New Targets and New Agents in High-Risk Multiple Myeloma

2016 ◽  
pp. e431-e441 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ajay K. Nooka ◽  
Sagar Lonial
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Personalized Medicine ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Proteasome Inhibitors ◽  
New Agents ◽  
Immunomodulatory Agents ◽  
Single Drug ◽  
Sequencing Studies ◽  
Minimal Residual

Advances in the treatment of multiple myeloma have resulted in dramatic improvements in outcomes for patients. The newly emerging profiling of mutations emerging as a consequence of large prospective sequencing studies such as the CoMMpass Study or other efforts from European investigators are not further helping to define the place and role for personalized medicine in myeloma. While mutations such as NRAS, KRAS, and BRAF do occur in myeloma, it is not clear that targeting them as a single drug strategy will result in meaningful responses or durations of response. Personalized medicine in multiple myeloma at this time likely entails the use of risk-based approaches for maintenance therapy, the use of current biology-based treatments such as proteasome inhibitors, and immunomodulatory agents, with an eye towards the use of mutation-specific treatments in the setting of minimal residual disease or in concert with biology-based treatments overall.

Depth of response and minimal residual disease status in ultra high-risk multiple myeloma and plasma cell leukemia treated with daratumumab, bortezomib, lenalidomide, cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone (Dara-CVRd): Results of the UK optimum/MUKnine trial.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 8001-8001
Author(s):  
Martin F. Kaiser ◽  
Andrew Hall ◽  
Katrina Walker ◽  
Ruth De Tute ◽  
Sadie Roberts ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Minimal Residual Disease ◽  
Plasma Cell ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Cell Leukemia ◽  
Ultra High Risk ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Minimal Residual

8001 Background: Patients with ultra high-risk (UHiR) newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) and patients with plasma cell leukemia (PCL) continue to have dismal outcomes and are underrepresented in clinical trials. Recently, improved responses with anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody combination therapy have been reported for NDMM patients. We report here outcomes for NDMM UHiR and PCL patients treated in the OPTIMUM/MUKnine (NCT03188172) trial with daratumumab, cyclophosphamide, bortezomib, lenalidomide, dexamethasone (Dara-CVRd) induction, augmented high-dose melphalan (HDMEL) and ASCT. With final analysis follow-up surpassed in Feb 2021, we report here early protocol defined endpoints from induction to day 100 post ASCT. Methods: Between Sep 2017 and Jul 2019, 107 patients with UHiR NDMM by central trial genetic (≥2 high risk lesions: t(4;14), t(14;16), t(14;20), gain(1q), del(1p), del(17p)) or gene expression SKY92 (SkylineDx) profiling, or with PCL (circulating plasmablasts > 20%) were included in OPTIMUM across 39 UK hospitals. Patients received up to 6 cycles of Dara-CVRd induction, HDMEL and ASCT augmented with bortezomib, followed by Dara-VR(d) consolidation for 18 cycles and Dara-R maintenance. Primary trial endpoints are minimal residual disease (MRD) status post ASCT and progression-free survival. Secondary endpoints include response, safety and quality of life. Data is complete but subject to further data cleaning prior to conference. Results: Median follow-up for the 107 patients in the safety population was 22.2 months (95% CI: 20.6 – 23.9). Two patients died during induction due to infection. Bone marrow aspirates suitable for MRD assessment by flow cytometry (10-5 sensitivity) were available for 81% of patients at end of induction and 78% at D100 post ASCT. Responses in the intention to treat population at end of induction were 94% ORR with 22% CR, 58% VGPR, 15% PR, 1% PD, 5% timepoint not reached (TNR; withdrew, became ineligible or died) and at D100 post ASCT 83% ORR with 47% CR, 32% VGPR, 5% PR, 7% PD, 10% TNR. MRD status was 41% MRDneg, 40% MRDpos and 19% not evaluable post induction and 64% MRDneg, 14% MRDpos and 22% not evaluable at D100 post ASCT. Responses at D100 post ASCT were lower in PCL with 22% CR, 22% VGPR, 22% PR, 22% PD, 12% TNR. Most frequent grade 3/4 AEs during induction were neutropenia (21%), thrombocytopenia (12%) and infection (12%). Grade 3 neuropathy rate was 3.7%. Conclusions: This is to our knowledge the first report on a trial for UHiR NDMM and PCL investigating Dara-CVRd induction and augmented ASCT. Response rates were high in this difficult-to-treat patient population, with toxicity comparable to other induction regimens. However, some early progressions highlight the need for innovative approaches to UHiR NDMM. Clinical trial information: NCT03188172.

