Daratumumab, Bortezomib, and Dexamethasone Versus Bortezomib and Dexamethasone in Patients With Previously Treated Multiple Myeloma: Three-year Follow-up of CASTOR

CRL4CRBN E3 Ligase Complex as a Therapeutic Target in Multiple Myeloma

Simple Summary

Immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs) are effective in the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) and other hematological malignancies. Cereblon (CRBN), a target of IMiDs, forms the CRL4 E3 ubiquitin ligase complex (CRL4^CRBN) with DDB1, CUL4A and RBX1. The insight into the molecular mechanism of IMiDs action has advanced dramatically since the identification of cereblon (CRBN) as their direct target. Targeting CRBN by IMiDs modifies CRL4^CRBN substrate specificity towards non-physiological protein targets which are subsequently ubiquitinated and degraded by the proteasome. To date, IMiDs are the only known group of protein degraders used in clinical practice. This review provides the current state of knowledge about thalidomide and its derivatives’ mechanisms of action, and highlights the future perspectives for targeted protein degraders.

Abstract

Multiple myeloma (MM) is the second most common hematological malignancy with a recurrent clinical course. The introduction of immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs) was one of the milestones in MM therapy leading to a significant improvement in patients’ prognosis. Currently, IMiDs are the backbone of MM therapy in newly diagnosed and relapsed/refractory settings. It is now known that IMiDs exert their anti-myeloma activity mainly by binding cereblon (CRBN), the substrate receptor protein of the CRL4 E3 ubiquitin ligase (CRL4^CRBN) complex. By binding CRBN, IMiDs alter its substrate specificity, leading to ubiquitination and proteasomal degradation of proteins essential for MM cell survival. Following the success of IMiDs, it is not surprising that the possibility of using the CRL4^CRBN complex’s activity to treat MM is being further explored. In this review, we summarize the current state of knowledge about novel players in the MM therapeutic landscape, namely the CRBN E3 ligase modulators (CELMoDs), the next generation of IMiDs with broader biological activity. In addition, we discuss a new strategy of tailored proteolysis called proteolysis targeting chimeras (PROTACs) using the CRL4^CRBN to degrade typically undruggable proteins, which may have relevance for the treatment of MM and other malignancies in the future.

Pathogenesis and treatment of multiple myeloma

Multiple myeloma (MM) is the second‐ranking malignancy in hematological tumors. The pathogenesis of MM is complex with high heterogeneity, and the development of the disease is a multistep process. Chromosomal translocations, aneuploidy, genetic mutations, and epigenetic aberrations are essential in disease initiation and progression. The correlation between MM cells and the bone marrow microenvironment is associated with the survival, progression, migration, and drug resistance of MM cells. In recent decades, there has been a significant change in the paradigm for the management of MM. With the development of proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulatory drugs, monoclonal antibodies, chimeric antigen receptor T‐cell therapies, and novel agents, the survival of MM patients has been significantly improved. In addition, nanotechnology acts as both a nanocarrier and a treatment tool for MM. The properties and responsive conditions of nanomedicine can be tailored to reach different goals. Nanomedicine with a precise targeting property has offered great potential for drug delivery and assisted in tumor immunotherapy. In this review, we summarize the pathogenesis and current treatment options of MM, then overview recent advances in nanomedicine‐based systems, aiming to provide more insights into the treatment of MM.

Daratumumab plus bortezomib or daratumumab plus lenalidomide as salvage therapy for patients with myeloma: initial follow-up of an Italian multicentre retrospective clinical experience by 'Rete Ematologica Pugliese'

We report herein a multicentre retrospective analysis of 192 consecutive patients with symptomatic refractory/relapsed multiple myeloma (RRMM) treated with daratumumab in combination with bortezomib or lenalidomide as salvage therapy at 9 haematological centres in Puglia. Choice of both regimens was based on previous treatment and/or physicians' preference. Considering the under-representation of older patients (very old patient ≥ 80 years) in clinical trials and the prognostic and predictive importance and value of frailty status, here, we further characterised the patient cohort by age. The overall response rate (ORR) was generally lower than what was previously reported in the CASTOR (ORR 72.6% vs 85%) and POLLUX (ORR 86.5% vs 93%) trials. The lower ORR in our analysis compared to the CASTOR and POLLUX trials could be related to a less selected population. Similarly, amongst very old patients, the ORR was encouraging: ORR to treatment with DVd (daratumumab + bortezomib + dexamethasone) was 66.7%, and ORR to treatment with DRd (daratumumab + lenalidomide + dexamethasone) was 92.3%. Median TTP (time to progression) was 10.8 months (1-year TTP: 44.7%; 2-year TTP: 25.3%) in the DVd group; median TTP was not reached in the DRd group (1-year TTP: 82.7%; 2-year TTP: 71.4%). Median OS (overall survival) was not reached either in the DRd group (1-year OS: 85.9%; 2-year OS: 73.7%) or the DVd group (1-year OS: 70.2%; 2-year OS: 58.9%).

