Search

BACKGROUND Triplet or quadruplet therapies incorporating proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulators, and anti-CD38 antibodies have led to prolonged survival among patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma; however, most patients have a relapse. Frontline lenalidomide therapy has increased the number of patients with lenalidomide-refractory disease at the time of the first relapse. METHODS In this phase 3, randomized, open-label trial, we evaluated belantamab mafodotin, pomalidomide, and dexamethasone (BPd), as compared with pomalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (PVd), in lenalidomide-exposed patients who had relapsed or refractory myeloma after at least one line of therapy. The primary end point was progression-free survival. Disease response and safety were also assessed. RESULTS A total of 302 patients underwent randomization; 155 were assigned to the BPd group, and 147 to the PVd group. At a median follow-up of 21.8 months (range, <0.1 to 39.2), the 12-month estimated progression-free survival with BPd was 71% (95% confidence interval [CI], 63 to 78), as compared with 51% (95% CI, 42 to 60) with PVd (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.73; P<0.001). Data on overall survival were immature. The percentage of patients with a response to treatment (partial response or better) was 77% (95% CI, 70 to 84) in the BPd group and 72% (95% CI, 64 to 79) in the PVd group; 40% (95% CI, 32 to 48) and 16% (95% CI, 11 to 23), respectively, had a complete response or better. Grade 3 or higher adverse events occurred in 94% of the patients in the BPd group and 76% of those in the PVd group. Ocular events occurred in 89% of the patients who received BPd (grade 3 or 4 in 43%) and 30% of those who received PVd (grade 3 or 4 in 2%); ocular events in the BPd group were managed with belantamab mafodotin dose modification. Ocular events led to treatment discontinuation in 9% of the patients in the BPd group and in no patients in the PVd group. CONCLUSIONS Among lenalidomide-exposed patients with relapsed or refractory myeloma, BPd conferred a significantly greater benefit than PVd with respect to progression-free survival, as well as deeper, more durable responses. Ocular events were common but were controllable by belantamab mafodotin dose modification. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The original version of this article contained a mistake. The name of Eirini Katroditou should have been Eirini Katodritou. The original article has been corrected. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Extramedullary relapse constitutes an uncommon manifestation of multiple myeloma, but central nervous system involvement as the only manifestation of relapse appears even less common. A 50-year-old man with a history of multiple myeloma achieved complete remission after autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Fifteen months later, he presented with central nervous relapse with no signs of systemic disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We evaluated progression-free survival (PFS) rate of patients treated with lenalidomide/dexamethasone (Len/Dex), the efficacy of the combination, and the prognostic significance of treatment at biochemical vs. clinical relapse on PFS in 207 consecutive myeloma patients treated with Len/Dex in second line, according to routine clinical practice in Greece. First-line treatment included bortezomib-based (63.3%) or immunomodulatory drug-based (34.8%) therapies; 25% of patients underwent autologous stem cell transplantation. Overall response rate was 73.4% (17.8% complete response and 23.7% very good partial response); median time to best response was 6.7 months. Overall, median PFS and 12-month PFS rate was 19.2 months and 67.6%, respectively. 67.5% of patients had biochemical relapse and 32.5% had clinical relapse prior to initiation of Len/Dex. Median PFS was 24 months for patients treated at biochemical relapse vs. 13.2 months for those treated at clinical relapse (HR:0.63, p = 0.006) and the difference remained significant after adjustment for other prognostic factors. Type of relapse was the strongest prognostic factor for PFS in multivariate analysis. These real-world data confirm the efficacy of Len/Dex combination at first relapse; more importantly, it is demonstrated for the first time outside a clinical trial setting that starting therapy with Len/Dex at biochemical, rather than at clinical relapse, is a significant prognostic factor for PFS, inducing a 37% reduction of the probability of disease progression or death. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: On rare occasions, a handful of innovative cancer drugs may successfully go through clinical trials and manage to obtain simultaneous regulatory approvals to treat a specific disease, providing hope for improved treatment outcomes. In the past few years, physicians in North America, Europe, and other countries with stronger economies have been able to use several of the recently approved drugs to treat a blood cancer called multiple myeloma, once older therapies have failed. This study looked at the treatment outcomes associated with the wave of newer drugs in patients diagnosed with multiple myeloma in Greece. The results showed that approximately three-quarters of patients who received one of the newer drugs after having progressed on front-line therapies remained in remission a year after initiating treatment. This finding was comparable to the results from previous studies in Greek patients who were diagnosed with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma and had previously used other therapies. Newer methodologies are needed to assess the real-world comparative effectiveness of a "generation" of pharmaceutical innovation versus the prior standard of care. This chart review study aimed to first evaluate the cumulative clinical benefits of pharmaceutical