A Single Center Retrospective Analysis of Daratumumab, Pomalidomide, and Dexamethasone As a Second Line Therapy for Multiple Myeloma

Introduction: Currently, there are many 2nd-line treatment regimens for relapsed Multiple Myeloma (MM) but no standard therapy. Daratumumab, pomalidomide, and dexamethasone (DPd) is a newer 3-drug regimen approved by the FDA for treatment of multiple myeloma in the 3rd or later lines. The POLLUX trial reported a 12-month PFS of 83% in relapsed (median of one prior treatment line) MM treated with daratumumab, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone but excluded lenalidomide-refractory patients. A meta-analysis by Premkumar et al recently showed that high risk MM, del17p, t(4:14), t(14:16) cytogenetics, had minimal benefit from daratumumab-based therapies as 1st-line but benefited more in the 3rd-line or later setting. Nooka et al. previously reported increased response in daratumumab and pomalidomide naïve patients with relapsed refractory MM: median PFS of 41 months in a cohort of 12 patients. A recent Phase II trial by Siegel et al. demonstrated decreased efficacy of 2nd and 3rd-line DPd (1-year PFS of 45.2% vs 82.8% and ORR of 55.0% and 79.5%) in high risk versus standard risk patients respectively. However, it is unclear whether this pattern is consistent between patients treated with DPd in the 2nd vs 3rd-line. Herein, we report the efficacy of DPd when used in the 2nd versus 3rd-line depending on patient MSMART risk category. Methods: We reviewed pharmacy and institutional records of patients who began treatment with DPd in the 2nd (n = 33) or 3rd-line (n = 17) from April 2016 to March 2019. Patients had at least 1 year of follow up from starting DPd unless they progressed or expired before then. A line of therapy was defined as the therapy received between the events of diagnosis, progression, and/or death. We compared the ORR and 12-month PFS of 2nd-line and 3rd-line DPd. The differences in the 12-month PFS and ORR were compared using Fisher's exact test. Odds ratios (OR) were calculated from univariate/multivariate logistic regressions. Results: Thirty-three patients (23 men and 10 women), with median age of 63 (range 47 - 79) and median ECOG of 1, were treated with DPd as 2nd-line therapy. The 3rd-line DPd group was similar, consisting of 17 patients (14 men and 3 women), with median age of 62 (range 51 - 77) and median ECOG of 1. One patient was excluded from analysis in the 2nd-line group due to loss to follow up. Six patients were censored at time of transplant in the 2nd-line group: 4 (12.1%) received DPd as induction therapy for ASCT and 2 (6.1%) received DPd as maintenance therapy after ASCT. In the 3rd-line group, 2 (11.8%) received DPd as induction therapy and were censored. The most common side effects were cytopenias (35.3%), infections (15.2%), fatigue (8.8%). Most of the patients were daratumumab and pomalidomide naïve except one patient in the 3rd-line DPd group who had prior pomalidomide exposure. Twenty-two (66.7%) patients in the 2nd-line group were IMiD refractory versus 16 (94%) in the 3rd-line group. The 12-month PFS for the 2nd-line group was 40.6% compared with 64.7% in the 3rd-line group and showed a trend towards statistical significance (OR=2.82, p=0.09), and the difference reduced (OR=1.49, p=0.57) after adjusting for M-SMART risk category and t(4:14) cytogenetics. On exclusion of high risk and t(4:14), the 12-month PFS was 61.1% vs 66.7% for 2nd- and 3rd-line respectively (p>0.99). The ORR was 84.9% in the 2nd-line group and 82.2% in the 3rd-line group (OR=1.34, p=0.74). The median follow-up for survivors were 22.3 months (range 2.5-43.4). 30 patients relapsed and 16 patients died during follow-up period. M-SMART high-risk designation (HR 2.56; 95%CI 1.09-6.04) and t(4:14) cytogenetics (HR 3.12; 95%CI 1.32-7.43) were associated with lower PFS. Older age of diagnosis was associated with a lower OS (HR 1.11; 95%CI 1.03-1.20). Conclusion: The difference in length of PFS between 2nd and 3rd- line DPd is likely an artifact of small sample size and differential efficacy of DPd depending on cytogenetics. Our results show comparable efficacy of 2nd to 3rd-line DPd when used in standard risk and non-t(4:14) intermediate risk MM. In patients with high risk or t(4:14) cytogenetics, it may be preferable to use DPd in the 3rd or later line. Disclosures Goldsmith: Wugen Inc.: Consultancy. Wildes:Carevive Systems: Consultancy; Janssen: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy. Schroeder:PBD Incorporated: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Dova Pharmaceuticals: Other; Astellas: Other; Gilead Sciences Inc: Other; GSK: Other; Celgene: Research Funding; Amgen: Other: served on advisory boards and received honoraria or consultant fees, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Other; Genzyme Sanofi: Other: served on advisory boards and received honoraria or consultant fees, Research Funding; Partners Therapeutics: Other; Novo Nordisk: Other; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Fortis: Research Funding; Cellect Inc: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Other: served on advisory boards and received honoraria or consultant fees, Research Funding; Genentech Inc: Research Funding; FlatIron Inc: Other. OffLabel Disclosure: Daratumumab, pomalidomide, and dexamethasone is approved for treatment of relapsed, refractory multiple myeloma.

Download Full-text

Phase 2 Study of Carfilzomib, Thalidomide, and Low-Dose Dexamethasone As Induction/Consolidation in Newly Diagnosed, Transplant Eligible Patients with Multiple Myeloma, the Carthadex Trial

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v128.22.1141.1141 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 128 (22) ◽

pp. 1141-1141 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

Ruth Wester ◽

Bronno van der Holt ◽

Emelie Asselbergs ◽

Mark van Duin ◽

Sonja Zweegman ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Multiple Myeloma ◽

Stem Cell ◽

High Risk ◽

Induction Therapy ◽

Research Funding ◽

Fixed Dose ◽

Phase 2 ◽

Newly Diagnosed ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Standard Risk

