main binding site of the virus. Since the pandemic outbreak, various publications focus on the aggravation of preexisting endocrine diseases by COVID-19 infection or the adverse prognosis of the disease in endocrine patients. However, data on endocrine disorders both during the phase of the infection (early complications) and upon recovery (late complications) are scarce. The aim of this review is to identify and discuss early and late endocrine complications of COVID-19. The majority of the available data refer to glucose dysregulation and its reciprocal effect on COVID-19 infection with the main interest focusing on the presentation of new onset of diabetes mellitus. Thyroid dysfunction with low triiodothyronine, low thyroid stimulating hormone, or subacute thyroiditis has been reported. Adrenal dysregulation and impaired spermatogenesis in affected men have been also reported. Complications of other endocrine glands are still not clear. Considering the recent onset of COVID-19 infection, the available follow-up data are limited, and therefore, long-term studies are required to evaluate certain effects of COVID-19 on the endocrine glands.

Background Selinexor is an oral, selective nuclear export inhibitor. STORM was a phase 2b, single-arm, open-label, multicenter trial of selinexor with low dose dexamethasone in patients with penta-exposed relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) that met its primary endpoint, with overall response of 26% (95% confidence interval [CI], 19 to 35%). Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was a secondary endpoint measured using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy – Multiple Myeloma (FACT-MM). This study examines impact of selinexor treatment on HRQoL of patients treated in STORM and reports two approaches to calculate minimal clinically important differences for the FACT-MM. Methods FACT-MM data were collected at baseline, on day 1 of each 4-week treatment cycle, and at end of treatment (EOT). Changes from baseline were analyzed for the FACT-MM total score, FACT-trial outcome index (TOI), FACT-General (FACT-G), and the MM-specific domain using mixed-effects regression models. Two approaches for evaluating minimal clinically important differences were explored: the first defined as 10% of the instrument range, and the second based on estimated mean baseline differences between Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) scores. Post-hoc difference analysis compared change in scores from baseline to EOT for treatment responders and non-responders. Results Eighty patients were included in the analysis; the mean number of prior therapies was 7.9 (standard deviation [SD] 3.1), and mean duration of myeloma was 7.6 years (SD 3.4). Each exploratory minimal clinically important difference threshold yielded consistent results whereby most patients did not experience HRQoL decline during the first six cycles of treatment (range: 53.9 to 75.7% for the first approach; range: 52.6 to 72.9% for the second). Treatment responders experienced less decline in HRQoL from baseline to EOT than non-responders, which was significant for the FACT-G, but not for other scores. Conclusion The majority of patients did not experience decline in HRQoL based on minimal clinically important differences during early cycles of treatment with selinexor and dexamethasone in the STORM trial. An anchor-based approach utilizing patient-level data (ECOG PS score) to define minimal clinically important differences for the FACT-MM gave consistent results with a distribution-based approach. Trial registration This trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov under the trial-ID NCT02336815 on January 8, 2015.

The precise etiology of multiple myeloma remains elusive, but both genetic and environmental factors have been suggested to contribute to disease risk. Several occupational categories and toxic agents have been implicated as potentially causative, yet findings from the literature are inconsistent. The aim of this review was to summarize and critically comment on the accumulated epidemiological evidence, across published meta-analyses, about the association between occupational exposure and risk of multiple myeloma. Overall, results from eleven meta-epidemiological studies underscore a significantly increased risk for firefighters, hairdressers, and employees exposed to engine exhaust, whereas farming and methylene chloride exposure have been non-significantly correlated with the disease. Further epidemiological studies are of utmost importance whilst emphasis should be placed on occupational hazard surveillance, as such studies will obtain a more accurate picture of disease occurrence in working populations, and will enable both the implementation of preventive actions and the evaluation of their effectiveness.

