American Society of Blood and Marrow Transplantation, European Society of Blood and Marrow Transplantation, Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinical Trials Network, and International Myeloma Working Group Consensus Conference on Salvage Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation in Patients with Relapsed Multiple Myeloma

Stem Cell Mobilization Performed with Different Doses of Cytarabine in Plasma Cell Myeloma Patients Relapsing after Previous Autologous Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation-A Multicenter Report by the Polish Myeloma Study Group

Salvage autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (auto-HCT) may be used to treat relapse of plasma cell myeloma occurring after previous auto-HCT. When an insufficient number of hematopoietic stem cells have been stored from the initial harvest, remobilization is necessary. Here, we aimed to analyze the efficacy and safety of different doses of cytarabine (total 800 vs. 1600 vs. 2400 mg/m2) for remobilization. Sixty-five patients, 55% male, with a median age at remobilization 63 years, were included. Remobilization was performed with cytarabine_800 in 7, cytarabine_1600 in 36, and cytarabine_2400 in 22 patients. Plerixafor rescue was used in 25% of patients receiving cytarabine_1600 and 27% of those receiving cytarabine_2400. Patients administered cytarabine_800 were not rescued with plerixafor. Remobilization was successful in 80% of patients (57% cytarabine_800; 86% cytarabine_1600; 77% cytarabine_2400; p = 0.199). The yield of collected CD34+ cells did not differ between the different cytarabine doses (p = 0.495). Patients receiving cytarabine_2400 were at the highest risk of developing severe cytopenias, requiring blood product support, or having blood-stream infections. One patient died of septic shock after cytarabine_2400. In summary, remobilization with cytarabine is feasible in most patients. All doses of cytarabine allow for successful remobilization. Cytarabine_2400 is associated with higher toxicity; therefore, lower doses (800 or 1600 mg/m2) seem to be preferable.

Allogeneic stem cell transplantation in multiple myeloma: is there still a place?

The introduction of novel agents dramatically improved response and outcomes of multiple myeloma (MM) and led to a sharp decline in the use of allogeneic hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (allo-HSCT). Thus, recent guidelines do not recommend anymore allo-HSCT as consolidation in the first-line treatment of newly diagnosed MM, even in high-risk patients. In a relapsed/refractory setting, allo-HSCT is not routinely recommended but should only be performed within clinical trials in young and high-risk patients. Nonetheless, allo-HSCT still represents a potential curative approach that has been used for decades in the treatment of MM and plasma cell neoplasms with favorable results and may still represent a treatment option for carefully selected patients. Despite that promising results were obtained with CAR T-cell therapies and bispecific antibodies in triple- and penta-exposed/refractory MM, these patients will inevitably relapse. To date, less is known about outcomes of allo-HSCT in patients exposed to novel immunotherapeutic drugs. Therefore, allo-HSCT could represent a reasonable treatment choice for younger and high-risk patients who have relapsed after CAR T-cell therapies and bispecific antibodies as well as an alternative for patients not eligible to these treatments and in those countries where immunotherapies are not yet available. In the choice of conditioning, reduced intensity conditioning regimens are currently recommended for the lower toxicity and mortality. Moreover, the use of alternative donors, particularly haploidentical, has progressively increased in last years with results comparable to full matched donors. Finally, post-transplantation maintenance strategies are encouraged whenever feasible.

Health-related quality of life and quality-adjusted progression free survival for carfilzomib and dexamethasone maintenance following salvage autologous stem-cell transplantation in patients with multiple myeloma: a randomized phase 2 trial by the Nordic Myeloma Study Group

BACKGROUND

Decisions regarding maintenance therapy in patients with multiple myeloma should be based on both treatment efficacy and health-related quality of life (HRQL) consequences. In the CARFI trial, patients with first relapse of multiple myeloma underwent salvage autologous stem cell transplantation (salvage ASCT) before randomization to carfilzomib-dexamethasone maintenance therapy (Kd) or observation. The primary clinical endpoint was time to progression, which was extended by 8 months by Kd. The aim of this paper is to present the all HRQL endpoints of the CARFI trial including the HRQL effect of Kd maintenance therapy relative to observation. The primary HRQL endpoint was assessed by EORTC QLQ-C30 Summary score (QLQ-C30-sum) at 8 months follow-up. A key secondary HRQL endpoint was quality-adjusted progression-free-survival (QAPFS).

METHODS

HRQL was assessed with EORTC QLQ-C30, EORTC QLQ-MY20 and FACT/GOG-Ntx at randomization and every second month during follow-up. HRQL data were analyzed with linear mixed effect models until 8 months follow-up. QAPFS per individual was calculated by multiplying progression-free survival (PFS) by two quality-adjustment metrics, the QLQ-C30-sum and EORTC Quality of Life Utility Measure-Core 10 dimensions (QLU-C10D). The QAPFS per treatment group was estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method. P < 0.05 was used for statistical significance, and a between-group minimal important difference of 10 points was interpreted as clinically relevant for the QLQ-C30-sum.

RESULTS

168 patients were randomized. HRQL questionnaire compliance was 93%. For the QLQ-C30-sum, the difference of 4.62 points (95% confidence interval (CI) -8.9: -0.4, p = 0.032) was not clinically relevant. PFS was 19.3 months for the Kd maintenance group and 16.8 months for the observation group; difference = 2.5 months (95% CI 0.5; 4.5). QAPFS based on the QLQ-C30-sum for the Kd maintenance group was 18.0 months (95% CI 16.4; 19.6) and for the observation group 15.0 months (95% CI 13.5; 16.5); difference = 3.0 months (95% CI 0.8-5.3). QAPFS based on the QLU-C10D for the Kd maintenance group was 17.5 months (95% CI 15.9; 19.2) and 14.0 months (95% CI 12.4; 15.5) for the observation group; difference = 3.5 months (95% CI 1.1-5.9).

CONCLUSIONS

Kd maintenance therapy after salvage ASCT did not adversely affect overall HRQL, but adjustment for HRQL reduced the PFS compared to unadjusted PFS. PFS of maintenance therapy should be quality-adjusted to balance the benefits and HRQL impact.

Autologous Stem Cell Transplant in Hodgkin's and Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma, Multiple Myeloma, and AL Amyloidosis

Human body cells are stem cell (SC) derivatives originating from bone marrow. Their special characteristics include their capacity to support the formation and self-repair of the cells. Cancer cells multiply uncontrollably and invade healthy tissues, making stem cell transplants a viable option for cancer patients undergoing high-dose chemotherapy (HDC). When chemotherapy is used at very high doses to eradicate all cancer cells from aggressive tumors, blood-forming cells and leukocytes are either completely or partially destroyed. Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is necessary for patients in those circumstances. The patients who undergo autologous transplants receive their own stem cells (SCs). The transplanted stem cells first come into contact with the bone marrow and then undergo engraftment, before differentiating into blood cells. ASCT is one of the most significant and innovative strategies for treating diseases. Here we focus on the treatment of Hodgkin's lymphoma, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, multiple myeloma, and AL amyloidosis, using ASCT. This review provides a comprehensive picture of the effectiveness and the safety of ASCT as a therapeutic approach for these diseases, based on the currently available evidence.

Prolonged infusion time of cyclophosphamide plus granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) as a mobilization regimen may improve mobilization efficiency in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients: a single center experience

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to clarify the effectiveness and safety of two different infusion durations of cyclophosphamide (CTX) plus granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) for peripheral blood stem cell mobilization in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM).

METHODS

One hundred and fifty-six consecutive NDMM patients receiving CTX plus G-CSF mobilization and autologous stem cell transplantation during the period of September 2008 to May 2020 were selected for retrospective analysis. According to differences in prolonged infusion time of CTX, they were divided into a 24-h group (24-h continuous infusion) and a control group (4-6 h of infusion). Mobilization and safety of infusion were analyzed. Flow cytometry was used to detect the peripheral blood CD34+ cell count. Multivariate analysis was performed to determine the factors influencing the number of CD34+ cells.

