Daratumumab, Bortezomib, and Dexamethasone for Multiple Myeloma

BACKGROUND

Daratumumab, a human IgGκ monoclonal antibody that targets CD38, induces direct and indirect antimyeloma activity and has shown substantial efficacy as monotherapy in heavily pretreated patients with multiple myeloma, as well as in combination with bortezomib in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.

METHODS

In this phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned 498 patients with relapsed or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma to receive bortezomib (1.3 mg per square meter of body-surface area) and dexamethasone (20 mg) alone (control group) or in combination with daratumumab (16 mg per kilogram of body weight) (daratumumab group). The primary end point was progression-free survival.

RESULTS

A prespecified interim analysis showed that the rate of progression-free survival was significantly higher in the daratumumab group than in the control group; the 12-month rate of progression-free survival was 60.7% in the daratumumab group versus 26.9% in the control group. After a median follow-up period of 7.4 months, the median progression-free survival was not reached in the daratumumab group and was 7.2 months in the control group (hazard ratio for progression or death with daratumumab vs. control, 0.39; 95% confidence interval, 0.28 to 0.53; P<0.001). The rate of overall response was higher in the daratumumab group than in the control group (82.9% vs. 63.2%, P<0.001), as were the rates of very good partial response or better (59.2% vs. 29.1%, P<0.001) and complete response or better (19.2% vs. 9.0%, P=0.001). Three of the most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events reported in the daratumumab group and the control group were thrombocytopenia (45.3% and 32.9%, respectively), anemia (14.4% and 16.0%, respectively), and neutropenia (12.8% and 4.2%, respectively). Infusion-related reactions that were associated with daratumumab treatment were reported in 45.3% of the patients in the daratumumab group; these reactions were mostly grade 1 or 2 (grade 3 in 8.6% of the patients), and in 98.2% of these patients, they occurred during the first infusion.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with relapsed or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma, daratumumab in combination with bortezomib and dexamethasone resulted in significantly longer progression-free survival than bortezomib and dexamethasone alone and was associated with infusion-related reactions and higher rates of thrombocytopenia and neutropenia than bortezomib and dexamethasone alone. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02136134.).

Lenalidomide, Bortezomib, and Dexamethasone with Transplantation for Myeloma

BACKGROUND

High-dose chemotherapy plus autologous stem-cell transplantation has been the standard treatment for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma in adults up to 65 years of age. However, promising data on the use of combination therapy with lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (RVD) in this population have raised questions about the role and timing of transplantation.

METHODS

We randomly assigned 700 patients with multiple myeloma to receive induction therapy with three cycles of RVD and then consolidation therapy with either five additional cycles of RVD (350 patients) or high-dose melphalan plus stem-cell transplantation followed by two additional cycles of RVD (350 patients). Patients in both groups received maintenance therapy with lenalidomide for 1 year. The primary end point was progression-free survival.

RESULTS

Median progression-free survival was significantly longer in the group that underwent transplantation than in the group that received RVD alone (50 months vs. 36 months; adjusted hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.65; P<0.001). This benefit was observed across all patient subgroups, including those stratified according to International Staging System stage and cytogenetic risk. The percentage of patients with a complete response was higher in the transplantation group than in the RVD-alone group (59% vs. 48%, P=0.03), as was the percentage of patients in whom minimal residual disease was not detected (79% vs. 65%, P<0.001). Overall survival at 4 years did not differ significantly between the transplantation group and the RVD-alone group (81% and 82%, respectively). The rate of grade 3 or 4 neutropenia was significantly higher in the transplantation group than in the RVD-alone group (92% vs. 47%), as were the rates of grade 3 or 4 gastrointestinal disorders (28% vs. 7%) and infections (20% vs. 9%). No significant between-group differences were observed in the rates of treatment-related deaths, second primary cancers, thromboembolic events, and peripheral neuropathy.

CONCLUSIONS

Among adults with multiple myeloma, RVD therapy plus transplantation was associated with significantly longer progression-free survival than RVD therapy alone, but overall survival did not differ significantly between the two approaches. (Supported by Celgene and others; IFM 2009 Study ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01191060 .).

Daratumumab plus Bortezomib, Melphalan, and Prednisone for Untreated Myeloma

BACKGROUND

The combination of bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone is a standard treatment for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who are ineligible for autologous stem-cell transplantation. Daratumumab has shown efficacy in combination with standard-of-care regimens in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma.

METHODS

In this phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned 706 patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were ineligible for stem-cell transplantation to receive nine cycles of bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone either alone (control group) or with daratumumab (daratumumab group) until disease progression. The primary end point was progression-free survival.

RESULTS

At a median follow-up of 16.5 months in a prespecified interim analysis, the 18-month progression-free survival rate was 71.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 65.5 to 76.8) in the daratumumab group and 50.2% (95% CI, 43.2 to 56.7) in the control group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.65; P<0.001). The overall response rate was 90.9% in the daratumumab group, as compared with 73.9% in the control group (P<0.001), and the rate of complete response or better (including stringent complete response) was 42.6%, versus 24.4% (P<0.001). In the daratumumab group, 22.3% of the patients were negative for minimal residual disease (at a threshold of 1 tumor cell per 10⁵ white cells), as compared with 6.2% of those in the control group (P<0.001). The most common adverse events of grade 3 or 4 were hematologic: neutropenia (in 39.9% of the patients in the daratumumab group and in 38.7% of those in the control group), thrombocytopenia (in 34.4% and 37.6%, respectively), and anemia (in 15.9% and 19.8%, respectively). The rate of grade 3 or 4 infections was 23.1% in the daratumumab group and 14.7% in the control group; the rate of treatment discontinuation due to infections was 0.9% and 1.4%, respectively. Daratumumab-associated infusion-related reactions occurred in 27.7% of the patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were ineligible for stem-cell transplantation, daratumumab combined with bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone resulted in a lower risk of disease progression or death than the same regimen without daratumumab. The daratumumab-containing regimen was associated with more grade 3 or 4 infections. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; ALCYONE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02195479 .).

Bortezomib, thalidomide, and dexamethasone with or without daratumumab before and after autologous stem-cell transplantation for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (CASSIOPEIA): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 study

BACKGROUND

Bortezomib, thalidomide, and dexamethasone (VTd) plus autologous stem-cell transplantation is standard treatment in Europe for transplant-eligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. We evaluated whether the addition of daratumumab to VTd before and after autologous stem-cell transplantation would improve stringent complete response rate in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.

METHODS

In this two-part, randomised, open-label, phase 3 CASSIOPEIA trial, we recruited transplant-eligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma at 111 European sites. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive four pre-transplant induction and two post-transplant consolidation cycles of VTd alone (VTd group) or in combination with daratumumab (D-VTd group). The primary endpoint of part 1 was stringent complete response assessed 100 days after transplantation. Part 2 (maintenance) is ongoing. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02541383.

