Treatment Patterns and Outcomes in Triple-Class Exposed Patients With Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma: Findings From the Multinational ITEMISE Study

Comparative effectiveness of lenalidomide/dexamethasone-based triplet regimens for treatment of relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma in the United States: An analysis of real-world electronic health records data

BACKGROUND

This retrospective longitudinal study compared the effectiveness of dexamethasone+lenalidomide (Rd)-based triplet regimens containing proteasome inhibitors (PIs) ixazomib (IRd), carfilzomib (KRd), and bortezomib (VRd) or monoclonal antibodies (MABs) elotuzumab (ERd) and daratumumab (DRd) in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM)-including those with high cytogenetic risk-primarily treated at community oncology clinics in the United States.

METHODS

Electronic health records of adult RRMM patients in a deidentified real-world database (01/01/2014-09/30/2020) who initiated IRd, KRd, VRd, ERd, or DRd in the second or later line of therapy (LOT) were analyzed. The index date was the date of initiation of each LOT and baseline was the 6-month pre-index period. Duration of therapy (DOT), time to next therapy (TTNT), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were compared across regimens with multivariable Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

Of the 1,185 patients contributing 1,332 LOTs, 985 had standard cytogenetic risk (median age, 71 years) and 180 had high risk (median age, 69 years). Compared with other regimens, DRd was associated with longer DOT overall (adjusted hazard ratio [95 % confidence interval]: 1.84 [1.42, 2.38] vs. KRd, 1.65 [1.20, 2.28] vs. ERd, 1.58 [1.23, 2.04] vs. IRd, and 1.54 [1.18, 2.00] vs. VRd), and longer TTNT and PFS. KRd was associated with shorter OS compared with DRd (1.45 [1.01, 2.08]) and VRd (1.32 [1.01, 1.73]). High-risk patients had similar outcomes with all triplet regimens.

CONCLUSION

Although DRd improved clinical outcomes overall, Rd-based triplet regimens containing a PI or MAB are similarly effective in high-risk RRMM.

Assessment of algorithms for identifying patients with triple-class refractory multiple myeloma using real-world data

Objective: Patients with triple-class refractory (TCR) multiple myeloma (MM) have limited treatment options and poor prognoses. This high unmet need has prompted the development of new therapies allowing for improved outcomes for these patients. Recently, new targeted therapies for the treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory MM have been approved based on single-arm clinical trial results. Real-world (RW) data enable a better understanding of the effectiveness of new therapies in clinical practice and provide external controls for single-arm studies. However, using RW data to identify patients with TCR MM is challenging and subject to limitations. Methods: In this retrospective cohort study of an analysis of the COTA electronic health record (EHR) database, we used four algorithms to define refractory status and created four groups of patients with TCR MM initiating post-TCR therapy. Each algorithm relied on slightly different criteria to identify TCR patients, but all were based on the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG)-derived and/or healthcare provider (HCP)-reported progressions within the database. Results: A total of 3815 patients with newly diagnosed MM met the eligibility criteria for this study. The choice of the algorithm did not impact the characteristics of identified patients with TCR MM (Algorithm 1 [n = 404], Algorithm 2 [n = 123], Algorithm 3 [n = 404], and Algorithm 4 [n = 375]), including their demographic and disease characteristics, MM treatment history, or treatment patterns received after becoming TCR. However, identifying TCR MM using a combination of IMWG-derived and HCP-reported progressions allowed up to a 70% increase in the size of the identified group of patients compared with using only IMWG-derived progressions. Conclusion: In RW settings, progressions from both IMWG-derived data and physician reports may be used to identify patients with TCR MM.

Real-world treatment patterns in patients initiating third-line therapy for relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma in Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom, France, and Spain

OBJECTIVES

To retrospectively analyze real-world treatment patterns in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) who initiated third-line treatment in Europe.

METHODS

German and Italian administrative claims data were sourced from the German AOK PLUS health insurance fund and Italian local health units (2016-2020). Data for the United Kingdom (UK), France, and Spain were sourced from medical chart reviews (MCRs) from 2016 to 2018 (historical) and 2019 to 2021 (new) using electronic case report forms.