Beyond Clinical Trials in Patients With Multiple Myeloma: A Critical Review of Real-World Results

The current strategies for the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) have improved, thanks to effective drug classes and combination therapies, for both the upfront and relapsed settings. Clinical trials for newly diagnosed transplant-ineligible patients led to the approval of immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs) and proteasome inhibitors (PIs) in combination with anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), to be administered during the induction phase before transplantation and during maintenance treatment, with lenalidomide recommended until relapse. In relapsed/refractory patients, the complex treatment scenario currently includes several options, such as triplets with anti-CD38 mAbs plus IMiDs or PIs, and novel targeted molecules. Comparisons among clinical trials and real-world data showed a good degree of reproducibility of some important results, particularly in terms of overall response rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival. This may help clinicians towards a proper selection of the best treatment options, particularly in real-world settings. However, as compared with the management of real-world settings, clinical trials have some pitfalls in terms of outcome and especially in terms of safety and quality of life. In fact, trials include younger and presumably healthier patients, excluding those with worst clinical conditions due to MM features (e.g., renal insufficiency or bone disease, which can impair the performance status) and comorbidities (e.g., cardiac and pulmonary disease), thus resulting in a possible lack of representativeness of data about the patients enrolled. In this review, we analyze comparable and discrepant results from clinical trials vs. real-world settings published in the last 10 years, focusing on different drugs and combinations for the treatment of MM and providing an overview of treatment choices.

PLK4 inhibitor plus bortezomib exhibits a synergistic effect on treating multiple myeloma via inactivating PI3K/AKT signaling

OBJECTIVE

The anti-tumor effect of polo-like kinase 4 (PLK4) inhibitor has been explored in several neoplasms, while its synergy with bortezomib in multiple myeloma (MM) remains elusive. Hence, the present study aimed to investigate the effect of PLK4 inhibitor on the sensitivity of MM to bortezomib treatment and its underlying mechanism.

METHODS

MM cell lines (RPMI-8226 and U266) were cultured in different concentrations of CFI-400945 (PLK4 inhibitor), bortezomib, or their combination. Subsequently, 740 Y-P (PI3K activator) was added in the combination of CFI-400945 and bortezomib. Besides, cell viability and apoptosis were measured by CCK-8 reagent and TUNEL apoptosis kit, separately; meanwhile, western blot was carried out for detecting PLK4, p-PI3K, PI3K, p-AKT, and AKT.

RESULTS

CFI-400945 and bortezomib decreased the cell viability in dose-dependent manners in MM cell lines, respectively. The combination of different concentrations of CFI-400945 and bortezomib reduced cell viability compared with monotherapy in MM cell lines (all P < 0.05). Interestingly, 200 nM CFI-400945 and 4 nM bortezomib showed the maximum synergy in MM cell lines. Furthermore, 200 nM CFI-400945 plus 4 nM bortezomib showed a better effect on decreasing cell viability and promoting cell apoptosis than CFI-400945 or bortezomib monotherapy in MM cells cell lines (all P < 0.05). Moreover, 740 Y-P alleviated the effect of bortezomib and CFI-400945 on PI3K/AKT signaling, cell viability, and apoptosis in MM cell lines.

CONCLUSIONS

PLK4 inhibitor plus bortezomib shows synergy in decreasing cell viability and enhancing cell apoptosis via repressing PI3K/AKT signaling in MM.

Outcomes of daratumumab in the treatment of multiple myeloma: A retrospective cohort study from the Canadian Myeloma Research Group Database

Daratumumab (dara) has significantly altered the therapeutic landscape of multiple myeloma (MM), especially in the relapsed setting. This study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of dara-containing regimens in the Canadian real-world setting among relapsed and refractory MM available within the national Canadian Myeloma Research Group Database (CMRG-DB). A total of 583 MM patients who received dara-based therapy in second-line or later treatment were included. After a median follow-up of 17.5 months, the median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for the entire cohort were 13.1 and 32.9 months, respectively. The median PFS and OS were 23.5 and 49.1 months in second-line treatment and decreased to 12.8 and 43.0 months in third-line and 7.0 and 20.5 months in fourth-line treatment respectively. Dara in monotherapy with or without corticosteroids after a median of four prior lines of therapy resulted in a median PFS of 3.9 months and a median OS of 17.1 months. The addition of bortezomib, lenalidomide or pomalidomide to dara resulted in an improved median PFS and OS of 8.3 and 26.2 months; 26.8 and 43.0 months; and 9.7 and 31.4 months respectively. These retrospective data from the CMRG-DB suggest that outcomes are superior when dara is used in combination and in earlier lines of treatment.

Recent advances of nanodrug delivery system in the treatment of hematologic malignancies

Although the survival rate of hematological malignancies (HM) has increased in recent years, the unnecessary adverse effect to the body is usually generated by the traditional chemotherapy for HM due to the lack of specificity to tumor tissue. Nanodrug delivery systems have exhibited unique advantages in targetability, stability and reducing toxicity, attracting wide concern, which is expected to be the prevalent alternative for the treatment of HM. In this review, we systemically introduced the current therapeutic strategies and the categories of HM. Subsequently, five key factors including circulation, targeting, penetration, internalization and release involving in tailoring nanoparticles were demonstrated, followed by the introduction of the development of nanodrug delivery-traditional synthetic nanomaterilas, biomimetic cell membrane coating nanomaterials, cell-based nanomaterials as well as immunotherapy combined with nanodrug. Afterwards, the recent advances of nanodrug delivery system for the treatment of HM were introduced. Moreover, the challenge and prospect of nanodrug delivery system in treating HM were discussed. The promising drug delivery system will provide new therapeutic avenues for the treatment of HM.