Real-World Experience with Minimal Residual Disease Testing with Next Generation Flow Cytometry and Functional Imaging in Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 17-18
Author(s):  
David Böckle ◽  
Paula Tabares Gaviria ◽  
Xiang Zhou ◽  
Janin Messerschmidt ◽  
Lukas Scheller ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Flow Cytometry ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Functional Imaging ◽  
Real World ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Focal Lesions ◽  
High Risk Disease ◽  
Minimal Residual

Background: Minimal residual disease (MRD) diagnostics in multiple myeloma (MM) are gaining increasing importance to determine response depth beyond complete remission (CR) since novel agents have shown to induce high rates of deep clinical responses. Moreover, recent reports indicated combining functional imaging with next generation flow cytometry (NGF) could be beneficial in predicting clinical outcome. This applies in particular to the subset of patients suffering from relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) who tend to show a higher incidence of residual focal lesions despite serological response. Here, we report our institutions experience with implementing both functional imaging and NGF-guided MRD diagnostics in clinical practice. Methods: Our study included patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) and RRMM achieving VGPR, CR or sCR. Bone marrow aspirates were obtained for MRD-testing according to IMWG 2016 criteria. Samples were collected between July 2019 and July 2020 and analyzed with NGF (according to EuroFlowTM guidelines) at a sensitivity level of 10-5. Results were compared to functional imaging obtained with positron emission tomography (PET) and diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI). High-risk disease was defined as presence of deletion 17p, translocation (14;16) or (4;14). Results: We included 66 patients with NDMM (n=39) and RRMM (n=27) who achieved VGPR or better. In patients with RRMM the median number of treatment lines was 2 (range 2-11). Fifteen patients suffered from high-risk disease. Median age at NGF diagnostics was 64 years (range 31-83). Among patients achieving VGPR (n=27), CR (n=10) and sCR (n=29) seventeen (26%) were MRD-negative by NGF testing. CR or better was significantly associated NGF MRD-negativity (p=0.04). Notably, rates of NGF MRD-negativity were similar among patients with NDMM (28%) and RRMM (26%). Even some heavily pretreated patients who underwent ≥ 4 lines of therapy achieved MRD-negativity on NGF (2 of 9). Functional imaging was performed in 46 (70%) patients with DW-MRI (n=22) and PET (n=26). Median time between NGF and imaging assessment was 2 days (range 0-147). Combining results from imaging and NGF, 12 out of 46 (26%) patients were MRD-negative with both methods (neg/neg). Three patients displayed disease activity as measured with both, imaging and NGF (pos/pos). Twenty-nine of the remaining patients were MRD-positive only according to NGF (pos/neg), while two patients were positive on imaging only (neg/pos). More patients demonstrated combined MRD-negativity on NGF and imaging (neg/neg) in the NDMM setting than in RRMM (32% versus 19%). We also observed that 30% of the patients with high-risk genetics showed MRD-negativity on both imaging and NGF. Of note, none of the patients with very advanced disease (≥4 previous lines) was MRD-negative on both techniques. Conclusion In the clinical routine, MRD diagnostics could be used to tailor maintenance and consolidation approaches for patients achieving deep responses by traditional IMWG criteria. Our real-world experience highlights that MRD-negativity can be achieved in patients suffering from high-risk disease and also in late treatment lines, supporting its value as endpoint for clinical trials. However, our data also support MRD diagnostics to be combined with functional imaging at least in the RRMM setting to rule out residual focal lesions. Future studies using MRD for clinical decision-making are highly warranted. Disclosures Einsele: Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Rasche:Celgene/BMS: Honoraria; GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria; Oncopeptides: Honoraria; Skyline Dx: Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria.

scholarly journals Post-Induction Undetectable Minimal Residual Disease at 10 -5 Sensitivity Level within Marrow and/or Stem Cell Graft Overrides Cytogenetic High Risk

Blood ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 2909-2909
Author(s):  
Guldane Cengiz Seval ◽  
Klara Dalva ◽  
Dilek Oz ◽  
Sule Mine Bakanay ◽  
Ender Soydan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Stem Cell ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Minimal Residual Disease ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Post Induction ◽  
Sensitivity Level ◽  
Stem Cell Graft ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Minimal Residual

