Predicting the Future: Machine-Based Learning for MRD Prognostication

The prognostic significance of minimal residual disease (MRD) detection in multiple myeloma is well established. Understanding factors that predict for MRD negativity, such as tumor burden, cytogenetic, and immune-related biomarkers, may enable us to improve outcome prediction at diagnosis, and in the future move toward tailored treatment approaches. See related article by Guerrero et al., p. 2598.

Amp 1q21 is more predictable with dismal survival than gain 1q21 of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma in real-world analysis

Introduction

The gain/amplification (amp) of 1q21 is one of the most common high‐risk chromosome abnormality (HRCA) in multiple myeloma (MM). The prognostic value of 1q21+ remains to be controversial on the status of gain or amp and the combination of other HRCAs.

Methods

In this retrospective study, we included 318 newly diagnosed MM (NDMM) patients who had fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) data and treated with novel agents in our department.

Results

Our study noted MM patients with amp 1q21 were more likely accompanied with t(4;14), t(14;16), and t(14;20). Patients with amp 1q21 presented with elder age, advanced Revised International Staging System (R‐ISS) stages, anemia, and more plasma cells in bone marrow compared to patients with gain 1q21 alone and no 1q21+. Moreover, amp 1q21 alone correlated with shorter progression‐free survival (PFS) (22.8m vs. 40.5m vs. 39.6m) and overall survival (OS) (45.2m vs. NA vs. 83.5m) compared with gain 1q21 alone and no FISH abnormalities. Although the high ratio of proteasome inhibitor and immunomodulatory drugs used in patients with amp 1q21, the overall response (ORR) was the lowest compared with no 1q21+ and gain 1q21. Multivariate analysis defined amp 1q21 as an independent prognostic marker for NDMM patients, rather than gain 1q21.

Conclusion

The amp 1q21 predict inferior treatment response and survival, especially coexisted with high‐risk IgH translocation.

Induction therapy prior to autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: an update

The current standard of care model for newly diagnosed fit multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients is the sequential treatment of induction, high dose melphalan, autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT), and maintenance. Adequate induction is required to achieve good disease control and induce deep response rates while minimizing toxicity as a bridge to transplant. Doublet induction regimens have greatly fallen out of favor, with current international guidelines favoring triplet or quadruplet induction regimens built around the backbone of the proteasome inhibitor bortezomib and dexamethasone (Vd). In fact, the updated 2021 European Haematology Association (EHA) and European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) clinical practice guidelines recommend the use of either lenalidomide-Vd (VRd), or daratumumab-thalidomide-Vd (Dara-VTd) as first-line options for transplant-eligible NDMM patients, and when not available, thalidomide-Vd (VTd) or cyclophosphamide-Vd (VCd) as acceptable alternatives. Quadruplet regimens featuring anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies are extremely promising and remain heavily investigated, as is the incorporation of more recent proteasome inhibitors such as carfilzomib. This review will focus on induction therapies prior to ASCT examining the latest data and guidelines on triplet and quadruplet regimens.

How I Treat High-risk Multiple Myeloma

Survival of multiple myeloma (MM) has significantly improved over the last decade; however, a composed group of patients (15-20%), named high-risk (HR) MM, still experience reduced survival. Both tumor biology and suboptimal/absent responses to therapy may underlie HR definition and a clear uniform identification of risk factors is crucial for a proper management of these patients. In biologic-HRMM, MRD negativity attainment and sustain, inside and outside BM, should be the primary goal and therapy should be adapted in patients with frailty to reduce toxicity and improve quality of life. MM treatment has traditionally been tailored on age and more recently frailty or comorbidities, but very rarely on the biology of the disease, mainly because of the lack of a clear benefit derived from a specific drug/combination, inhomogeneity in HR definition and lack of data coming from prospective, properly designed clinical trials. Some attempts have been successfully made recently in this direction. In this review, we are discussing the current different definitions of HR and the need for a consensus, the results of available trials in HR patients and the way through risk-adapted treatment strategies. For this purpose, we are proposing several clinical cases of difficult-to-treat patients throughout different treatment phases.