FINDINGS

Between Sept 22, 2015, and Aug 1, 2017, 1085 patients were enrolled at 111 European sites and were randomly assigned to the D-VTd group (n=543) or the VTd group (n=542). At day 100 after transplantation, 157 (29%) of 543 patients in the D-VTd group and 110 (20%) of 542 patients in the VTd group in the intention-to-treat population had achieved a stringent complete response (odds ratio 1·60, 95% CI 1·21-2·12, p=0·0010). 211 (39%) patients in the D-VTd group versus 141 (26%) in the VTd group achieved a complete response or better, and 346 (64%) of 543 versus 236 (44%) of 542 achieved minimal residual disease-negativity (10-5 sensitivity threshold, assessed by multiparametric flow cytometry; both p<0·0001). Median progression-free survival from first randomisation was not reached in either group (hazard ratio 0·47, 95% CI 0·33-0·67, p<0·0001). 46 deaths on study were observed (14 vs 32, 0·43, 95% CI 0·23-0·80). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were neutropenia (28% vs 15%), lymphopenia (17% vs 10%), and stomatitis (13% vs 16%).

INTERPRETATION

D-VTd before and after autologous stem-cell transplantation improved depth of response and progression-free survival with acceptable safety. CASSIOPEIA is the first study showing the clinical benefit of daratumumab plus standard of care in transplant-eligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.

FUNDING

The Intergroupe Francophone du Myélome and Dutch-Belgian Cooperative Trial Group for Hematology Oncology.

Daratumumab-Based Treatment for Immunoglobulin Light-Chain Amyloidosis

BACKGROUND

Systemic immunoglobulin light-chain (AL) amyloidosis is characterized by deposition of amyloid fibrils of light chains produced by clonal CD38+ plasma cells. Daratumumab, a human CD38-targeting antibody, may improve outcomes for this disease.

METHODS

We randomly assigned patients with newly diagnosed AL amyloidosis to receive six cycles of bortezomib, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone either alone (control group) or with subcutaneous daratumumab followed by single-agent daratumumab every 4 weeks for up to 24 cycles (daratumumab group). The primary end point was a hematologic complete response.

RESULTS

A total of 388 patients underwent randomization. The median follow-up was 11.4 months. The percentage of patients who had a hematologic complete response was significantly higher in the daratumumab group than in the control group (53.3% vs. 18.1%) (relative risk ratio, 2.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.1 to 4.1; P<0.001). Survival free from major organ deterioration or hematologic progression favored the daratumumab group (hazard ratio for major organ deterioration, hematologic progression, or death, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.93; P = 0.02). At 6 months, more cardiac and renal responses occurred in the daratumumab group than in the control group (41.5% vs. 22.2% and 53.0% vs. 23.9%, respectively). The four most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were lymphopenia (13.0% in the daratumumab group and 10.1% in the control group), pneumonia (7.8% and 4.3%, respectively), cardiac failure (6.2% and 4.8%), and diarrhea (5.7% and 3.7%). Systemic administration-related reactions to daratumumab occurred in 7.3% of the patients. A total of 56 patients died (27 in the daratumumab group and 29 in the control group), most due to amyloidosis-related cardiomyopathy.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with newly diagnosed AL amyloidosis, the addition of daratumumab to bortezomib, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone was associated with higher frequencies of hematologic complete response and survival free from major organ deterioration or hematologic progression. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; ANDROMEDA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03201965.).

Minimal residual disease negativity using deep sequencing is a major prognostic factor in multiple myeloma

The introduction of novel agents has led to major improvements in clinical outcomes for patients with multiple myeloma. To shorten evaluation times for new treatments, health agencies are currently examining minimal residual disease (MRD) as a surrogate end point in clinical trials. We assessed the prognostic value of MRD, measured during maintenance therapy by next-generation sequencing (NGS). MRD negativity was defined as the absence of tumor plasma cell within 1 000 000 bone marrow cells (<10-6). Data were analyzed from a recent clinical trial that evaluated the role of transplantation in newly diagnosed myeloma patients treated with lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (RVD). MRD negativity was achieved at least once during maintenance in 127 patients (25%). At the start of maintenance therapy, MRD was a strong prognostic factor for both progression-free survival (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.22; 95% confidence interval, 0.15-0.34; P < .001) and overall survival (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.24; 95% confidence interval, 0.11-0.54; P = .001). Patients who were MRD negative had a higher probability of prolonged progression-free survival than patients with detectable residual disease, regardless of treatment group (RVD vs transplant), cytogenetic risk profile, or International Staging System disease stage at diagnosis. These results were similar after completion of maintenance therapy. Our findings confirm the value of MRD status, as determined by NGS, as a prognostic biomarker in multiple myeloma, and suggest that this approach could be used to adapt treatment strategies in future clinical trials.

Overall survival with daratumumab, bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (ALCYONE): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Standard-of-care treatment for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma includes combination therapies for patients who are not eligible for autologous stem-cell transplantation. At the primary analysis for progression-free survival of the phase 3 ALCYONE trial, progression-free survival was significantly longer with daratumumab in combination with bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone (D-VMP) versus bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone (VMP) alone in patients with transplant-ineligible, newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Here we report updated efficacy and safety results from a prespecified, interim, overall survival analysis of ALCYONE with more than 36 months of follow-up.

METHODS

ALCYONE was a multicentre, randomised, open-label, active-controlled, phase 3 trial that enrolled patients between Feb 9, 2015, and July 14, 2016, at 162 sites in 25 countries across North America, South America, Europe, and the Asia-Pacific region. Patients were eligible for inclusion if they had newly diagnosed multiple myeloma and were ineligible for high-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem-cell transplantation, because of their age (≥65 years) or because of substantial comorbidities. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio and by permuted block randomisation to receive D-VMP or VMP. An interactive web-based randomisation system was used. Randomisation was stratified by International Staging System disease stage, geographical region, and age. There was no masking to treatment assignments. All patients received up to nine 6-week cycles of subcutaneous bortezomib (1·3 mg/m² of body surface area on days 1, 4, 8, 11, 22, 25, 29, and 32 of cycle one and on days 1, 8, 22, and 29 of cycles two through nine), oral melphalan (9 mg/m² once daily on days 1 through 4 of each cycle), and oral prednisone (60 mg/m² once daily on days 1 through 4 of each cycle). Patients in the D-VMP group also received intravenous daratumumab (16 mg/kg of bodyweight, once weekly during cycle one, once every 3 weeks in cycles two through nine, and once every 4 weeks thereafter as maintenance therapy until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, which has been reported previously. Results presented are from a prespecified interim analysis for overall survival. The primary analysis population (including for overall survival) was the intention-to-treat population of all patients who were randomly assigned to treatment. The safety population included patients who received any dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02195479.