Efficacy of Daratumumab-Containing Regimens Among Patients With Multiple Myeloma Progressing on Lenalidomide Maintenance: Retrospective Analysis

Background

Daratumumab, a monoclonal antibody directed against CD38 is a recent class of drugs introduced into the multiple myeloma therapeutic landscape. While clinical trial data have shown a remarkable impact on outcomes, the efficacy of daratumumab combination therapies in specific clinically relevant subgroups including among patients refractory to lenalidomide maintenance remains unknown.

Methods

In this study, retrospective data were reviewed from the Canadian Myeloma Research Group and the German Munster Myeloma databases to identify patients that received daratumumab in combination with pomalidomide (DPd), lenalidomide (DRd), and bortezomib (DVd) in a population that had relapsed on lenalidomide maintenance postautologous stem cell transplant. The primary aim of the study was to look at outcomes of these patients in different daratumumab combinations.

Results

A total of 73 patients were identified. The median age of the patients at the time of daratumumab initiation was 60 (38-72) and 64.4% (n = 47) were men. In the selected cohort, 43.8% (n = 32) were treated with DRd, 31.5% (n = 23) with DVd, and 24.7% (n = 18) with DPd regimen. The median progression-free survival (PFS) of the entire cohort was 15.8 months (95% CI, 12.9–37.1 months). The median PFS of the individual regimens was as follows: DPd 18.9 months (95% CI, 13.7-not reached), DRd 21.7 months (95% CI, 11.6-not reached), and DVd 12.9 months (95% CI, 3.1-not reached).

Conclusions

Daratumumab-containing therapies are effective regimens in patients progressing on lenalidomide maintenance. Additional studies are required to decide the optimal regimen post-lenalidomide maintenance.

Prognostic value of minimal residual disease negativity in myeloma: combined analysis of POLLUX, CASTOR, ALCYONE, and MAIA

We explored minimal residual disease (MRD) in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) and transplant-ineligible (TIE) newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) using data from 4 phase 3 studies (POLLUX, CASTOR, ALCYONE, and MAIA). Each study previously demonstrated that daratumumab-based therapies improved MRD negativity rates and reduced the risk of disease progression or death by approximately half vs standards of care. We conducted a large-scale pooled analysis for associations between patients achieving complete response or better (≥CR) with MRD-negative status and progression-free survival (PFS). MRD was assessed via next-generation sequencing (10-5 sensitivity threshold). Patient-level data were pooled from all 4 studies and for patients with TIE NDMM and patients with RRMM who received ≤2 prior lines of therapy (≤2 PL). PFS was evaluated by response and MRD status. Median follow-up (months) was 54.8 for POLLUX, 50.2 for CASTOR, 40.1 for ALCYONE, and 36.4 for MAIA. Patients who achieved ≥CR and MRD negativity had improved PFS vs those who failed to reach CR or were MRD positive (TIE NDMM and RRMM hazard ratio [HR] 0.20, P < .0001; TIE NDMM and RRMM ≤2 PL HR 0.20, P < .0001). This benefit occurred irrespective of therapy or disease setting. A time-varying Cox proportional hazard model confirmed that ≥CR with MRD negativity was associated with improved PFS. Daratumumab-based treatment was associated with more patients reaching ≥CR and MRD negativity. These findings represent the first large-scale analysis with robust methodology to support ≥CR with MRD negativity as a prognostic factor for PFS in RRMM and TIE NDMM. These trials were registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02076009, #NCT02136134, #NCT02195479, and #NCT02252172.

Pomalidomide, dexamethasone, and daratumumab immediately after lenalidomide-based treatment in patients with multiple myeloma: updated efficacy, safety, and health-related quality of life results from the phase 2 MM-014 trial

Patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) need proven subsequent therapies after early-line lenalidomide treatment failure. The phase 2 MM-014 trial (NCT01946477) investigated pomalidomide, dexamethasone, and daratumumab after 1 to 2 prior treatment lines (62.5%, 1 prior line) in patients with RRMM and prior lenalidomide (75.0%, lenalidomide refractory). With a median follow-up of 28.4 months, overall response rate was 77.7% (52.7% achieved very good partial response or better) and median progression-free survival was 30.8 months. For patients with lenalidomide-refractory disease, these outcomes were 76.2%, 47.6%, and 23.7 months, respectively. No new safety signals were observed; 64.3% experienced grade 3/4 neutropenia. Health-related quality of life was preserved or trended toward improvement through 12 treatment cycles. Pomalidomide, dexamethasone, and daratumumab given immediately after early-line lenalidomide-based treatment continues to demonstrate safety and efficacy, supporting pomalidomide-dexamethasone as a foundation of combination therapy in RRMM and providing evidence that the immunomodulatory agent class delivers benefit after lenalidomide treatment failure.