Abstract Introduction: Post-induction minimal residual disease (MRD) within but not outside (peripheral blood/stem cell graft) of marrow among transplant eligible patients with multiple myeloma (MM) is currently recognized as poor-prognostic. Emerging number of studies are evaluating MRD within the context of cytogenetic risk. In this study we aimed to quantify circulating plasma cells (PCs) by flow in apheresis products (graft=gMRD) and compare with marrow MRD(mMRD) and outcome according to cytogenetics. Patients & Methods: Four hundred eleven subsequent newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients transplanted (AHCT) between September 2006 - June 2021 were included prospectively. Standard-risk cytogenetics(SR) is defined as t(11;14), t(6;14), or a normal karyotype , whereas del(17p13), t(4;14), t(14;16), t(14;20), + 1q21 and complex findings are high-risk cytogenetics (HR). In the sample drawn for HPSC quantification of the graft and bone marrow, the number of clonal PCs were quantified by Flow. CD27 PC7 orCD27 A750, CD56 A700, CD19 ECD, CD38 FITC orCD38 A750, CD138 APC, CD45 KO, CD81 PE, CD117 PC7, polyclonal Rabbit Anti-Human Kappa or Lambda Chains /FITC antibodies and acquisition of at least 10 5 cells per tube Analysis was performed using the Navios Flow Cytometer (3L10C, Beckman Coulter) using the Kaluza software (Beckman Coulter, USA) according to the criteria defined by Montero et al and also abnormal distribution of kappa vs. Lambda expression. Undetectable MRD was defined as absence of clonal PCs at a sensitivity of 10 -4 prior to 2017(n=217) and 10 -5 after 2017(n=131). MRD assessment is similar in the graft and marrow. Impact of postinduction MRD analysis was performed in 131 patients with MRD data of 10 -5 sensitivity level. Results were reported in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population for mMRD. Results: Median follow-up after AHCT was 61.5 months (range:3.2-168) (prior to 2017) and 17.7 months (range: 3-47.4) (after 2017). Induction regimen consisted of bortezomib without or with immunomodulatory drug (IMID) 78.8%, 2.8% (prior to 2017) and 74.1%, 22.9% (after 2017). Consolidation 18% (n=39/217), 22.1% (n=29/131) (prior and after 2017) and maintenance 21.2% (n=46/217), 35.1% (n=46/131) (prior and after 2017) were administered based on the response to AHCT. Cytogenetically HR was observed 14.1% (n=47) (among total cohort) and 15.8% (n=19) (after 2017 cohort). Post-induction biochemical response distribution among patients with undetectable MRD are shown in Table-1. MRD assessments were performed at a sensitivity of 10 -4 and 10 -5 in graft (n=147 and 76), marrow (n=18 and 4) or both (n=52 and 51). A statistically significant correlation was detected between marrow and graft MRD only at sensitivity level 10 -5 (SE: 0.638, p<0.001). Additionally, correlations between CR and gMRD (Kappa coefficient (SE): -0.284, p=0.03); CR and mMRD (SE: -0.452, p:0.001) were found. Since marrow and graft MRD results are correlated, all graft and marrow results were merged for the multivariate analysis (MVA) (Table-2). Having undetectable vs detectable MRD in either graft or marrow estimates a 2 years-PFS of 83.6% vs 46.5% (p=0.007). Among 42 MRD(-) patients, only four (two with HR)have relapsed. There is a tendency for better two year probability of PFS with undetectable mMRD vs gMRD at 10-5 ( not reached vs 84.7% ; ns)(Figure 1). The patients (after 2017) are divided into four groups according to MRD status and cytogenetic risk stratification: MRD(-)SR (n=35; 29.2%), MRD(-)HR (n=7; 5.8%), MRD(+)SR (n=66; 55%), MRD(+)HR (n=12; 10%). Kaplan-Meier curves revealed significant differences in PFS among these groups (p=0.03) (Figure-2). Conclusion: Our real-world triplet drug induction-based experience shows for the first-time post-induction mMRD and MRD to be correlated with each other and with PFS. PFS with MRD(-) at 10 -5 results have displayed a better outcome compared to 10 -4. MVA showed MRD and age to determine PFS, independent from post-induction CR, ISS and cytogenetic risk. Although observed less frequently, achieving post-induction MRD(-) either in graft or marrow may ameliorate the poor prognosis of HR. With improvement in induction it may be possible to achieve more frequent MRD(-) and thus analyze the impact of each cytogenetics risk group ie 1q amplification separately. Furthermore, MRD in graft may be a non-invasive therapeutic efficacy tool which is subject to less sampling variation. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Beksac: Amgen,Celgene,Janssen,Takeda,Oncopeptides,Sanofi: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau.

