Combination therapy with carfilzomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone (KRd) results in an unprecedented purity of the stem cell graft in newly diagnosed patients with myeloma

Treatment Strategy for Ultra-High-Risk Multiple Myelomas with Chromosomal Aberrations Considering Minimal Residual Disease Status and Bone Marrow Microenvironment

Despite the development of anti-myeloma therapeutics, such as proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulatory drugs, anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies, and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT), multiple myeloma remains incurable. A trial treatment combining four drugs-daratumumab, carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone-followed by ASCT frequently results in minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity and prevents progressive disease in patients with standard- and high-risk cytogenetics; however, it is insufficient to overcome the poor outcomes in patients with ultra-high-risk chromosomal aberration (UHRCA). In fact, MRD status in autografts can predict clinical outcomes after ASCT. Therefore, the current treatment strategy might be insufficient to overcome the negative impact of UHRCA in patients with MRD positivity after the four-drug induction therapy. High-risk myeloma cells lead to poor clinical outcomes not only by aggressive myeloma behavior but also via the generation of a poor bone marrow microenvironment. Meanwhile, the immune microenvironment effectively suppresses myeloma cells with a low frequency of high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities in early-stage myeloma compared to late-stage myeloma. Therefore, early intervention might be key to improving clinical outcomes in myeloma patients. The purpose of this review is to improve clinical outcomes in patients with UHRCA by considering MRD assessment results and improvement of the microenvironment.

Feasibility of six cycles of lenalidomide-based triplet induction before stem cell collection for newly diagnosed transplant-eligible multiple myeloma

OBJECTIVES

Achieving a deep response with induction therapy has a major impact on outcomes following autologous stem cell transplantation. Although longer and intensified induction therapy may provide better disease control, longer exposure to lenalidomide negatively affects stem cell yield. We examined the feasibility of 6 cycles of lenalidomide-based triplet induction therapy before stem cell collection in transplant-eligible multiple myeloma patients.

METHODS

In this prospective study, patients received a combination of bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone for 6 cycles. For patients who did not achieve a deep response after 3 cycles, bortezomib was substituted with carfilzomib for the last 2 cycles (5th and 6th courses).

RESULTS

Although only half of the patients achieved a deep response after 3 cycles, all but 1 patient achieved a very good partial response (n = 4) or complete response (n = 5) after completing 6 cycles. Among 9 patients who received cyclophosphamide-based stem cell mobilization, 1 patient required a second mobilization that was successfully performed using plerixafor. After autologous transplantation, 7 patients showed complete response, including 5 with minimal residual disease-negative status.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that 6 cycles of lenalidomide-based induction therapy before stem cell collection are a feasible and promising approach for transplant-eligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients.The study is registered at UMIN Clinical Trials Registry as UMIN000026936.Trial registration: UMIN Japan identifier: UMIN000026936.

Stem Cell Mobilization and Autograft Minimal Residual Disease Negativity with Novel Induction Regimens in Multiple Myeloma

Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) remains the standard of care for transplantation-eligible patients with multiple myeloma (MM). Bortezomib with lenalidomide and dexamethasone (VRD) is the most common triplet regimen for newly diagnosed MM in the United States. Carfilzomib with lenalidomide and dexamethasone (KRD) has shown promising efficacy and may supplant VRD. We compared stem cell yields and autograft minimal residual disease (MRD)-negativity after VRD and KRD induction. Deeper responses (ie, very good partial response or better) were more common with KRD. Precollection bone marrow (BM) cellularity, interval from the end of induction therapy to start of stem cell collection, and method of stem cell mobilization were similar for the 2 cohorts. Days to complete collection was greater with KRD (2.2 days, versus 1.81 days with VRD), which more often required ≥3 days of apheresis. Precollection viable CD34⁺ cell content was greater with VRD, as was collection yield (11.11 × 10⁶, versus 9.19 × 10⁶ with KRD). Collection failure (defined as <2 × 10⁶ CD34⁺ cells/kg) was more frequent with KRD (5.4% versus .7% with VRD). The difference in stem cell yield between VRD and KRD is associated with the degree of lenalidomide exposure. Age ≥70 years predicted poorer collection for both cohorts. Stem cell autograft purity/MRD-negativity was higher with KRD (81.4%, versus 57.1% with VRD). For both cohorts, MRD-negativity was attained in a larger fraction of autografts than in precollection BM. For patients proceeding to ASCT, the time to neutrophil/platelet engraftment was comparable in the 2 study arms. In summary, our data demonstrate that KRD induces deeper clinical responses and greater autograft purity than VRD without compromising stem cell yield or post-transplantation engraftment kinetics.