Diagnosis and Management of Multiple Myeloma: A Review

IMPORTANCE

Multiple myeloma is a hematologic malignancy characterized by presence of abnormal clonal plasma cells in the bone marrow, with potential for uncontrolled growth causing destructive bone lesions, kidney injury, anemia, and hypercalcemia. Multiple myeloma is diagnosed in an estimated 34 920 people in the US and in approximately 588 161 people worldwide each year.

OBSERVATIONS

Among patients with multiple myeloma, approximately 73% have anemia, 79% have osteolytic bone disease, and 19% have acute kidney injury at the time of presentation. Evaluation of patients with possible multiple myeloma includes measurement of hemoglobin, serum creatinine, serum calcium, and serum free light chain levels; serum protein electrophoresis with immunofixation; 24-hour urine protein electrophoresis; and full-body skeletal imaging with computed tomography, positron emission tomography, or magnetic resonance imaging. The Revised International Staging System combines data from the serum biomarkers β2 microglobulin, albumin, and lactate dehydrogenase in conjunction with malignant plasma cell genomic features found on fluorescence in situ hybridization-t(4;14), del(17p), and t(14;16)-to assess estimated progression-free survival and overall survival. At diagnosis, 28% of patients are classified as having Revised International Staging stage I multiple myeloma, and these patients have a median 5-year survival of 82%. Among all patients with multiple myeloma, standard first-line (induction) therapy consists of a combination of an injectable proteasome inhibitor (ie, bortezomib), an oral immunomodulatory agent (ie, lenalidomide), and dexamethasone and is associated with median progression-free survival of 41 months, compared with historical reports of 8.5 months without therapy. This induction therapy combined with autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation followed by maintenance lenalidomide is standard of care for eligible patients.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Approximately 34 920 people in the US and 155 688 people worldwide are diagnosed with multiple myeloma each year. Induction therapy with an injectable proteasome inhibitor, an oral immunomodulatory agent and dexamethasone followed by treatment with autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, and maintenance therapy with lenalidomide are among the treatments considered standard care for eligible patients.

The changing landscape of relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (MM): fundamentals and controversies

The increase in the number of therapeutic alternatives for both newly diagnosed and relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) patients has widened the clinical scenario, leading to a level of complexity that no algorithm has been able to cover up to date. At present, this complexity increases due to the wide variety of clinical situations found in MM patients before they reach the status of relapsed/refractory disease. These different backgrounds may include primary refractoriness, early relapse after completion of first-line therapy with latest-generation agents, or very late relapse after chemotherapy or autologous transplantation. It is also important to bear in mind that many patient profiles are not fully represented in the main randomized clinical trials (RCT), and this further complicates treatment decision-making. In RRMM patients, the choice of previously unused drugs and the number and duration of previous therapeutic regimens until progression has a greater impact on treatment efficacy than the adverse biological characteristics of MM itself. In addition to proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulatory drugs, anti-CD38 antibodies and corticosteroids, a new generation of drugs such as XPO inhibitors, BCL-2 inhibitors, new alkylators and, above all, immunotherapy based on conjugated anti-BCMA antibodies and CAR-T cells, have been developed to fight RRMM. This comprehensive review addresses the fundamentals and controversies regarding RRMM, and discusses the main aspects of management and treatment. The basis for the clinical management of RRMM (complexity of clinical scenarios, key factors to consider before choosing an appropriate treatment, or when to treat), the arsenal of new drugs with no cross resistance with previously administered standard first line regimens (main phase 3 clinical trials), the future outlook including the usefulness of abandoned resources, together with the controversies surrounding the clinical management of RRMM patients will be reviewed in detail.

Current and prospective antibody-based therapies in multiple myeloma

Multiple Myeloma (MM) is a hematologic malignancy involving clonal plasma cell proliferation. Unfortunately, MM remains an incurable disease. Over the past five years, the incorporation of novel monoclonal antibodies has synergized with standard of care to improve patient outcomes in both newly diagnosed MM as well as relapsed and refractory MM. This manuscript reviews current and prospective antibody-based treatments including naked monoclonal antibodies, immunoconjugates, and Bi-specific T-cell engagers (BiTE).

Stratification for RRMM and Risk-Adapted Therapy: Sequencing of Therapies in RRMM

The treatment landscape for relapsed multiple myeloma (RRMM) has experienced an unprecedented wave of innovation. Implementation of numerous new substances and drug classes with different modes of action is made possible in routine clinical practice. Next generation proteasome inhibitors, monoclonal antibodies, as well as first in class agents such as selinexor and venetoclax have widened the therapeutic spectrum. This has led to an increase in progression-free and overall survival. Consequently, new challenges for treating physicians in choosing the right treatment at the right stage of the disease have been generated. Several trials support the use of novel agents in the frontline treatment of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. The use of lenalidomide or bortezomib as a backbone in the first-line setting, requires strategies for treatment once these patients relapse and are refractory to these drugs. Despite the variety of options, selecting the optimal treatment strategy is difficult, since multiple factors have to be considered: patient-specific factors such as age and co-morbidities, as well as myeloma/tumor specific factors such as cytogenetics and relapse kinetics. This review intends to summarize the existing data and guidelines regarding the optimal sequencing of treatments of RRMM using already approved agents as well as agents under investigation.