Summary Patients with multiple myeloma (MM) have a suboptimal antibody response following vaccination against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) and lower seroconversion rates following coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) compared with healthy individuals. In this context, we evaluated the development of neutralising antibodies (NAbs) against SARS‐CoV‐2 in non‐vaccinated patients with MM and COVID‐19 compared with patients after vaccination with two doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine. Serum was collected either four weeks post confirmed diagnosis or four weeks post a second dose of BNT162b2. NAbs were measured with a Food and Drug Administration‐approved enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay methodology. Thirty‐five patients with COVID‐19 and MM along with 35 matched patients were included. The two groups did not differ in age, sex, body mass index, prior lines of therapy, disease status, lymphocyte count, immunoglobulin levels and comorbidities. Patients with MM and COVID‐19 showed a superior humoral response compared with vaccinated patients with MM. The median (interquartile range) NAb titre was 87·6% (71·6–94%) and 58·7% (21·4–91·8%) for COVID‐19‐positive and vaccinated patients, respectively (P = 0·01).Importantly, there was no difference in NAb production between COVID‐19‐positive and vaccinated patients who did not receive any treatment (median NAb 85·1% vs 91·7%, P = 0·14). In conclusion, our data indicate that vaccinated patients with MM on treatment without prior COVID‐19 should be considered for booster vaccine doses.

Simple Summary Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) remains the standard of care for transplant-eligible newly diagnosed Multiple Myeloma (NDMM) patients. However, despite its overall benefit, patients undergo various clinical outcomes post ASCT. Therefore, the identification of biomarkers that could explain, at least partially, this heterogeneity is of utmost clinical significance. The aim of this study was to assess clonal plasma cell contamination of the stem cell grafts of NDMM and evaluate its potency as a predictive/prognostic marker. Our results showed that worse responses to induction therapy correlate with higher levels of graft contamination. Importantly, our data revealed the significantly higher risk of delaying or not achieving complete remission and minimal residual disease (MRD)-negative responses among patients with graft contamination. Graft contamination is emerging as a promising predictive biomarker of clinical relevance that could be used to stratify patients post ASCT. Abstract High-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell support (ASCT) is the standard of care for eligible newly diagnosed Multiple Myeloma (MM) patients. Stem cell graft contamination by aberrant plasma cells (APCs) has been considered a possible predictive marker of subsequent clinical outcome, but the limited reports to date present unclear conclusions. We prospectively estimated the frequency of graft contamination using highly sensitive next-generation flow cytometry and evaluated its clinical impact in 199 myeloma patients who underwent an ASCT. Contamination (con+) was detected in 79/199 patients at a median level 2 × 10−5. Its presence and levels were correlated with response to induction treatment, with 94%, 71% and 43% achieving CR, VGPR and PR, respectively. Importantly, con+ grafts conferred 2-fold and 2.8-fold higher patient-risk of not achieving or delaying reaching CR (4 vs. 11 months) and MRD negativity (5 vs. 18 months) post ASCT, respectively. Our data also provide evidence of a potentially skewed bone marrow (BM) reconstitution due to unpurged grafts, since con+ derived BM had significantly higher prevalence of memory B cells. These data, together with the absence of significant associations with baseline clinical features, highlight graft contamination as a potential biomarker with independent prognostic value for deeper responses, including MRD negativity. Longer follow-up will reveal if this corresponds to PFS or OS advantage.

Recent data suggest a suboptimal antibody response to COVID-19 vaccination in patients with hematological malignancies. Neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) against SARS-CoV-2 were evaluated in 276 patients with plasma cell neoplasms after vaccination with either the BNT162b2 or the AZD1222 vaccine, on days 1 (before the first vaccine shot), 22, and 50. Patients with MM (n = 213), SMM (n = 38), and MGUS (n = 25) and 226 healthy controls were enrolled in the study (NCT04743388). Vaccination with either two doses of the BNT162b2 or one dose of the AZD1222 vaccine leads to lower production of NAbs in patients with MM compared with controls both on day 22 and on day 50 (p p = 0.009) and on day 50 (p = 0.003). Importantly, active treatment with either anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies (Mabs) or belantamab mafodotin and lymphopenia at the time of vaccination were independent prognostic factors for suboptimal antibody response following vaccination. In conclusion, MM patients have low humoral response following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, especially under treatment with anti-CD38 or belamaf. This underlines the need for timely vaccination, possibly during a treatment-free period, and for continuous vigilance on infection control measures in non-responders.