Abstract Introduction A phase 2 dose escalation trial of Carfilzomib in combination with Thalidomide and Dexamethasone (KTd) for induction and consolidation in newly diagnosed, transplant-eligible patients with multiple myeloma (MM). We report the results of 4 dose levels. Methods In this multicenter, open-label, phase 2 trial, transplant-eligible patients aged between 18 and 65 years with previously untreated symptomatic MM were included. Patients were treated with 4 cycles of escalating dose of Carfilzomib + fixed-dose thalidomide and dexamethasone (KTd) for induction therapy. The dose of Carfilzomib was 20 mg/m2 i.v. on days 1, 2 followed by 27 mg/m2 on days 8, 9, 15, 16 of cycle 1 and on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15 and 16 of cycles 2 to 4. Thalidomide dose was 200 mg orally on days 1 through 28 and Dexamethasone 40 mg orally on days 1, 8, 15 and 22. Carfilzomib was escalated to 20/36 mg/m2 in cohort 2, to 20/45 mg/m2 in cohort 3 and to 20/56 mg/m2 in cohort 4. Induction was followed by stem cell harvest after Cyclophosphamide priming (2 to 4 mg/m2) and G-CSF. Hereafter patients received high-dose Melphalan (HDM, 200mg/m2) and autologous stem cell transplantation followed by consolidation treatment with 4 cycles of KTd in the same schedule except a lower dose of Thalidomide (50mg). The primary endpoint was response after induction therapy and overall, specifically complete response (CR) and very good partial response (VGPR). Secondary endpoints were safety, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Results All 111 patients with a median follow-up of 55, 42, 35 and 28 months, in cohorts 1 to 4, respectively were included in the analysis. Median age was 58 years. ISS stages I/II/III were 41%/34%/23%, respectively, R-ISS stages I/II/III/unknown were 23%/59%/9%/9%, respectively. Of 111 patients, 9 patients stopped treatment during/after induction, 8 patients after cyclophosphamide priming or HDM and 9 patients during consolidation because of toxicity (n=9), non-eligibility for further treatment (n=6), progression (n=5), refusal (n=2) or other reasons (n=4). Overall response rate for all cohorts was 95%. Response after induction was CR/sCR in 18% of patients, ≥ VGPR in 66% of patients, ≥ PR in 94% of patients. After HDM the CR/sCR rate increased to 31% and after consolidation to 64%. Responses between cohorts were in general comparable. See Table 1. Response based on risk status by ISS/FISH in either cohort and accumulated did not show a difference in CR/sCR rate after consolidation between standard-risk (67%) and high risk defined as t(4;14) and/or del17p and/or add1q and/or ISS3 (60%). OS at 30 months was comparable between standard risk and high risk, 91% versus 90%. PFS at 30 months for standard risk and high risk was 79% and 62%, logrank p=0.02 (HR=2.3, 95% CI=1.1-4.5). PFS at 30 months per cohort was 70% (95% CI, 55% to 81%), 70% (95% CI, 45% to 85%), 80% (95% CI, 56% to 92%) and 62% (95% CI, 32% to 82%) in cohorts 1,2, 3 and 4, respectively, and 71% (95% CI, 61% to 79%) in all patients. OS at 30 months per cohort was 90% (95% CI, 77% to 96%), 90% (95% CI, 66% to 97%), 95% (95% CI, 71% to 99%) and 88% (95% CI, 58% to 97%) respectively, and 91% (95% CI, 83% to 95%) in all patients. Gene expression profiling using the Affymetrix U133 Plus 2.0 GeneChips was performed on purified tumor cells for 49 patients. Using the prognostic classifier EMC92 a high-risk group of patients (16%) was identified versus standard risk (in terms of OS: logrank p=0.06 (HR=3.7, 95% CI=0.8-16.8), and in terms of PFS: logrank p=0.14 (HR=2.1, 95% CI=0.8-6.0)). Safety analysis for all 111 patients showed non-hematological grade 3 and 4 toxicity, mainly respiratory disorders (in 15%), GI disorders (13%) and skin lesions (10%). Toxicity between cohorts did not show a significant difference. Cardiac adverse events were limited and included heart failure (n=2 at 27 mg/m2), hypertension (n=2) and chest pain (n=1 at 45mg/m2). Conclusion Carfilzomib, thalidomide, dexamethasone (KTd) is an effective regimen, with increasing CR percentages following KTd consolidation. With escalated doses of Carfilzomib responses and toxicity were comparable to standard dose of 27 mg/m2. Disclosures Zweegman: Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Kersten:Celgene: Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria. Minnema:Celgene: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Jansen Cilag: Consultancy. Palumbo:Janssen Cilag: Honoraria; Takeda: Employment, Honoraria. Lokhorst:Genmab: Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Broijl:Celgene: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria. Sonneveld:Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Redefining the Prognostic Significance of t(11;14) Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2020-138888 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 43-43

Author(s):

Susan Bal ◽

Smith Giri ◽

Kelly N. Godby ◽

Luciano J. Costa

Keyword(s):

Multiple Myeloma ◽

High Risk ◽

Real World ◽

Research Funding ◽

Prognostic Significance ◽

Rank Test ◽

Prognostic Impact ◽

The Impact ◽

Standard Risk

Background In the era prior to introduction of novel agents, multiple myeloma (MM) harboring t(11;14) was characterized as standard risk. More recently, its unique biology, predictive ability and the prospect of targeted therapeutic agents have renewed interest in t(11;14) MM. Using a large, contemporary real-world database, we investigated the characteristics and outcomes of t(11;14) MM. Methods We used the Flatiron Health Electronic Health Record (EHR)-derived de-identified database to source patients (pts) with newly diagnosed MM from 1/2011 to 2/2020 with available Fluorescence in situ Hybridization (FISH) results documented within 90 days of diagnosis. We compared characteristics of t(11;14)+ patients [without additional high-risk FISH abnormalities: del(17p), Ch1 abnormality (Ch1a), t(4;14), t(14;16) or t(14;20)] vs. t(11;14)- patients (without additional high risk FISH) vs. del(17p) (irrespective of other abnormality) vs. Ch1a (Ch1a without additional high-risk FISH) vs. high-risk translocations [t(4;14), t(14;16) or t(14;20) without del(17p)]. We subsequently compared real-world progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) across these five subsets. Additionally, we assessed the impact of t(11;14) as additional FISH abnormality in patients with del(17p) and in patients with Ch1a. We used Kaplan Meier methods with log-rank test and Cox proportional hazard regression model for survival analysis with date of diagnosis as the index date for follow-up. Results 6039 patients in the database met the inclusion criteria. Overall, 83.6% of patients received initial therapy with immunomodulatory agent (IMiD) and/or proteasome inhibitor (PI); of these 40.3% received combination of IMiD and PI. Overall, 27.1% received autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation. Median follow up was 2.1 years (IQR 0.8-4.0). There were 637 pts in t(11;14)+ group, 3173 in t(11;14)- group, 587 in del(17p), 1205 in Ch1a and 437 with high-risk translocations. The t(11;14)+ group had a higher proportion of men, IgM and light-chain isotype, as well as a higher proportion of patients with serum creatinine ³ 2mg/dl (Table). Patients in t(11;14)+ group had worse PFS (mPFS 3.1 vs. 3.3 years, p=0.02) and worse OS (mOS 5.9 vs. 6.5 years , p=0.04) compared to t(11;14)-, but better PFS and OS than the other three high-risk groups (Figure panels A and B). Worse PFS for t(11;14)+ was demonstrable even after adjustment for sex, age, race/ethnicity, immunoglobulin isotype, stage, comorbidities, and treatment received (adjusted HR=0.87, 95% C.I. 0.77-0.98, P=0.027). We subsequently analyzed the impact of presence of t(11;14) in MM with del(17p) or Ch1a.. The presence of t(11;14) in addition to del(17p) resulted in worse OS compared to del 17p without t(11;14) (mOS 2.8y vs. 3.7y; p=0.04). Indeed, the impact of t(11;14) on del(17p) was comparable to the impact of t(4;14) (Figure, Panel C). There was no difference in survival with concomitant presence of t(11;14) with Ch1a (Figure, Panel D). Conclusion MM with t(11;14) has distinct features at presentation and even when treated with modern therapy carries worse prognosis than otherwise standard-risk MM. The concomitant presence of t(11;14) portends a negative prognostic impact to MM with del(17p) but does not appear to impact MM with Ch1a. When present alongside del17p, t(11;14) behaves like a high-risk translocation and identifies a subset of MM in greatest need of newer therapies. Figure 1 Disclosures Costa: Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Genentech: Consultancy.