Minimal Residual Disease Negativity Does Not Overcome Poor Prognosis in High-Risk Multiple Myeloma: A Single-Center Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

Minimal residual disease (MRD) is a standard measurement for response assessment in multiple myeloma (MM). Despite new treatments, high-risk MM patients continue to have poor prognosis. We evaluated the effect of MRD negativity in high-risk versus standard-risk patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated all consecutive MM patients who underwent routine MRD testing by 1-tube 8-color advanced flow cytometry with 2,000,000 events and sensitivity level 10^-5 at our center from 2015 to 2018 after initial therapy. Kaplan-Meier and log-rank test were used to assess survival estimates and differences between study groups.

RESULTS

One hundred thirty-six patients with MRD testing after initial therapy or autologous stem-cell transplantation were identified. At a median follow-up of 14 months (range, 1-36 months), progression-free survival and overall survival were significantly worse in high-risk versus standard-risk patients. During the study period, 50% of high-risk group had experienced disease progression (relapse and/or death) versus 20% in the standard-risk group (P = .0006). No patients with standard-risk died, but 4 (14%) in the high-risk group did (P = .0007). Regardless of MRD status, high-risk patients had statistically significant worse progression-free survival than standard-risk patients. At median follow-up, those with disease 10% standard-risk/MRD negative; 20% standard-risk/MRD positive; 40% high-risk/MRD negative; and 45% high-risk/MRD positive had either experienced relapse or died (P = .0041). MRD status did not significantly affect overall survival in either group (P = .0914); however, longer follow-up is needed to assess survival.

CONCLUSION

Genetic abnormalities remain a powerful prognostic indicator for MM, regardless of MRD status. For newly diagnosed MM patients treated with novel triple-drug initial therapy and frontline autologous stem-cell transplantation, MRD-negative status did not mitigate the poor-prognosis outcomes of high-risk MM patients.

What to do with minimal residual disease testing in myeloma

The role and use of minimal residual disease (MRD) testing has changed significantly over the past few years as it has become part of the routine care for response assessment in multiple myeloma. The most widely used standardized methods to assess MRD in myeloma in the bone marrow are multicolor flow cytometry and next-generation sequencing. Importantly, the depth of MRD negativity in the bone marrow correlates with improved progression-free survival and overall survival in myeloma. Whole-body position emission tomography-computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging are also used to evaluate patchy and extramedullary disease, which may not be readily visible through bone marrow assessment. This article reviews a clinical case in which MRD testing, both in bone marrow and in functional imaging, is part of the standard of care. It also reviews the different modalities of MRD testing and current practice guidelines. Finally, patients with myeloma may be tested for MRD after treatment because this is part of the routine response assessment according to International Myeloma Working Group criteria and correlates with clinical outcomes. Important questions such as when to stop therapy for sustained MRD-negative patients or whether to change treatments for patients who go from MRD negative to positive without other evidence of disease relapse are being evaluated in clinical trials and remain controversial.

Multiple myeloma: Role of autologous transplantation

Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) has been the mainstay of multiple myeloma (MM) treatment for approximately 30 years. Although the continuous introduction of novel agents in the armamentarium against MM has questioned its value, ASCT remains a backbone treatment for fit MM patients. However, there is no unanimous approach for several aspects including the positioning of ASCT in the therapeutic algorithm either upfront or following the first relapse, the need for single or tandem ASCT, as well as the role of ASCT as salvage therapy. Furthermore, the anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies along with the next generation proteasome inhibitors and immunomodulatory drugs provide a platform for optimizing the induction and consolidation/maintenance regimens. In this review, we present current data pertaining to all aspects of ASCT in MM, whereas we highlight the open issues that should be addressed in the design of future clinical trials in the field.