FINDINGS

706 patients were randomly assigned to treatment groups (350 to the D-VMP group, 356 to the VMP group). At a median follow-up of 40·1 months (IQR 37·4-43·1), a significant benefit in overall survival was observed for the D-VMP group. The hazard ratio (HR) for death in the D-VMP group compared with the VMP group was 0·60 (95% CI 0·46-0·80; p=0·0003). The Kaplan-Meier estimate of the 36-month rate of overall survival was 78·0% (95% CI 73·2-82·0) in the D-VMP group and 67·9% (62·6-72·6) in the VMP group. Progression-free survival, the primary endpoint, remained significantly improved for the D-VMP group (HR 0·42 [0·34-0·51]; p<0·0001). The most frequent adverse events during maintenance daratumumab monotherapy in patients in the D-VMP group were respiratory infections (54 [19%] of 278 patients had upper respiratory tract infections; 42 [15%] had bronchitis, 34 [12%] had viral upper respiratory tract infections), cough (34 [12%]), and diarrhoea (28 [10%]).

INTERPRETATION

D-VMP prolonged overall survival in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were ineligible for stem-cell transplantation. With more than 3 years of follow-up, the D-VMP group continued to show significant improvement in progression-free survival, with no new safety concerns.

FUNDING

Janssen Research & Development.

Triplet Therapy, Transplantation, and Maintenance until Progression in Myeloma

BACKGROUND

In patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, the effect of adding autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) to triplet therapy (lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone [RVD]), followed by lenalidomide maintenance therapy until disease progression, is unknown.

METHODS

In this phase 3 trial, adults (18 to 65 years of age) with symptomatic myeloma received one cycle of RVD. We randomly assigned these patients, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive two additional RVD cycles plus stem-cell mobilization, followed by either five additional RVD cycles (the RVD-alone group) or high-dose melphalan plus ASCT followed by two additional RVD cycles (the transplantation group). Both groups received lenalidomide until disease progression, unacceptable side effects, or both. The primary end point was progression-free survival.

RESULTS

Among 357 patients in the RVD-alone group and 365 in the transplantation group, at a median follow-up of 76.0 months, 328 events of disease progression or death occurred; the risk was 53% higher in the RVD-alone group than in the transplantation group (hazard ratio, 1.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.23 to 1.91; P<0.001); median progression-free survival was 46.2 months and 67.5 months. The percentage of patients with a partial response or better was 95.0% in the RVD-alone group and 97.5% in the transplantation group (P = 0.55); 42.0% and 46.8%, respectively, had a complete response or better (P = 0.99). Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred in 78.2% and 94.2%, respectively; 5-year survival was 79.2% and 80.7% (hazard ratio for death, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.65).

CONCLUSIONS

Among adults with multiple myeloma, RVD plus ASCT was associated with longer progression-free survival than RVD alone. No overall survival benefit was observed. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and others; DETERMINATION ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01208662.).

Once-per-week selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone versus twice-per-week bortezomib and dexamethasone in patients with multiple myeloma (BOSTON): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Selinexor combined with dexamethasone has shown activity in patients with heavily pre-treated multiple myeloma. In a phase 1b/2 study, the combination of oral selinexor with bortezomib (a proteasome inhibitor) and dexamethasone induced high response rates with low rates of peripheral neuropathy, the main dose-limiting toxicity of bortezomib. We aimed to evaluate the clinical benefit of weekly selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone versus standard bortezomib and dexamethasone in patients with previously treated multiple myeloma.

METHODS

This phase 3, randomised, open-label trial was done at 123 sites in 21 countries. Patients aged 18 years or older, who had multiple myeloma, and who had previously been treated with one to three lines of therapy, including proteasome inhibitors, were randomly allocated (1:1) to receive selinexor (100 mg once per week), bortezomib (1·3 mg/m2 once per week), and dexamethasone (20 mg twice per week), or bortezomib (1·3 mg/m2 twice per week for the first 24 weeks and once per week thereafter) and dexamethasone (20 mg four times per week for the first 24 weeks and twice per week thereafter). Randomisation was done using interactive response technology and stratified by previous proteasome inhibitor therapy, lines of treatment, and multiple myeloma stage. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Patients who received at least one dose of study treatment were included in the safety population. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03110562. The trial is ongoing, with 55 patients remaining on randomised therapy as of Feb 20, 2020.

FINDINGS

Of 457 patients screened for eligibility, 402 were randomly allocated-195 (49%) to the selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone group and 207 (51%) to the bortezomib and dexamethasone group-and the first dose of study medication was given between June 6, 2017, and Feb 5, 2019. Median follow-up durations were 13·2 months [IQR 6·2-19·8] for the selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone group and 16·5 months [9·4-19·8] for the bortezomib and dexamethasone group. Median progression-free survival was 13·93 months (95% CI 11·73-not evaluable) with selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone and 9·46 months (8·11-10·78) with bortezomib and dexamethasone (hazard ratio 0·70 [95% CI 0·53-0·93], p=0·0075). The most frequent grade 3-4 adverse events were thrombocytopenia (77 [39%] of 195 patients in the selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone group vs 35 [17%] of 204 in the bortezomib and dexamethasone group), fatigue (26 [13%] vs two [1%]), anaemia (31 [16%] vs 20 [10%]), and pneumonia (22 [11%] vs 22 [11%]). Peripheral neuropathy of grade 2 or above was less frequent with selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (41 [21%] patients) than with bortezomib and dexamethasone (70 [34%] patients; odds ratio 0·50 [95% CI 0·32-0·79], p=0·0013). 47 (24%) patients in the selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone group and 62 (30%) in the bortezomib and dexamethasone group died.

INTERPRETATION

A once-per-week regimen of selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone is a novel, effective, and convenient treatment option for patients with multiple myeloma who have received one to three previous lines of therapy.

FUNDING

Karyopharm Therapeutics.

Molecular High-Grade B-Cell Lymphoma: Defining a Poor-Risk Group That Requires Different Approaches to Therapy

PURPOSE

Biologic heterogeneity is a feature of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), and the existence of a subgroup with poor prognosis and phenotypic proximity to Burkitt lymphoma is well known. Conventional cytogenetics identifies some patients with rearrangements of MYC and BCL2 and/or BCL6 (double-hit lymphomas) who are increasingly treated with more intensive chemotherapy, but a more biologically coherent and clinically useful definition of this group is required.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We defined a molecular high-grade (MHG) group by applying a gene expression-based classifier to 928 patients with DLBCL from a clinical trial that investigated the addition of bortezomib to standard rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) therapy. The prognostic significance of MHG was compared with existing biomarkers. We performed targeted sequencing of 70 genes in 400 patients and explored molecular pathology using gene expression signature databases. Findings were validated in an independent data set.