Up-front carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone with transplant for patients with multiple myeloma: the IFM KRd final results

Bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone plus transplant is a standard of care for eligible patients with multiple myeloma. Because responses can deepen with time, regimens with longer and more potent induction/consolidation phases are needed. In this phase 2 study, patients received eight 28-day cycles of carfilzomib (K) 20/36 mg/m2 (days 1-2, 8-9, 15-16), lenalidomide (R) 25 mg (days 1-21), and dexamethasone (d) 20 mg (days 1-2, 8-9, 15-16, 22-23). All patients proceeded to transplant after 4 cycles and received 1 year of lenalidomide maintenance (10 mg, days 1-21). The primary objective was stringent complete response at the completion of consolidation. Overall, 48 patients were screened and 46 enrolled; 21% had adverse cytogenetics. Among 42 evaluable patients after consolidation, 26 were in stringent complete response (CR; 61.9%), 27 were at least in CR (64.3%): 92.6% had undetectable minimal residual disease according to flow cytometry (≥2.5 × 10-5) and 63.0% according to next-generation sequencing (10-6). Median time to CR was 10.6 months. According to multiparametric flow cytometry and next-generation sequencing, 69.0% and 66.7% of patients, respectively, had undetectable minimal residual disease at some point. With a median follow-up of 60.5 months, 21 patients progressed, and 10 died (7 of multiple myeloma). Median progression-free survival was 56.4 months. There were no KRd-related deaths. Four patients discontinued the program due to toxicities; 56 serious adverse events were reported in 31 patients, including 8 cardiovascular events (2 heart failures, 5 pulmonary embolisms or deep vein thrombosis). Common grade 3/4 adverse events were hematologic (74%) and infectious (22%). In summary, 8 cycles of KRd produce fast and deep responses in transplant-eligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. The safety profile is acceptable, but cardiovascular adverse events should be closely monitored. This clinical trial is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02405364.

Disease heterogeneity, prognostication and the role of targeted therapy in multiple myeloma

Multiple myeloma (MM) is a clonal plasma cell malignancy with a heterogeneous disease course. Insights into the genetics of the disease have identified certain high-risk cytogenetic features that are associated with adverse outcomes. While the advances in therapy have translated into dramatic improvements in the outcome of patients with MM, those with high-risk genetic features continue to perform poorly. This has resulted in a need for clinical trials focusing on the high-risk subgroup of MM as they search for additional biomarkers and therapeutic targets continue. In this review, we discuss the currently existing data on prognostic and predictive biomarkers in MM and speculate the role of treatment stratification based on the genetic features of the disease.

Immunotherapy in Multiple Myeloma-Time for a Second Major Paradigm Shift

Multiple myeloma (MM) is a genetically heterogenous disease and remains mostly incurable with a small group of patients achieving long-term disease remission. The past decade witnessed enormous efforts to break the circulus vitiosus of tumor-induced immunosuppression and to re-engage the immune system to fight cancer. The first-in-class anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody, daratumumab, has shown unprecedented responses especially in combination with other novel agents in both newly diagnosed and relapsed MM. There has been great interest in harnessing the power of T cells with bispecific antibodies and chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapies in hematologic malignancies including MM. These immune-based approaches have shown notable antimyeloma effects with deeper, durable responses in early clinical trials of heavily pretreated patients with MM with limited therapeutic options. Several trials are underway investigating both single and combinatorial immune therapies at different stages with a hope to bring major transformation in MM. In the current review, we summarize how an immunologic approach offers promise for the treatment of MM and is setting the stage for second major paradigm shift 2 decades after the emergence of thalidomide and novel therapeutics.

Novel Experimental Drugs for Treatment of Multiple Myeloma

Multiple myeloma (MM) is the second most frequent hematological malignancy characterized by bone marrow aberrant plasma cells proliferation leading to a genetic complex and heterogeneous disease, with a median survival ranging from two to more than 10 years. By using new drugs such as proteasome inhibitors (PIs), immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs), monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) in different combinations and high-dose therapy followed by auto-transplantation, there has been an amazing improvement in the outcome of this disease in recent years. Despite this, MM is still considered an incurable disease, characterized by remission periods alternated with relapse/progression episodes finally leading to resistant disease. In particular, patients who become refractory to PIs, IMiDs and mAbs have a very poor outcome. Moreover, to overcome resistant residual disease, a large combination of drugs will be increasingly used in early lines of therapy; this further reduces the therapeutic options at each relapse. This natural history means that MM always needs new drugs/strategies to overcome the incoming resistance. New combinations of naked mAbs are becoming the therapy of choice for patients refractory to lenalidomide and/or PI; conjugated mAbs will be useful in triple- and more-refractory patients; CAR-T cells and bispecific mAbs have shown relevant results in very advanced stages of disease. In this review, we reported the results of these new therapies and explored their potential applications. Personalized and precision medicine seem to be the new frontier of cancer treatment. Although no single or few factors have been identified as disease drivers in MM, recurrent gene mutations were recognized and specific compounds targeting these alterations were developed and studied. Therefore, we reviewed these targeted drugs to try to understand what the best therapeutic strategy in MM is.