Download Full-text

Persistent Benefit of VTD (Bortezomib/Thalidomide/Dexamethasone) As Pretransplant Induction Therapy for Multiple Myeloma: Long-Term Follow-up of a Randomized Phase 3 Pethema/GEM Study

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v124.21.3457.3457 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 124 (21) ◽

pp. 3457-3457 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Laura Rosiñol ◽

Albert Oriol ◽

Ana Isabel Teruel ◽

Dolores Hernandez ◽

M Jesús Blanchard ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Multiple Myeloma ◽

High Risk ◽

Induction Therapy ◽

Combination Chemotherapy ◽

Phase Iii ◽

Long Term Results ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Standard Risk

Abstract Background: The randomized PETHEMA/GEM phase III trial GEM05menos65 (www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT00461747) demonstrated that pretransplant induction therapy with VTD resulted in a significantly higher CR rate both, pretransplant and postransplant and in a significantly longer progression-free survival (PFS) when compared with thalidomide/dexamethasone (TD) and combination chemotherapy plus bortezomib (VBMCP/VBAD/B) (Rosiñol et al, Blood 2012). We report here the long-term results of the trial, five years after the last patient was included. Methods: From April 6, 2006 to August 5, 2009, 386 patients younger than 65 years with newly diagnosed symptomatic multiple myeloma (MM) were randomized to receive three different induction regimens: six 4-week cycles of TD (thalidomide 200 mg daily; dexamethasone 40 mg on days 1-4 and 9-12) vs. six 4-week cycles of VTD (TD at identical doses plus i.v. bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2 on days 1, 4, 8 and 11) vs. combination chemotherapy plus bortezomib (4 cycles of alternating VBMCP and VBAD chemotherapy followed by two cycles of i.v. bortezomib at the usual dose of 1.3 mg/m2 on days 1,4,8,11 every 3 weeks). The duration of the induction therapy was 24 weeks in all arms. All patients were planned to undergo ASCT with high-dose melphalan at 200 mg/m2 followed by maintenance therapy with thalidomide/bortezomib (TV) vs. thalidomide (T) vs. alfa-2b-interferon (alfa2-IFN) for 3 years. One-hundred and thirty patients were allocated to VTD, 127 to TD and 129 to VBMCP/VBAD/B. Seventy out of the 330 patients (21%) with cytogenetic studies had high-risk cytogenetics [t(4;14), t(14;16) and/or 17p deletion]. Patient characteristics at diagnosis and prognostic factors such as ISS, cytogenetics and maintenance arm were similarly distributed in the 3 arms. Results: After a median follow-up of 70.6 months, VTD resulted in a significantly longer PFS when compared with TD and VBMCP/VBAD/B (56.1 vs 29.2 vs 39.9 months, p=0.005) (Figure 1). The estimated overall survival (OS) at 8 years was 60% with no significant differences among the 3 arms. In the overall series, the PFS was significantly shorter in patients with high-risk cytogenetics compared with patients with standard-risk (15.7 vs. 44.3 months, p=0.003). In the TD and in the VBMCP/VBAD/B arm patients with high-risk cytogenetics had a significantly shorter PFS than patients with standard-risk (8.9 vs 32.8 months, p=0.04 in TD group; 14.1 vs. 43.3 months, p=0.05 in VBMCP/VBAD/B group). However, there was no significant difference in the VTD arm (23.6 vs 56.1 months, p=0.2). Patients with high-risk cytogenetics had a significantly shorter OS in the overall series (median 42.1 months vs not reached, p=0.00001) and this was observed in the three treatment arms: VTD median 37.1 months vs not reached (p=0.001), TD median 54.2 months vs not reached (p=0.06), VBMCP/VBAD/B median 30.2 months vs not reached (p=0.007). The achievement of a deeper response at the end of induction was associated with a longer PFS and OS. Thus, patients achieving CR at the end of induction had a significantly longer PFS than patients achieving a lower degree of response (median 62 vs. 28 months, p=0.00001), irrespective of the treatment arm. Furthermore, on an intention to treat basis, patients who were in postrasplant CR had a significantly longer PFS (p<0.00001) and OS (p<0.00001) than those who did not reach CR after ASCT (p<0.001). In the overall series the OS after progression was 30.5 months and was not significantly different among the 3 arms (VTD 25.4 months, TD 50 months, VBMCP/VBAD/B 30.2 months, p=0.4). Patients with high-risk cytogenetics had a significantly shorter OS after relapse in the overall series (13.3 months vs. 37.5 months, p=0.001), in the VTD arm (13.3 vs 33.9, p=0.01) and in the VBMCP/VBAD/B arm (8.5 vs 38 months, p=0.01). Conclusions: Our long-term results confirm that induction with VTD results in a significantly longer PFS when compared with TD and VBMCP/VBAD/B. Patients with high-risk cytogenetics had a worse outcome even with the use of novel drugs. Finally, the PFS of 56 months achieved with VTD is the longest ever reported in the first line treatment of younger patients with MM elegible for ASCT and support the use of VTD as the standard of care for pretransplant induction therapy. Figure 1: PFS according to the induction arm Figure 1:. PFS according to the induction arm Disclosures Rosiñol: Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Oriol:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy. De La Rubia:Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Gutierrez:Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Martinez-Lopez:Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Alegre:Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Lahuerta:Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. San Miguel:Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria.