RESULTS

The MHG group comprised 83 patients (9%), with 75 in the cell-of-origin germinal center B-cell-like group. MYC rearranged and double-hit groups were strongly over-represented in MHG but comprised only one half of the total. Gene expression analysis revealed a proliferative phenotype with a relationship to centroblasts. Progression-free survival rate at 36 months after R-CHOP in the MHG group was 37% (95% CI, 24% to 55%) compared with 72% (95% CI, 68% to 77%) for others, and an analysis of treatment effects suggested a possible positive effect of bortezomib. Double-hit lymphomas lacking the MHG signature showed no evidence of worse outcome than other germinal center B-cell-like cases.

CONCLUSION

MHG defines a biologically coherent high-grade B-cell lymphoma group with distinct molecular features and clinical outcomes that effectively doubles the size of the poor-prognosis, double-hit group. Patients with MHG may benefit from intensified chemotherapy or novel targeted therapies.

Autologous Transplantation, Consolidation, and Maintenance Therapy in Multiple Myeloma: Results of the BMT CTN 0702 Trial

PURPOSE

Single-cycle melphalan 200 mg/m2 and autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (AHCT) followed by lenalidomide (len) maintenance have improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for transplantation-eligible patients with multiple myeloma (MM). We designed a prospective, randomized, phase III study to test additional interventions to improve PFS by comparing AHCT, tandem AHCT (AHCT/AHCT), and AHCT and four subsequent cycles of len, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (RVD; AHCT + RVD), all followed by len until disease progression.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with symptomatic MM within 12 months from starting therapy and without progression who were age 70 years or younger were randomly assigned to AHCT/AHCT + len (n = 247), AHCT + RVD + len (n = 254), or AHCT + len (n = 257). The primary end point was 38-month PFS.

RESULTS

The study population had a median age of 56 years (range, 20 to 70 years); 24% of patients had high-risk MM, 73% had a triple-drug regimen as initial therapy, and 18% were in complete response at enrollment. The 38-month PFS rate was 58.5% (95% CI, 51.7% to 64.6%) for AHCT/AHCT + len, 57.8% (95% CI, 51.4% to 63.7%) for AHCT + RVD + len, and 53.9% (95% CI, 47.4% to 60%) for AHCT + len. For AHCT/AHCT + len, AHCT + RVD + len, and AHCT + len, the OS rates were 81.8% (95% CI, 76.2% to 86.2%), 85.4% (95% CI, 80.4% to 89.3%), and 83.7% (95% CI, 78.4% to 87.8%), respectively, and the complete response rates at 1 year were 50.5% (n = 192), 58.4% (n = 209), and 47.1% (n = 208), respectively. Toxicity profiles and development of second primary malignancies were similar across treatment arms.

CONCLUSION

Second AHCT or RVD consolidation as post-AHCT interventions for the up-front treatment of transplantation-eligible patients with MM did not improve PFS or OS. Single AHCT and len should remain as the standard approach for this population.

Daratumumab, Bortezomib, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone for Multiple Myeloma

BACKGROUND

Daratumumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting CD38, has been approved for use with standard myeloma regimens. An evaluation of subcutaneous daratumumab combined with bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRd) for the treatment of transplantation-eligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma is needed.

METHODS

In this phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned 709 transplantation-eligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma to receive either subcutaneous daratumumab combined with VRd induction and consolidation therapy and with lenalidomide maintenance therapy (D-VRd group) or VRd induction and consolidation therapy and lenalidomide maintenance therapy alone (VRd group). The primary end point was progression-free survival. Key secondary end points were a complete response or better and minimal residual disease (MRD)-negative status.

RESULTS

At a median follow-up of 47.5 months, the risk of disease progression or death in the D-VRd group was lower than the risk in the VRd group. The estimated percentage of patients with progression-free survival at 48 months was 84.3% in the D-VRd group and 67.7% in the VRd group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.42; 95% confidence interval, 0.30 to 0.59; P<0.001); the P value crossed the prespecified stopping boundary (P = 0.0126). The percentage of patients with a complete response or better was higher in the D-VRd group than in the VRd group (87.9% vs. 70.1%, P<0.001), as was the percentage of patients with MRD-negative status (75.2% vs. 47.5%, P<0.001). Death occurred in 34 patients in the D-VRd group and 44 patients in the VRd group. Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in most patients in both groups; the most common were neutropenia (62.1% with D-VRd and 51.0% with VRd) and thrombocytopenia (29.1% and 17.3%, respectively). Serious adverse events occurred in 57.0% of the patients in the D-VRd group and 49.3% of those in the VRd group.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of subcutaneous daratumumab to VRd induction and consolidation therapy and to lenalidomide maintenance therapy conferred a significant benefit with respect to progression-free survival among transplantation-eligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. (Funded by the European Myeloma Network in collaboration with Janssen Research and Development; PERSEUS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03710603; EudraCT number, 2018-002992-16.).

Gene-expression profiling of bortezomib added to standard chemoimmunotherapy for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (REMoDL-B): an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Biologically distinct subtypes of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma can be identified using gene-expression analysis to determine their cell of origin, corresponding to germinal centre or activated B cell. We aimed to investigate whether adding bortezomib to standard therapy could improve outcomes in patients with these subtypes.

METHODS

In a randomised evaluation of molecular guided therapy for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma with bortezomib (REMoDL-B), an open-label, adaptive, randomised controlled, phase 3 superiority trial, participants were recruited from 107 cancer centres in the UK (n=94) and Switzerland (n=13). Eligible patients had previously untreated, histologically confirmed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma with sufficient diagnostic material from initial biopsies for gene-expression profiling and pathology review; were aged 18 years or older; had ECOG performance status of 2 or less; had bulky stage I or stage II-IV disease requiring full-course chemotherapy; had measurable disease; and had cardiac, lung, renal, and liver function sufficient to tolerate chemotherapy. Patients initially received one 21-day cycle of standard rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisolone (R-CHOP; rituximab 375 mg/m2, cyclophosphamide 750 mg/m2, doxorubicin 50 mg/m2, and vincristine 1·4 mg/m2 [to a maximum of 2 mg total dose] intravenously on day 1 of the cycle, and prednisolone 100 mg orally once daily on days 1-5). During this time, we did gene-expression profiling using whole genome cDNA-mediated annealing, selection, extension, and ligation assay of tissue from routine diagnostic biopsy samples to determine the cell-of-origin subtype of each participant (germinal centre B cell, activated B cell, or unclassified). Patients were then centrally randomly assigned (1:1) via a web-based system, with block randomisation stratified by international prognostic index score and cell-of-origin subtype, to continue R-CHOP alone (R-CHOP group; control), or with bortezomib (RB-CHOP group; experimental; 1·3 mg/m2 intravenously or 1·6 mg/m2 subcutaneously) on days 1 and 8 for cycles two to six. If RNA extracted from the diagnostic tissues was of insufficient quality or quantity, participants were given R-CHOP as per the control group. The primary endpoint was 30-month progression-free survival, for the germinal centre and activated B-cell population. The primary analysis was on the modified intention-to-treat population of activated and germinal centre B-cell population. Safety was assessed in all participants who were given at least one dose of study drug. We report the progression-free survival and safety outcomes for patients in the follow-up phase after the required number of events occurred. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01324596, and recruitment and treatment has completed for all participants, with long-term follow-up ongoing.