RESULTS

The mean CD34+ cell counts collected in 24-h and control groups were 6.78 (interquartile range [IQR] 3.59-11.69) and 4.48 (IQR 2.39-6.30) ×106/kg, respectively (p < 0.001). Meanwhile, the target number of CD34+ cells/kg (defined as ≥4 × 106/kg) was collected from 51 (75%) of cases in 24-h group vs. 45 (51%) in the control group (p = 0.002). Multivariate analysis identified the independence of CTX infusion time as a factor influencing the target number of CD34+ cells/kg [odds ratio OR, 4.045; 95% CI: 1.630-10.038, p = 0.003]. The post-transplantation time to neutrophil engraftment was 10 (IQR 9-11) in 24-h group and 11 (IQR 10-12) in control group (p < 0.001). Finally, no statistical differences were identified between groups in terms of hematologic and non-hematologic toxicities.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with NDMM, 24-h continuous infusion of CTX plus G-CSF contributes to improved mobilization efficiency and equivalent toxicity as a stem cell mobilization regimen.

Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation in Multiple Myeloma: Risk Factors and Outcomes in the Era of New Therapeutic Options-A Single-Center Experience

BACKGROUND

Despite major treatment advances, multiple myeloma remains incurable. The outcome of patients who are refractory to immunomodulatory agents, proteasome inhibitors, and anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies is poor, and improved treatment strategies for this difficult-to-treat patient population are an unmet medical need.

METHODS

This retrospective, unicentric analysis included 38 patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma or plasma cell leukemia who underwent allogeneic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) between 2013 and 2022. Survival outcomes, relapse incidence, and non-relapse mortality were calculated according to remission status, date of allo-HSCT, cytogenetic risk status, timing, and number of previous autologous HSCTs.

RESULTS

The median PFS was 13.6 months (95% CI, 7.7-30.4) and the median OS was 51.4 months (95% CI, 23.5-NA) in the overall cohort. The cumulative incidence of relapse at 3 years was 57%, and non-relapse mortality was 16%. The median PFS and OS were significantly longer in patients with very good partial remission (VGPR) or better compared to patients with less than VGPR at the time of allo-HSCT (mPFS 29.7 months (95% CI, 13.7-NA) vs. 6.5 months (95% CI, 2.6-17.0); p = 0.009 and mOS not reached vs. 18.6 months (95% CI, 7.0-NA); p = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

For selected patients, allo-HSCT may result in favorable overall survival, in part by providing an appropriate hemato-immunological basis for subsequent therapies.

Continuous Elotuzumab, Pomalidomide, and Dexamethasone Maintenance Following Second Autologous Transplantation for Multiple Myeloma: Results of a Prospective Phase 2 Multicenter Trial

Second autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (AHCT2) is a useful therapeutic modality for fit patients with multiple myeloma who have durable remission after upfront AHCT. Retrospective studies have suggested a significant benefit of incorporating maintenance therapy post-AHCT2, but prospective data on specific regimens are lacking. The purpose of this study was to investigate the use of elotuzumab, pomalidomide, and dexamethasone (EPd) as salvage therapy prior to and maintenance after AHCT2 for relapsed multiple myeloma. This prospective single-arm phase II trial investigating the use of EPd in combination with AHCT2 in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma was conducted at 2 academic centers in North America. The primary outcome was 1-year progression-free survival (PFS). Twenty-five patients were enrolled on the study. Sixteen patients received EPd induction; six patients (38%) progressed during salvage therapy and were removed from the trial prior to AHCT2. Following a planned safety analysis, the protocol was amended, and EPd induction was removed from the study schema. An additional 9 patients underwent induction off-study and were enrolled on trial for AHCT2 and EPd maintenance. A total of 18 patients underwent AHCT2 and received EPd maintenance. Two patients discontinued treatment because of toxicity, one attributed to elotuzumab and the other to pomalidomide. The 1-year PFS was 72%, and the median PFS was 19 months. The study was closed early owing to poor accrual; 6 patients remained on therapy at time of analysis. EPd maintenance after AHCT2 was safe and tolerable. The 1-year PFS and median PFS were similar to values in previous retrospective reports of outcomes following AHCT2. Further studies are needed to define the optimal use of and protocol for AHCT2 in fit patients with relapsed multiple myeloma.

Effect of transplanted cells with CD184 and CD26 expressions and reconstitution of CD3+ lymphocyte population on long-term survival after autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for multiple myeloma

Autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (auto-SCT) is the recommended treatment for responding patients with multiple myeloma (MM). However, we do not know the risk factors influencing long-term survival without progression after auto-SCT. Therefore, this prospective study aimed to investigate the influence of transplanted cells with cluster of differentiation (CD)184+ expression, CD26+ lymphocytes and monocytes, and reconstitution of CD3+ lymphocytes on overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) after auto-SCT in MM. Forty-eight patients with MM underwent auto-SCT at our center from 2011 to 2013. The numbers of CD184+ cells, CD26+ lymphocytes, and CD26+ monocytes were measured in the harvested material. In addition, the number of lymphocyte subpopulations (CD3+ lymphocytes, helpers, suppressors, natural killer (NK), cytotoxic NK, and B lymphocytes) was measured in peripheral blood during regeneration after auto-SCT. Flow cytometry was performed in both cases. The median OS was 92 months. Our analysis revealed a statistically significant effect of the number of transplanted CD184+ cells on OS and a statistically significant correlation between PFS and the number of transplanted CD184+ cells and reconstitution of CD3+ lymphocytes. In conclusion, our study showed that the increasing numbers of transplanted CD184+ cells, CD26+ lymphocytes, and CD26+ monocytes augmented the risk of death.

Minimal residual disease status is the prognostic determinant following high-dose treatment for patients with multiple myeloma

BACKGROUND

The presence of minimal residual disease (MRD+) following autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in multiple myeloma represents a poor prognostic factor for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).

METHODS

At our department, we recommend lenalidomide maintenance for patients who are MRD+ after ASCT, while MRD-negative (MRD-) patients, after information about the national guidelines, were not advised to follow this regimen.

RESULTS

Out of the total 228 patients, 175 received ASCT following first-line induction (MRD- 92 (53%), MRD+ 83 (47%), at 2 months post-ASCT), while 53 underwent ASCT after second-line treatment (MRD- 27 (51%), MRD+ 26 (49%), at the same time point). Comparatively, MRD- patients who did not receive maintenance demonstrated better OS than MRD+ patients who received upfront ASCT and maintenance treatment (96% vs. 86%, p = 0.030, at 3 years). However, nonsignificant difference was found in PFS (76% vs. 62%, at 3 years). Furthermore, second-line ASCT, MRD- non-maintained patients exhibited significantly better PFS than MRD+ (71% vs. 27%, p > 0.001, at 3 years). However, OS was better but nonsignificant (96% vs. 76%, at 3 years). Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) analysis was performed on 141 out of the 228 patients. Of these, 85 (60%) patients were deemed standard risk (SR), and 56 (40%) were classified as high risk (HR). In the SR cohort, MRD- patients exhibited better PFS and OS than MRD+ patients (71% vs. 59% and 100% vs. 85%, respectively). In the HR cohort, the MRD- patients showed superior PFS but similar OS compared to MRD+ patients (66% vs. 42% and 81% vs. 80%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that being MRD- is a more crucial prognostic factor for the 3-year PFS and OS than the presence of high-risk cytogenetic markers or undergoing maintenance treatment. The latter appears insufficient, particularly for MRD+ patients following ASCT in the second-line setting, suggesting that these patients may require a more intensive treatment approach.

Carfilzomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone followed by a second ASCT is an effective strategy in first relapse multiple myeloma: a study on behalf of the Chronic malignancies working party of the EBMT

In the setting of a first relapse of multiple myeloma (MM), a second autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) following carfilzomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (KRd) is an option, although there is scarce data concerning this approach. We performed a retrospective study involving 22 EBMT-affiliated centers. Eligible MM patients had received a second-line treatment with KRd induction followed by a second ASCT between 2016 and 2018. Primary objective was to estimate progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Secondary objectives were to assess the response rate and identify significant variables affecting PFS and OS. Fifty-one patients were identified, with a median age of 62 years. Median PFS after ASCT was 29.5 months while 24- and 36-months OS rates were 92.1% and 84.5%, respectively. Variables affecting PFS were an interval over four years between transplants and the achievement of a very good partial response (VGPR) or better before the relapse ASCT. Our study suggests that a relapse treatment with ASCT after KRd induction is an effective strategy for patients with a lenalidomide-sensitive first relapse. Patients with at least four years of remission after a frontline ASCT and who achieved at least a VGPR after KRd induction appear to benefit the most from this approach.

Mobilization Strategies in Myeloma Patients Intended for Autologous Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation

Background

Multiple myeloma is currently the leading indication for autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (AHCT). A prerequisite for AHCT is mobilization and collection of adequate blood graft to support high-dose therapy. Current mobilization strategies include granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) alone or in combination with chemotherapy most commonly cyclophosphamide (CY). More recently, plerixafor has become into agenda especially in patients who mobilize poorly. In the selection of a mobilization method, several factors should be considered.

Summary

Preplanned collection target is important as G-CSF plus plerixafor is more effective in the mobilization of CD34+ cells than G-CSF alone. On the other hand, CY plus G-CSF is superior to G-CSF only mobilization. Previous therapy and age of the patients are important considerations as G-CSF alone may not be effective enough in patients with risk factors for poor mobilization. These factors include extensive lenalidomide exposure, irradiation to bone marrow-bearing sites, higher age, or a previous mobilization failure. Also, local preferences and experiences as well as the number of apheresis needed are important issues as well as cost-effectiveness considerations. Mobilization method used may have implication for cellular composition of collected grafts, which might have an impact on posttransplant events such as hematologic and immune recovery in addition to also potential long-term outcomes.

Key Message

Currently, G-CSF alone and preemptive plerixafor if needed might be considered as a standard mobilization strategy in MM patients intended for AHCT.

Long-term outcomes of allogeneic stem cell transplant in multiple myeloma

Allogeneic stem cell transplant (allo SCT) for multiple myeloma (MM) is potentially curative in some, while toxic in many others. We retrospectively analyzed 85 patients diagnosed with MM who underwent allo SCT as frontline or salvage therapy between 2000 and 2022 at Mayo Clinic Rochester and examined patient outcomes and prognostic markers. Overall survival (OS), progression free survival (PFS), treatment related mortality (TRM), and relapse rates (RR) were estimated using the Kaplan Meier method and competing risk models. Median follow-up was 11.5 years. Median OS and PFS were 1.7 and 0.71 years, respectively. Five-year OS and PFS were 22.2% and 15.1%, respectively. One-year TRM was 23.5%. Twelve patients demonstrated durable overall survival, living 10+ years beyond their allo SCT. This subgroup was more likely to have no or one prior auto SCT (p = 0.03) and to have been transplanted between 2000 and 2010 (p = 0.03). Outcomes were poor in this cohort with long follow-up, with few patients surviving 5 years or more, and most relapsing or dying within 2 years. We would expect better outcomes and tolerability with an expanded array of novel therapeutics and would prefer them to allo SCT.

Management of Relapsed-Refractory Multiple Myeloma in the Era of Advanced Therapies: Evidence-Based Recommendations for Routine Clinical Practice

Multiple myeloma (MM) is the second most common hematologic malignancy in adults worldwide. Over the past few years, major therapeutic advances have improved progression-free and overall survival, as well as quality of life. Despite this recent progress, MM remains incurable in the vast majority of cases. Patients eventually relapse and become refractory to multiple drug classes, making long-term management challenging. In this review, we will focus on the treatment paradigm of relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM) in the era of advanced therapies emphasizing the available novel modalities that have recently been incorporated into routine practice, such as chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy, bispecific antibodies, and other promising approaches. We will also discuss major factors that influence the selection of appropriate drug combinations or cellular therapies, such as relapse characteristics, and other disease and patient related parameters. Our goal is to provide insight into the currently available and experimental therapies for RRMM in an effort to guide the therapeutic decision-making process.

Daratumumab, pomalidomide, and dexamethasone (DPd) followed by high dose chemotherapy-Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation leads to superior outcomes when compared to DPd-alone for patients with Relapsed Refractory Multiple Myeloma

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

While the role of autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) in the first line therapy for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma is well established, efficacy of ASCT for patients with relapsed refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) in the era of novel therapeutic agents remains unknown. In this single center retrospective analysis, we evaluated and compared the efficacy and safety outcomes of patients with RRMM treated with daratumumab pomalidomide dexamethasone (DPd) alone versus (vs) DPd followed by ASCT.

METHODS

A total of 83 patients with RRMM who were treated with and achieved at least partial response (PR) with DPd were evaluated by electronic medical records. All patients who responded to DPd and were deemed eligible for ASCT proceeded with high dose melphalan followed by autologous stem cell infusion (DPd + ASCT group). Remaining patients continued DPd until disease progression or intolerable toxicities (DPd-alone group). Responses were evaluated using the International Myeloma Working Group response criteria and toxicities were graded using National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. Patient and disease characteristics, as well as efficacy and safety outcomes were summarized using descriptive statistics. Kaplan-Meier analyses were used to estimate progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

A total of 21/83 (25%) patients with RRMM who achieved at least PR to DPd underwent ASCT (DPd + ASCT group) while the remaining 62/83 (75%) continued DPd without ASCT (DPd-alone group). For the entire patient population, median age was 66 years (42-81), 49 (59%) patients were male, 54 (65%) patients had IgG isotype, 21 (25%) patients had R-ISS stage III disease, 51 (61%) patients had high-risk cytogenetics, and 17 (20%) patients had extramedullary disease. Patient age, disease stage, cytogenetic risk profile were well balanced between two groups. A stringent complete response was seen in 10 (16%) and 12 (57%) patients in the DPd-alone and DPd + AST groups, respectively. Median PFS was 17.5 months in the DPd-alone vs 42.2 months (p=0.006) in the DPd + ASCT group. Median OS was 38.1 months in the DPd-alone group vs not reached in the DPD + ASCT group (p=0.009). The most common grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAE) were myelosuppression and gastrointestinal toxicities, more commonly seen in the DPd + ASCT group. No treatment-related mortalities were observed in either group.

CONCLUSION

Patients with RRMM who responded to DPd and underwent HDT-ASCT demonstrated superior depth and duration of remission compared to those who received DPd-alone. Although DPd followed by ASCT is associated with more cytopenias and gastrointestinal toxicities, this treatment appears to be overall safe for patients with RRMM.

Elkourahy Omar S. Treatment of Multiple Myeloma in the First Relapse

The treatment scope for relapsed myeloma has been expanded considerably in the last few years, by virtue of the advent of numerous novel agents with new mechanisms of actions. This has resulted in increasing responses and prolonging survival even in advanced diseases. The wealth of novel regimens comes with the challenges of balancing toxicities and aligning a regimen with the biology of myeloma and the nature of relapse in conjunction with the patient’s treatment history, comorbidities, and personal preference. The second-line treatment in myeloma includes new generation of proteasome inhibitors and immunomodulators, CD38 monoclonal antibodies, Panobinostat, and Elotuzumab. Recent randomized trials have shown that triplet combinations incorporating CD38 monoclonal antibodies, dexamethasone along with either proteasome inhibitor or immunomodulator were superior to doublet combinations in terms of response rate and progression-free survival. The choice of the second-line therapy is determined by lenalidomide/bortezomib exposure and resistance and access to new agents. Furthermore, autologous transplantation should be considered in selected cases. Here, we will be discussing the optimal management of multiple myeloma in the first relapse.