innovation in everyday relapse/refractory multiple myeloma before analyzing findings in the context of respective real-world outcomes from the bortezomib/lenalidomide era. Study endpoints included the 52-week PFS rate in second and third line of therapy (LOT), mPFS-2 across the first and second LOT, the ORR, reasons for discontinuation, and the treatment duration per therapeutic algorithm. Data from 107 patients were collected. The median follow-up was 2.0 years. Of the subjects who met the selection criteria for the second LOT, 72.2% maintained the PFS at 52 weeks. In the third-line setting, the PFS rate at 52 weeks was 63.5%. The mPFS across the first and second, the second, and the third LOTs were 26, 17, and 15 months, respectively. The ORR was 76.1% in the second and 69.7% in the third LOT. After non-response or progression, the main reason for drug discontinuation was treatment intolerability. The second-line ORR and the 52-week PFS rate were similar to previous real-world findings from the bortezomib/lenalidomide era. The cumulative mPFS across the second and third LOTs was higher than the respective mPFS across the first and second LOTs. Despite its limitations, the methodology and findings from this study may be used in future clinical and economic evaluations across all hematological malignancies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Multiple myeloma (MM) is characterized by the presence of deregulated bone metabolism. Restoring bone turnover is essential for patients with MM. We prospectively evaluated the impact of the anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody daratumumab on markers of bone remodeling among patients with relapsed/refractory MM. Overall, daratumumab improved bone turnover by favoring bone formation. Biomarkers of bone turnover in serum are suggestive of bone dynamics during treatment in multiple myeloma (MM). We evaluated the role of daratumumab on bone remodeling among patients with relapsed/refractory MM in the prospective, open-label, phase 2 study REBUILD. Daratumumab was administered according to the approved indication. A total of 33 out of 57 enrolled patients completed 4 months of treatment. The median percent change from baseline to 4 months in C-terminal cross-linking telopeptide of type 1 collagen (CTX) (primary endpoint) was 3.9%, with 13 (39.4%) and 11 (33.3%) patients showing at least 20% and 30% reduction in CTX levels, respectively. The median percent decrease from baseline to 4 months in tartrate resistant acid phosphatase 5b (TRACP-5b) levels (co-primary endpoint) was 2.6%, with 10 (30.3%) and 6 (18.2%) patients showing at least 20% and 30% reduction in TRACP-5b levels, respectively. However, the changes in these markers of bone catabolism were not statistically significant. Furthermore, the levels of osteocalcin, bone-specific alkaline phosphatase and procollagen type-I N-pro-peptide (bone formation markers) increased from baseline to 4 months (secondary endpoints) by 18.4%, 92.6% and 10.2%, respectively. Furthermore, the median levels of dickkopf-1 and C-C motif ligand-3 showed a significant decrease at 4 months by 17.5% and 16.0%, respectively. In conclusion, daratumumab improved bone turnover by inducing bone formation and reducing osteoblast inhibition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Therapeutic regimens for previously treated multiple myeloma (MM) may not provide prolonged disease control and are often complicated by significant adverse events, including peripheral neuropathy. In patients with previously treated MM in the Phase 3 BOSTON study, once weekly selinexor, once weekly bortezomib, and 40 mg dexamethasone (XVd) demonstrated a significantly longer median progression-free survival (PFS), higher response rates, deeper responses, a trend to improved survival, and reduced incidence and severity of bortezomib-induced peripheral neuropathy when compared with standard twice weekly bortezomib and 80 mg dexamethasone (Vd). The pre-specified analyses described here evaluated the influence of the number of prior lines of therapy, prior treatment with lenalidomide, prior proteasome inhibitor (PI) therapy, prior immunomodulatory drug therapy, and prior autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) on the efficacy and safety of XVd compared with Vd. In this 1:1 randomized study, enrolled patients were assigned to receive once weekly oral selinexor (100 mg) with once weekly subcutaneous bortezomib (1.3 mg/m2) and 40 mg per week dexamethasone (XVd) versus standard twice weekly bortezomib and 80 mg per week dexamethasone (Vd). XVd significantly improved PFS, overall response rate, time-to-next-treatment, and showed reduced all grade and grade ≥ 2 peripheral neuropathy compared with Vd regardless of prior treatments, but the benefits of XVd over Vd were more pronounced in patients treated earlier in their disease course who had either received only one prior therapy, had never been treated with a PI, or had prior ASCT. Treatment with XVd improved outcomes as compared to Vd regardless of prior therapies as well as manageable and generally reversible adverse events. XVd was associated with clinical benefit and reduced peripheral neuropathy compared to standard Vd in previously treated MM. These results suggest that the once weekly XVd regimen may be optimally administered to patients earlier in their course of disease, as their first bortezomib-containing regimen, and in those relapsing after ASCT. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03110562). Registered 12 April 2017. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03110562. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Multiple myeloma triplet therapies: baseline characteristics and control groups - Authors' reply. [Extracted from the article]