Isatuximab, carfilzomib and dexamethasone (Isa-Kd) for the management of relapsed multiple myeloma

The treatment of relapsed multiple myeloma remains challenging. Based on interim data from the randomized Phase III IKEMA study demonstrating a progression-free survival benefit with a combination of isatuximab (Isa, a CD38-targeted monoclonal antibody) and carfilzomib/dexamethasone (Kd) versus Kd alone, Isa-Kd recently received regulatory approval in the USA and Europe for patients with multiple myeloma who have received at least one prior line of therapy (in the USA, up to three prior lines). In this review we discuss the rationale and clinical trial experience to date with Isa-Kd. Although final IKEMA results are pending, Isa-Kd has emerged as an effective and tolerable therapy for patients with relapsed multiple myeloma. Given the growing number of antibody-containing triplet regimens in this setting, potential niches and limitations for Isa-Kd are also discussed.

A combination of carfilzomib, dexamethasone, and daratumumab for treatment of adult patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma in two dosing regimens: once-weekly and twice-weekly

INTRODUCTION

Despite the development of new therapeutic agents, relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) is associated with poor survival outcomes. Furthermore, many patients develop resistance to immunomodulatory drugs (IMiD), creating a need for IMiD-free regimens. Areas covered: This review focuses on the combination of carfilzomib, dexamethasone, and daratumumab (KdD or DKd) which has shown promising results in patients with RRMM who have tried multiple lines of therapy, and has been approved in the U.S., EU, and Japan. The KdD triplet has two recommended dosage regimens, carfilzomib once-weekly (KdD70 QW) and carfilzomib twice-weekly (KdD56 BIW), with comparable efficacy and safety profiles. Expert opinion: These options provide flexibility to patients and healthcare providers, especially in the era of COVID-19. Carfilzomib-based regimens remain a standard of care based on multiple randomized phase 3 studies. Additional studies are currently underway investigating carfilzomib-based regimens such as KdD combined with novel agents. Nevertheless, KdD is one of the most efficacious options for patients with RRMM.

Pomalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone at first relapse in lenalidomide-pretreated myeloma: A subanalysis of OPTIMISMM by clinical characteristics

Objective

We evaluated the efficacy and safety of pomalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (PVd) vs bortezomib and dexamethasone (Vd) by age, renal function, and high‐risk cytogenetic abnormalities in lenalidomide‐pretreated patients with multiple myeloma at first relapse.

Methods

OPTIMISMM was a phase 3, multicenter, open‐label, randomized study (NCT01734928; N = 559). The primary endpoint was progression‐free survival (PFS).

Results

Overall, 226 patients had received one prior line of therapy. PVd significantly prolonged PFS vs Vd in patients aged ≤65 years (median, 22.0 vs 13.1 months; P = .0258) and >65 years (median, 17.6 vs 9.9 months; P = .0369). Median PFS in patients with renal impairment (RI; creatinine clearance <60 mL/min) was 15.1 months with PVd vs 9.5 months with Vd (hazard ratio [HR], 0.67 [95% CI, 0.34‐1.34]). In patients without RI, median PFS was 22.0 vs 13.1 months (HR, 0.45 [95% CI, 0.27‐0.76]). In patients with high‐risk cytogenetics, median PFS was 14.7 vs 9.9 months (HR, 0.39 [95% CI, 0.13‐1.17]). PVd significantly improved overall response rate vs Vd in all subgroups. The safety profile of PVd was consistent with previous reports.

Conclusions

These findings confirmed the benefits of PVd at first relapse, including in patients with poor prognostic factors.

Efficacy and safety of daratumumab in the treatment of multiple myeloma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of combination regimens containing daratumumab in patients with multiple myeloma (MM).

Methods

A systematic search of publications listed on electronic databases (PubMed®, The Cochrane Library, Science Direct and Web of Science) between inception and 13 November 2020 was conducted to find randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that included patients with MM that were treated with combination regimens containing daratumumab.

Results

A total of seven RCTs were included (n = 4268 patients). Meta-analysis showed that compared with the control group, the group containing daratumumab showed a significantly better overall response rate and a complete response or better. Daratumumab improved efficacy in both standard-risk and cytogenetically high-risk patients with MM. The prevalence of neutropenia (≥grade 3) and pneumonia was significantly higher in the daratumumab group compared with the control group.

Conclusion

The available evidence demonstrated that the clinical application of combination regimens containing daratumumab improved the efficacy in patients with MM and had acceptable safety.

CD38-Directed Therapies for Management of Multiple Myeloma

The survival outcomes for multiple myeloma have improved several-fold in the past two decades, primarily due to the introduction of therapies with novel mechanisms of action including immunomodulatory agents, proteasome inhibitors, stem cell transplant and monoclonal antibodies in the schema of therapy. Antibody-based therapies targeting the surface marker CD38, namely daratumumab and isatuximab, have emerged as being highly effective as single agents as well as in combination regimens for both newly diagnosed and relapsed settings. Herein, the authors summarize the most recent data with both the current and emerging CD38-directed therapies in multiple myeloma.