New regimens and directions in the management of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma

The introduction of novel agents over the last decade has rapidly expanded the therapeutic landscape of multiple myeloma (MM) for both transplant-eligible and transplant-ineligible patients. The assessment of minimal residual disease (MRD) by next-generation flow cytometry or next-generation sequencing is established as a powerful predictor of long-term outcomes. The use of MRD in response-adapted clinical trials may provide opportunities to identify candidates for treatment escalation and de-escalation. Agents with proven activity in the relapsed and refractory setting are being studied in the management of high-risk newly diagnosed MM (NDMM). Here, we summarize the most recent clinical trials that have led to the current paradigms in the management of NDMM. We also discuss how novel agents could be incorporated in the newly diagnosed setting and potential clinical trial designs that could leverage MRD information with the goal of treatment optimization.

How to Treat High-Risk Myeloma at Diagnosis and Relapse

Survival in multiple myeloma has improved greatly during the past 2 decades, but this change has primarily benefited patients who have standard-risk disease. Patients with high-risk disease remain a challenge to diagnose and treat. To improve their clinical outcomes, it is imperative to develop tools to readily identify them and to provide them with the most effective available treatments. The most widely used stratification system, the revised International Staging System, incorporates serum β-2 microglobulin, albumin, lactate dehydrogenase, and high-risk chromosomal abnormalities [del(17p), t(4;14), and t(14;16)]. Recent updates have included mutational status and chromosome 1q abnormalities. Plasma cell leukemia, extramedullary disease, circulating plasma cells, renal failure, and frailty are also associated with poor outcome. The treatment approach for a newly diagnosed patient with high-risk multiple myeloma should include induction therapy, autologous stem cell transplantation if appropriate, and maintenance therapy. Triplet therapy with a proteasome inhibitor, immunomodulatory drug, and steroid, with or without an anti-CD38 antibody, should be considered for induction, along with a proteasome inhibitor and/or immunomodulatory drug for maintenance. Aiming for a deep and sustained response is important. Similar principles apply at relapse, with close monitoring of response, especially extramedullary disease and active management of side effects, so that patients can continue therapy and benefit from treatment. Immune-based therapies, including autologous CAR T-cell-based therapies and bispecific antibodies, show promising activity in relapsed disease and are being actively explored in earlier disease settings. As the prognosis for high-risk disease remains poor, the future goal for this patient group is to develop specific clinical trials to explore novel approaches and therapies efficiently.

The Role of Monoclonal Antibodies in the First-Line Treatment of Transplant-Ineligible Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma

Elderly transplant-ineligible (NTE) patients represent the majority of patients affected by multiple myeloma (MM). Elderly patients are a highly heterogeneous population, with large variability in health and functional status. Thus, choosing their optimal treatment is challenging. A wide range of first-line treatments is available, and novel-agent combinations, including monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), have recently entered clinical practice. The combination of the anti-CD38 mAb daratumumab with bortezomib, melphalan and prednisone (Dara-VMP) or lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Dara-Rd) demonstrated impressive advantages in terms of progression-free survival and minimal residual disease negativity, as compared to VMP and Rd, without safety concerns. Another anti-CD38 mAb, isatuximab, is showing encouraging results, and new isatuximab-based combinations might enter clinical practice in the future. Nevertheless, available data come from clinical trials with selected patient populations and, to date, the manageability of these regimens in real-life patients or in frail patients remains unknown. Frailty-tailored treatments, including mAbs, are under evaluation in preliminary studies. In this review, we analyze recently approved mAb-based treatments for NTE newly diagnosed MM patients and new combinations under evaluation, focusing on the efficacy and safety of these regimens and on open issues regarding the choice of therapy for elderly patients.