Simple Summary Multiple myeloma bone disease (MMBD) is one of the most important complications of multiple myeloma with a great impact on quality of life. Recent advances in the field of imaging techniques provided clinicians with a variety of imaging modalities with high sensitivity for the diagnosis of MMBD. However, no circulating biomarkers are available to support the diagnosis of MMBD in cases where the results are inconclusive. The aim of our study was to investigate the clinical utility of 19 miRNAs implicated in osteoporosis in MMBD. Our results suggest that the levels of circulating let-7b-5p, miR-143-3p, miR-17-5p, miR-335-5p, and miR-214-3p (standalone or combined in multi-miRNA models) can effectively predict the presence of MMBD in newly diagnosed MM patients. Abstract Background: Multiple myeloma bone disease (MMBD) constitutes a common and severe complication of multiple myeloma (MM), impacting the quality of life and survival. We evaluated the clinical value of a panel of 19 miRNAs associated with osteoporosis in MMBD. Methods: miRNAs were isolated from the plasma of 62 newly diagnosed MM patients with or without MMBD. First-strand cDNA was synthesized, and relative quantification was performed using qPCR. Lastly, we carried out extensive biostatistical analysis. Results: Circulating levels of let-7b-5p, miR-143-3p, miR-17-5p, miR-214-3p, and miR-335-5p were significantly higher in the blood plasma of MM patients with MMBD compared to those without. Receiver operating characteristic curve and logistic regression analyses showed that these miRNAs could accurately predict MMBD. Furthermore, a standalone multi-miRNA–based logistic regression model exhibited the best predictive potential regarding MMBD. Two of those miRNAs also have a prognostic role in MM since survival analysis indicated that lower circulating levels of both let-7b-5p and miR-335-5p were associated with significantly worse progression-free survival, independently of the established prognostic factors. Conclusions: Our study proposes a miRNA signature to facilitate MMBD diagnosis, especially in ambiguous cases. Moreover, we provide evidence of the prognostic role of let-7b-5p and miR-335-5p as non-invasive prognostic biomarkers in MM.

Introduction: Waldenstrom's macroglobulinemia (WM), an orphan disease, is a rare low-grade B-cell lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma with unique clinical features and monoclonal IgM production. Rituximab remains to this date the backbone of most commonly used treatment combinations. The FDA/EMA approval of Ibrutinib, the first-in-class BTK inhibitor, either as monotherapy or in combination with rituximab, changed the treatment landscape of the disease.Areas covered: Clinical trial data that demonstrate mode of action, efficacy, and the safety profile of each agent will be covered. A safety analysis of the combination treatment will also be performed to point out its high efficacy and overall favorable toxicity profile. The disadvantages and treatment gaps that still exist in the treatment of WM which relate to the need for long-term ibrutinib administration and the lack of deep remissions and subsequent disease relapse, will also be reviewed.Expert opinion: The ibrutinib-rituximab combination is both effective and safe, in the newly-diagnosed and relapsed-refractory disease setting. The optimal therapeutic approach for WM patients remains however to be established. The question of which combinatory (or synergistic) regimen can allow for a fixed-treatment duration, deep and durable responses with a safe toxicity profile is being addressed in ongoing clinical trials.