FINDINGS

Between June 2, 2011, and June 10, 2015, 1128 eligible patients were registered, of whom 918 (81%) were randomly assigned to receive treatment (n=459 to R-CHOP, n=459 to RB-CHOP), comprising 244 (26·6%) with activated B-cell disease, 475 (51·7%) with germinal centre B cell disease, and 199 (21·7%) with unclassified disease. At a median follow-up of 29·7 months (95% CI 29·0-32·0), we saw no evidence for a difference in progression-free survival in the combined germinal centre and activated B-cell population between R-CHOP and RB-CHOP (30-month progression-free survival 70·1%, 95% CI 65·0-74·7 vs 74·3%, 69·3-78·7; hazard ratio 0·86, 95% CI 0·65-1·13; p=0·28). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse event was haematological toxicity, reported in 178 (39·8%) of 447 patients given R-CHOP and 187 (42·1%) of 444 given RB-CHOP. However, RB-CHOP was not associated with increased haematological toxicity and 398 [87·1%] of 459 participants assigned to receive RB-CHOP completed six cycles of treatment. Grade 3 or worse neuropathy occurred in 17 (3·8%) patients given RB-CHOP versus eight (1·8%) given R-CHOP. Serious adverse events occurred in 190 (42·5%) patients given R-CHOP, including five treatment-related deaths, and 223 (50·2%) given RB-CHOP, including four treatment-related deaths.

INTERPRETATION

This is the first large-scale study in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma to use real-time molecular characterisation for prospective stratification, randomisation, and subsequent analysis of biologically distinct subgroups of patients. The addition of bortezomib did not improve progression-free survival.

FUNDING

Janssen-Cilag, Bloodwise, and Cancer Research UK.

Bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone as induction therapy prior to autologous transplant in multiple myeloma

Achieving and maintaining a high-quality response is the treatment goal for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). The phase 3 PETHEMA/GEM2012 study, in 458 patients aged ≤65 years with NDMM, is evaluating bortezomib (subcutaneous) + lenalidomide + dexamethasone (VRD) for 6 cycles followed by autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) conditioned with IV busulfan + melphalan vs melphalan and posttransplant consolidation with 2 cycles of VRD. We present grouped response analysis of induction, transplant, and consolidation. Responses deepened over time; in patients who initiated cycle 6 of induction (n = 426), the rates of a very good partial response or better were 55.6% by cycle 3, 63.8% by cycle 4, 68.3% by cycle 5, and 70.4% after induction. The complete response rate of 33.4% after induction in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population, which was similar in the 92 patients with high-risk cytogenetics (34.8%), also deepened with further treatment (44.1% after ASCT and 50.2% after consolidation). Rates of undetectable minimal residual disease (median 3 × 10-6 sensitivity) in the ITT population also increased from induction (28.8%) to transplant (42.1%) and consolidation (45.2%). The most common grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events during induction were neutropenia (12.9%) and infection (9.2%). Grade ≥2 peripheral neuropathy (grouped term) during induction was 17.0%, with a low frequency of grade 3 (3.7%) and grade 4 (0.2%) events. VRD is an effective and well-tolerated regimen for induction in NDMM with deepening response throughout induction and over the course of treatment. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01916252 and EudraCT as #2012-005683-10.

Multiple myeloma: 2018 update on diagnosis, risk‐stratification, and management

Disease overview

Multiple myeloma accounts for approximately 10% of hematologic malignancies.

Diagnosis

The diagnosis requires ≥10% clonal bone marrow plasma cells or a biopsy proven plasmacytoma plus evidence of one or more multiple myeloma defining events (MDE): CRAB (hyperc alcemia, r enal failure, a nemia, or lytic b one lesions) features felt related to the plasma cell disorder, bone marrow clonal plasmacytosis ≥60%, serum involved/uninvolved free light chain (FLC) ratio ≥100 (provided involved FLC is ≥100 mg/L), or >1 focal lesion on magnetic resonance imaging.

Risk stratification

Patients with del(17p), t(14;16), and t(14;20) have high-risk multiple myeloma. Patients with t(4;14) translocation and gain(1q) have intermediate-risk. All others are considered standard-risk.

Risk-adapted initial therapy

Initial treatment consists of bortezomib, lenalidomide, dexamethasone (VRd). In high-risk patients, carfilzomib, lenalidomide, dexamethasone (KRd) is an alternative to VRd. In eligible patients, initial therapy is given for approximately 3–4 cycles followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). Standard risk patients can opt for delayed ASCT at first relapse. Patients not candidates for transplant are treated with VRd for approximately 8–12 cycles followed by lenalidomide or lenalidomide plus dexamethasone.

Maintenance therapy

After ASCT, lenalidomide maintenance is recommended for standard risk patients, while maintenance with a bortezomib-based regimen is needed for patients with intermediate or high-risk disease.

Management of refractory disease

Most patients require a triplet regimen at relapse, with the choice of regimen varying with each successive relapse. Aggressive relapse with extramedullary plasmacytomas or plasma cell leukemia may require anthracycline containing combination chemotherapy regimens.

Bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone with or without elotuzumab in patients with untreated, high-risk multiple myeloma (SWOG-1211): primary analysis of a randomised, phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

The introduction of immunomodulatory agents, proteasome inhibitors, and autologous haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation has improved outcomes for patients with multiple myeloma, but patients with high-risk multiple myeloma have a poor long-term prognosis. We aimed to address optimal treatment for these patients.

METHODS

SWOG-1211 is a randomised phase 2 trial comparing eight cycles of lenalidomide (25 mg orally on days 1-14 every 21 days), bortezomib (1·3 mg/m2 subcutaneously on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 every 21 days), and dexamethasone (20 mg orally on days 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, and 12 every 21 days; RVd) induction followed by dose-attenuated RVd maintenance (bortezomib 1 mg/m2 subcutaneously on days 1, 8, and 15; lenalidomide 15 mg orally on days 1-21; dexamethasone 12 mg orally on days 1, 18, and 15 every 28 days) until disease progression with or without elotuzumab (10 mg/kg intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 for cycles 1-2, on days 1 and 11 for cycles 3-8, and on days 1 and 15 during maintenance). Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either RVd or RVd-elotuzumab. High-risk multiple myeloma was defined by one of the following: gene expression profiling high risk (GEPhi), t(14;16), t(14;20), del(17p) or amp1q21, primary plasma cell leukaemia and elevated serum lactate dehydrogenase (two times the upper limit of normal or more). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, and all analyses were done on intention-to-treat basis among eligible patients who were evaluable for response. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01668719.