Lenalidomide-based triplet regimens in first relapsed multiple myeloma patients: real-world evidence from a propensity score matched analysis

Lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rd)-based triplets, in particular carfilzomib-Rd (KRd) and daratumumab-Rd (DaraRd), represent a standard of care in lenalidomide-sensitive multiple myeloma (MM) patients in first relapse. Meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCT), suggested better outcome with DaraRd. Trying to address this issue in clinical practice, we collected data of 430 consecutive MM patients addressed to Rd-based triplets in first relapse between January 2017 and March 2021. Overall, the most common used regimen was DaraRd, chosen in almost half of the cases (54.4%), followed by KRd (34.6%). Different triplets were used much less commonly. In an attempt to limit the imbalance of a retrospective analysis, we conducted a propensity score matching (PSM) comparison between DaraRd and KRd. After PSM, efficacy of DaraRd versus KRd was similar in terms of overall-response rate (ORR) (OR: 0.9, P=0.685) as well as of very good partial response (VGPR) or better (OR: 0.9, P=0.582). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was significantly longer for DaraRd (29.8 vs. 22.5 months; P=0.028). DaraRd was tolerated better, registering a lower rate of grade 3-4 non-hematological toxicity (OR: 0.4, P<0.001). With the limitations of any retrospective analysis, our real-life PSM comparison between DaraRd and KRd, in first-relapse MM patients, showed better tolerability and prolonged PFS of DaraRd, although with some gaps of performance, in particular of DaraRd, with respect to RCT. Carfilzomib-containing regimens, like KRd, still remain a valid second-line option in the emerging scenario of first-line daratumumab-based therapy.

Non-interventional Study Evaluating the Mobilization of Stem Cells by Plerixafor Before Salvage Autologous Stem Cell Transplant in Relapsed Multiple Myeloma (IFM-2015-03)

INTRODUCTION

Despite the implementation of new therapeutic agents, management of relapsed multiple myeloma (MM) remains a challenge. Salvage autologous hematopoietic cell transplant (AHCT) remains a valid therapeutic option for eligible patients who achieve prolonged response after a first AHCT. However, a second graft is not always available, and these patients may need a second mobilization.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This prospective, non-interventional, multicenter study aimed to collect data on the feasibility of salvage AHCT using a plerixafor-based hematopoietic cell mobilization in relapsed MM, according to the plerixafor label in France. Adult patients with relapsed MM eligible for a second AHCT and mobilized using granulocyte- colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) and plerixafor were included.

RESULTS

Of the 23 patients, 17 achieved a successful hematopoietic cell mobilization and 13 were able to proceed to a second AHCT. Median age was 62.9 years (min-max 51-71). Ten patients (77%) were male. Eleven (85%) received AHCT as a third-line treatment or more. Median time between first and second AHCT was 5.4 years (range, 2.6-16.3). Among 18 evaluable patients, mobilization was successful for 17 (94%) of them [95% CI 84-100], with no reported side effects. Among the 13 patients who underwent salvage AHCT, the median time to engraftment was 14 days (min-max 11-29). One-year progression-free and overall survival were 88.9% [95% CI 43.3-98.4] and 100%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that plerixafor allows safe and efficient mobilization in relapsed MM patients who are candidates for a salvage AHCT.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02439476 Registered 8 May 2015, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02439476 .

Patient and Caregiver Experience Decision Factors in Treatment Decision Making: Results of a Systematic Literature Review of Multiple Myeloma Decision Aids

OBJECTIVES

Decision-aids (DAs) may facilitate shared decision-making for patients and caregivers, by providing evidence-based information to assist healthcare professionals, patients, and caregivers in making choices about aspects of care, and/or highlighting decision factors to discuss with the potential of altering the treatment decision. These decision factors may not be well integrated in DAs.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted in the field of multiple myeloma (MM) on peer-reviewed publications, extended with a gray literature search. Data on whether and how patient and caregiver experience elements, other than survival and physical quality of life, were mentioned as decision factors in the identified MM DAs were extracted and analyzed qualitatively.

RESULTS

Seventy MM DAs were found and analyzed; 51% of DAs mentioned any patient non-routinely assessed experience decision factors and only 17% mentioned any caregiver-related information. One hundred and forty potential decision factors were extracted, deduplicated and categorized into the following categories: 1) financial, 2) mode of administration / transportation issues, 3) personal beliefs and values, 4) emotional and social quality of life, 5) other medical information, 6) availability of social support, 7) caregiver burden. None of the DAs presented a comprehensive framework on all seven categories of decision factors being consider when mapping patient and caregiver experience value elements in MM.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on available DAs, we recommend a set of patient and caregiver experience decision factors that have the potential to affect treatment choices of patients with MM, which should be included in DAs, including MM clinical guidelines.

The first relapse in multiple myeloma: how to pick the next best thing

The choice of treatment for patients with multiple myeloma (MM) at first relapse/progression is based on many factors: (1) treatment-related factors, which include the regimen used during first induction, the quality and duration of first response achieved, toxicities from the first treatment, whether the patient underwent autologous stem cell transplant, and whether the patient was on maintenance at the time of relapse/progression; (2) disease-related factors, including disease presentation and pace of progression; and (3) patient-related factors, including functional age and performance status. The learning objectives are to present the treatment options for patients with MM upon their first relapse and to learn about various strategies for selecting an optimal treatment regimen.

Case report: A successful second autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in refractory systemic sclerosis, with positive effect on skin involvement, pulmonary function and microcirculation

Background

Systemic sclerosis (SSc) is a complex autoimmune disease characterized by inflammation, vasculopathy and fibrosis of the skin and internal organs. Treatment with autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) for progressive SSc has improved overall and event-free survival rates significantly, but unfortunately disease progression after HCT is seen in a subset of patients. Data on the efficacy and safety of second HCT is scarce.

Case

We present a patient with diffuse cutaneous SSc and associated interstitial lung disease (ILD) who successfully underwent a second HCT for progressive disease five years after a first HCT. We describe changes in skin involvement and pulmonary involvement as well as the changes observed in sequential nailfold microcapillaroscopy (NCM), performed from first presentation up to this moment.

Conclusion

This case adds to the current limited literature on efficacy and safety of a second HCT in SSc refractory cases. Furthermore it outlines the potential of HCT on amelioration of microvasculopathy in SSc.

Risk Assessment for Newly Diagnosed Fit Young Patients with Multiple Myeloma in the Era of Novel Treatment Modalities: Should There Be Additional Factors Taken into Consideration??

Introduction

The optimal treatment for young patients with high-risk newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) remains a challenge.

Methods

We retrospectively evaluated 58 NDMM patients younger than 55 years treated in our center from 2010 to 2021 with the current recommended protocols.

Results

After a median follow-up of 48 months, median overall survival (OS) was not reached; however, approximately 25% of them died within 4 years after diagnosis. Advanced disease stage, presence of extramedullary disease, elevated LDH, and less than very good remission before autologous hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation adversely affected patient survival. Based on these factors, we created a risk-assessment scoring system that sufficiently discriminated young NDMM patients at risk of poor outcome. The 4-year OS was superior for patients with zero to two factors to those with three to five factors (86% vs 44%, p<0.001).

Conclusion

The proposed scoring system could be reliably used at diagnosis and at interim disease evaluation in aiming for personalized treatment for young NDMM patients.