Isatuximab, carfilzomib, and dexamethasone in relapsed multiple myeloma (IKEMA): a multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Isatuximab is an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody approved in combination with pomalidomide-dexamethasone and carfilzomib-dexamethasone for relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. This phase 3, open-label study compared the efficacy of isatuximab plus carfilzomib-dexamethasone versus carfilzomib-dexamethasone in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma.

METHODS

This was a prospective, randomised, open-label, parallel-group, phase 3 study done at 69 study centres in 16 countries across North America, South America, Europe, and the Asia-Pacific region. Patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma aged at least 18 years who had received one to three previous lines of therapy and had measurable serum or urine M-protein were eligible. Patients were randomly assigned (3:2) to isatuximab plus carfilzomib-dexamethasone (isatuximab group) or carfilzomib-dexamethasone (control group). Patients in the isatuximab group received isatuximab 10 mg/kg intravenously weekly for the first 4 weeks, then every 2 weeks. Both groups received the approved schedule of intravenous carfilzomib and oral or intravenous dexamethasone. Treatment continued until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival and was assessed in the intention-to-treat population according to assigned treatment. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose according to treatment received. The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03275285.

FINDINGS

Between Nov 15, 2017, and March 21, 2019, 302 patients with a median of two previous lines of therapy were enrolled. 179 were randomly assigned to the isatuximab group and 123 to the control group. Median progression-free survival was not reached in the isatuximab group compared with 19·15 months (95% CI 15·77-not reached) in the control group, with a hazard ratio of 0·53 (99% CI 0·32-0·89; one-sided p=0·0007). Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) of grade 3 or worse occurred in 136 (77%) of 177 patients in the isatuximab group versus 82 (67%) of 122 in the control group, serious TEAEs occurred in 105 (59%) versus 70 (57%) patients, and TEAEs led to discontinuation in 15 (8%) versus 17 (14%) patients. Fatal TEAEs during study treatment occurred in six (3%) versus four (3%) patients.

INTERPRETATION

The addition of isatuximab to carfilzomib-dexamethasone significantly improves progression-free survival and depth of response in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma, representing a new standard of care for this patient population.

FUNDING

Sanofi. VIDEO ABSTRACT.

Prognostic impact of resistance to bortezomib and/or lenalidomide in carfilzomib-based therapies for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: The Kyoto Clinical Hematology Study Group, multicenter, pilot, prospective, observational study in Asian patients

Background

Combinatory strategies with carfilzomib (CFZ), a second‐generation proteasome inhibitor, plus dexamethasone (DEX) with or without lenalidomide (LEN) have shown promising efficacy for patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) in pivotal clinical trials. However, their effects on patients who were resistance to bortezomib (BTZ) and/or LEN have not been fully evaluated in a daily practice setting.

Aims

To evaluate the real‐world efficacy and safety of CFZ‐based treatments; that is, CFZ with LEN plus DEX (KRD therapy) and CFZ with DEX (KD therapy), in Asian patients, we conducted a multicenter pilot prospective observational study in the Kyoto Clinical Hematology Study Group.

Methods and Results

All 50 patients with RRMM enrolled in this study were treated with CFZ‐based treatments between 2017 and 2019. KRD and KD were administered to 31 and 19 patients, respectively. The overall response rates (ORRs) were 80.6% with KRD and 73.7% with KD. Two‐year progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 58.5% and 79.7% with KRD, and 23.1% and 52.6% with KD. By multivariate analysis, refractoriness to BTZ and to LEN were identified as independent unfavorable factors for both PFS and OS. The common non‐hematologic AEs included hypertension (42.0%), fever (24.0%), fatigue (24.0%), and infection (16.0%). No serious heart failure was observed. This study is registered as UMIN000025108.

Conclusion

This study suggests the need of the development of novel CFZ‐containing strategy which can overcome the refractoriness to BTZ and/or LEN, while both KRD and KD were shown to be mostly feasible in Asian patients in a daily practice setting.

When and How to Treat Relapsed Multiple Myeloma

The treatment landscape for relapsed multiple myeloma has expanded considerably in recent years, as numerous agents with new mechanisms of action have been introduced, increasing responses even in advanced disease and prolonging survival. The wealth of novel regimens comes with the challenges of balancing toxicities and aligning a regimen with the biology of the myeloma and the nature of the relapse in conjunction with patient treatment history and personal preference. Herein, we provide an overview of treatment options for both early and late relapsing disease as well as a discussion of the role of emerging immune-based therapies.