RESULTS

Across all countries, immunomodulatory imide drug (IMiD)-based regimens were prominent in the third-line setting. From 2016 to 2020, lenalidomide-dexamethasone was most common in Italy (18.0%) and Germany (12.7%). From 2019 to 2021, the most common regimen was ixazomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (67.5%) in the UK, pomalidomide-dexamethasone (17.1%) in France, and daratumumab-bortezomib-dexamethasone (15.0%) in Spain. In the historical data (2016-2018), third-line lenalidomide- and pomalidomide-dexamethasone doublet use across the UK (>47%), France (>46%), and Spain (>33%) was high. From historical to new, triplet use increased in Spain (>19% to >60%) as did anti-CD38 agent use in France (15.1% to 51.9%) and Spain (19.7% to 42.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

From 2016 to 2021, third-line regimens were mostly IMiD based. The MCR data demonstrated evolving treatment choices from 2016 to 2018 and 2019 to 2021, providing insights into uptake of novel agents and current RRMM European clinical practice.

Characterization and Outcomes of Spanish Patients With Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma Included in the LocoMMotion Study

BACKGROUND

Despite advances in treatments for multiple myeloma (MM), most patients relapse and become refractory to standard drug classes including immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs), proteasome inhibitors (PIs), and anti-CD38 antibodies. The LocoMMotion study showed poor clinical outcomes in triple-class exposed patients with relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM) treated with real-world clinical practice (RWCP) therapy. Here, we report efficacy outcomes for Spanish patients receiving RWCP treatments in the LocoMMotion study compared with the full cohort.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The prospective, noninterventional, multinational LocoMMotion study (NCT04035226) enrolled 248 patients who had received ≥ 3 prior lines of therapy (LOT), including a PI, an IMiD, and an anti-CD38 antibody, with disease progression during or after their last LOT. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Spanish patients (n = 24) had received a median of 4 prior LOT (range, 2-7). At 29.2 months median follow-up, patients had received 14 different treatment regimens used in RWCP during the study. Efficacy outcomes were consistent between the Spanish cohort and overall study population. The ORR was 29.2% (95% CI, 12.6%-51.1%). Median PFS and OS were 4.6 months (95% CI, 1.2-6.3) and 11.6 months (95% CI, 6.4-24.5), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Spanish patients from the LocoMMotion study demonstrated poor outcomes in response to RWCP treatments consistent with those of the overall study population, highlighting the need for access to new and effective therapies for patients with RRMM in Spain and globally.

Outcome of carfilzomib/pomalidomide-based regimens after daratumumab-based treatment in relapsed multiple myeloma: A Canadian Myeloma Research Group Database analysis

INTRODUCTION

Although daratumumab-containing regimens improve multiple myeloma (MM) outcomes, recurrence is inevitable.

METHODS AND OBJECTIVE

We performed a retrospective study using the Canadian Myeloma Research Group Database to benchmark the efficacy of carfilzomib- or pomalidomide-based therapies immediately following progression on daratumumab treatment.

RESULTS

We identified 178 such patients; median number of prior lines of therapy was 3, 97% triple-class exposed, and 60% triple-class refractory. In our cohort, 75 received a subsequent carfilzomib-based therapy, 79 received a pomalidomide-based therapy, and 24 received a treatment with both immunomodulatory drug (IMiD) and proteasome inhibitor (PI) using carfilzomib and/or pomalidomide. The median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for the entire cohort were 4.5 and 14.2 months, respectively. Carfilzomib-based therapy yielded a median PFS and OS of 4.5 and 10.2 months, respectively, compared to 5.2 and 21.7 months for pomalidomide-based therapy. Patients who received both IMiD and PI with carfilzomib and/or pomalidomide had a median PFS and OS of 4.1 and 14.5 months, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Our observations demonstrate the poor outcome of MM patients when standard regimens based on carfilzomib and/or pomalidomide are utilized directly after daratumumab-based therapy given in the relapsed setting. Novel therapies, including immune therapies, are urgently needed to improve the outcomes of these daratumumab-exposed patients.

Teclistamab versus real-world physician's choice of therapy in triple-class exposed relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma

Aim: We compared the effectiveness of teclistamab versus real-world physician's choice of therapy (RWPC) in triple-class exposed relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. Materials & methods: MajesTEC-1 eligibility criteria were applied to the RWPC cohort. Baseline covariate imbalances were adjusted using inverse probability of treatment weighting. Overall survival, progression-free survival and time to next treatment were compared. Results: After inverse probability of treatment weighting, baseline characteristics were similar between cohorts (teclistamab, n = 165; RWPC, n = 364 [766 observations]). Teclistamab treated patients had numerically better overall survival (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.82 [95% CI: 0.59-1.14]; p = 0.233) and significantly greater progression-free survival (HR: 0.43 [0.33-0.56]; p < 0.0001) and time to next treatment (HR: 0.36 [0.27-0.49]; p < 0.0001) versus the RWPC cohort. Conclusion: Teclistamab offered clinical benefit over RWPC in triple-class exposed relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.