Gaps and opportunities in the treatment of relapsed-refractory multiple myeloma: Consensus recommendations of the NCI Multiple Myeloma Steering Committee

A wide variety of new therapeutic options for Multiple Myeloma (MM) have recently become available, extending progression-free and overall survival for patients in meaningful ways. However, these treatments are not curative, and patients eventually relapse, necessitating decisions on the appropriate choice of treatment(s) for the next phase of the disease. Additionally, an important subset of MM patients will prove to be refractory to the majority of the available treatments, requiring selection of effective therapies from the remaining options. Immunomodulatory agents (IMiDs), proteasome inhibitors, monoclonal antibodies, and alkylating agents are the major classes of MM therapies, with several options in each class. Patients who are refractory to one agent in a class may be responsive to a related compound or to a drug from a different class. However, rules for selection of alternative treatments in these situations are somewhat empirical and later phase clinical trials to inform those choices are ongoing. To address these issues the NCI Multiple Myeloma Steering Committee formed a relapsed/refractory working group to review optimal treatment choices, timing, and sequencing and provide recommendations. Additional issues considered include the role of salvage autologous stem cell transplantation, risk stratification, targeted approaches for genetic subsets of MM, appropriate clinical trial endpoints, and promising investigational agents. This report summarizes the deliberations of the working group and suggests potential avenues of research to improve the precision, timing, and durability of treatments for Myeloma.

How I Treat Relapsed Multiple Myeloma

Despite recent advances multiple myeloma remains an incurable disease for most of the patients and initial remission will be followed by relapses requiring therapy. For many, there will be several remissions and relapses until resistance develops to all available therapies. With the introduction of several new agents, myeloma treatment has changed drastically and there are new options for the management of relapsed or refractory disease, including new drug classes with distinct mechanisms of action and cellular therapies. However, resistance to major drug classes used in first line remain the most critical factor for the choice of treatment at relapse. Continuous lenalidomide-based therapy is used extensively at first line and resistance to lenalidomide has become the key factor for the choice of salvage therapy. Daratumumab is increasingly used in first line and soon patients that relapse while on daratumumab will become a common challenge. Three-drug regimens are standard approach to manage relapsed disease. Adding drugs with new mechanisms of activity can improves outcomes and overcomes class resistance but, until now, while the biology is important, can offer only limited guidance for the choice of therapy.

Safety and Efficacy Analysis of Selinexor-Based Treatment in Multiple Myeloma, a Meta-Analysis Based on Prospective Clinical Trials

Background: Selinexor (SEL) is an orally bioavailable, highly-selective, and slowly-reversible small molecule that inhibits Exportin 1. Preclinical studies showed that SEL had synergistic antimyeloma activity with glucocorticoids, proteasome inhibitors (PIs) and immunomodulators. The combination of selinexor and dexamethasone (DEX) has been approved in the United States for patients with penta-refractory multiple myeloma in July 2019. This meta-analysis aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of selinexor based treatment in Multiple myeloma. Methods: We systematically searched the Medline (PubMed), Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials Library databases and ClinicalTrials.gov. Outcome measures of efficacy included overall response rate (ORR), clinical benefit rate (CBR), stringent complete response rate (sCR), complete response rate (CR), very good partial response (VGPR), partial response rate (PR), minimal response (MR), rate of stable disease (SDR), rate of progressive disease (PDR) and median progression-free survival (mPFS). Safety was evaluated by the incidences of all grade adverse events and Grade≥3 adverse events. The subgroup analysis was conducted to analyze the difference in different combination treatment regimens (SEL + DEX + PIs vs SEL + DEX). Results: We included six studies with 477 patients. The pooled ORR, CBR, sCR, CR, VGPR, PR, MR, SDR, and PDR were 43% (18-67%), 55% (32-78%), 5% (-2-13%), 7% (4-11%), 14% (5-24%), 23% (15-31%), 11% (8-14%), 26% (14-38%) and 14% (4-23%), respectively. SEL + DEX + PIs treatment had higher ORR (54 vs 24%, p = 0.01), CBR (66 vs 37%, p = 0.01), sCR (10 vs 2%, p = 0.0008), and VGPR (23 vs 5%, p < 0.00001) compared to SEL + DEX treatment, and lower PDR (4 vs 23%, p < 0.00001) and SDR (17 vs 37%, p = 0.0006). The pooled incidences of any grade and grade≥3 were 45 and 30% in hematological AEs, and in non-hematological AEs were 40 and 30%, respectively. The most common all grade (68%) and grade≥3 (54%) hematological AE were both thrombocytopenia. Fatigue was the most common all grade (62%) and grade≥3 (16%) non-hematological AE. Compared to SEL + DEX treatment, SEL + DEX + PIs treatment had lower incidences of hyponatremia (39 vs 12%, p < 0.00001), nausea (72 vs 52%, p < 0.00001), vomiting (41 vs 23%, p < 0.0001), and weight loss (42 vs 17%, p = 0.03) in all grade AEs. Meanwhile, SEL + DEX + PIs treatment had lower incidences of anemia (36 vs 16%, p = 0.02), fatigue (20 vs 13%, p = 0.04), hyponatremia (22 vs 5%, p < 0.0001) than SEL + DEX treatment in grade≥3 AEs. Conclusion: Our meta-analysis revealed that selinexor-based regimens could offer reasonable efficacy and tolerable adverse events in patients with multiple myeloma. SEL + DEX + PIs treatments had higher efficacy and lower toxicities than SEL + DEX.

Treatment Strategy for Multiple Myeloma to Improve Immunological Environment and Maintain MRD Negativity

Improving the immunological environment and eradicating minimal residual disease (MRD) are the two main treatment goals for long-term survival in patients with multiple myeloma (MM). Immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs), monoclonal antibody drugs (MoAbs), and autologous grafts for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) can improve the immunological microenvironment. ASCT, MoAbs, and proteasome inhibitors (PIs) may be important for the achievement of MRD negativity. An improved immunological environment may be useful for maintaining MRD negativity, although the specific treatment for persistent MRD negativity is unknown. However, whether the ongoing treatment should be continued or changed if the MRD status remains positive is controversial. In this case, genetic, immunophenotypic, and clinical analysis of residual myeloma cells may be necessary to select the effective treatment for the residual myeloma cells. The purpose of this review is to discuss the MM treatment strategy to "cure MM" based on currently available therapies, including IMiDs, PIs, MoAbs, and ASCT, and expected immunotherapies, such as chimeric antigen receptor T cell (CAR-T) therapy, via improvement of the immunological environment and maintenance of MRD negativity.

Second Autologous Stem Cell Transplant as Salvage in Multiple Myeloma - The Oregon Health and Science University Experience

BACKGROUND

Second autologous transplants (SAT) are routinely performed in the setting of myeloma relapse, though data on outcomes are lacking. We conducted a single-center review of all multiple myeloma patients at OHSU who received SAT (excluding tandems) with responses assessed by International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) criteria.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight patients received SAT between 1999 and 2019. Risk by IMWG was available for 50 patients (10 high-risk). Median age at SAT was 61 (45-74). Median time between 1st and 2nd Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) was 5.5 years (1.1 - 15.2). Median progression-free survival (PFS) after 1st ASCT (available for 53 pts) was 2.5 years (0.3 - 10). The average # of lines of therapy prior to SAT was 2.8 (1-14). SAT prep regimens (available for 67 pts) were: Fifty-one (87%) melphalan 200 mg/m², 6 (9%) melphalan 140 mg/m², 1 (2%) BEAM, 1 (2%) melphalan 200 mg/m² and bortezomib. All used PBSC mobilization. Median overall survival (OS) after SAT was 4.68 years, and median PFS was 1.72 years. By treatment era (1999-2009 vs. 2010-2019), median OS was 1.97 vs. 5.52 years (P = .15). When analyzed by IMWG group (standard/low vs. high risk) median PFS and OS were not significantly different (1.87 vs. 1.61 years and 3.58 vs. 5.91 years, respectively). Treatment-Related Mortality (TRM) occurred in 1 patient (2%).

CONCLUSION

Our experience with SAT for multiple myeloma (MM) shows that it has low TRM and is effective, with median OS >4.5 years, though with a shorter PFS than after 1st ASCT.