Objectives To evaluate the prognostic impact of hypercalcemia in newly diagnosed patients with symptomatic multiple myeloma ( MM), especially after the incorporation of new agents. Methods we analyzed the outcomes of newly diagnosed patients with symptomatic myeloma included in the database of the Greek Myeloma Study Group for the prognostic effect of the presence of hypercalcemia (defined as corrected serum calcium ≥11 mg/ dL) at diagnosis. Results Among 2129 consecutive patients with symptomatic MM, 19.5% presented with hypercalcemia at the time of diagnosis. The presence of hypercalcemia was associated with anemia, thrombocytopenia, lower estimated glomerular filtration rate ( eGFR), advanced ISS stage, and presence of lytic lesions. Hypercalcemia was more common in patients with high-risk cytogenetics and was associated with inferior survival across different time periods, age groups, and primary treatments. Hypercalcemia was also associated with a twofold increase in the risk of early death. In patients without available FISH, hypercalcemia could substitute for the presence of high-risk cytogenetics and identify patients with worse prognosis along with ISS stage and elevated serum LDH. Conclusion Hypercalcemia remains a poor prognostic feature in the era of novel agents despite the improvement in the outcomes of patients who present with elevated calcium. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Despite treatment improvements a considerable proportion of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) patients experience early progressive disease (EPD) defined as progression or relapse in < 18 months following initial response to first line treatment., Methods: We evaluated 1436 newly diagnosed MM patients out of whom 23.3% had EPD., Results: Patients with EPD had higher median age, β2-microglobulin, LDH and lower hemoglobin and eGFR, compared to others (P < .05); EPD population presented more commonly with advanced stage (ISS3, RISS3, and R2-ISS stage III/IV). Ultra-high-risk MM (UHR-MM) i.e., detection of ≥ 2 high-risk molecular abnormalities was more frequent in EPD population (P < .001). The percentage of patients treated with lenalidomide-based regimens was not significantly different. Daratumumab-based therapies (DBT) were administered less frequently in patients with EPD (2% vs. 10%; P < .001); 11% of patients with EPD versus 33% underwent ASCT (P < .001); Complete response to induction therapy was significantly lower in EPD patients (12% vs. 27%; P < .001). Binary logistic regression analysis demonstrated that ISS, RISS, R2-ISS, UHR-MM, ASCT and DBT were significant predictors for EPD (P < .05). In multivariate analysis R2-ISS, ASCT, and DBT were independent prognosticators for EPD (P < .001). Median PFS and OS were 10 versus 40 months and 29 versus 76 months in patients with EPD versus others, respectively (P < .001)., Conclusion: In real-world, EPD is observed in more than one-fifth of patients, and it remains an unmet clinical need. Daratumumab-based therapies and ASCT significantly reduce the probability of EPD, while R2-ISS could serve as a useful prognostic tool for recognizing this population and guide therapeutic decisions., Competing Interests: Disclosure EK: Janssen Cilag, Amgen, Abbvie, Pfizer, GSK, Takeda, Sanofi, Karyopharm: Honoraria, Research Funding, EK: Consultancy: Janssen, Pfizer, Amgen Honoraria: Janssen, Pfizer, Takeda, Genesis Pharma, Amgen MG; Honoraria: Janssen, Genesis Pharma, Amgen, Karyopharm, Sanofi, GSK, Takeda, DD: Pfizer Research Funding, DF: Honoraria: Janssen, Sanofi. MM: Honoraria: Janssen, MG: Honoraria: Janssen, Genesis Pharma, Amgen, Karyopharm, Sanofi, GSK, Takeda, MAD: Honoraria: Takeda, BMS, Amgen, Beigene, Janssen. DF; Honoraria: Janssen, ET: Consultancy: Janssen, Amgen, Genesis Pharma, Celgene, Takeda, Sanofi; Honoraria: Novartis, Janssen, Takeda, Genesis Pharma, Amgen, Celgene, Sanofi, BMS, GSK. The other authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2025 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Abstract: Twice-weekly carfilzomib (27 mg/m2) plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone (KRd27) is a standard of care in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Once-weekly carfilzomib regimens have shown clinical benefits with improved patient convenience. This open-label, phase 3, multicenter, randomized study aimed to demonstrate noninferiority of the overall response rate (ORR) for once-weekly carfilzomib (56 mg/m2) plus Rd (KRd56) vs twice-weekly KRd27 in RRMM. A total of 454 patients were randomized (1:1) to receive carfilzomib as once-weekly 30-minute infusions of 56 mg/m2 (KRd56; n = 228) or twice-weekly 10-minute infusions of 27 mg/m2 (KRd27; n = 226). Baseline characteristics were balanced between groups. ORR was 82.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 76.9-87.2) in the once-weekly group vs 86.3% (95% CI, 81.1-90.5) in the twice-weekly group (risk ratio, 0.954 [95% CI, 0.882-1.032]) and did not meet the threshold for statistical significance of noninferiority (P = .0666). Complete response (CR) or better was obtained in 46.9% of patients in the once-weekly arm and 36.3% in the twice-weekly arm. The proportions of patients who achieved CR and were also assessed negative for minimal residual disease were 21.5% and 18.1%, respectively (odds ratio, 1.235 [95% CI, 0.775-1.970]). Progression-free survival was comparable between groups (hazard ratio, 0.945 [95% CI, 0.617-1.447]). The safety profile was similar for both groups. In conclusion, although statistical significance for noninferiority of ORR was not achieved, the efficacy and safety of once-weekly KRd56 were similar to those of twice-weekly KRd27, and once-weekly KRd56 may be an effective and convenient treatment option for patients with RRMM. This trial was registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov as #NCT03859427., (© 2024 by The American Society of Hematology. Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), permitting only noncommercial, nonderivative use with attribution. All other rights reserved.)