The Role of Monoclonal Antibodies in Smoldering and Newly Diagnosed Transplant-Eligible Multiple Myeloma

The recent introduction of monoclonal antibodies (MoAbs), with several cellular targets, such as CD-38 (daratumumab and isatuximab) and SLAM F7 (elotuzumab), differently combined with other classes of agents, has significantly extended the outcomes of patients with multiple myeloma (MM) in different phases of the disease. Initially used in advanced/refractory patients, different MoAbs combination have been introduced in the treatment of newly diagnosed transplant eligible patients (NDTEMM), showing a significant improvement in the depth of the response and in survival outcomes, without a significant price in terms of toxicity. In smoldering MM, MoAbs have been applied, either alone or in combination with other drugs, with the goal of delaying the progression to active MM and restoring the immune system. In this review, we will focus on the main results achieved so far and on the main on-going trials using MoAbs in SMM and NDTEMM.

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

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

Multiple Myeloma: Clinical Updates from the American Society of Clinical Oncology Annual Scientific Symposium 2020

The novel clinical data for plasma cell neoplasms (smoldering myeloma, multiple myeloma, and AL amyloidosis) that were presented in the 2020 American Society of Clinical Oncology virtual scientific symposium are summarized here. Data from large phase-3 studies (CASSIOPEIA, ENDURANCE, and TOURMALINE-MM4 trials) and phase-2 studies (SWOG 1211, GMMG CONCEPT trials) for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients who are eligible for autologous stem cell transplantation are described. Updates from previous important studies for multiple myeloma (STaMINA) along with studies on three different chimeric antigen receptor (CAR-) T cell products are also described. Results of clinical studies involving the use of anti-myeloma drugs with novel mechanisms of action such as immunoconjugates, selinexor, venetoclax, monoclonal antibodies, and data on minimal residual disease (MRD) are discussed. These data provide an overview of the efficacy and safety of the various treatments in multiple myeloma and could lead to changes in our clinical practice, which could pave the path for a "cure" in myeloma.

Monoclonal Antibodies to Treat Multiple Myeloma: A Dream Come True

Immunotherapy is increasingly used in the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM). Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) are safe and effective ways to elicit immunotherapeutic responses. In 2015, daratumumab has become the first mAb approved by the Food and Drug Administration for clinical use in MM and, in the last 5 years, a lot of clinical and preclinical research has been done to optimize the use of this drug class. Currently, mAbs have already become part of standard-of-care combinations for the treatment of relapsed/refractory MM and very soon they will also be used in the frontline setting. The success of simple mAbs ('naked mAbs') prompted the development of new types of molecules. Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) are tumor-targeting mAbs that release a cytotoxic payload into the tumor cells upon antigen binding in order to destroy them. Bispecific antibodies (BiAbs) are mAbs simultaneously targeting a tumor-associated antigen and an immune cell-associated antigen in order to redirect the immune cell cytotoxicity against the tumor cell. These different constructs produced solid preclinical data and promising clinical data in phase I/II trials. The aim of this review article is to summarize all the recent developments in the field, including data on naked mAbs, ADCs and BiAbs.

Monoclonal antibodies as an addition to current myeloma therapy strategies

INTRODUCTION

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

AREAS COVERED

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

EXPERT OPINION

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

Autologous stem-cell collection following VTD or VRD induction therapy in multiple myeloma: a single-center experience

Triplet-drug regimen bortezomib-thalidomide-dexamethasone (VTD) and bortezomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (VRD) are considered as standard of care induction prior autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) in myeloma. In addition to improve response rate, induction therapy should preserve an adequate stem-cell collection. In the present retrospective study, we analyzed stem-cell collection in 325 newly diagnosed myeloma patients who received either VTD or VRD induction before ASCT. Stem-cell mobilization consisted of intravenous cyclophosphamide plus G-CSF. Plerixafor was administered preemptively to rescue mobilization. In comparison with VTD, VRD induction was associated with a more frequent use of plerixafor (19.3% versus 5.4%, p = 0.004) and with an increased number of apheresis to reach adequate collection (>2 apheresis required in 42.3% versus 30.2%, p = 0.05). Moreover, more patients experienced collection failure in the VRD group (6% versus 1.8%, p = 0.004). The median number of CD34-positive cells (×10⁶/kg) was lower in the VRD group: 8.5 versus 9.3 (p = 0.05) in the VTD group. The vast majority of patients underwent ASCT (93% versus 98%, in VRD and VTD group, respectively). These data highlight the need of optimal stem-cell collection strategy, especially in the context of tandem transplantation and incorporation of anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody into induction.