EPIDEMIOLOGICAL LANDSCAPE OF YOUNG MULTIPLE MYELOMA PATIENTS DIAGNOSED EARLIER THAN 40 YEARS: THE FRENCH EXPERIENCE

Multiple Myeloma (MM) is rare in young patients - especially before 40 years at diagnosis, representing less than 2% of all patients with MM. Little is known about the disease characteristics and prognosis of these patients. In this study we examined 214 patients diagnosed with MM ≤ 40 years old over 15 years, in the era of modern treatments. Among them, 189 patients had symptomatic MM. Disease characteristics were similar to older patients: 35% had anemia, 17% had renal impairment, and 13% hypercalcemia. The staging was ISS-1 in 52.4%, ISS-2 in 27.5% and ISS-3 in 20.1%. Overall, 18% of patients had high risk cytogenetics (del 17p and/or t(4;14)). Ninety percent of patients received intensive chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplant, and 25% of patients had allogeneic stem cell transplantation predominantly at time of relapse. The median follow-up was 76 months, the estimated median overall survival was 14.5 years and the median PFS was 41 months. In multivariate analysis, bone lesions (HR=3.95; p=0.01), high ISS score (HR=2.14; p=0.03) and high-risk cytogenetics (HR=4.54; p<0.0001) were significant risk factors for poor outcomes. Among predefined time-dependent covariables, onset of progression (HR=13.2; p<0.0001) significantly shortened OS. At 5 years, Relative Survival compared to same age and sex matched individuals was 83.5%, and estimated Standardized Mortality Ratio was 69.9 (95%CI 52.7-91.1), confirming that MM dramatically shortens the survival of young patients despite an extended survival after diagnosis.

Salvage autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for multiple myeloma performed with stem cells procured after previous high dose therapy - a multicenter report by the Polish Myeloma Study Group

Salvage autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (auto-HSCT) constitutes a therapeutic option for a group of well-selected patients with relapsed multiple myeloma (MM). However, if an insufficient number of stem cells were harvested and stored before the first auto-HSCT, stem cells need to be remobilized. Patients diagnosed with MM who following relapse after auto-HSCT, had remobilization and afterward, auto-HSCT with remobilized cells were included in this retrospective analysis. Thirty-three patients, 61% males, the median age 61 years, were included. With a median follow-up of 1.8 years, 2-year progression-free survival was 56.2%, non-relapse mortality 4.8%. The 2-year cumulative incidence of t-MDS was 4.9%. Factors important for the outcome were: the quality of response, previous radiotherapy, the time between the first and salvage auto-HSCT. To conclude, salvage auto-HSCT performed with cells procured after the previous auto-HSCT can be efficacious in relapsed MM, especially if a sufficiently long response had been obtained to the first auto-HSCT(s).

Emerging Targets and Cellular Therapy for Relapsed Refractory Multiple Myeloma: A Systematic Review

Multiple myeloma is the second most common hematologic malignancy and remains incurable. Patients who fail multiple lines of therapy typically have a poor prognosis despite recent advances in myeloma treatment. Chimeric antigen receptor T (CAR T) cell treatment has emerged as a promising therapy for many hematologic malignancies, including recently approved and emerging applications for myeloma treatment. A systematic review of the available clinical trial data for CAR T therapies in multiple myeloma was undertaken. All multiple myeloma trials registered at ClinicalTrials.gov were reviewed and studies mentioning CAR T and studying relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (R/R MM) were included. PubMed, Google Scholar, and conference proceedings were also reviewed to determine which trials had reported data. Twenty-seven registered clinical trials in humans with published data were identified as of March 10, 2021. The majority of these trials were CAR T cells targeting B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA), and many were Phase I studies. Data demonstrated promising short-term (<12 months) efficacy with low incidence of grade 3 or higher toxicities. CAR T cell therapy in R/R MM remains a promising treatment modality. While one biologic has recently received FDA-approval, the majority of products remain investigational and in early-phase trials. More investigation is needed to determine which CAR T constructs and combination therapies optimize patient outcomes.

Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation in Patients with High-Risk Multiple Myeloma: Utopia or Continuous Challenge in Aiming for Cure?

OPINION STATEMENT

Nowadays, several novel agents have been introduced in the treatment of multiple myeloma, not only resulting in high response rates and prolonged survival but also offering good quality of life. However, the potential of cure, especially for patients with advanced or unfavorable disease features, remains elusive. Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, based mainly on the graft vs. myeloma effect, can offer prolonged disease control and probability of cure but unfortunately at the cost of considerable transplant-related toxicity rates. Therefore, the role of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in the treatment of multiple myeloma has been called into question. Recently, several studies, particularly those with long-term follow-up, demonstrated a trend of survival superiority for allografted patients with high-risk disease. These data fuel again the interest in allogeneic stem cell transplantation for selected patients with high-risk multiple myeloma, especially if the high remission rates which can be achieved with the currently used treatment protocols could be long-life sustained through the additional exploitation of the long-lasting anti-multiple myeloma effect, originating from the allograft.

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.

Use of Backup Stem Cells for Stem Cell Boost and Second Transplant in Patients with Multiple Myeloma Undergoing Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation

Autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is a standard treatment for multiple myeloma (MM). Consensus guidelines recommend collecting sufficient stem cells in case there is a need for stem cell boost for delayed/poor engraftment or for future second ASCT. However, collecting and storing backup stem cells in all patients requires significant resources and cost, and the rates of backup stem cell utilization are not well studied. We sought to examine the utilization of backup stem cells (BSCs) in patients with MM undergoing ASCT. Patients with MM aged ≥18 years old who underwent first ASCT at our institution from January 2010 through December 2015 and collected sufficient stem cells for at least 2 transplants were included in this single-center retrospective study. This timeframe was selected to allow for adequate follow-up. A total of 393 patients were included. The median age was 58 years (range, 25-73). After a median follow-up of 6 years, the median progression-free survival (PFS) of the cohort was 3 years. Sixty-one percent (n = 240) of patients progressed or relapsed. Chemotherapy-based mobilization was used in almost all patients (98%). The median total CD34+ cells collected was 18.2 × 106/kg (range, 3.4-112.4). A median of 5.7 × 106 CD34+ cells/kg (range, 1.8-41.9) was infused during the first ASCT, and a median of 10.1 × 106 CD34+ cells/kg (range, 1.5-104.5) was cryopreserved for future use. Of the patients, 6.9% (n = 27) used backup stem cells, with 2.3% (n = 10) using them for stem cell boost, 4.6% (n = 18) for a second salvage ASCT, including 1 patient for both stem cell boost and second ASCT. Rates of backup stem cell use among patients aged <60, 60-69, and ≥70 years were 7.8%, 5.7%, and 5.9%, respectively. There was a trend toward higher rates of backup stem cell use for second ASCT in patients who were younger, had suboptimal disease control at time of first ASCT, and longer PFS. The median dose of stem cell boost given was 5.6 × 106 CD34+ cells/kg (range, 1.9-20). The median time from stem cell boost to neutrophil, hemoglobin, and platelet engraftment was 4 (range, 2-11), 15 (range, 4-34), and 12 (range, 0-34) days, respectively. Lower CD34+ dose and older age at time of ASCT predicted need for stem cell boost. With new salvage therapies for relapsed MM, the rates of second ASCT are very low. The low rates of use suggest that institutional policies regarding universal BSC collection and long-term storage should be reassessed and individualized. However, need for stem cell boost in 2.3% of patients may present a challenge to that.