Real-World Outcomes of Belantamab Mafodotin for Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM): Preliminary Results of a Spanish Expanded Access Program (EAP)

INTRODUCTION

Belantamab mafodotin (BM) is a new anti-BCMA antibody-drug conjugate, recently approved for triple-class relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). We assessed real-world outcomes with BM in patients under the Spanish Expanded Access Program (EAP).

METHODS

We conducted an observational, retrospective, multicenter study including RRMM patients who received ≥ 1 dose of BM (Nov 2019 to Jun 2021). The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs).

RESULTS

Thirty-three patients were included with a median of 70 years of age (range, 46-79 years). Median time from diagnosis was 71 months (range, 10-858 months). Median prior lines was 5 (range, 3-8 lines); 90% of patients were triple-/quad-/penta-refractory; 48% showed high-risk cytogenetics. Median BM doses was 3 (range 1-16 doses), with a median follow-up of 11 months (6-15 months). ORR was 42.2% (≥ VGPR, 18.2%). Median PFS was 3 months (95% CI 0.92-5.08) in the overall population, and 11 months (HR 0.26; 95% CI 0.10-0.68) for patients who achieved ≥ PR. PFS was not significantly different according to age, cytogenetic risk, and prior therapy lines. OS was 424 days (95% CI 107-740). Non-hematological TEAEs (57.6% of patients; 30.3% ≥ G3) included keratopathy (51.5%; 21.2% ≥ G3) and patient-reported vision-related symptoms (45.5%). Keratopathy was resolved in 70.6% of patients. G3 hematological TEAEs was 18.2%, thrombocytopenia (21.2%). Dose reductions due to TEAEs: 30.3%; delays: 36.4%. Treatment discontinuation causes: progression (54.5%), toxicity (non-ocular; 6%/ocular; 6% /ocular + non-ocular toxicity; 3%), death (6%), and patient's decision (3%).

CONCLUSIONS

BM showed relevant anti-myeloma activity in RRMM with a manageable safety profile. These results corroborate those observed in the BM pivotal trial.

Geranylgeranyl diphosphate synthase inhibitor and proteasome inhibitor combination therapy in multiple myeloma

Background

Multiple myeloma (MM) remains an incurable malignancy, despite the advent of therapies such as proteosome inhibitors (PIs) that disrupt protein homeostasis and induce ER stress. We have pursued inhibition of geranylgeranyl diphosphate synthase (GGDPS) as a novel mechanism by which to target protein homeostasis in MM cells. GGDPS inhibitors (GGSI) disrupt Rab geranylgeranylation, which in turn results in perturbation of Rab-mediated protein trafficking, leading to accumulation of intracellular monoclonal protein, induction of ER stress and apoptosis. Our lead GGSI, RAM2061, has demonstrated favorable pharmacokinetic properties and in vivo efficacy. Here we sought to evaluate if combination therapy with GGSI and PI would result in enhanced disruption of the unfolded protein response (UPR) and increase anti-MM efficacy.

Methods

MTT assays were conducted to evaluate the cytotoxic effects of combining RAM2061 with bortezomib in human MM cells. The effects of RAM2061 and/or PI (bortezomib or carfilzomib) on markers of UPR and apoptosis were evaluated by a combination of immunoblot (ATF4, IRE1, p-eIF2a, cleaved caspases and PARP), RT-PCR (ATF4, ATF6, CHOP, PERK, IRE1) and flow cytometry (Annexin-V). Induction of immunogenic cell death (ICD) was assessed by immunoblot (HMGB1 release) and flow cytometry (calreticulin translocation). Cell assays were performed using both concurrent and sequential incubation with PIs. To evaluate the in vivo activity of GGSI/PI, a flank xenograft using MM.1S cells was performed.

Results

Isobologram analysis of cytotoxicity data revealed that sequential treatment of bortezomib with RAM2061 has a synergistic effect in MM cells, while concurrent treatment was primarily additive or mildly antagonistic. The effect of PIs on augmenting RAM2061-induced upregulation of UPR and apoptotic markers was dependent on timing of the PI exposure. Combination treatment with RAM2061 and bortezomib enhanced activation of ICD pathway markers. Lastly, combination treatment slowed MM tumor growth and lengthened survival in a MM xenograft model without evidence of off-target toxicity.

Conclusion

We demonstrate that GGSI/PI treatment can potentiate activation of the UPR and apoptotic pathway, as well as induce upregulation of markers associated with the ICD pathway. Collectively, these findings lay the groundwork for future clinical studies evaluating combination GGSI and PI therapy in patients with MM.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40164-022-00261-6.