Introduction Selinexor is a first-in-class, oral, potent selective inhibitor of nuclear export (SINE) which blocks XPO1, forcing the nuclear retention and activation of tumor suppressor proteins, leading to cancer cell apoptosis. Selinexor has demonstrated antimyeloma activity in triple class refractory multiple myeloma (MM) [Chari et al. NEJM 2019]. Selinexor synergizes with proteasome inhibitors (PIs) in PI-sensitive and -resistant cell lines and produces high response rates in patients with PI refractory and non-refractory MM (Bahlis et al. Blood 2018). In the phase 3 BOSTON study, the combination of once weekly (QW) selinexor, QW bortezomib, and dexamethasone (SVd) in patients who had received 1-3 prior therapies led to a significantly longer (47%) median progression-free survival (PFS) of 13.93 vs 9.46 months, with a hazard ratio of 0.70 (P=0.0075) compared to standard twice weekly bortezomib and dexamethasone (Vd). In addition, SVd regimen produced higher response rates and deeper responses (ORR: 76.4% vs 62.3% and ≥CR 16.9% vs 10.2%) compared with Vd. The benefit with SVd was observed across all efficacy endpoints and was associated with lower incidence and severity of bortezomib-induced peripheral neuropathy. Here we analyzed the effect of prior PI therapy (bortezomib, carfilzomib, ixazomib) on the efficacy and safety of SVd compared with Vd. Methods BOSTON is an open-label, randomized phase 3 study in patients with MM comparing SVd (QW oral selinexor 100 mg, QW subcutaneous bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2, and BIW oral dexamethasone 20 mg), versus Vd (BIW bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2 and QIW dexamethasone 20 mg). Patients previously treated with a PI must have had at least a partial response (PR) to the PI and 6 months since the last PI regimen. The study primary end point was PFS. Here we report subgroup analysis of treatment outcomes based on prior PI treatment. Results Subgroups consisted of PI naïve patients (n=95; 24%) and patients with prior PI treatment (n=307; 76%). Both the subgroups and study arms were comparable for baseline patient demographic and disease characteristics. However, those with prior PI treatment more frequently had a previous stem cell transplant (38% vs 24%) or 3 lines of prior anti MM therapy (21% vs 13%). Median PFS was improved with SVd compared with Vd in both the PI naïve group (PFS not reached (NR) vs 9.7 months; HR 0.2585 [95% CI, 0.1116-0.5988]; P=0.0003) and in the PI treated group (11.7 vs 9.4 months; HR 0.7839 [95% CI, 0.5791-1.0612]; P=0.06). Other efficacy endpoints are shown in the table. Peripheral neuropathy ≥grade 2 (a secondary study endpoint) was less frequent in the SVd compared with the Vd arm (PI naïve: 25.5%, Vd 43.8%, P=0.0302; PI treated: SVd 19.6%, Vd 31.4%, P=0.0092). Adverse events of ≥grade 3 occurred in 71% of patients in the PI naïve group (SVd 77%, Vd 65%) and 74% of patients in the PI treated group (SVd 88%, Vd 60%). Thrombocytopenia was more frequent in patients in the SVd arms (PI naïve: SVd 32%, Vd 13%; PI treated: SVd 42%, Vd 19%) as was anemia (PI naïve: SVd 15%, Vd 6%; PI treated: SVd 16%, Vd 12%), and fatigue (PI naïve: SVd 15%, Vd 2%; PI treated: SVd 13%, Vd 1%). Conclusions The once-weekly SVd combination was associated with significant clinical benefit and reduced peripheral neuropathy as compared with standard twice-weekly Vd in patients with MM and 1-3 prior therapies, regardless of prior therapy with a PI. However, the benefits of SVd over Vd were more pronounced in patients who had never been treated with a PI (PFS HR 0.26), suggesting that selinexor could be an optimal partner for combining with weekly bortezomib as the first PI-containing MM regimen. Figure 1 Disclosures Mateos: Roche: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria; EDO Mundipharma: Honoraria; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Honoraria; GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria. Gavriatopoulou:Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria; Genesis Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria. Facon:Celgene, Janssen, Takeda, Amgen, Roche, Karyopharm, Oncopeptides, BMS, Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Auner:Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Leleu:AbbVie: Honoraria; GSK: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Carsgen: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; Merck: Honoraria; BMS-celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Oncopeptide: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Karyopharm: Honoraria. Hajek:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharma MAR: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Dimopoulos:Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Personal fees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Personal fees; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Personal fees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Personal fees, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Personal fees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Delimpasi:GENESIS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Spicka:Celgene, Amgen, Janssen-Cilag, Takeda, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Kryachok:Janssen, Bayer, Karyopharm, MSD, Acerta, AvbbVie, Debiopharm: Research Funding; Takeda, Janssen: Consultancy; Takeda, MSD, AbbVie, Ro: Other: Travel, accommodations, expenses; Takeda, Janssen, Novartis, Roche, MSD, Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding. Sinha:Dr Reddys Lab, Intas Pharmaceuticals, Karyopharm Therapeutics: Honoraria. Venner:Celgene, Amgen: Research Funding; Janssen, BMS/Celgene, Sanofi, Takeda, Amgen: Honoraria. Garg:Janssen, Takeda, Celgene, Novartis, Sanofi: Honoraria. Stevens:Amgen, MorphoSys: Consultancy. Quach:GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Glaxo Kline Smith: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Jagannath:BMS, Janssen, Karyopharm, Legend Biotech, Sanofi, Takeda: Consultancy. Moreau:Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene/Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria. Levy:Karyopharm,Takeda, BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Badros:Amgen: Consultancy; University of Maryland: Current Employment. Anderson:Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Bahlis:Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS/Celgene and Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accomodations, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria. Cavo:Jannsen, BMS, Celgene, Sanofi, GlaxoSmithKline, Takeda, Amgen, Oncopeptides, AbbVie, Karyopharm, Adaptive: Consultancy, Honoraria. Chai:Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc: Current Employment. Arazy:Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc.: Current Employment. Shah:Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Shacham:Karyopharm: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Patents & Royalties: (8999996, 9079865, 9714226, PCT/US12/048319, and I574957) on hydrazide containing nuclear transport modulators and uses, and pending patents PCT/US12/048319, 499/2012, PI20102724, and 2012000928) . Kauffman:Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Richardson:Celgene/BMS, Oncopeptides, Takeda, Karyopharm: Research Funding.