scholarly journals Use of KRD-PACE as Salvage Therapy in Aggressive, Relapsed/Bortezomib-Refractory Extramedullary Multiple Myeloma: A Report of Two Cases and Literature Review

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Ricardo D. Parrondo ◽  
Vivek Roy ◽  
Taimur Sher ◽  
Victoria Alegria ◽  
Asher A. Chanan-Khan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Poor Prognosis ◽  
Proteasome Inhibitors ◽  
Salvage Chemotherapy ◽  
First Line ◽  
Immunomodulatory Agents ◽  
Resistance To Therapy ◽  
Line Setting ◽  
Novel Agent

Extramedullary multiple myeloma is defined by the presence of plasma cell infiltration outside of the bone marrow. It is associated with a poor prognosis and resistance to therapy and is often associated with high-risk cytogenetics. Aggressive relapsed and refractory extramedullary multiple myeloma is often treated with salvage infusional chemotherapy to achieve rapid disease control. Commonly used regimens include DCEP, CVAD, and VTD-PACE. While VTD-PACE contains bortezomib and thalidomide which have potent antimyeloma activity, the advent of novel agent therapy with proteasome inhibitors and immunomodulatory agents being used in the first-line setting has resulted in many patients being refractory to bortezomib by the time they are treated with VTD-PACE. Herein, we discuss two cases of aggressive relapsed, high-risk, bortezomib-refractory extramedullary multiple myeloma treated with KRD-PACE and review the available clinical data on salvage chemotherapy regimens used in relapsed refractory myeloma.

Autologous Stem-Cell Transplantation for Multiple Myeloma in the Era of Novel Therapies

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 56-66 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ricardo D. Parrondo ◽  
Sikander Ailawadhi ◽  
Taimur Sher ◽  
Asher A. Chanan-Khan ◽  
Vivek Roy
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Stem Cell ◽  
Stem Cell Transplantation ◽  
Cell Transplantation ◽  
Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Proteasome Inhibitors ◽  
Novel Therapies ◽  
Immunomodulatory Agents

Despite the evolution of the therapeutic arsenal for the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) over the past decade, autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) remains an integral part of the treatment of patients with both newly diagnosed and relapsed MM. The advent of novel therapies, such as immunomodulatory agents, proteasome inhibitors, and monoclonal antibodies, has led to unprecedented levels of deep hematologic responses. Nonetheless, studies show that ASCT has an additive effect leading to additional deepening of responses. As the therapeutic agents for MM continue to evolve, the timing, duration, and sequence of their use in combination with ASCT will be crucial to understand to obtain the deepest response and survival benefit for patients with MM. This review aims to discuss the role of ASCT for the management of MM, with a particular focus on the role of ASCT in the context of novel therapies and minimal residual disease.

Carfilzomib, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone in High-Risk Smoldering Multiple Myeloma: Final Results from the NCI Phase 2 Pilot Study

Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 4746-4746 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ola Landgren ◽  
Mark Roschewski ◽  
Sham Mailankody ◽  
Mary Kwok ◽  
Elisabet E. Manasanch ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Bone Marrow ◽  
Flow Cytometry ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Minimal Residual Disease ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Color Flow ◽  
Smoldering Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Generation Sequencing ◽  
Minimal Residual