FINDINGS

100 (RVd n=52, RVd-elotuzumab n=48) patients were enrolled between Oct 27, 2013, and May 15, 2016, across 26 cooperative group institutions in the USA. Median age was 64 years (IQR 57-70, range 36-85). 74 (75%) of 99 had International Staging System stage II or stage III disease, 47 (47%) of 99 had amp1q21, 37 (37%) of 100 had del17p, 11 (11%) of 100 had t(14;16), eight (9%) of 90 were GEPhi, seven (7%) of 100 had primary plasma cell leukaemia, five (5%) of 100 had t(14;20), four (4%) of 100 had elevated serum lactate dehydrogenase, and 17 (17%) had two or more features. With a median follow-up of 53 months (IQR 46-59), no difference in median progression-free survival was observed (RVd 33·64 months [95% CI 19·55-not reached], RVd-elotuzumab 31·47 months [18·56-53·98]; hazard ratio 0·968 [80% CI 0·697-1·344]; one-sided p=0·45]. 37 (71%) of 52 patients in the RVd group and 37 (77%) of 48 in the RVd-elotuzumab group had grade 3 or worse adverse events. No significant differences in the safety profile were observed, although some notable results included grade 3-5 infections (four [8%] of 52 in the RVd group, eight [17%] of 48 in the RVd-elotuzumab group), sensory neuropathy (four [8%] of 52 in the RVd group, six [13%] of 48 in the RVd-elotuzumab group), and motor neuropathy (one [2%] of 52 in the RVd group, four [8%] of 48 in the RVd-elotuzumab group). There were no treatment-related deaths in the RVd group and one death in the RVd-elotuzumab group for which study treatment was listed as possibly contributing by the investigator.

INTERPRETATION

In the first randomised study of high-risk multiple myeloma reported to date, the addition of elotuzumab to RVd induction and maintenance did not improve patient outcomes. However, progression-free survival in both study groups exceeded the original statistical assumptions and supports the role for continuous proteasome inhibitors and immunomodulatory drug combination maintenance therapy for this patient population.

FUNDING

National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Leukemia and Lymphoma Society.

Effect of High-Cutoff Hemodialysis vs Conventional Hemodialysis on Hemodialysis Independence Among Patients With Myeloma Cast Nephropathy: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Cast nephropathy is the main cause of acute kidney injury in multiple myeloma and persistent reduction in kidney function strongly affects prognosis. Strategies to rapidly remove nephrotoxic serum-free light chains combined with novel antimyeloma agents have not been evaluated prospectively.

Objective

To compare the hemodialysis independence rate among patients newly diagnosed with myeloma cast nephropathy treated with hemodialysis using a high-cutoff dialyzer (with very large membrane pores and high permeability to immunoglobulin light chains) or a conventional high-flux dialyzer (with small pores and lower permeability).

Design, Setting, and Participants

Randomized clinical trial involving 98 patients with biopsy-proven myeloma cast nephropathy requiring hemodialysis treated at 48 French centers between July 2011 and June 2016; the final date of follow-up was June 29, 2016.

Interventions

Intensive hemodialysis (eight 5-hour sessions over 10 days) with either a high-cutoff dialyzer (46 patients) or a conventional high-flux dialyzer (48 patients). All patients received the same chemotherapy regimen of bortezomib and dexamethasone.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Primary end point was hemodialysis independence at 3 months; secondary end points: hemodialysis independence rates at 6 and 12 months, hemodialysis- and chemotherapy-related adverse events, and death.

Results

Among 98 randomized patients, 94 (96%) (median age, 68.8 years [interquartile range, 61.2-75.3 years]; 45% women) were included in the modified intent-to-treat analysis. The hemodialysis independence rate at 3 months was 41.3% (n = 19) in the high-cutoff hemodialysis group vs 33.3% (n = 16) in the conventional hemodialysis group (between-group difference, 8.0% [95% CI, -12.0% to 27.9%], P = .42); at 6 months, the rate was 56.5% (n = 26) vs 35.4% (n = 17), respectively (between-group difference, 21.1% [95% CI, 0.9% to 41.3%], P = .04); and at 12 months, the rate was 60.9% (n = 28) vs 37.5% (n = 18) (between-group difference, 23.4% [95% CI, 3.2% to 43.5%], P = .02). The incidence of hemodialysis-related adverse events was 43% in the high-cutoff hemodialysis group vs 39% in the conventional hemodialysis group; chemotherapy-related serious adverse events, 39% vs 37%, respectively; and at 12 months, 9 patients vs 10 patients died.

Conclusions and Relevance

Among patients with myeloma cast nephropathy treated with a bortezomib-based chemotherapy regimen, the use of high-cutoff hemodialysis compared with conventional hemodialysis did not result in a statistically significant difference in hemodialysis independence at 3 months. However, the study may have been underpowered to identify an early clinically important difference.

Trial Registration

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01208818.

A Phase Ib/II Trial of the First-in-Class Anti-CXCR4 Antibody Ulocuplumab in Combination with Lenalidomide or Bortezomib Plus Dexamethasone in Relapsed Multiple Myeloma

PURPOSE

Ulocuplumab (BMS-936564) is a first-in-class fully human IgG4 monoclonal anti-CXCR4 antibody that inhibits the binding of CXCR4 to CXCL12.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This phase Ib/II study aimed to determine the safety and tolerability of ulocuplumab alone and in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Arm A), or bortezomib and dexamethasone (Arm B), in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.

RESULTS

Forty-six patients were evaluated (median age, 60 years; range, 53-67). The median number of prior therapies was 3 (range, 1-11), with 70% of subjects having received ≥3. This trial had a dose-escalation and a dose-expansion part. Using a 3+3 design on both arms of the trial, ulocuplumab's dose was escalated to a maximum of 10 mg/kg without reaching MTD. The most common treatment-related adverse events (AE) were neutropenia (13 patients, 43.3%) in Arm A and thrombocytopenia (6 patients, 37.5%) in Arm B. No deaths related to study drugs occurred. The combination of ulocuplumab with lenalidomide and dexamethasone showed a high response rate (PR or better) of 55.2% and a clinical benefit rate of 72.4%, even in patients who had been previously treated with immunomodulatory agents (IMiD).

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that blockade of the CXCR4-CXCL12 axis by ulocuplumab is safe with acceptable AEs and leads to a high response rate in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed/refractory myeloma, making CXCR4 inhibitors a promising class of antimyeloma drugs that should be further explored in clinical trials.