Role of Stem Cell Transplantation in Multiple Myeloma

Autologous stem cell transplantation (auto-SCT) has been the standard of care in eligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) patients. Outcomes of patients with MM have improved significantly due to the advent of several novel drugs. Upfront use of these drugs in induction therapy has significantly increased the rate and depth of responses that have translated into longer remission and survival. This has now raised a debate regarding the role and relevance of auto-SCT in the management of myeloma. However, clinical trials have confirmed the utility of auto-SCT even in the era of novel drugs. Tandem auto-SCT followed by maintenance has shown a progression-free survival (PFS) benefit in high-risk MM, and hence can be considered in young and fit patients with high-risk disease. Auto-SCT has the advantages of resetting the bone marrow microenvironment, short-lived toxicity compared to the long-term physical and financial toxicities of continued chemotherapy in the absence of SCT, very low transplant-related mortality (TRM) in high volume centers, and providing longer disease-free survival when followed by maintenance therapy. Allogeneic SCT is one potentially curative option for MM, albeit with an increased risk of death due to high TRM. Strategies to modulate the graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) while maintaining or improving the graft-versus-myeloma (GVM) effect could place allogeneic SCT back in the treatment armamentarium of MM.

Stem cell mobilization in multiple myeloma patients relapsing after previous autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: A multicenter report by the Polish Myeloma Study Group

BACKGROUND

Salvage autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (autoHSCT) may be used to treat relapse of multiple myeloma occurring after previous autoHSCT. When insufficient number of hematopoietic stem cells was stored from the initial harvest, remobilization of stem cells is necessary.

PURPOSE

The analysis of stem cell remobilization after previous autoHSCT.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Fifty-eight patients, 60% males, median 59 years, were included. Median time interval between autoHSCT and remobilization was 42 months. The first remobilization was performed mostly after chemotherapy: cyclophosphamide (33%), cytarabine (43%), and etoposide (19%).

RESULTS

The first remobilization was successful in 67% patients. About 19% patients required plerixafor rescue, among whom it allowed for successful harvesting in 14%. Use of cyclophosphamide, cytarabine, and etoposide allowed for successful remobilization in 53%, 84%, and 55% patients, respectively. Patients treated with cytarabine had the highest yield of CD34+ cells (median 7.5 × 10⁶ /kg vs 5.8 and 2.4 for etoposide and cyclophosphamide, P = .001). Higher percentage of patients was able to collect ≥2 × 10⁶ CD34+ cells/kg during one leukapheresis after cytarabine (76% vs 21% for cyclophosphamide vs 36% for etoposide, P = .001). Cytarabine use was associated with lower risk of remobilization failure OR = 0.217, P = .02. Toxicity comprised mostly hematological toxicity (thrombocytopenia and neutropenia). One patient succumbed to septic shock.

CONCLUSION

Remobilization after previous autoHSCT is feasible only in a proportion of patients. Cytarabine is associated with the highest rate of successful mobilization and the highest yield of mobilized CD34+ cells. The toxicity requires careful surveillance of these patients.

Current Treatment Strategies for Multiple Myeloma

The treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) continues to evolve with the approval of numerous agents over the past decade. Advances in treatment have led to the incorporation of these newer therapies into the treatment paradigm, with improvements in overall survival and the possibility of deep responses including a minimal residual disease-negative state. The strategy of triplet therapies for patients with newly diagnosed MM, followed by high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem-cell transplantation for eligible patients, and subsequently consolidation and maintenance therapy, is the current treatment roadmap for patients. However, patients with MM will ultimately develop refractoriness to antimyeloma therapies. In this article, we summarize our current practice of managing patients with MM. We highlight our approach to patients with newly diagnosed MM who are transplantation eligible and ineligible and highlight risk-adapted strategies for these patients. In addition, we discuss our approach to the management of patients with relapsed or refractory MM. Last, we review standard therapies and emerging strategies such as targeted approaches, immune-based therapies, and drugs with novel mechanisms of action. Trials evaluating chimeric antigen receptor T cells targeting B-cell maturation antigen are ongoing and are only one of several novel approaches targeting cell maturation antigen, which include the use of bispecific T-cell engager antibodies and antibody drug conjugates. Emerging therapies offer the promise of more individualized approaches in the management of patients with MM and ultimately may result in the possibility of being one step closer to curing patients with MM.

Allogeneic Hematopoietic Transplantation for Multiple Myeloma in the New Drugs Era: A Platform to Cure

Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (alloHCT) represents a treatment option for multiple myeloma (MM) patients. As shown in several studies, alloHCT is highly effective, but it is hampered by a high toxicity, mainly related to the graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), a complex immunological reaction ascribable to the donor’s immune system. The morbidity and mortality associated with GVHD can weaken the benefits of this procedure. On the other side, the high therapeutic potential of alloHCT is also related to the donor’s immune system, through immunological activity known as the graft-versus-myeloma effect. Clinical research over the past two decades has sought to enhance the favorable part of this balance, along with the reduction in treatment-related toxicity. Frontline alloHCT showed promising results and a potential for a cure in the past. Currently, thanks to the improved results of first-line therapies and the availability of effective second- or third-line salvage therapies, alloHCT is reserved for selected high-risk patients and is considered a clinical option. For donor lymphocyte infusion, bortezomib or lenalidomide have been used as consolidation or maintenance therapies post-transplant—none has become standard of care. For those patients who relapse, the best treatment should be evaluated considering the patient’s clinical status and the previous lines of therapy. The use of newer drugs, such as monoclonal antibodies or other immunotherapies in the post-transplant setting, deserves further investigation. However, acceptable toxicity and a synergic effect with the newer immune system could be hopefully expected.

Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation for multiple myeloma: A retrospective analysis of the Polish Myeloma Group

PURPOSE

In this multicenter retrospective analysis of the Polish Myeloma Group we assessed the real-life application of allogeneic transplantations (alloHCT) in multiple myeloma (MM) outside clinical trials in Poland.

METHODS

Anonymized clinical data of patients who underwent alloHCT were retrospectively collected from eight transplant centers and analyzed to identify factors affecting the outcome.

RESULTS

Sixty patients (34 males, 26 females) at median age of 45 (22-59) years who received alloHCT between 1993 and 2016 were included. In this group, 16 (27%) patients underwent myeloablative conditioning and 44 (73%) reduced-intensity conditioning alloHCT. Acute graft versus host disease (GvHD) occurred in 27 (45%) patients, while chronic GvHD was diagnosed in 13 (22%) patients. With the median observation time after alloHCT of 10 months, the relapse rate was 38%. Median progression-free survival (PFS) reached 9 months (0-183) while median overall survival (OS) was 23 months (0-183). Main causes of death included disease progression in 16 (43%), infections in 10 (27%), and GvHD in 7 patients (19%). Presence of chronic GvHD was the only factor associated with prolonged PFS (28 vs. 6 months; p = 0.05), however its impact on OS was not statistically significant (73 vs. 8 months; p = 0.09).

CONCLUSIONS

In this relatively small and heterogeneous study we observed that alloHCT was associated with high risk of severe complications, but resulted in long-term survival in a proportion of patients. Decisions on optimal indications and timing of the alloHCT in MM need to be taken in the broader context of reported outcomes including data from large studies.

Treatment of relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma

The therapeutic strategy for relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) integrates a holistic approach regarding patient, disease, and drug-related factors. Patient-related factors include age, frailty status, and underlying comorbidities, especially cardiovascular and renal diseases and peripheral neuropathies that affect tolerability to multiple drug combinations or transplantations. Disease-related factors encompass these multiple patient-related factors, particularly the aggressiveness of the disease and cytogenetics. Regarding drug-related factors, the approval of novel proteasome inhibitors (such as carfilzomib and ixazomib), immunomodulatory agents (such as pomalidomide), monoclonal antibodies (such as daratumumab and elotuzumab), and new classes of drugs increasingly makes the choice treatment more complex and necessitates a comprehensive summary and an update of the efficacy and toxicities of each antimyeloma drug and its combinations. Further, careful monitoring of the side effects and supportive care throughout the course of treatment are important to achieve better outcomes for patients with RRMM.