Abstract BACKGROUND: Early treatment with lenalidomide and dexamethasone delays progression and increases overall survival in patients with high-risk smoldering multiple myeloma. The addition of the selective proteasome inhibitor carfilzomib to a lenalidomide and dexamethasone backbone has proven effective in patients with newly-diagnosed multiple myeloma; this combination may allow patients with high-risk smoldering multiple myeloma to obtain deep and durable responses. METHODS: In this phase 2 pilot study, patients with high-risk smoldering multiple myeloma received eight 28-day cycles of induction therapy with carfilzomib (at a dose of 20/36 mg per square meter on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16), lenalidomide (at a dose of 25 mg on days 1–21), and dexamethasone (at a dose of 10 or 20 mg on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16, 22, and 23). Patients achieving stable disease or better after combination therapy received 2 years of maintenance therapy with lenalidomide. Minimal residual disease was assessed with multi-color flow cytometry, next-generation sequencing by the LymphoSIGHT method, and fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography-computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT). Myeloma clonotypes were identified in genomic DNA obtained from CD138+ bone marrow cell lysate or cell-free bone marrow aspirate at baseline for each patient based on their high frequency within the B-cell repertoire. Per study protocol, minimal residual disease assessment by next-generation sequencing, multi-color flow cytometry and FDG-PET/CT was repeated when patients achieved a complete response or completed 8 cycles of induction treatment. A sample size of 12 evaluable patients was calculated as being minimally necessary based on the following probability calculations: If the true probability of a very good partial response was 20% or 50%, we calculated that there would be a 7.3% or 80.6% probability, respectively, if 5 or more patients exhibiting a very good partial response (VGPR). Thus, if 5 or more patients out of 12 achieved a very good partial response, there would be strong evidence that the true probability of a VGPR was 50% or more. RESULTS: Twelve patients were enrolled. All 11 patients (100%) who completed 8 cycles of combination therapy obtained VGPR or better (primary end point). Minimal residual disease assessment by next-generation sequencing was performed on bone marrow supernatant to detect cell-free myeloma clonotypes, while flow cytometry analysis utilized bone marrow cells. Overall (N=12), 100% of patients achieved a complete response or better over the study period, including 11 patients (92%) negative for minimal residual disease based on multi-color flow cytometry. Based on next-generation sequencing, two of the 12 patients were positive for minimal residual disease in the bone marrow supernatant; one of these two patients was also positive for minimal residual disease based on multi-color flow cytometry in the bone marrow cells. Information regarding longitudinal minimal residual disease status will be available and presented at the meeting. Adverse events were manageable. CONCLUSIONS: Early treatment with carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone was associated with high rates of complete response and minimal residual disease negativity by multi-color flow cytometry, next-generation sequencing, and FDG-PET/CT in patients with high-risk smoldering multiple myeloma. Disclosures Landgren: Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Medscape: Consultancy; Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Independent Data Monitoring Committee (IDMC), Independent Data Monitoring Committee (IDMC) Other. Off Label Use: Carfilzomib and lenalidomide for high-risk smoldering multiple myeloma.

scholarly journals Heavy and Light Chain Monitoring in High Risk Smoldering Multiple Myeloma Patients Included in the GEM-CESAR Trial: Comparison with Conventional and Minimal Residual Disease IMWG Response Assessment

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 1852-1852
Author(s):  
Noemi Puig ◽  
Teresa Contreras ◽  
Bruno Paiva ◽  
María Teresa Cedena ◽  
José J Pérez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Bone Marrow ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Response Assessment ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Minimal Residual