Download Full-text

Cytogenetic Characteristics and Outcomes of Patients Receiving CTL019 CAR T Cell Therapy

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-130060 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 1464-1464 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Allison Barz Leahy ◽

Kaitlin J. Stanley ◽

Regina M. Myers ◽

Amanda M. DiNofia ◽

Lisa Wray ◽

...

Keyword(s):

T Cell ◽

High Risk ◽

Research Funding ◽

Risk Category ◽

Intermediate Risk ◽

Car T Cell ◽

Advisory Boards ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Car T ◽

Scientific Advisory

Background: CTL019 is a therapy derived from autologous T cells expressing a CD19-specific chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) that was approved by the FDA in August 2017 (tisagenlecleucel). Complete and durable remissions have been seen in the setting of pediatric and young adult patients with relapsed and refractory B cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) (Maude NEJM 2018). Initial case reports suggested that there may be differential outcomes mediated by cytogenetic characteristics of the leukemia at CAR T cell infusion. Here, we report results from a single institution experience of 112 patients. Methods: Patients with relapsed/refractory ALL were identified as having received CTL019 either in the context of a clinical trial (NCT02906371) or commercial product (tisagenlecleucel) at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia from October 2016 to April 2019. Patients who received prior CAR T therapy were excluded. Demographic, cytogenetic, and outcome data were manually abstracted from the medical record or clinical trial datasets. High risk lesions were defined as MLL(KMT2A) rearrangements, Philadelphia-chromosome (Ph+), Ph-like, hypodiploidy, and TCF3/HLF fusion. Favorable cytogenetics were defined as the presence of hyperdiploidy or ETV6/RUNX1fusion and intermediate were defined as iAMP21, IKZF1deletion, or TCF3/PBX1. Patients were classified according to their highest risk cytogenetic characteristic and stratified by cytogenetic risk category present at CAR T cell infusion. Relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) was described for cohorts with more than 10 patients. Results: One hundred and twelve patients were included in the analysis, with a median age of 11 years (range 1-29) at infusion, of which 32% had had a previous allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (alloHSCT). Disease burden at the time of CTL019 infusion was heterogenous, with 61% having detectable disease in the bone marrow and 21% having more than 25% blasts by flow cytometry. Thirty-six patients (32%) had leukemias with high-risk genetic lesions at infusion, including 12 with MLL rearrangements and 18 with Ph+ or Ph-like lesions (Table 2). Thirty-one patients (28%) had hyperdiploidy or ETV6/RUNX1; 3 additional were in conjunction with high-risk cytogenetics (t(17;19) and 2 with Ph+), and 3 in the setting of intermediate-risk cytogenetics (iAmp21, TCF3/PBX1, IKZF1deletion). Figure 1 demonstrates RFS for those patients in remission at day 28 following infusion, stratified by cytogenetic risk category. Complete remission (CR) rate in the high-risk cytogenetics group was 94%. RFS at 12 months was 69% (0.50-0.82), 69% (0.40-0.86), and 67% (0.48-0.80) for non-informative, favorable, and high-risk cytogenetic groups, respectively. Figure 2 shows OS of patients infused with CTL019, again stratified by cytogenetic categories of interest, with a maximum follow-up time of 30 months. OS at 12 months was 84% (0.68-0.93) and 76% (0.56-0.88) for the non-informative and high-risk cytogenetic groups, respectively. There were no deaths in that time period for the favorable risk category. There was no statistically significant difference in RFS or OS for patients with high-risk cytogenetics. The intermediate-risk cytogenetics group (n<10) was excluded from these analyses. Conclusion: Durable remissions can be achieved with CTL019 across several high-risk cytogenetic subtypes of B-ALL. Stratifying outcomes by cytogenetic risk category in this unadjusted analysis does not show a statistically significant difference in either RFS nor OS. Further investigation is needed to parse out the contribution of individual cytogenetic lesions as well as the effects of other relapse and survival risk factors at play. Figure Disclosures Rheingold: Novartis: Consultancy; Pfizer: Research Funding. Callahan:Novartis: Consultancy. Hunger:Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Equity Ownership; Jazz: Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy. Grupp:Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy; GSK: Consultancy; Cure Genetics: Consultancy; Humanigen: Consultancy; CBMG: Consultancy; Novartis: Research Funding; Kite: Research Funding; Servier: Research Funding; Jazz: Other: study steering committees or scientific advisory boards; Adaptimmune: Other: study steering committees or scientific advisory boards. Maude:Kite: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy.

Download Full-text

Real-World Clinical Outcomes By Cytogenetic Risk Category in Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma: Evidence from a Cohort Review in France

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v128.22.4784.4784 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 128 (22) ◽

pp. 4784-4784

Author(s):

