The effectiveness and safety of lenalidomide and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma in real-world clinical practice: a study of the Korean Multiple Myeloma Working Party (KMMWP-151 study)

Efficacy and safety of anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: a systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials

Objectives

The current study aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) among patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) through meta-analysis.

Methods

As of June 2023, we searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase and the Cochrane Library. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) which compared the clinical outcomes of anti-CD38 mAbs plus immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs) or proteasome inhibitors (PIs) plus dexamethasone and IMiDs (or PIs) and dexamethasone alone for RRMM patients were included. Efficacy outcomes were mainly evaluated with progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). The safety was analyzed with hematologic and nonhematologic treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). All results were pooled using hazard ratio (HR), relative risk (RR), and their 95% confidence interval (CI) and prediction interval (PI).

Results

This meta-analysis included 11 RCTs in total. Compared with IMiDs (or PIs) and dexamethasone alone, anti-CD38 mAbs in combination with IMiDs (or PIs) and dexamethasone significantly prolonged PFS (HR: 0.552, 95% CI = 0.461 to 0.659, 95% PI = 0.318 to 0.957) and OS (HR: 0.737, 95% CI = 0.657 to 0.827, 95% PI = 0.626 to 0.868) in patients with RRMM. Additionally, RRMM patients receiving anti-CD38 mAbs in combination with IMiDs (or PIs) and dexamethasone achieved higher rates of overall response (RR: 1.281, 95% CI = 1.144 to 1.434, 95% PI = 0.883 to 1.859), complete response or better (RR: 2.602, 95% CI = 1.977 to 3.424, 95% PI = 1.203 to 5.628), very good partial response (VGPR) or better (RR: 1.886, 95% CI = 1.532 to 2.322, 95% PI = 0.953 to 3.731), and minimum residual disease (MRD)-negative (RR: 4.147, 95% CI = 2.588 to 6.644, 95% PI = 1.056 to 16.283) than those receiving IMiDs (or PIs) and dexamethasone alone. For TEAEs, the rates of hematologic and nonhematologic TEAEs, including thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, upper respiratory tract infection (URTI), pneumonia, bronchitis, dyspnea, diarrhea, pyrexia, back pain, arthralgia, fatigue, insomnia, and hypertension, were higher in the anti-CD38 mAbs in combination with IMiDs (or PIs) and dexamethasone group than in the IMiDs (or PIs) and dexamethasone group.

Conclusion

Our study showed that anti-CD38 mAbs in combination with IMiDs (or PIs) and dexamethasone improved PFS and OS, and achieved higher rates of overall response, complete response or better, VGPR or better, and MRD-negative, as well as higher rates of thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, URTI, pneumonia, bronchitis, dyspnea, diarrhea, pyrexia, back pain, arthralgia, fatigue, insomnia, and hypertension in RRMM patients.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42023431071.

Real-World Treatment of Patients With Relapsed/Refractory Myeloma

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

Lenalidomide with dexamethasone to multiple myeloma patients relapsing from bortezomib-based induction therapies: A prospective, observational study

Lenalidomide with dexamethasone (Len/Dex) is considered to be an effective and well-tolerated regimen to treat multiple myeloma (MM) patients relapsing after bortezomib induction therapy. With the increase in novel agents targeting refractory and relapsed MM, the identification of clinical or laboratory variables that can predict the appropriate candidates of Len/Dex is essential. To address this question, we prospectively assessed 38 adult MM patients who received bortezomib-based induction therapy and were administered Len/Dex for their first relapse. These 38 patients were stratified into the symptomatic relapse group (n = 10) and biological relapse group (n = 28) according to the disease status when Len/Dex was initiated. The overall response rate in the symptomatic group and biological relapse group was 70.0% (7/10) and 60.7% (17/28), respectively (P = 0.964). These two groups harbored a comparable median Len/Dex treatment duration (139 vs. 225 days; P = 0.876) and progression-free survival 2 (PFS2) (501 vs. 1289 days; P = 0.410). Multivariate analyses failed to show that treating biological relapse (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.29; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.43-3.88; P = 0.648), PFS with bortezomib-based induction therapies ≥18 months (HR: 1.79; 95% CI: 0.64-5.01; P = 0.266), autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HR: 2.18; 95% CI: 0.56-8.55; P = 0.262), and high-risk cytogenetics (HR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.18-3.93; P = 0.835) were attributed to depth of Len/Dex treatment. In conclusion, whether MM patients treated by Len/Dex for biological relapse would have a better outcome than those prescribed for symptomatic relapse remains inconclusive. Treating significant biological relapse and symptomatic relapse remains the current consensus.

Real-world Data on the Efficacy and Safety of Ixazomib-based Therapy in Multiple Myeloma: A Single-center Study in China

Objective

To assess the short-term efficacy and safety of ixazomib in Chinese multiple myeloma (MM) patients in the real world.

Methods

Fifty-nine MM patients who received at least one cycle of ixazomib-based therapy between 1 June 2018 and 30 September 2019 were retrospectively analyzed in Tianjin Medical University General Hospital. Thirteen newly diagnosed MM (NDMM), 13 refractory/relapsed MM (RRMM) and 33 continuous therapy (27 bortezomib peripheral neuritis (PN) intolerant and six maintenance therapy) MM patients were included. The indicated overall response rate (ORR), time to overall response (TOR), and adverse events (AEs) were investigated.

Results

The ORR in NDMM was 76.9%, with one complete response (CR), five very good partial response (VGPR), four partial response (PR), median PFS, and TOR were 122 (66–272) days and 49 (22–108) days. The ORR in RRMM was 46.2%, with one CR, two VGPR, three PR, median PFS, and TOR were 79 (28–169) days and 59 (23–88) days. The ORR in continuous therapy MM patients was 100%, with nine stringent CR, 15 CR, six VGPR and three PR, median TOR was 75 (25–141) days. There were no significant differences regarding ORR between patients with cytogenetic high risk and standard risk in three subgroups (all P>0.05). The most frequent hematological AEs were anemia (13.6%) and thrombocytopenia (10.2%). The most common nonhematological AEs were PN (25.0%) and diarrhea (13.6%).

Conclusion

The real-world data demonstrated that ixazomib-based therapy was generally effective and safe in the short term for MM patients.

Clinical impact of frailty on treatment outcomes of elderly patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma treated with lenalidomide plus dexamethasone

We compared efficacy and safety, according to frailty, of elderly patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) treated with lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rd), for whom bortezomib treatment had failed. Patients, 164 (52.9%) and 146 (47.1%), were classified as non-frail and frail using a simplified frailty scale. The overall response rates (ORR) and survival outcomes were lower in frail than in non-frail patients (ORR: 56.2% vs. 67.7%, P = 0.069; median progression free survival: 13.17 vs. 17.80 months, P = 0.033; median overall survival: 23.00 vs. 36.27 months, P = 0.002, respectively). The number of treatment emergent adverse events in grade 3 or worse was higher in frail than in non-frail patients (41.8% vs. 24.4%, P = 0.002, respectively). In frail patients, independent poor prognostic factors for survival were two or more Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) score, prior to exposure to both bortezomib and thalidomide, and achieved less than partial response In conclusion, frailty could predict clinical outcomes of Rd treatment in elderly patients with RRMM who had failed prior bortezomib. In frail patients, lower CCI in addition to less previous treatment exposure and deep response were associated with better survival.