Real-world treatment patterns, comorbidities, and disease-related complications in patients with multiple myeloma in the United States

OBJECTIVES

To describe multiple myeloma (MM) treatment patterns and comorbidities over time in the US.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Study patients were newly diagnosed with MM (ICD-9-CM 203.0x) between 1 July 2006 and 31 March 2014 and had ≥6 months of data prior to the initial MM diagnosis in MarketScan Research Databases. Patients were followed until inpatient death or the end of data. First-line, second-line, and third-line treatment regimens were identified following diagnosis and were described over time based upon the start date of the first line of therapy (2006-2007, 2008-2014, 2013-2014). Comorbid conditions and disease-related complications were examined during the 6 months prior to the line of therapy start dates.

RESULTS

A total of 24,507 MM patients were examined (mean age: 65.2 years, 54.1% male, mean follow-up: 23 months, 16.2% transplant). Across all lines of therapy, the proportion of patients on thalidomide-based regimens decreased over time. In the first line, bortezomib-based regimens became more common from 2006-2007 to 2008-2014 (2006-2007: 17.0%, 2008-2014: 44.3%, 2013-2014: 49.4%). In the second line, lenalidomide- and bortezomib-based regimens were the most common (2013-2014: lenalidomide: 28.9%, bortezomib: 26.2%). The combination regimen of lenalidomide + bortezomib became more common in the first and second lines. In the third line, carfilzomib- and/or pomalidomide-based regimens were 37.0% in 2013-2014. Skeletal-related events, hypertension, anemia, and chronic kidney disease were the most prevalent comorbidities and disease-related complications. During the 6 months prior to each line of therapy, the prevalence of the majority of the comorbidities and complications increased as patients progressed to higher lines of therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

MM treatment patterns have been dynamic over time. Comorbid conditions and myeloma-related complications increase as patients progress and may worsen MM patients' prognoses over time. Combination regimens such as lenalidomide + bortezomib are more widely used as first- and second-line therapy. Newly approved agents (carfilzomib, pomalidomide) are the prevailing treatments in the third line and are under further investigation for earlier lines of therapy.

FDA Approval Summary: Daratumumab for Treatment of Multiple Myeloma After One Prior Therapy

Multiple myeloma is mostly an incurable disease. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted daratumumab accelerated approval in November 2015 as monotherapy for patients with multiple myeloma who have received at least three prior lines of therapy, including a proteasome inhibitor and an immunomodulatory agent, or who are double refractory to a proteasome and an immunomodulatory agent. This article describes the FDA review of the strength of evidence for this application and its clinical implications for the multiple myeloma population.

On November 21, 2016, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration granted regular approval to daratumumab in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone, or bortezomib and dexamethasone, for the treatment of patients with multiple myeloma who have received at least one prior therapy. Approval was based on two randomized, open‐label trials in which daratumumab was added to these backbone therapies. The MMY3003 trial demonstrated substantial improvement in progression‐free survival (PFS) when daratumumab was added to lenalidomide and dexamethasone compared with lenalidomide and dexamethasone alone. The estimated median PFS had not been reached in the daratumumab arm and was 18.4 months in the control arm (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.37; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.27–0.52; p < .0001), representing a 63% reduction in the risk of disease progression or death. Similar results were observed in the MMY3004 trial comparing the combination of daratumumab, bortezomib, and dexamethasone with bortezomib and dexamethasone. The estimated median PFS was not reached in the daratumumab arm and was 7.2 months in the control arm (HR = 0.39; 95% CI: 0.28–0.53; p < .0001), representing a 61% reduction in the risk of disease progression or death. The most frequently reported adverse reactions (greater than or equal to 20%) in MMY3003 were infusion reactions, diarrhea, nausea, fatigue, pyrexia, upper respiratory tract infection, muscle spasm, cough, and dyspnea. The most frequently reported adverse reactions (greater than or equal to 20%) in MMY3004 were infusion reactions, diarrhea, peripheral edema, upper respiratory tract infection, and peripheral sensory neuropathy. Neutropenia and thrombocytopenia have been added to the Warnings and Precautions of the drug label.

Implications for Practice.

Daratumumab, the first monoclonal antibody targeted against CD38, received U.S. Food and Drug Administration accelerated approval in 2015 based on data from single‐agent, single‐arm trials that provided response rate information. Results of the MMY3003 and MMY3004 trials established that daratumumab can be combined synergistically with some of the most highly active agents used to treat multiple myeloma, leading to daratumumab's regular approval in 2016. Daratumumab added to lenalidomide and dexamethasone, or bortezomib and dexamethasone, provides a substantial improvement in progression‐free survival in previously treated patients with multiple myeloma. These combinations will likely improve the survival outlook for patients with multiple myeloma.

Blockade of Deubiquitylating Enzyme USP1 Inhibits DNA Repair and Triggers Apoptosis in Multiple Myeloma Cells

Purpose: The ubiquitin proteasome pathway is a validated therapeutic target in multiple myeloma. Deubiquitylating enzyme USP1 participates in DNA damage response and cellular differentiation pathways. To date, the role of USP1 in multiple myeloma biology is not defined. In the present study, we investigated the functional significance of USP1 in multiple myeloma using genetic and biochemical approaches.Experimental Design: To investigate the role of USP1 in myeloma, we utilized USP1 inhibitor SJB3-019A (SJB) for studies in myeloma cell lines and patient multiple myeloma cells.Results: USP1-siRNA knockdown decreases multiple myeloma cell viability. USP1 inhibitor SJB selectively blocks USP1 enzymatic activity without blocking other DUBs. SJB also decreases the viability of multiple myeloma cell lines and patient tumor cells, inhibits bone marrow plasmacytoid dendritic cell-induced multiple myeloma cell growth, and overcomes bortezomib resistance. SJB triggers apoptosis in multiple myeloma cells via activation of caspase-3, caspase-8, and caspase-9. Moreover, SJB degrades USP1 and downstream inhibitor of DNA-binding proteins as well as inhibits DNA repair via blockade of Fanconi anemia pathway and homologous recombination. SJB also downregulates multiple myeloma stem cell renewal/survival-associated proteins Notch-1, Notch-2, SOX-4, and SOX-2. Moreover, SJB induced generation of more mature and differentiated plasma cells. Combination of SJB and HDACi ACY-1215, bortezomib, lenalidomide, or pomalidomide triggers synergistic cytotoxicity.Conclusions: Our preclinical studies provide the framework for clinical evaluation of USP1 inhibitors, alone or in combination, as a potential novel multiple myeloma therapy. Clin Cancer Res; 23(15); 4280-9. ©2017 AACR.

Multiple Myeloma Treatment in Real-world Clinical Practice: Results of a Prospective, Multinational, Noninterventional Study

BACKGROUND

The present prospective, multinational, noninterventional study aimed to document and describe real-world treatment regimens and disease progression in multiple myeloma (MM) patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Adult patients initiating any new MM therapy from October 2010 to October 2012 were eligible. A multistage patient/site recruitment model was applied to minimize the selection bias; enrollment was stratified by country, region, and practice type. The patient medical and disease features, treatment history, and remission status were recorded at baseline, and prospective data on treatment, efficacy, and safety were collected electronically every 3 months.