Introduction Selinexor is a first-in-class, oral, potent selective inhibitor of nuclear export (SINE) which blocks XPO1, forcing the nuclear retention and activation of tumor suppressor proteins, leading to cancer cell apoptosis. Selinexor has demonstrated antimyeloma activity in triple class refractory multiple myeloma (MM) [Chari et al. NEJM 2019]. Selinexor synergizes with proteasome inhibitors (PIs) in PI-sensitive and -resistant cell lines and produces high response rates in patients with PI refractory and non-refractory MM. (Bahlis et al. Blood 2018). In the phase 3 BOSTON study, the combination of once weekly (QW) selinexor, QW bortezomib and dexamethasone (SVd) in patients who had received 1-3 prior therapies led to a significantly (47%) longer median progression-free survival (PFS) of 13.93 versus 9.46 months (HR 0.70; P=0.0075) compared to standard twice weekly bortezomib and dexamethasone (Vd). In addition, SVd regimen produced higher response rates and deeper responses (ORR: 76.4% vs 62.3% and ≥CR 16.9% vs 10.2%) compared with Vd. The benefit with SVd was observed across all efficacy endpoints and was associated with lower incidence and severity of bortezomib-induced peripheral neuropathy. Here we present subgroup analyses according to number of prior lines of therapy and prior treatment with lenalidomide (LEN). Methods BOSTON is an open-label, randomized phase 3 study in patients with MM comparing SVd (QW selinexor 100 mg, QW subcutaneous bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2, and 20 mg twice weekly [BIW] dexamethasone), versus Vd (1.3 mg/m2 bortezomib BIW and dexamethasone 20 mg 4 x weekly [QIW]). Patients previously treated with a PI must have had at least a partial response (PR) to the PI and 6 months since the last PI regimen. The study primary end point was PFS. Results Of the 402 patients in the BOSTON study, 198 (49%) had 1 prior line versus 204 (51%) with 2-3 prior lines. In addition, 154 (38%) comprised the LEN treated subgroup, versus 248 (62%) in the LEN naïve subgroup. Of note, 41% patients received prior thalidomide, which is consistent with most of the BOSTON study patients being treated in the EU. Baseline demographic and disease characteristics were well balanced between treatment arms across subgroups. A very good partial response (VGPR) or better to most recent prior line anti-MM therapy was more frequent in patients with 1 prior line of therapy (63% vs 41%) versus those with 2-3 prior lines of therapy. Patients with prior LEN therapy were more likely to have had 2-3 prior therapies (72.1%) compared with LEN naive patients (37.5%). As shown in the table, SVd was associated with longer PFS compared with Vd in all subgroups. Overall response rates (ORR) and times-to-next-treatment (TTNT) were statistically greater with SVd compared with Vd in all subgroups. Rates of very good partial response or better (VGPR) were statistically greater for SVd vs Vd in the LEN-naïve group and 1 prior treatment group. Grade ≥2 peripheral neuropathy (a key secondary endpoint prespecified in the study) occurred less frequently across all SVd subgroups compared with Vd: LEN treated (21% SVd, 37% Vd, P=0.0166); LEN-naïve (21% SVd, 33% Vd, P=0.0252), 1 prior line (21% SVd, 33% Vd, P=0.0501); 2-3 prior lines (21% SVd, 36% Vd, P=0.0107). Adverse events of ≥grade 3 were more commonly reported in the SVd treatment arm than in the Vd arm, LEN treated (83% SVd, 57% Vd), LEN-naïve (76% SVd, 55% Vd), 1 prior line (77% SVd, 56% Vd), 2-3 prior lines (81% SVd, 56% Vd), and were mostly managed with dose modification and/or supportive treatment. Pneumonia occurred at comparable rates between treatment arms. There were no differences between subgroups in grade 3 adverse events. Conclusions In the BOSTON study, once-weekly SVd significantly improved PFS, ORR, TTNT and reduced rates of ≥grade 2 peripheral neuropathy compared with Vd regardless of number of prior treatments or whether patients were previously treated with LEN. Adverse events were managed with dose modification and treatment-related