Weekly carfilzomib plus cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone in the treatment of relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: Final results from the MCRN-003/MYX.1 single arm phase II trial

The MCRN-003/CCTGMYX.1 is a single arm phase II trial of weekly carfilzomib, cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone (wKCd), exploring a convenient immunomodulator (IMiD)-free regimen in relapsed myeloma. Weekly carfilzomib (20/70 mg/m² ), dexamethasone 40 mg and cyclophosphamide 300 mg/m² was delivered over 28-day cycles. The primary endpoint was overall response after four cycles. Secondary endpoints included toxicity, response depth, PFS and OS. Exploratory endpoints included the impact of cytogenetics, prior therapy exposure and serum free light chain (sFLC) escape; 76 patients were accrued. The ORR was 85% (68% ≥very good partial response [VGPR] and 29% ≥complete response [CR]). The median OS and PFS were 27 and 17 months respectively. High-risk cytogenetics conferred a worse ORR (75% vs. 97%, p = .013) and median OS (18 months vs. NR, p = .002) with a trend toward a worse median PFS (14 vs. 22 months, p = .06). Prior proteasome inhibitor (PI) or lenalidomide did not influence OS or PFS. The sFLC was noted in 15% of patients with a median PFS of 17 months when included as a progression event. The most common ≥ grade 3 non-hematologic adverse events were infectious (40%), vascular (17%) and cardiac (15%). The wKCD is a safe and effective regimen in relapse, especially for patients ineligible for lenalidomide-based therapies.

Kidney injury and disease in patients with haematological malignancies

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is common in patients with cancer, especially in those with haematological malignancies. Kidney injury might be a direct consequence of the underlying haematological condition. For example, in the case of lymphoma infiltration or extramedullary haematopoiesis, it might be caused by a tumour product; in the case of cast nephropathy it might be due to the presence of monoclonal immunoglobulin; or it might result from tumour complications, such as hypercalcaemia. Kidney injury might also be caused by cancer treatment, as many chemotherapeutic agents are nephrotoxic. High-intensity treatments, such as high-dose chemotherapy followed by haematopoietic stem cell transplantation, not only increase the risk of infection but can also cause AKI through various mechanisms, including viral nephropathies, engraftment syndrome and sinusoidal obstruction syndrome. Some conditions, such as thrombotic microangiopathy, might also result directly from the haematological condition or the treatment. Novel immunotherapies, such as immune checkpoint inhibitors and chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy, can also be nephrotoxic. As new therapies for haematological malignancies with increased anti-tumour efficacy and reduced toxicity are developed, the number of patients receiving these treatments will increase. Clinicians must gain a good understanding of the different mechanisms of kidney injury associated with cancer to better care for these patients.

The impact of lenalidomide maintenance on second-line chemotherapy in transplant eligible patients with multiple myeloma

OBJECTIVES

To understand the impact of therapy sequencing on progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM). The use of daily, low-dose, lenalidomide maintenance (LM) has raised concern for fostering resistance, preventing its use in the relapsed setting.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of survival outcomes from the Canadian Myeloma Research Group Database. Patients were grouped based on receipt of LM after autologous stem cell transplant and receipt of lenalidomide in second-line therapy, 575 patients were included.

RESULTS

Patients treated with LM had statistically similar 2nd PFS when re-exposed to lenalidomide in second-line therapy compared to those receiving non-lenalidomide-containing regimens (10.2 vs 14.0 months, P =.53). This cohort also had the longest 2nd OS, 18 months longer than patients treated with LM who did not receive lenalidomide at relapse (55.3 vs 37 months, P =.004). Patients treated with LM also demonstrated deeper responses to second-line therapy than their non-LM counterparts.

CONCLUSION

Our data suggest that patients progressing on LM who receive lenalidomide-containing therapy at first relapse have comparable 2nd PFS and better 2nd OS compared to non-lenalidomide-containing second-line regimens. Identification of patients mostly likely to benefit from further lenalidomide-containing therapy is paramount.

Cost-Effectiveness of First-Line Versus Second-Line Use of Daratumumab in Older, Transplant-Ineligible Patients With Multiple Myeloma

PURPOSE

The MAIA trial found that addition of daratumumab to lenalidomide and dexamethasone (DRd) significantly prolonged progression-free survival in transplant-ineligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, compared with lenalidomide and dexamethasone alone (Rd). However, daratumumab is a costly treatment and is administered indefinitely until disease progression. Therefore, it is unclear whether it is cost-effective to use daratumumab in the first-line setting compared with reserving its use until later lines of therapy.

METHODS

We created a Markov model to compare healthcare costs and clinical outcomes of transplant-ineligible patients treated with daratumumab in the first-line setting compared with a strategy of reserving daratumumab until the second-line. We estimated transition probabilities from randomized trials using parametric survival modeling. Lifetime direct healthcare costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated for first-line daratumumab versus second-line daratumumab from a US payer perspective.

RESULTS

First-line daratumumab was associated with an improvement of 0.52 QALYs and 0.66 discounted life-years compared with second-line daratumumab. While both treatment strategies were associated with considerable lifetime expenditures ($1,434,937 v $1,112,101 in US dollars), an incremental cost of $322,836 for first-line daratumumab led to an ICER of $618,018 per QALY. The cost of daratumumab would need to be decreased by 67% for first-line daratumumab to be cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000 per QALY.

CONCLUSION

Using daratumumab in the first-line setting for transplant-ineligible patients may not be cost-effective under current pricing. Delaying daratumumab until subsequent lines of therapy may be a reasonable strategy to limit healthcare costs without significantly compromising clinical outcomes. Mature overall survival data are necessary to more fully evaluate cost-effectiveness in this setting.