Huamao Mark Lin ◽

Keith L Davis ◽

James A. Kaye ◽

Katarina Luptakova ◽

Lu Gao ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Multiple Myeloma ◽

High Risk ◽

Partial Response ◽

Research Funding ◽

Complete Response ◽

Line Treatment ◽

Second Line ◽

High Risk Patients ◽

Risk Patients ◽

Standard Risk

Abstract INTRODUCTION: Multiple Myeloma (MM) is an incurable hematologic cancer characterized by multiple recurrences. With each recurrence, patients have a lower probability of response and duration of response is shorter. Therefore, there is an unmet need to improve outcomes in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). There is a shortage of data describing clinical features and outcomes in these patients in real-world practice, particularly with regard to differences in outcomes by baseline cytogenetic risk. To help address this information gap, this study analyzed data from a cohort of RRMM patients in France. METHODS: A retrospective observational review of medical records was conducted in a cohort of 200 patients with RRMM in France. Patients were selected (based on randomly generated first letter of last name) from the caseloads of 40 hematology/oncology providers across France practicing mainly in academic hospitals. Inclusion criteria were: ≥18 years of age at initial MM diagnosis; first determined to have RRMM between January 1, 2009 and December 31, 2011, where RRMM was defined by (1) first-line (induction) regimen of chemotherapy with or without stem cell transplant (SCT) and with or without other post-induction/SCT therapy and (2) disease progression while on or at any time after completion of first-line therapy. Patients could be alive or deceased at the time of record abstraction. Baseline cytogenetic risk was defined as follows: high-risk: cytogenetic abnormalities del(17p), t(4:14), or t(14;16); unknown/unassessed risk: patients for whom cytogenetics were unavailable; or standard-risk: all patients with known cytogenetics not classified as high-risk. Patients were assessed for treatment response, overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) from date of first relapse (study index date). All analyses were descriptive. Survival was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier (K-M) method. RESULTS: Demographic and clinical characteristics of the study sample are presented in Table 1. A total of 55 high-risk and 113 standard-risk patients were identified; risk category was unknown or unassessed for 32 patients. Among all patients, mean (SD) age at RRMM diagnosis was 66.3 (8.9) years and 62% of the sample was male. Lenalidomide + dexamethasone was the most common second-line systemic regimen initiated (50% of high-risk patients, 59.5% of standard-risk patients receiving second-line treatment). A total of 114 patients (57%) initiated a third-line treatment. Despite clinical response in second-line treatment occurring sooner in high-risk patients (median: 106 days) than in standard-risk patients (median: 237 days), physician-assessed overall response rate (ORR) was lower in high-risk patients (63%: 17% complete response, 46% partial response) than standard-risk patients (91%: 26% complete response, 65% partial response) across all second-line treatments combined (Table 2).. For third-line treatment, ORR was lower in high-risk patients (54%: 12% complete response, 42% partial response) than standard-risk patients (74%: 9% complete response, 65% partial response). Among patients who initiated a second-line treatment (n = 192), 47.4% were deceased at the time of data collection. From second-line initiation, K-M estimates of 1- to 5-year OS and PFS were substantially lower for high-risk patients versus standard-risk. Specifically, the proportions of patients still alive 1, 3, and 5 years after second-line treatment initiation were 73%, 51%, and 36%, respectively, for high-risk patients and 94%, 73%, and 61% for standard-risk patients. The proportions of patients without disease progression at 1, 3, and 5 years after second-line initiation were 48%, 13.5%, and 5% for high-risk patients and 82%, 42%, and 14% for standard-risk patients. CONCLUSIONS: The importance of cytogenetic risk classification as a prognostic factor in RRMM was apparent in this retrospective review, in which patients with high-risk cytogenetics had less favorable outcomes in terms of ORR, OS, and PFS than standard-risk patients. Decreased response rate and lower PFS and OS was documented among patients with high-risk cytogenetics, which is in contrast to shorter time needed to achieve best clinical response in this subgroup. Results from this real-world study provide further confirmation of the unmet medical need presented by RRMM, especially for patients with high-risk cytogenetics. Disclosures Lin: Takeda: Employment. Davis:Takeda: Research Funding. Kaye:Takeda: Research Funding. Luptakova:Takeda Oncology: Employment. Gao:Takeda: Employment. Nagar:Takeda: Research Funding. Seal:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited: Employment, Equity Ownership.

Download Full-text

Impact of proteasome inhibitor vs. IMiD maintenance therapy on outcomes of patients with high-risk multiple myeloma (HRMM).

Journal of Clinical Oncology ◽

10.1200/jco.2020.38.15_suppl.e20557 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽

pp. e20557-e20557

Author(s):

Eric Leon Tam ◽

David Joseph Iberri ◽

Michaela Liedtke ◽

Lori S. Muffly ◽

Parveen Shiraz ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Multiple Myeloma ◽

High Risk ◽

Maintenance Therapy ◽

Proteasome Inhibitor ◽

Post Transplant ◽

Risk Patients ◽

To Receive ◽

Standard Risk

e20557 Background: The ideal choice of maintenance therapy in patients with HRMM high-risk multiple myeloma remains unknown. We analyzed the outcomes of patients with HRMM undergoing transplant receiving different maintenance approaches. Methods: Patients with MM undergoing their first ASCT from 2012-19 within 1 year of diagnosis were identified from the prospectively maintained database of patients undergoing ASCT. HRMM was defined as having t(4;14), t(14;16), t(14;20), del17p13, or gain 1q detected on fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH). Results: Of the 412 patients undergoing ASCT within 1 year of diagnosis, 333 had FISH data available and of these, 37% (124/333) patients had high-risk cytogenetics. Distribution of HR cytogenetics was as follows: deletion 17p: 37% (n = 46), t(4;14): 27% (n = 34), t(14;16) or t(14;20): 12% (n = 26), gain1q: 31% (n = 41). 9% (n = 12) had more than one HR abnormality. In patients with HRMM, median age at transplant was 59 years (range: 39 to 73), and 61% (n = 103) were males. 64% (n = 107) of high-risk patients received post-transplant maintenance therapy. Maintenance therapy in this group included a proteasome inhibitor (PI) in 34% (n = 29), immunomodulatory drug (IMiD) in 59% (n = 51), or both in 7% (n = 6). There was no difference in baseline characteristics of HRMM patients receiving PI vs. IMiD maintenance, except that patients with del17p were more likely to receive PI maintenance therapy (55% vs 28%, p = 0.01). (Table) After a median follow-up of 3.1 years from diagnosis, patients with HRMM had inferior PFS compared to patients with standard risk disease, with median PFS of 3 vs. 4.8 years, p < 0.001. Amongst the 86 HRMM patients receiving maintenance therapy, median PFS in patients receiving PI vs. IMiD vs. both PI + IMiD maintenance was 3 vs. 3.2 vs. 2.2 years, respectively, log-rank p = 0.7. In the sub-group of patients with 17p deletion, median PFS in the three groups was 3 vs. 2.9 vs. 2.2 years, respectively, log-rank p = 0.7. Conclusions: Patients with HRMM have inferior PFS compared to patients with standard risk disease. We observed similar outcomes in HRMM patients post-transplant regardless of the choice of maintenance therapy. [Table: see text]

Download Full-text

Prognostic Molecular Stratification in Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma - Results of the Pomalidomide Mukseven (NCT02406222) Biomarker Trial

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-123640 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 4327-4327

Author(s):

James Croft ◽

Andrew Hall ◽

Amy L Sherborne ◽

Katrina Walker ◽

Sidra Ellis ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Multiple Myeloma ◽