discontinuation rates did not differ between the 2 regimens for any subgroup. The PFS of 16.6 months with SVd after 1 prior therapy, and the HR of 0.63 in patients with prior LEN treatment support the use of once-weekly SVd for the second line treatment of MM following a LEN-containing regimen. Table Disclosures Mateos: Takeda: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria; EDO Mundipharma: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Honoraria. Jagannath:Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria; Legend Biotech: Consultancy, Honoraria. Delimpasi:GENESIS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Spicka:Celgene, Amgen, Janssen-Cilag, Takeda, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Kryachok:Takeda, Janssen, Novartis, Roche, MSD, Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen, Bayer, Karyopharm, MSD, Acerta, AvbbVie, Debiopharm: Research Funding; Takeda, MSD, AbbVie, Ro: Other: Travel, accommodations, expenses; Takeda, Janssen: Consultancy. Gavriatopoulou:Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria; Genesis Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria. Dimopoulos:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Personal fees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Personal fees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Personal fees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Personal fees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Personal fees. Auner:Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria. Leleu:BMS-celgene: Honoraria; Carsgen: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; Merck: Honoraria; AbbVie: Honoraria; Oncopeptide: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; GSK: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Karyopharm: Honoraria. Sinha:Dr Reddys Lab, Intas Pharmaceuticals, Karyopharm Therapeutics: Honoraria. Venner:Celgene, Amgen: Research Funding; Janssen, BMS/Celgene, Sanofi, Takeda, Amgen: Honoraria. Garg:Janssen, Takeda, Celgene, Novartis, Sanofi: Honoraria. Stevens:Amgen, MorphoSys: Consultancy. Quach:Amgen, Celgene, karyopharm, GSK, Janssen Cilag, Sanofi.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GlaxoSmithKline, Karyopharm, Amgen, Celgene, Janssen Cilag: Honoraria; GlaxoSmithKline, Karyopharm, Amgen, Celgene, Janssen Cilag: Consultancy; Amgen, sanofi, celgene, Karyopharm, GSK: Research Funding. Moreau:Novartis: Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene/Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria. Levy:Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol Meyers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; BeiGene: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Baylor University Med Center: Current Employment; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Badros:Amgen: Consultancy; University of Maryland: Current Employment. Anderson:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Bahlis:Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS/Celgene and Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accomodations, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria. Facon:Celgene, Janssen, Takeda, Amgen, Roche, Karyopharm, Oncopeptides, BMS, Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Cavo:Jannsen, BMS, Celgene, Sanofi, GlaxoSmithKline, Takeda, Amgen, Oncopeptides, AbbVie, Karyopharm, Adaptive: Consultancy, Honoraria. Chai:Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc: Current Employment. Arazy:Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc.: Current Employment. Shah:Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Shacham:Karyopharm: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Patents & Royalties: (8999996, 9079865, 9714226, PCT/US12/048319, and I574957) on hydrazide containing nuclear transport modulators and uses, and pending patents PCT/US12/048319, 499/2012, PI20102724, and 2012000928) . Kauffman:Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Richardson:Celgene/BMS, Oncopeptides, Takeda, Karyopharm: Research Funding.