Central nervous system (CNS) involvement is a rare and aggressive complication of multiple myeloma (MM). We identified 54/4352 MM patients (1.2%), who developed CNS-MM between 2000 and 2022. A matched-control group of MM patients without CNS-MM was used for comparisons. Median age was 63 years. Median time to CNS-MM was 28 months; 6/54 experienced CNS-MM at MM diagnosis. Abnormal lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), high-risk cytogenetics, and extramedullary involvement (EMI), that is, soft tissue plasmacytomas and/or plasma cell leukemia (PCL), were more frequent in CNS-MM versus controls (p < .05); 13/54 had PCL at CNS-MM. The majority had leptomeningeal infiltration (LMI) (66%); 26% had CNS-MM without systemic myeloma; EMI was the strongest predictor for CNS-MM (OR: 6.3). Median overall survival (OS) of CNS-MM patients versus controls was 43 months (95% CI: 32-54) versus 60 months (95% CI: 38-82) (p < .001); treatment of CNS-MM included mainly bortezomib/thalidomide/chemotherapy whereas 20% received novel drugs/immunotherapy combinations; 28 patients underwent cerebrospinal fluid infusions; EMI was the strongest negative predictor for post CNS-MM OS (p = .005; HR: 2.9). Treatment after 2016 predicted significantly for OS (p = .002; HR: 0.27). Median post CNS-MM OS was 4 months (95% CI: 2.6-5.4); in patients treated after 2016 median OS was 12 months. In conclusion, we have demonstrated in this large real-world series that survival of CNS-MM remains poor; however, there is a positive impact of treatment after 2016, related to the efficacy of modern anti-myeloma therapy; EMI significantly increases the probability to develop CNS-MM and the risk of post CNS-MM death, indicating a potential need for CNS prophylaxis for those patients., (© 2024 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Novel therapies have improved outcomes for multiple myeloma (MM) patients, but most ultimately relapse, making treatment decisions for relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM) patients increasingly challenging. We report the final analysis of a single-arm, phase 2 study evaluating the oral proteasome inhibitor (PI) ixazomib combined with daratumumab and dexamethasone (IDd; NCT03439293). Sixty-one RRMM patients (ixazomib/daratumumab-naïve; 1-3 prior therapies) were enrolled to receive IDd (28-day cycles) until disease progression/unacceptable toxicity. Median age was 69 years; 14.8% of patients had International Staging System stage III disease; 14.8% had received three prior therapies. Patients received a median of 16 cycles of IDd. In 59 response-evaluable patients, the overall response rate was 64.4%; the confirmed ≥very good partial response (VGPR) rate (primary endpoint) was 30.5%. Rates of ≥VGPR in patient subgroups were: high-risk cytogenetics (n = 15, 26.7%), expanded high-risk cytogenetics (n = 24, 29.2%), aged ≥75 years (n = 12, 16.7%), lenalidomide-refractory (n = 21, 28.6%), and prior PI/IMiD therapy (n = 58, 31.0%). With a median follow-up of 31.6 months, median progression-free survival was 16.8 months (95% confidence interval: 10.1-23.7). Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in 54.1% of patients; 44.3% had serious TEAEs; TEAEs led to dose modifications/reductions/discontinuations in 62.3%/36.1%/16.4%. There were five on-study deaths. Any-grade and grade ≥3 peripheral neuropathy occurred in 18.0% and 1.6% of patients. Quality of life was generally maintained throughout treatment. IDd showed a positive risk-benefit profile in RRMM patients and was active in clinically relevant subgroups with no new safety signals., (© 2024 The Author(s). American Journal of Hematology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Once-weekly carfilzomib at 56 mg/m 2 plus immunomodulatory drugs and dexamethasone has shown efficacy and tolerability treating early relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). The phase 2 SELECT study (NCT04191616) evaluated efficacy/safety of weekly carfilzomib, pomalidomide, and dexamethasone (KPd) in early RRMM patients refractory to lenalidomide. All 52 treated patients were refractory to prior treatment, and 19 (37%) were triple-class refractory. Overall response rate (ORR; primary endpoint) was 58% (35% ≥ very good partial response, 6% ≥ complete response); median response duration was 20.3 months. Minimal residual disease negativity (10 -5 ) was achieved in 10% of patients. Median progression-free survival was 11.1 months; median overall survival was 18.8 months. Adverse events (AEs) were consistent with the known safety profile including grade ≥3 treatment-emergent AEs reported in 67% of patients. Although the primary endpoint of ORR was not met, KPd showed meaningful clinical benefits in lenalidomide-refractory RRMM patients, including those who were daratumumab-refractory and/or triple-class refractory.