Flow Cytometry ◽

T Cell ◽

High Risk ◽

Real World ◽

Research Funding ◽

Unmet Need ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Equity Ownership

Background Treatment of relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) remains challenging as durable remissions are achieved in patient sub-groups only. Identifying patients that are likely to benefit prior to or early after starting relapse treatments remains an unmet need. MUKseven is a trial specifically designed to investigate and validate biomarkers for treatment optimization in a 'real-world' RRMM population. Design In the randomized multi-center phase 2 MUKseven trial, RRMM patients (≥2 prior lines of therapy, exposed to proteasome inhibitor and lenalidomide) were randomized 1:1 to cyclophosphamide (500 mg po d1, 8, 15), pomalidomide (4 mg days 1-21) and dexamethasone (40 mg; if ≥75 years 20 mg; d1, 8, 15, 21) (CPomD) or PomD and treated until progression. All patients were asked to undergo bone marrow (BM) and peripheral blood (PB) bio-sampling at baseline, cycle 1 day 14 (C1D14, on-treatment) and relapse. For biomarker discovery and validation, IGH translocations were profiled by qRT-PCR, copy number aberrations by digital MLPA (probemix D006; MRC Holland), GEP by U133plus2.0 array (Affymetrix), PD protein markers by IHC and PB T-cell subsets by flow cytometry for all patients with sufficient material. Primary endpoint was PFS, secondary endpoints included response, OS, safety/toxicity and biomarker validation. Original planned sample size was 250 patients but due to a change in UK standard of care during recruitment with pomalidomide becoming available, a decision was made to stop recruitment early. Results In total, 102 RRMM patients were randomized 1:1 between March 2016 and February 2018. Trial entry criteria were designed to include a real-world RRMM population, permitting transfusions and growth factor support. Median age at randomization was 69 years (range 42-88), 28% of patients had received ≥5 prior lines of therapy (median: 3). Median follow-up for this analysis was 13.4 months (95% CI: 12.0-17.5). 16 patients remained on trial at time of analysis (median number of cycles: 19.5; range 8-28). More patients achieved ≥PR with CPomD compared to PomD: 70.6% (95% CI: 56.2-82.5%) vs. 47.1% (CI: 32.9-61.5%) (P=0.006). Median PFS was 6.9 months (CI: 5.7-10.4) for CPomD vs. 4.6 months (CI: 3.5-7.4) for PomD, which was not significantly different as per pre-defined criteria. Follow-up for OS is ongoing and will be presented at the conference. High-risk genetic aberrations were found at following frequencies: t(4;14): 6%, t(14;16)/t(14;20): 2%, gain(1q): 45%, del(17p): 13%. Non-high risk lesions were present as follows: t(11;14): 22%, hyperdiploidy: 44%. Complete information on all high-risk genetic markers was available for 71/102 patients, of whom 12.7% had double-hit high-risk (≥2 adverse lesions), 46.5% single-hit high-risk (1 adverse lesion) and 40.8% no risk markers, as per our recent meta-analysis in NDMM (Shah V, et al., Leukemia 2018). Median PFS was significantly shorter for double-hit: 3.4 months (CI: 1.0-4.9) vs. single-hit: 5.8 months (CI: 3.7-9.0) or no hit: 14.1 months (CI: 6.9-17.3) (P=0.005) (Figure 1A). GEP was available for 48 patients and the EMC92 high-risk signature, present in 19% of tumors, was associated with significantly shorter PFS: 3.4 months (CI: 2.0-5.7) vs. 7.4 (CI: 3.9-15.1) for EMC92 standard risk (P=0.037). Pharmacodynamic (PD) profiling of cereblon and CRL4CRBN ubiquitination targets (including Aiolos, ZFP91) in BM clots collected at baseline and C1D14 is currently ongoing. Preliminary results for the first 10 patients demonstrate differential change of nuclear Aiolos (Figure 1C), with a major decrease in Aiolos H-scores in 7/10 patients from baseline to C1D14 and reconstitution at relapse. T-cell PB sub-sets were profiled at baseline and C1D14 by flow cytometry. Specific sub-sets increased with therapy from baseline to C1D14, e.g. activated (HLA-DR+) CD4+ T-cells, as reported at last ASH. CD4+ T-cell % at baseline was associated with shorter PFS in these analyses in a multi-variable Cox regression model (P=0.005). PD and T-cell biomarker results will be updated and integrated with molecular tumor characteristics and outcome. Discussion Our results demonstrate that molecular markers validated for NDMM predict treatment outcomes in RRMM, opening the potential for stratified delivery of novel treatment approaches for patients with a particularly high unmet need. Additional immunologic and PD biomarkers are currently being explored. Disclosures Croft: Celgene: Other: Travel expenses. Hall:Celgene, Amgen, Janssen, Karyopharm: Other: Research funding to Institution. Walker:Janssen, Celgene: Other: Research funding to Institution. Pawlyn:Amgen, Janssen, Celgene, Takeda: Other: Travel expenses; Amgen, Celgene, Janssen, Oncopeptides: Honoraria; Amgen, Celgene, Takeda: Consultancy. Flanagan:Amgen, Celgene, Janssen, Karyopharm: Other: Research funding to Institution. Garg:Janssen, Takeda, Novartis: Other: Travel expenses; Novartis, Janssen: Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria. Couto:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties. Wang:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Boyd:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Pierceall:Celgene: Employment. Thakurta:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Cook:Celgene, Janssen-Cilag, Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen, Takeda, Sanofi, Karyopharm, Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squib, GlycoMimetics, Seattle Genetics, Sanofi: Honoraria. Brown:Amgen, Celgene, Janssen, Karyopharm: Other: Research funding to Institution. Kaiser:Takeda, Janssen, Celgene, Amgen: Honoraria, Other: Travel Expenses; Celgene, Janssen: Research Funding; Abbvie, Celgene, Takeda, Janssen, Amgen, Abbvie, Karyopharm: Consultancy.

Download Full-text

EARLY Results of TOTAL Therapy 7 (TT7): High Response Rates of NEWLY Diagnosed High Risk Myeloma to Daratumumab

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-131887 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 4569-4569 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Frits van Rhee ◽

Sharmilan Thanendrarajan ◽

Carolina D. Schinke ◽

Jeffery R. Sawyer ◽

Adam Rosenthal ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Multiple Myeloma ◽

High Risk ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Response Rates ◽

Newly Diagnosed ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Early Results ◽