Prognostic Factors for Postrelapse Survival after ex Vivo CD34+-Selected (T Cell-Depleted) Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation in Multiple Myeloma

Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (alloHCT) for multiple myeloma (MM), with its underlying graft-versus-tumor capacity, is a potentially curative approach for high-risk patients. Relapse is the main cause of treatment failure, but predictors for postrelapse survival are not well characterized. We conducted a retrospective analysis to evaluate predictors for postrelapse overall survival (OS) in 60 MM patients who progressed after myeloablative T cell-depleted alloHCT. The median patient age was 56 years, and 82% had high-risk cytogenetics. Patients received a median of 4 lines of therapy pre-HCT, and 88% achieved at least a partial response (PR) before alloHCT. Of the 38% who received preemptive post-HCT therapy, 13 received donor lymphocyte infusions (DLIs) and 10 received other interventions. Relapse was defined as very early (<6 months; 28%), early (6 to 24 months; 50%), or late (>24 months; 22%). At relapse, 27% presented with extramedullary disease (EMD). The median postrelapse overall survival (OS) by time to relapse was 4 months for the very early relapse group, 17 months for the early relapse group, and 72 months for the late relapse group (P = .002). Older age, relapse with EMD, <PR before alloHCT, <PR by day +100, and no maintenance were prognostic for inferior postrelapse OS on univariate analysis. On multivariate analysis adjusted for age and sex, very early relapse (hazard ratio [HR], 4.37; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.42 to 13.5), relapse with EMD (HR, 5.20; 95% CI, 2.10 to 12.9), and DLI for relapse prevention (HR, .11; 95% CI, 2.10 to 12.9) were significant predictors for postrelapse survival. Despite their shared inherent high-risk status, patients with MM have significantly disparate post-HCT relapse courses, with some demonstrating long-term survival despite relapse.

Utilization and Cost Implications of Hematopoietic Progenitor Cells Stored for a Future Salvage Autologous Transplantation or Stem Cell Boost in Myeloma Patients

Autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (autoHCT) is a standard initial treatment for multiple myeloma (MM). Consensus guidelines recommend collecting sufficient hematopoietic progenitor cells (HPCs) for 2 autoHCTs in all eligible patients. Despite a lack of published data on the utilization of HPCs stored for future use, it is common practice across transplantation programs to collect enough HPCs for 2 autoHCTs in MM patients. In this single-center retrospective study, we analyzed the utilization of HPCs collected and stored at the time of first autoHCT in patients with MM, along with the cost implications of HPC collection targets sufficient for 2 transplantations. In a cohort of 400 patients (median age, 63 years; range, 22 to 79 years), after a median follow-up of 50.4 months, 197 patients had relapsed and 36 had received HPC infusion as salvage autoHCT (n = 29) and/or HPC boost (n = 8). In this cohort, a median CD34⁺ cell dose of 4.3 × 10⁶/kg (range, 1.1 to 12.94.3 × 10⁶/kg) was used for first autoHCT, and a median of 4.4 × 10⁶/kg (range, 1.0 to 20.2× 10⁶/kg) CD34⁺ cells were stored for future use. At 6 years after the first autoHCT, the estimated cumulative incidence of salvage autoHCT was 12.0% without HPC boost and 13.9% with HPC boost. HPC utilization was significantly higher in the 60- to 64-year age group, whereas no patients who were age ≥70 years at the time of first autoHCT received salvage autoHCT. Using the CD34⁺ cell dose infused during the first autoHCT as the cutoff for individual patients, the estimated mean additional cost of HPC collection intended for subsequent use (over and above the HPCs used for first autoHCT) was $10,795 ($4.32 million for the entire cohort), an estimated 14% of which (ie, $583,600) was actually used up in salvage autoHCT by 6 years from first autoHCT. In conclusion, our results suggest the need for reappraisal of HPC collection targets for salvage autoHCT and argue against HPC collection and storage for salvage autoHCT in patients age ≥70 years at the time of first autoHCT.

Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation in Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma Treatment: Is It Still Relevant? (Running Title: The Role of Salvage alloSCT in MM)

Background: Despite offering an attractive option, the role of allogeneic stem cell transplantation (alloSCT) for treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) remains unclear. Methods: Recognizing the paucity of data in the Asian population, we retrospectively evaluated the outcomes of 24 patients (median age 52) undergoing alloSCT between April 2003 and November 2017. Results: The median time from diagnosis to alloSCT was 39.4 months. The majority of the patients (70.8%) underwent alloSCT followed by reduced intensity conditioning regimens after a median of five lines of therapy. Among 24 patients, 15 patients (62.5%) had a high-risk MM feature. The two-year relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) of the total patients were 29.2 ± 9.3% and 44.3 ± 10.3%, respectively. Patients who were treated with less chemotherapy lines (<5) before alloSCT had a prolonged RFS and OS. All patients (seven patients) who received a myeloablative conditioning regimen had high-risk features, but two out of seven patients showed long-term survival without lasting sequelae. Nine patients (37.5%) experienced non-relapse mortality (NRM) within one year after alloSCT (the one-year cumulative incidence of NRM was 38.3 ± 10.1%). Conclusion: AlloSCT can still be implemented as effective salvage option in the treatment of relapsed/refractory high-risk MM. The optimal timing of alloSCT remains to be determined.

Allogeneic Transplantation in Multiple Myeloma-Does It Still Have a Place?

Novel drugs have improved survival for patients with multiple myeloma in recent years. However, the disease is still fatal. Allogeneic stem cell transplantation (Allo) has proven to cure some patients with the disease, but its role is controversial due to relatively high transplant-related toxicity and mortality (nonrelapse mortality, NRM). Using nonmyeloablative reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC), both toxicity and NRM can be reduced, and RICAllo is, therefore, an option for subgroups of patients. Upfront tandem autologous/RICAllo (Auto/RICAllo) was shown to be superior to single Auto or tandem Auto/Auto in both progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in two prospective studies with long-term follow-up, while three similarly designed studies did not detect a difference. A recent update of pooled patient data from four of these studies showed significantly superior PFS and OS with Auto/RICAllo. Importantly, none of these studies showed inferior results with Auto/RICAllo in patients less than 70 years of age. Auto/RICAllo appears to overcome some poor risk cytogenetic markers. Encouraging results have also been seen in treatment of relapsed patients. Combining Allo with new proteasome inhibitors and immunomodulatory drugs may further improve results. Other encouraging new cell therapies such as with CAR T-cells, NK- and CAR NK-cells may well have a place in combination with RICAllo. Such studies are warranted.

Results from a multicenter, noninterventional registry study for multiple myeloma patients who received stem cell mobilization regimens with and without plerixafor

Plerixafor plus granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) enhances the mobilization of hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs) for collection and subsequent autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) in patients with multiple myeloma (MM). This international, multicenter, noninterventional registry study (NCT01362972), evaluated long-term outcomes for MM patients who received plerixafor versus other mobilization regimens. The comparisons were: G-CSF + plerixafor (G-CSF + P) versus G-CSF-; G-CSF + P versus G-CSF + chemotherapy (G-CSF + C); and G-CSF + P + C versus G-CSF + C. Propensity score matching was used to balance groups. Primary outcome measures were progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR) after transplantation. After propensity matching, 77 versus 41 patients in the G-CSF + P versus G-CSF cohorts, 129 versus 129 in the G-CSF + P versus G-CSF + C cohorts, and 117 versus 117 in the G-CSF + P + C versus G-CSF + C cohorts were matched, respectively. Propensity score matching resulted in a smaller sample size and imbalances were not completely overcome. For both PFS and OS, the upper limits of the hazard ratio 95% confidence intervals exceeded prespecified boundaries; noninferiority was not demonstrated. CIR rates were higher in the plerixafor cohorts. G-CSF + P remains an option for the mobilization of HSCs in poor mobilizers with MM with no substantial differences in PFS, OS, and CIR in comparison with other regimens.