RESULTS

A total of 2358 patients were enrolled. Of these patients, 775 and 1583 did and did not undergo stem cell transplantation (SCT) at any time during treatment, respectively. Of the patients in the SCT and non-SCT groups, 49%, 21%, 14%, and 15% and 57%, 20%, 12% and 10% were enrolled at treatment line 1, 2, 3, and ≥ 4, respectively. In the SCT and non-SCT groups, 45% and 54% of the patients had received bortezomib-based therapy without thalidomide/lenalidomide, 12% and 18% had received thalidomide/lenalidomide-based therapy without bortezomib, and 30% and 4% had received bortezomib plus thalidomide/lenalidomide-based therapy as frontline treatment, respectively. The corresponding proportions of SCT and non-SCT patients in lines 2, 3, and ≥ 4 were 45% and 37%, 30% and 37%, and 12% and 3%, 33% and 27%, 35% and 32%, and 8% and 2%, and 27% and 27%, 27% and 23%, and 6% and 4%, respectively. In the SCT and non-SCT patients, the overall response rate was 86% to 97% and 64% to 85% in line 1, 74% to 78% and 59% to 68% in line 2, 55% to 83% and 48% to 60% in line 3, and 49% to 65% and 36% and 45% in line 4, respectively, for regimens that included bortezomib and/or thalidomide/lenalidomide.

CONCLUSION

The results of our prospective study have revealed great diversity in the treatment regimens used to manage MM in real-life practice. This diversity was linked to factors such as novel agent accessibility and evolving treatment recommendations. Our results provide insight into associated clinical benefits.

An implantable smart magnetic nanofiber device for endoscopic hyperthermia treatment and tumor-triggered controlled drug release

The study describes the design and synthesis of an implantable smart magnetic nanofiber device for endoscopic hyperthermia treatment and tumor-triggered controlled drug release. This device is achieved using a two-component smart nanofiber matrix from monodisperse iron oxide nanoparticles (IONPs) as well as bortezomib (BTZ), a chemotherapeutic drug. The IONP-incorporated nanofiber matrix was developed by electrospinning a biocompatible and bioresorbable polymer, poly (d,l-lactide-co-glycolide) (PLGA), and tumor-triggered anticancer drug delivery is realized by exploiting mussel-inspired surface functionalization using 2-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)ethylamine (dopamine) to conjugate the borate-containing BTZ anticancer drug through a catechol metal binding in a pH-sensitive manner. Thus, an implantable smart magnetic nanofiber device can be exploited to both apply hyperthermia with an alternating magnetic field (AMF) and to achieve cancer cell-specific drug release to enable synergistic cancer therapy. These results confirm that the BTZ-loaded mussel-inspired magnetic nanofiber matrix (BTZ-MMNF) is highly beneficial not only due to the higher therapeutic efficacy and low toxicity towards normal cells but also, as a result of the availability of magnetic nanoparticles for repeated hyperthermia application and tumor-triggered controlled drug release.

STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE

The current work report on the design and development of a smart nanoplatform responsive to a magnetic field to administer both hyperthermia and pH-dependent anticancer drug release for the synergistic anticancer treatment. The iron oxide nanoparticles (IONPs) incorporated nanofiber matrix was developed by electrospinning a biocompatible polymer, poly (d,l-lactide-co-glycolide) (PLGA), and tumor-triggered anticancer drug delivery is realized by surface functionalization using 2-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)ethylamine (dopamine) to conjugate the boratecontaining anticancer drug bortezomib through a catechol metal binding in a pH-sensitive manner. This implantable magnetic nanofiber device can be exploited to apply hyperthermia with an alternating magnetic field and to achieve cancer cell-specific drug release to enable synergistic cancer therapy, which results in an improvement in both quality of life and patient compliance.

Induction Therapy with Bortezomib Followed by Bortezomib-High Dose Melphalan and Stem Cell Transplantation for Light Chain Amyloidosis: Results of a Prospective Clinical Trial

The depth of hematologic response has been shown to correlate with survival and organ responses for patients with light chain (AL) amyloidosis. We conducted a prospective trial of 2 cycles of induction with bortezomib and dexamethasone on a twice a week schedule followed by conditioning with bortezomib and high-dose melphalan (HDM) and autologous stem cell transplantation (SCT). The objectives were hematologic responses, tolerability, and survival. Thirty-five patients were enrolled from 2010 to 2013. Of these, 30 proceeded with SCT, whereas 5 did not because of clinical deterioration during induction (n = 3) or complications after stem cell collection (n = 2). Two patients developed features of an autologous graft-versus-host disease-like syndrome post-SCT, which responded to steroids; no other unusual complications were seen. Treatment-related mortality occurred in 8.5% (3/35). Hematologic responses were achieved by 100% of the 27 assessable patients (63% complete response, 37% very good partial response [VGPR]) who completed the planned treatment. By intention-to-treat, hematologic responses occurred in 77% of patients (49% complete response, 29% VGPR). With a median follow-up of 36 months, the median overall survival and progression-free survival were not reached. In conclusion, incorporating bortezomib into induction and conditioning yielded a high rate of hematologic responses after HDM/SCT in patients with AL amyloidosis.

Impact of prior treatment on patients with relapsed multiple myeloma treated with carfilzomib and dexamethasone vs bortezomib and dexamethasone in the phase 3 ENDEAVOR study

The randomized phase 3 ENDEAVOR study (N=929) compared carfilzomib and dexamethasone (Kd) with bortezomib and dexamethasone (Vd) in relapsed multiple myeloma (RMM). We performed a subgroup analysis from ENDEAVOR in patients categorized by number of prior lines of therapy or by prior treatment. Median progression-free survival (PFS) for patients with one prior line was 22.2 months for Kd vs 10.1 months for Vd, and median PFS for patients with ⩾2 prior lines was 14.9 months for Kd vs 8.4 months for Vd. For patients with prior bortezomib exposure, the median PFS was 15.6 months for Kd vs 8.1 months for Vd, and for patients with prior lenalidomide exposure the median PFS was 12.9 months for Kd vs 7.3 months for Vd. Overall response rates (Kd vs Vd) were 81.9 vs 65.5% (one prior line), 72.0 vs 59.7% (⩾2 prior lines), 71.2 vs 60.3% (prior bortezomib) and 70.1 vs 59.3% (prior lenalidomide). The safety profile in the prior lines subgroups was qualitatively similar to that in the broader ENDEAVOR population. In RMM, outcomes are improved when receiving treatment with carfilzomib compared with bortezomib, regardless of the number of prior therapy lines or prior exposure to bortezomib or lenalidomide.