Research Grant

Background. The TT approach has significantly improved the outcome of multiple myeloma (MM) by combining new drugs with a regimen that comprises induction, tandem autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT), consolidation and maintenance. However, a group of 15% of patients with high risk multiple myeloma (HRMM) have derived little benefit despite similar response rates to induction chemotherapy and ASCT when compared to low risk MM. The poor outcome of HRMM is explained by early relapse post ASCT resulting in a short progression free survival (PFS) with only 15-20% of patients surviving long-term. Daratumumab (Dara) is a human IgG1k anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody that has shown favorable results in early single-arm studies and more recently in phase III studies for relapsed/refractory and newly diagnosed MM. In TT7, we introduced Dara during all phases of therapy, including immune consolidation early post ASCT, to improve responses rate and PFS in HRMM. Methods. Patients had newly diagnosed HRMM as defined by high risk cytogenetic abnormalities, presence of extramedullary disease, >3 focal lesions on CT-PET, elevated LDH due to MM, or ISS II/III with cytogenetic abnormality. Dara (16mg/kgx1) was added to induction with KTD-PACE (carfilzomib, thalidomide, dexamethasone; and four-day continuous infusions of cisplatin, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, etoposide). Conditioning for tandem autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) was with fractionated melphalan (50mg/m2x4) (fMEL) based on prior observations that patients with adverse cytogenetics fare better with fMEL rather than single high dose MEL200mg/m2.In the inter tandem ASCT period immunological consolidation with Dara (16mg/kg) alone for 2 doses was followed by Dara (16mg/kg) on day 1 combined with K (36mg/m2) and D (20mg) weekly for 2 cycles. DaraKD was administered to avoid treatment free periods allowing for myeloma regrowth. The 2nd ASCT was followed by further immunological consolidation with Dara (16mg/k) for 2 doses, and maintenance therapy for 3 yrs with 3-months block of alternating Dara-KD (dara 16mg/kg day 1; K 36mg/m2 and dex 20mg weekly) and Dara-lenalidomide (R)D (dara 16mg/kg day 1; R 15mg day 1-21 q28 and D 20mg weekly). Results. TT7 enrolled 43 patients thus far. The median follow-up was 11 months (range: 1-22). The median age was 61 yrs (range 44-73). Sixteen patients were ≥65 yrs (37.2%). A mean of 29.4x106 CD34+ cells/kg (range: 4.6-86.4) were collected. 36 patients completed ASCT #1 (83.7%) and 18 (41.9%) ASCT #2, whilst 14 patients have proceeded to the maintenance phase. R-ISS II/III or metaphase cytogenetic abnormalities were present in 85.1 and 58.1% of patients, respectively. Elevated LDH or >3FL on CT-PET were noted in 30 and 41.8%. The 1-yr cumulative incidence estimates for reaching VGPR and PR were 87 and 83%, respectively. A CR or sCR was achieved in 68 and 46%. The 1-yr estimates of PFS and OS were 91.6 and 87.2%. 40 subjects are alive, whilst 5 progressed on study therapy and 3 subsequently died. 38 patients are progression free at the time of reporting. Dara was well-tolerated and no subjects discontinued therapy due to dara-related side effects. The CR and sCR rates compared favorably to the predecessor HRMM TT5 protocol where CR and sCR rates were 59 and 27%. Conclusion. The early results of TT7 point to increased response rates of HRMM to a dara-based TT regimen with especially higher rates of CR and sCR. Longer follow-up is required to determine if these early results translate into superior PFS and OS. Figure Disclosures van Rhee: Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy; Kite Pharma: Consultancy; Adicet Bio: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Sanofi Genzyme: Consultancy; Castleman Disease Collaborative Network: Consultancy; EUSA: Consultancy. Walker:Celgene: Research Funding. Morgan:Amgen, Roche, Abbvie, Takeda, Celgene, Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Other: research grant, Research Funding. Davies:Amgen, Celgene, Janssen, Oncopeptides, Roche, Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Consultant/Advisor; Janssen, Celgene: Other: Research Grant, Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Bortezomib, Lenalidomide and Dexamethasone (VRD) Followed By Autologous Stem Cell Transplant for Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma; The Mayo Clinic Experience

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2018-99-111147 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 2147-2147

Author(s):

M Hasib Sidiqi ◽

Mohammed A Aljama ◽

Angela Dispenzieri ◽

Eli Muchtar ◽

Francis K. Buadi ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Multiple Myeloma ◽

Overall Survival ◽

High Risk ◽

Maintenance Therapy ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Mayo Clinic ◽

Research Funding ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Post Transplant ◽

Standard Risk

Abstract We retrospectively reviewed all patients receiving bortezomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone induction followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) within 12 months of diagnosis for multiple myeloma at the Mayo Clinic. 243 patients treated between January 2010 and April of 2017 were included in the study. Median age was 61 (interquartile range, 55-67) with 62% of patients being male. High risk cytogenetic abnormalities (HRA) were present in 34% of patients. 166 (68%) patients received some form of maintenance/other therapy post transplant (no maintenance (NM, n=77), lenalidomide maintenance (LM, n=108), bortezomib maintenance (BM, n=39) and other therapy (OT, n=19)). Overall response rate was 99% with complete response (CR) rate of 42% and 62% at day 100 and time of best response post transplant respectively. The four cohorts categorized by post transplant therapy were well matched for age, gender and ISS stage. HRA were more common amongst patients receiving bortezomib maintenance or other therapy post transplant (NM 18% vs LM 22% vs BM 68% vs OT 79%, p<0.0001). Two year and five year overall survival rates were 90% and 67% respectively with an estimated median overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS) of 96 months and 28 months respectively for the whole cohort. OS was not significantly different when stratified by post-transplant therapy (Median OS 96 months for NM vs not reached for LM vs 62 months for BM vs not reached for OT, p=0.61), however post-transplant therapy was predictive of PFS (median PFS 23 months for NM vs 34 months for LM vs 28 months for BM vs 76 months for OT, p=0.01). High risk cytogenetics was associated with a worse OS but not PFS when compared to patients with standard risk (median OS: not reached for standard risk vs 60 months for HRA, p=0.0006; median PFS: 27 months for standard risk vs 22 months for HRA, p=0.70). In patients that did not receive maintenance therapy presence of HRA was a strong predictor of OS and PFS (median OS: not reached for standard risk vs 36 months for HRA, p<0.0001; median PFS: 24 months for standard risk vs 7 months for HRA, p<0.0001). Patients receiving maintenance therapy appeared to have a similar PFS and OS irrespective of cytogenetics (median OS: not reached for standard risk vs 62 months for HRA, p=0.14; median PFS: 35 months for standard risk vs 34 months for HRA, p=0.79).On multivariable analysis ISS stage III and achieving CR/stringent CR predicted PFS whilst the only independent predictors of OS were presence of HRA and achieving CR/stringent CR. The combination of bortezomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone followed by ASCT is a highly effective regimen producing deep and durable responses in many patients. Maintenance therapy in this cohort may overcome the poor prognostic impact of high risk cytogenetic abnormalities. Table Table. Disclosures Dispenzieri: Celgene, Takeda, Prothena, Jannsen, Pfizer, Alnylam, GSK: Research Funding. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding. Dingli:Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.. Kapoor:Celgene: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Kumar:KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Gertz:Abbvie: Consultancy; Apellis: Consultancy; annexon: Consultancy; Medscape: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; Prothena: Honoraria; spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy; janssen: Consultancy; Ionis: Honoraria; Teva: Consultancy; Alnylam: Honoraria; Research to Practice: Consultancy; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy.