Recent Advances in the Treatment of Patients with Multiple Myeloma

In the past 20 years, few diseases have seen as great progress in their treatment as multiple myeloma. With the approval of many new drugs and the limited availability of clinical trials comparing head-to-head the different possible combinations, the choice of the best treatments at each stage of the disease becomes complex as well as crucial since multiple myeloma remains incurable. This article presents a general description of the novelties of the whole treatment of multiple myeloma, from induction in the newly diagnosed patient through the role of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation and maintenance treatment until early and late relapses, including a section on recently approved drugs as well as novel drugs and immunotherapy in advanced stages of research, and that will surely play a relevant role in the treatment of this devastating disease in the coming years.

Shaping the Treatment Paradigm Based on the Current Understanding of the Pathobiology of Multiple Myeloma: An Overview

Multiple myeloma is an incurable malignancy which despite progressive improvements in overall survival over the last decade remains characterised by recurrent relapse with progressively shorter duration of response and treatment-free intervals with each subsequent treatment. Efforts to unravel the complex and heterogeneous genomic alterations, the marked dysregulation of the immune system and the multifarious interplay between malignant plasma cells and those of the tumour microenvironment have not only led to improved understanding of myelomagenesis and disease progression but have facilitated the rapid development of novel therapeutics including immunotherapies and small molecules bringing us a step closer to therapies that no doubt will extend survival. Novel therapeutic combinations both in the upfront and relapsed setting as well as novel methods to assess response and guide management are rapidly transforming the management of myeloma.

Daratumumab, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone in relapsed/refractory myeloma: a cytogenetic subgroup analysis of POLLUX

High cytogenetic risk abnormalities confer poor outcomes in multiple myeloma patients. In POLLUX, daratumumab/lenalidomide/dexamethasone (D-Rd) demonstrated significant clinical benefit versus lenalidomide/dexamethasone (Rd) in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) patients. We report an updated subgroup analysis of POLLUX based on cytogenetic risk. The cytogenetic risk was determined using fluorescence in situ hybridization/karyotyping; patients with high cytogenetic risk had t(4;14), t(14;16), or del17p abnormalities. Minimal residual disease (MRD; 10^–5) was assessed via the clonoSEQ^® assay V2.0. 569 patients were randomized (D-Rd, n = 286; Rd, n = 283); 35 (12%) patients per group had high cytogenetic risk. After a median follow-up of 44.3 months, D-Rd prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) versus Rd in standard cytogenetic risk (median: not estimable vs 18.6 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.43; P < 0.0001) and high cytogenetic risk (median: 26.8 vs 8.3 months; HR, 0.34; P = 0.0035) patients. Responses with D-Rd were deep, including higher MRD negativity and sustained MRD-negativity rates versus Rd, regardless of cytogenetic risk. PFS on subsequent line of therapy was improved with D-Rd versus Rd in both cytogenetic risk subgroups. The safety profile of D-Rd by cytogenetic risk was consistent with the overall population. These findings demonstrate the improved efficacy of daratumumab plus standard of care versus standard of care in RRMM, regardless of cytogenetic risk.

Monoclonal antibodies as an addition to current myeloma therapy strategies

INTRODUCTION

Immunotherapy has emerged as a major class in the therapeutic arsenal of multiple myeloma. Cell-based immunotherapy (CAR T-cells) and monoclonal antibody-based immunotherapy (naked monoclonal antibodies, antibody-drug conjugates, and bispecific T-cell engagers) are the two cornerstones of this novel approach for myeloma patients. Among numerous targets evaluated in the previous decade; CD38, SLAMF7, and, more recently, BCMA stand as the most promising.

AREAS COVERED

This review presents and discusses the currently available data regarding monoclonal antibodies in the treatment of multiple myeloma.

EXPERT OPINION

Anti-CD38-naked monoclonal antibodies have become a standard-of-care in multiple myeloma, greatly improving the depth and duration of response when combined with conventional therapy. Elotuzumab is approved in the relapse setting in combination with pomalidomide and maybe an interesting option in patients whose disease became refractory to anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies. Anti-BCMA drug conjugates and bispecific T-cell engager antibodies are promising new molecules in the multiple myeloma armamentarium.

Current developments in the combination therapy of relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma

INTRODUCTION

Therapy for patients with multiple myeloma has improved dramatically over the past decade following the introduction of novel agents and combinations across the disease spectrum. When relapse or refractory disease develops, non-cross-resistant drugs, most often used in multidrug regimens, have provided significant improvements in patient outcomes. Despite these advances, myeloma remains incurable and additional therapeutic approaches, based on emerging molecular and cellular biology, are moving rapidly through development phases. Approaches new to myeloma, including antibody-drug conjugates, T-cell-directed therapies, and novel small molecules, are poised to bring in the next wave of treatment.

AREAS COVERED

This review addresses recent data for the management of relapsed/refractory disease, rationale for agent and regimen selection and combinations, and options showing early promise in trials. Literature and abstracts pertaining to trial data published or presented up to 2019 are included.

EXPERT OPINION

Therapeutic strategies continue to evolve in myeloma, with the application of existing platforms (e.g., antibody-drug conjugates) to target relevant biology (e.g., B cell maturation antigen). Within the next year, there will be additional agents approved for those with advanced disease, and combinations as well as placement in sequencing will deepen responses and improve outcomes for patients.