The use of lenalidomide in frontline therapy for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) has increased the number of those who become refractory to lenalidomide at second line. In this context, we assessed the efficacy of daratumumab in combination with ixazomib and dexamethasone (Dara-Ixa-dex) in the prospective phase 2 study DARIA. Eligible patients had relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM) after one prior line with a lenalidomide-based regimen. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included survival outcomes, safety and changes in biomarkers of bone metabolism. Overall, 50 patients were enrolled (median age 69 years, 56% males). 32 (64%) patients were refractory to lenalidomide, and 17 (34%) had undergone autologous transplant. The ORR was 64% (n = 32); whereas 17 (34%) had a very good partial response or better. The median time to first response was 1.0 month. After a median follow-up of 23.4 months, the median PFS and OS were 8.1 and 39.2 months, respectively. Furthermore, significant changes in markers of bone metabolism became evident as early as at 6 months on treatment. Regarding safety, 21 (42%) patients had ≥1 grade 3/4 adverse event (AE); the most common was thrombocytopenia (n = 9, 18%). 14 (28%) patients had ≥1 serious AE (SAE), the most common being acute kidney injury and pneumonia (n = 2, each). Four patients died due to infections. In conclusion, second-line treatment with Dara-Ixa-dex in patients with RRMM pre-treated with a lenalidomide-based regimen resulted in rapid responses along with a favorable effect on bone metabolism., (© 2024 The Authors. American Journal of Hematology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: Dose modifications in response to adverse events (AEs) can maintain tumor response and improve therapy tolerability. We conducted a post-hoc analysis of the efficacy and safety of reduced selinexor doses in the BOSTON trial (NCT03110562)., Patients and Methods: Efficacy, safety, and quality of life (QoL) in 195 patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma randomized to once-weekly (QW) selinexor (100 mg), QW subcutaneous bortezomib (1.3 mg/m 2 ), and twice-weekly dexamethasone (20 mg) were compared between patients with dose reductions and those without., Results: In total, 126 patients (65%) had selinexor dose reductions (median dose 71.4 mg/wk). In patients with dose reductions versus those without median progression-free survival was 16.6 months (95% CI 12.9-not evaluable [NE]) versus 9.2 months [95% CI 6.8-15.5]), overall response rate was 81.7% (95% CI 73.9-88.1%) versus 66.7% (95% CI 54.3-77.6%), ≥very good partial response was (51.6% [95% CI 42.5-60.6%] vs. 31.9% [95% CI 21.2-44.2]), median duration of response was not reached (95% CI 13.8-NE) versus 12.0 months (95% CI 8.3-NE), and time to next treatment was 22.6 months (95% CI 14.6-NE) versus 10.5 months (95% CI 6.3-18.2). Mean best change from baseline on the EORTC QLQ-C30 Global Health Status/QoL scale was 10.0 ± 20.5 versus 4.0 ± 20.9. Duration-adjusted AE rates that were lower after selinexor dose reduction included thrombocytopenia (62.5% before vs. 47.6% after), nausea (31.6% vs. 7.3%), fatigue (28.1% vs. 9.9%), decreased appetite (21.5% vs. 6.4%), anemia (17.9% vs. 10.3%), and diarrhea (12.9% vs. 5.2%)., Conclusion: Appropriate dose reductions in response to AEs of the 100 mg selinexor starting dose in the BOSTON study were associated with improved efficacy, reduced AE rates and improved QoL., Competing Interests: Disclosure Sundar Jagannath: consultation: Janssen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Sanofi, Regeneron, Takeda, and Caribou. Sosana Delimpasi: Speaker: Janssen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Amgen, Sanofi, GSK, and Takeda. Meletios A. Dimopoulos: honoraria for participation in advisory boards: Abbvie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Beigene Inc, GSK, Janssen, Menarini, Regeneron, Sanofi and Takeda. Ohad S. Bentur and Dane R. Van Domelen: employment and equity holders: Karyopharm. The remaining authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Multiple myeloma remains incurable, and heavily pretreated patients with relapsed or refractory disease have few good treatment options. Belantamab mafodotin showed promising results in a phase 2 study of patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma at second or later relapse and a manageable adverse event profile. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of belantamab mafodotin in a phase 3 setting., Methods: In the DREAMM-3 open-label phase 3 study, conducted at 108 sites across 18 countries, adult patients were enrolled who had confirmed multiple myeloma (International Myeloma Working Group criteria), ECOG performance status of 0-2, had received two or more previous lines of therapy, including two or more consecutive cycles of both lenalidomide and a proteasome inhibitor, and progressed on, or within, 60 days of completion of the previous treatment. Participants were randomly allocated using a central interactive response technology system (2:1) to receive belantamab mafodotin 2·5 mg/kg intravenously every 21 days, or oral pomalidomide 4·0 mg daily (days 1-21) and dexamethasone 40·0 mg (20·0 mg if >75 years) weekly in a 28-day cycle. Randomisation was stratified by previous anti-CD38 therapy, International Staging System stage, and number of previous therapies. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in all patients who were randomly allocated. The safety population included all randomly allocated patients who received one or more doses of study treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04162210, and is ongoing. Data cutoff for this analysis was Sept 12, 2022., Findings: Patients were recruited between April 2, 2020, and April 18, 2022. As of September, 2022, 325 patients were randomly allocated (218 to the belantamab mafodotin group and 107 to the pomalidomide-dexamethasone group); 184 (57%) of 325 were male and 141 (43%) of 325 were female, 246 (78%) of 316 were White. Median age was 68 years (IQR 60-74). Median follow-up was 11·5 months (5·5-17·6) for belantamab mafodotin and 10·8 months (5·6-17·1) for pomalidomide-dexamethasone. Median progression-free survival was 11·2 months (95% CI 6·4-14·5) for belantamab mafodotin and 7·0 months (4·6-10·6) for pomalidomide-dexamethasone (hazard ratio 1·03 [0·72-1·47]; p=0·56). Most common grade 3-4 adverse events were thrombocytopenia (49 [23%] of 217) and anaemia (35 [16%]) for belantamab mafodotin, and neutropenia (34 [33%] of 102) and anaemia (18[18%]) for pomalidomide-dexamethasone. Serious adverse events occurred in 94 (43%) of 217 and 40 (39%) of 102 patients, respectively. There were no treatment-related deaths in the belantamab mafodotin group and one (1%) in the pomalidomide-dexamethasone group due to sepsis., Interpretation: Belantamab mafodotin was not associated with statistically improved progression-free survival compared with standard-of-care, but there were no new safety signals associated with its use. Belantamab mafodotin is being tested in combination regimens for relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma., Funding: GSK (study number 207495)., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests MAD has received fees from speaker's bureau participation from Amgen, Beigene, BMS, Janssen, and Takeda. VTMH has received fees for consulting from AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Sanofi, and Takeda. AR has received honoraria from Roche, Pfizer, AbbVie, Swixx, SOBI, and Novartis; consulting or advisory fees from Roche, Swixx, SOBI. SD has received honoraria from Amgen, GSK, Janssen, and Takeda. GM has received honoraria from AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Janssen, BMS, Takeda, Roche, and Richter; has received consulting or advisory fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Janssen, BMS, Takeda, Roche; research funding from AbbVie; and fees for travel, accommodations, and expenses from BMS, Janssen, and Takeda. TM has received fees for participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board from AbbVie, BMS, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and Takeda. MC has received speaker's bureau participation fees from Sanofi, BMS, and Janssen; and fees for travel, accommodations, and expenses Sanofi, BMS, and Janssen. AM reports honoraria from Amgen, BMS, Janssen, Sanofi, and Takeda. VP reports research funding from Genesis Pharma SA. XL has received honoraria from Amgen, BMS/Celgene, Janssen, Takeda, Novartis, Sanofi, Merck, Oncopeptide, Karyopharm, Roche, AbbVie, Carsgen, GSK, and Harpoon Therapeutics. NS is an employee of GSK and holds stocks and shares in GSK, Pfizer, and BMS. MaL is an employee of GSK and holds stocks and shares in GSK and Astra Zeneca. AMK is an employee of, and holds stocks and shares in GSK, AstraZeneca, and Novartis. WH was an employee of GSK at the time this analysis was completed, and holds stocks and shares in GSK. SB, BC, SP, JB, and SR-G are all employees of and hold stocks and shares in GSK. JO is an employee of and holds stocks, patents, and shares in GSK. KW has received honoraria from AbbVie, Amgen, Adaptive Biotech, Astra Zeneca, BMS/Celgene, Janssen, GSK, Karyopharm, Novartis, Oncopeptides, Pfizer, Roche Pharma, Sanofi, Stemline, and Takeda; consulting or advisory fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Adaptive Biotech, BMS/Celgene, Janssen, GSK, Karyopharm, Oncopeptides, Pfizer, Roche Pharma, Sanofi, and Takeda; and research funding from AbbVie, Amgen, BMS/Celgene, Janssen, GSK, and Sanofi. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The primary analysis of the APOLLO trial, done after a median follow-up of 16·9 months, showed that daratumumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone significantly improved progression-free survival versus pomalidomide and dexamethasone. Here, we report the final overall survival and updated safety results from APOLLO., Methods: APOLLO was an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial conducted at 48 academic centres and hospitals across 12 countries in Europe, that included adults aged 18 years or older with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma who had an ECOG performance status score of 0-2, had received at least one previous line of therapy, including lenalidomide and a proteasome inhibitor, had a partial response or better to one or more previous lines of antimyeloma therapy, and were refractory to lenalidomide if they had received only one previous line of therapy. An interactive web-response system was used to randomly assign patients (1:1) to receive daratumumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone or pomalidomide and dexamethasone; patients were stratified by the number of previous lines of therapy and International Staging System disease stage. Oral pomalidomide (4 mg once daily; days 1-21) and dexamethasone (40 mg once daily; days 1, 8, 15, and 22) were given in 28-day cycles until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Daratumumab (1800 mg subcutaneously or 16 mg/kg intravenously) was administered weekly (cycles 1-2), every 2 weeks (cycles 3-6), and every 4 weeks thereafter. The primary endpoint of progression-free survival, which has previously been reported, and the pre-planned secondary endpoint of overall survival were assessed in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03180736) and is no longer enrolling patients., Findings: Between June 22, 2017, and June 13, 2019, 304 patients were randomly assigned: 151 to the daratumumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone group and 153 to the pomalidomide and dexamethasone group. The median age was 67 years (IQR 60-72); 143 (47%) patients were female and 161 (53%) were male, and 272 (89%) were White. At a median follow-up of 39·6 months (IQR 37·1-43·7), median overall survival was 34·4 months (95% CI 23·7-40·3) in the daratumumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone group versus 23·7 months (19·6-29·4) in the pomalidomide and dexamethasone group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·82 [95% CI 0·61-1·11]; p=0·20). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events were neutropenia (103 [69%] of 149 with daratumumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone vs 76 [51%] of 150 with pomalidomide and dexamethasone), anaemia (27 [18%] vs 32 [21%]), and thrombocytopenia (27 [18%] vs 28 [19%]). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 80 (54%) of 149 patients in the daratumumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone group and in 60 (40%) of 150 patients in the pomalidomide and dexamethasone group, the most common of which was pneumonia (23 [15%] of 149 vs 13 [9%] of 150). Treatment-emergent adverse events resulting in death occurred in 13 (9%) of 149 patients in the daratumumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone group and in 13 (9%) of 150 patients in the pomalidomide and dexamethasone group, with 4 (3%) of 151 adverse events leading to death within 30 days of the last treatment dose thought to be related to study treatment in the daratumumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone group (septic shock [n=1]; sepsis [n=1]; bone marrow failure, campylobacter infection, and liver disorder [n=1]; and pneumonia [n=1]) and none in the pomalidomide and dexamethasone group., Interpretation: Although the difference in overall survival observed between treatment groups was not significant, the safety profile results with long-term follow-up reported here continue to support the use of daratumumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma., Funding: European Myeloma Network and Janssen Research & Development., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests MAD received honoraria and participated in advisory boards for Amgen, Takeda, Bristol Myers Squibb, Janssen, and BeiGene. ET received honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, EUSA Pharma, GSK, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Takeda, and Sanofi; received research funding from Amgen, Janssen, GSK, Takeda, and Sanofi; and received travel expenses from Amgen, EUSA Pharma, and Takeda. MBo received honoraria and research funding from Sanofi, Celgene, Amgen, Janssen, Novartis, and Bristol Myers Squibb; received honoraria from AbbVie; received research funding from Mundipharma; and served on a board of directors or advisory committee for Janssen and GSK. MBe received honoraria from, consulted for, and served on a speakers bureau for Janssen, Sanofi, Amgen, Oncopeptides, and Takeda. EK received honoraria from Amgen, GSK, Takeda, Integris Pharma, and AbbVie; received research funding from Janssen, Amgen, GSK, Takeda, Sanofi, Karyopharm, and AbbVie; and received travel expenses from Janssen, GSK, and AbbVie. PM served on an advisory board and received honoraria from Janssen, Celgene, Amgen, AbbVie, Sanofi, and Oncopeptides. AS received honoraria from, served on a board of directors or advisory committee for, and received research funding from AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Genesis Pharma, Gilead, GSK, Integris Pharma, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, and Takeda. JB served on a board of directors, advisory committee, and speakers bureau and consulted for Janssen, Amgen, and Takeda. AO served as a consultant for Sanofi, GSK, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Janssen. M-VM served on a board of directors or advisory committee for and received honoraria from Janssen, Celgene, Takeda, Amgen, GSK, AbbVie, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi, and Oncopeptides; and received honoraria from Seagen. HE received honoraria and research funding from and served on a speakers bureau for Janssen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Amgen, and GSK. IO is an equity holder in Health Data Specialists. TK, WL, JW, MK, and RC are employees of Janssen Research & Development. NT is an equity holder and employee of Janssen Research & Development. PS received honoraria and research funding from and served on an advisory board for Amgen, Celgene, Janssen, Takeda, and Bristol Myers Squibb. SD and LB declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

We evaluated the efficacy and prognostic impact of bortezomib-lenalidomide triplet (VRd) or daratumumab-based quadruplets (DBQ) versus previous anti-myeloma therapies, that is, bortezomib standard combinations (BSC) or conventional chemotherapy (CT), in a large cohort of patients with primary plasma cell leukemia (pPCL), including those fulfilling the revised diagnostic criteria, that is, circulating plasma cells (cPCS): ≥5%; 110 pPCL patients (M/F: 51/59; median age 65 years, range: 44-86) out of 3324 myeloma patients (3%), registered in our database between 2001 and 2021, were studied; 37% had cPCS 5%-19%; 89% received novel combinations including DBQ (21%), VRd (16%) and BSC (52%); 35% underwent autologous stem cell transplantation. 83% achieved objective responses. Treatment with VRd/DBQ strongly correlated with a higher complete response rate (41% vs. 17%; p = .008). After a median follow-up of 51 months (95% CI: 45-56), 67 patients died. Early mortality was 3.5%. Progression-free survival was 16 months (95% CI: 12-19.8), significantly longer in patients treated with VRd/DBQ versus BSC/CT (25 months, 95% CI: 13.5-36.5 vs. 13 months 95% CI: 9-16.8; p = .03). Median overall survival (OS) was 29 months (95% CI: 19.6-38.3), significantly longer in patients treated with VRd/DBQ versus BSC/CT (not reached vs. 20 months, 95% CI: 14-26; 3-year OS: 70% vs. 32%, respectively; p < .001; HzR: 3.88). In the multivariate analysis VRd/DBQ therapy, del17p(+) and PLT <100.000/μL, independently predicted OS (p < .05). Our study has demonstrated that in the real-world setting, treatment with VRd/DBQ induces deep and durable responses and is a strong prognostic factor for OS representing currently the best therapeutic option for pPCL., (© 2023 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