Download Full-text

A Salvage Autologous Stem Cell Transplant (ASCT2) Induces Superior Overall Survival Following Bortezomib-Containing Re-Induction Therapy for Relapsed Multiple Myeloma (MM): Results from the Myeloma X (Intensive) Trial

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v126.23.394.394 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 126 (23) ◽

pp. 394-394 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Gordon Cook ◽

Cathy Williams ◽

David A Cairns ◽

Anna Hockaday ◽

Jamie Cavenagh ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Overall Survival ◽

Induction Therapy ◽

Research Funding ◽

Phase Iii ◽

Second Line ◽

Educational Support ◽

End Point ◽

Line Therapy ◽

Meeting Support

Abstract Introduction: Autologous transplantation (ASCT) in myeloma (MM) is standard consolidative therapy in first line therapy in eligible patients. We have shown definitely that a salvage ASCT in relapse setting can induce superior durability of responses (time-to-progression; TTP) over non-transplant consolidation with oral cyclophosphamide after a proteasome inhibitor-based re-induction schedule (ISRCTN601231201). The secondary end point of this multi-centre phase III randomised controlled trial was to evaluate the impact of salvage ASCT on the overall survival (OS_ of patients relapsing after a prior ASCT and delineate patient subgroups that may benefit the most. Patients and Methods: Eligible patients with MM relapsing after a prior ASCT were enrolled. All patients were re-induced with Bortezomib, Doxorubicin and Dexamethasone (PAD) therapy delivered in 2-4 21-day cycles before 1:1 randomization to either a second ASCT (melphalan 200mg/m2 iv; ASCT2 supported by either stored or remobilized stem cells) or low dose consolidation with weekly cyclophosphamide 400mg/m2 PO for 12 weeks (Non-Transplant Consolidation; NTC). Response was assessed (by IMWG criteria) after re-induction and 100 days post-randomization with TTP being determined as the primary end-point. Patients were stratified by β2microglobulin (β2M) at trial entry, ASCT1 TTP and response to re-induction, analyzed according to cytogenetic abnormalities by iFISH (unfavorable: t(4;14), t(14;16) and del17p) with OS was a key secondary endpoint. Results: 297 patients were entered into the study and 174 randomized from April 2008 to November 2012: ASCT2 n=89, NTC n=85. Median age was 61 (range 38-75) with 73.6% of patients relapsing more than 24 months from first ASCT. ORR to re-induction therapy was 79.4% with a 16.0% sCR/CR rate. Post-randomization, sCR/CR was significantly higher after ASCT2 (39.3% [95% CI 29.1,50.3] vs 22.4% [95% CI 14.0,32.7]; p=0á012). The median follow-up is 52 months (IQR range 41, 62) and the up-dated TTP demonstrates continued advantage in ASCT2 cohort compared to NTC (19 months [95% CI 16,26] vs 11 months [95% CI 9,12]; Log Rank p<0.0001). 75 patients (43.1%) have died since randomization, primarily from disease progression (59.4%). The median survival was 67 months (95% CI 55, °) in the ASCT2 cohort compared with 52 months (95% CI 42,60) in the NTC cohort (Log Rank p=0.022). Cox proportional hazards regression (adjusted for stratification factors including whether PBSC was remobilized) showed a reduced hazard of death in the ASCT2 group compared to NTC (HR=0.56, 95%CI [0.35, 0.90], p=0.0169). CR/sCR to re-induction therapy (HR 0.14, p=0.032), ASCT1 TTP > 24m (HR0.60, p=0.089), β2M level <3.5mg/L (HR 0.35, p=0.039) and the absence of high risk iFISH (HR 0.36, p=0.007) were associated with improved OS in favour of ASCT2 (Fig. 1A). To-date, following progression on protocol, 88.7% in the ASCT2 and 84% in the NTC cohorts have received 3rd line therapy, primarily consisting of a lenalidomide based combination (88.9% in the ASCT2 and 81% in the NTC cohorts). 20 patients (26.7%) in the NTC cohort underwent salvage ASCT in 3rd/4th line (NTC/ASCT2), with 1 patient in each cohorts proceeding to allogeneic SCT. The PFS2 was significantly better in the ASCT2 compared with both NTC/ASCT2 and NTC cohorts (ASCT2: 67m, [95%CI 52,°] vs NTC/ASCT2: 31m, [95%CI 23,42] vs NTC 39m, [95%CI 32,47]; p<0.0001). Consequently, the 4-year OS demonstrated a superiority of a salvage ASCT in second line over 3rd line or not (ASCT2: 69% [95%CI 58,79] vs NTC/ASCT2: 61% [95%CI 52,69] vs NTC 50% [95%CI 36,64]) where the OS in NTC groups split by 3rd line ASCT were not significantly different (p = 0.139, Fig. 1b). Conclusion: This long-term follow-up analysis demonstrates a clear advantage in terms of OS when salvage ASCT consolidates bortezomib-based re-induction therapy in patients with MM at first relapse. The delay of salvage ASCT to third line, though being suggestive of benefit over no salvage ASCT, does not confer the same degree of OS advantage as shown with a salvage transplant in second line. This data is key for patient-centered clinical decision-making. 1. G Cook, et al.. The Lancet Oncology, Vol. 15, No. 8, p874-885 Figure 1. Forest plots showing (a) heterogeneity of effect of randomised treatment on OS and (b) effect on OS of randomised treatment followed by ASCT at second relapse (NTC/ASCT2) Figure 1. Forest plots showing (a) heterogeneity of effect of randomised treatment on OS and (b) effect on OS of randomised treatment followed by ASCT at second relapse (NTC/ASCT2) Figure 1B. Figure 1B. Disclosures Cook: Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Takeda Oncology: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Williams:Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Cavenagh:Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Snowden:MSD: Consultancy, Other: Educational support, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Other: Educational support, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Other: Educational support, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy. Parrish:Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Yong:Takeda: Honoraria; Autolous: Consultancy; Janssen: Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy; BMS: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria. Cavet:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Bird:Janssen: Other: Educational support; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy. Heartin:Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy. O'Connor:Celgene: Research Funding. Ashcroft:Janssen: Consultancy, Other: Educational support. Brown:Janssen: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding. Morris:Janssen: Other: Meeting support; Celgene: Other: Meeting support.

Download Full-text