Carfilzomib with immunomodulatory drugs for the treatment of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma

Carfilzomib, a selective proteasome inhibitor (PI), is approved for the treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (MM). Combination regimens incorporating a PI and immunomodulatory drug (IMiD) have been associated with deep responses and extended survival in patients with newly diagnosed MM (NDMM). Carfilzomib-based combinations with immunomodulators are being extensively studied in the frontline setting. The objective of this review was to describe efficacy and safety data for carfilzomib-based, PI/immunomodulatory combinations in NDMM. Information sources were articles indexed in PubMed and abstracts from key hematology/oncology congresses published between January 2012 and December 2018. PubMed and congresses were searched for prospective clinical studies assessing the combination of carfilzomib with an IMiD for NDMM treatment. Retrospective and preclinical reports, case reports/series, reviews, and clinical studies not evaluating carfilzomib-immunomodulator combinations in NDMM were excluded based on review of titles and abstracts. A total of nine articles and 72 abstracts were deemed relevant and included in the review. A total of six distinct carfilzomib-based, PI/immunomodulator combination regimens have been evaluated in 12 clinical trials. Overall, treatment with these regimens has resulted in deep responses, including high rates of negativity for minimal residual disease. These deep responses have translated to long progression-free survival and overall survival rates. Efficacy results for these regimens have generally been consistent across subgroups defined by age, transplant eligibility, and cytogenetic risk. The safety profile of carfilzomib in NDMM is consistent with that observed in the relapsed-refractory MM setting. Clinical studies have found that carfilzomib-based combinations with immunomodulators are highly active with a favorable safety profile in NDMM. The carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (KRd) drug backbone is a promising foundation for treatment strategies aimed at achieving long-term, deep responses (functional cures) in the frontline setting. Several ongoing studies are evaluating KRd, with or without anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies.

Minimal Residual Disease Assessment Within the Bone Marrow of Multiple Myeloma: A Review of Caveats, Clinical Significance and Future Perspectives

There is an increasing clinical interest in the measure and achievement of minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity in the bone marrow of Multiple Myeloma (MM) patients, as defined equally either by Multicolor Flow Cytometry (MFC) or by Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) technologies. At present, modern technologies allow to detect up to one on 104 or on 105 or even on 106 cells, depending on their throughput. MFC approaches, which have been progressively improved up to the so-called Next Generation Flow (NGF), and NGS, which proved clear advantages over ASO-PCR, can detect very low levels of residual disease in the BM. These methods are actually almost superimposable, in terms of MRD detection power, supporting the lack of unanimous preference for either technique on basis of local availability. However, some technical issues are still open: the optimal assay to use to detect either phenotype (e.g., next generation multidimensional flow cytometry, imaging) or genotype aberrations (e.g., ASO-RQ PCR, digital droplet PCR, NGS) and their standardization, the sample source (BM or peripheral blood, PB) and its pre-processing (red-cell lysis vs. Ficoll, fresh vs. frozen samples, requirement of CD138+ cells enrichment). Overall, MRD negativity is considered as the most powerful predictor of favorable long-term outcomes in MM and is likely to represent the major driver of treatment strategies in the near future. In this manuscript, we reviewed the main pitfalls and caveats of MRD detection within bone marrow in MM patients after front-line therapy, highlighting the improving of the currently employed technology and describing alternative methods for MRD testing in MM, such as liquid biopsy.

How do I structure logistic processes in preparation for outsourcing of cellular therapy manufacturing?

As cell and gene therapies (CGT) assume center stage in early-phase clinical trials for several acute and chronic diseases, there is heightened interest in the standardization and automation of manufacturing processes in preparation for commercialization. Toward this goal, a hybrid and oftentimes geographically separated model comprising regional cell procurement and infusion facilities and a centralized cell manufacturing unit is gaining traction in the field. Although CGT processing facilities in academic institutions are not involved directly in the manufacturing of these therapies, they must be prepared to collaborate with commercial or contract manufacturing organizations (CMOs) and be ready to address several supply-chain challenges that have emerged for autologous and allogeneic CGT. Academic center cell-processing facilities must handle many events up- and downstream of manufacturing such as donor screening, cell collection, product labeling, cryopreservation, transportation, and thaw infusion. These events merit closer evaluation in the context of multifacility manufacturing since standard procedures have yet to be established. Based on our institutional experience, we summarize logistical challenges encountered in the handling and distribution of CGT products in early phase studies, specifically those involving CMO (outsourced) manufacturing. We also make recommendations to standardize processes unique to the CGT supply chain, emphasizing the need to maintain needle-to-needle traceability from product collection to infusion. These guidelines will inform the development of more complex supply-chain models for larger-scale cell and gene therapeutics.