In the phase 3 APOLLO trial, daratumumab in combination with pomalidomide and dexamethasone (D-Pd) significantly reduced the rate of disease progression or death by 37% relative to Pd alone in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) who had received ≥1 prior line of therapy including lenalidomide and a proteasome inhibitor. Here, we present patient-reported outcomes (PROs) from APOLLO. Median treatment duration was 11.5 months with D-Pd and 6.6 months with Pd. PRO compliance rates were high and similar in both groups. No changes from baseline were observed for EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status scores in either group, while physical and emotional functioning, disease symptoms, and adverse effects of treatment remained at baseline levels with D-Pd but worsened with Pd. Reductions (p < 0.05) in pain and fatigue were seen at several time points with D-Pd versus Pd. Overall, these results suggest patients' health-related quality of life remained stable when daratumumab was added to Pd, with several results favoring D-Pd versus Pd. These findings complement the significant clinical improvements observed with D-Pd and support its use in patients with RRMM., (© 2022 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

In the phase 3 BOSTON study, patients with multiple myeloma (MM) after 1-3 prior regimens were randomized to once-weekly selinexor (an oral inhibitor of exportin 1 [XPO1]) plus bortezomib-dexamethasone (XVd) or twice-weekly bortezomib-dexamethasone (Vd). Compared with Vd, XVd was associated with significant improvements in median progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR), and lower rates of peripheral neuropathy, with trends in overall survival (OS) favoring XVd. In BOSTON, 141 (35.1%) patients had MM with high-risk (presence of del[17p], t[4;14], t[14;16], or ≥4 copies of amp1q21) cytogenetics (XVd, n = 70; Vd, n = 71), and 261 (64.9%) exhibited standard-risk cytogenetics (XVd, n = 125; Vd, n = 136). Among patients with high-risk MM, median PFS was 12.91 months for XVd and 8.61 months for Vd (HR, 0.73 [95% CI, (0.4673, 1.1406)], p = 0.082), and ORRs were 78.6% and 57.7%, respectively (OR 2.68; p = 0.004). In the standard-risk subgroup, median PFS was 16.62 months for XVd and 9.46 months for Vd (HR 0.61; p = 0.004), and ORRs were 75.2% and 64.7%, respectively (OR 1.65; p = 0.033). The safety profiles of XVd and Vd in both subgroups were consistent with the overall population. These data suggest that selinexor can confer benefits to patients with MM regardless of cytogenetic risk. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03110562., (© 2021 The Authors. American Journal of Hematology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: Selinexor combined with dexamethasone has shown activity in patients with heavily pre-treated multiple myeloma. In a phase 1b/2 study, the combination of oral selinexor with bortezomib (a proteasome inhibitor) and dexamethasone induced high response rates with low rates of peripheral neuropathy, the main dose-limiting toxicity of bortezomib. We aimed to evaluate the clinical benefit of weekly selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone versus standard bortezomib and dexamethasone in patients with previously treated multiple myeloma., Methods: This phase 3, randomised, open-label trial was done at 123 sites in 21 countries. Patients aged 18 years or older, who had multiple myeloma, and who had previously been treated with one to three lines of therapy, including proteasome inhibitors, were randomly allocated (1:1) to receive selinexor (100 mg once per week), bortezomib (1·3 mg/m 2 once per week), and dexamethasone (20 mg twice per week), or bortezomib (1·3 mg/m 2 twice per week for the first 24 weeks and once per week thereafter) and dexamethasone (20 mg four times per week for the first 24 weeks and twice per week thereafter). Randomisation was done using interactive response technology and stratified by previous proteasome inhibitor therapy, lines of treatment, and multiple myeloma stage. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Patients who received at least one dose of study treatment were included in the safety population. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03110562. The trial is ongoing, with 55 patients remaining on randomised therapy as of Feb 20, 2020., Findings: Of 457 patients screened for eligibility, 402 were randomly allocated-195 (49%) to the selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone group and 207 (51%) to the bortezomib and dexamethasone group-and the first dose of study medication was given between June 6, 2017, and Feb 5, 2019. Median follow-up durations were 13·2 months [IQR 6·2-19·8] for the selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone group and 16·5 months [9·4-19·8] for the bortezomib and dexamethasone group. Median progression-free survival was 13·93 months (95% CI 11·73-not evaluable) with selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone and 9·46 months (8·11-10·78) with bortezomib and dexamethasone (hazard ratio 0·70 [95% CI 0·53-0·93], p=0·0075). The most frequent grade 3-4 adverse events were thrombocytopenia (77 [39%] of 195 patients in the selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone group vs 35 [17%] of 204 in the bortezomib and dexamethasone group), fatigue (26 [13%] vs two [1%]), anaemia (31 [16%] vs 20 [10%]), and pneumonia (22 [11%] vs 22 [11%]). Peripheral neuropathy of grade 2 or above was less frequent with selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (41 [21%] patients) than with bortezomib and dexamethasone (70 [34%] patients; odds ratio 0·50 [95% CI 0·32-0·79], p=0·0013). 47 (24%) patients in the selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone group and 62 (30%) in the bortezomib and dexamethasone group died., Interpretation: A once-per-week regimen of selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone is a novel, effective, and convenient treatment option for patients with multiple myeloma who have received one to three previous lines of therapy., Funding: Karyopharm Therapeutics., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)