Introduction: The GEM-CESAR trial is a potentially curative strategy for high-risk smoldering multiple myeloma (HRsMM) patients (pts) in which the primary endpoint is the achievement of bone marrow minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity. However, other methods of disease evaluation in serum such as heavy+light chain (HLC) assessment, with a potential complementary value to the IMWG response criteria, have also been tested. Aim: To evaluate the performance of HLC assay in HRsMM pts at diagnosis and after consolidation, comparing the results with standard serological methods and Next Generation Flow (NGF) for the assessment of bone marrow MRD. Patients and Methods: Ninety HRsMM pts included in the GEM-CESAR trial received six 4-weeks cycles of carfilzomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone followed by high dose melphalan and 2 further cycles of consolidation with the same regimen. All pts received maintenance treatment with lenalidomide for up to 2 years. SPEP and IFE were performed using standard procedures. Serum IgGk, IgGl, IgAk and IgAl HLC concentrations were measured using Hevylite (The Binding Site Group Ltd, Birmingham, UK) on a SPA PLUS turbidimeter. HLC concentrations and ratios were considered abnormal if they were outside the 95% reference ranges provided by the manufacturer. MRD was analyzed by flow cytometry following EuroFlow recommendations (sensitivity, 2x10-6). Standard response assignment was carried out as per the IMWG guidelines. Hevylite responses were assigned and HLC-pair suppression was defined as in Michalet et al (Leukemia 2018). Results: Out of 90 HRsMM pts, 75 had monoclonal intact immunoglobulin and samples available at diagnosis (50 IgG and 25 IgA). HLC ratio was abnormal in 98% of IgG pts and in 100% of IgA pts. Response assessment by Hevylite and standard IMWG criteria were available in 62 pts post-consolidation (Table 1). A good agreement was found between the two methods (kappa quadratic weighting = 0,6327 (0,4016 - 0,8638)). Among 46 pts with assigned CR as per the IMWG response criteria, there were 3 and 8 pts in PR and VGPR according to the Hevylite method, respectively. In 62 cases, paired Hevylite and MRD assessment data were available. Concordant results were found in 72.5% of cases (45/62; HLC+/NGF+ in 15 and HLC-/NGF- in 30 cases) while in the remaining 27.4% of cases results were discordant (17/62; HLC-/NGF+ in 6 and HLC+/NGF- in 11 cases). Post-consolidation, 24, 25.8 and 42.3% of the 62 samples were positive by SPEP, NGF and Hevylite, respectively. HLC-pair suppression was identified in 13/62 pts; 10 had severe HLC-pair suppression at the end of consolidation. After a median follow-up of 32 months (8-128), 93% of pts remain alive and progression-free. Three patients that have already progressed had their responses assessed post-consolidation. The first pt was assigned VGPR by the standard IMWG criteria and PR by Hevylite and was MRD positive by NGF; the second pt was assigned CR by IMWG criteria and Hevylite but had severe HLC-pair immunosuppression and was MRD positive by NGF; the third pt was in CR by IMWG and HLC criteria and was MRD positive by MFC. Conclusions: Moderate agreement was found between response assessment by Hevylite and the standard IMWG methods as well as between Hevylite and MRD assessment by NGF. Most discordances were a result of Hevylite detecting disease in samples negative by the standard methods, but longer follow-up is needed to ascertain its clinical value. HLC assessment could have anticipated the progression noted in 2 (out of 3) patients. Disclosures Puig: Takeda, Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; The Binding Site: Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Paiva:Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Roche and Sanofi: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene, Janssen, Sanofi and Takeda: Consultancy. Rodriguez Otero:Kite Pharma: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy. Oriol:Celgene, Amgen, Takeda, Jansse: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Rios:Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Alegre:Celgene, Amgen, Janssen, Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. de la Rubia:Amgen: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy. De Arriba:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria. Ocio:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Array Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Pharmamar: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Mundipharma: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Bladé:Janssen, Celgene, Amgen, Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Irctures: Honoraria. Mateos:Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmamar: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GSK: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; EDO: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Adaptive: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

scholarly journals The Prognostic Significance of Minimal Residual Disease and Possibility of Its Correction in Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 5751-5751
Author(s):  
Andrey Garifullin ◽  
Sergei Voloshin ◽  
Alexey Kuvshinov ◽  
Anastasiya Kuzyaeva ◽  
Alexander Sсhmidt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Bone Marrow ◽  
Flow Cytometry ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Minimal Residual Disease ◽  
Induction Therapy ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Pet Ct ◽  
Minimal Residual

Abstract Introduction. Most patients with multiple myeloma (MM) are considered to be incurable, and relapse owing to minimal residual disease (MRD) is the main cause of death among these patients, the optimal methodology to assess MRD is not clear. The results of previous studies demonstrated the potential of multiparameter flow cytometry (MFC) and (PET-CT) in evaluation of MRD in MM. MRD monitoring should be applied in prospective clinical trials to compare and evaluate the efficacy of different treatment strategies, particularly in the consolidation and maintenance settings. The impact of MRD negativity is important, but further studies are needed to quantify the pharmacoeconomic and quality-of-life differences between early and delayed transplant strategies. Therefore, with the currently available evidence, upfront autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is standard of care regardless of MRD status. Aim. We are aiming to determine the role of MRD and role of autologous stem cells transplantation in MM. Materials and methods. We`ve recently started a prospective one-center pilot study in subjects with MM. We analyzed 18 transplant-eligible patients with MM (the median age is 57 years, a male/female ratio is 3.5:1).The induction therapy Bortezomib-based only regimens was used in 12/18 (67%) patients, combination of Bortezomib-Immunomodulator-based regimens - in 6/18 (33%). High dose therapy (Mel200) and ASCT is carried out on 100% patients. The standard risk was established on 15 patients, 1 patient has an intermediate risk and 2 patients have high risk according to mSMART 2.0 stratification. The MFC MRD status of bone marrow was evaluated after 4-6 cycles of induction therapy and after ASCT on 5-color flow cytometry with use anti- CD38, CD138, CD45, CD19, CD20, CD27, CD56 and CD117 antibodies. We were based on two levels: MFC MRD- (<10-4) and MFC MRD- (<10-5) for assessing the significance of factors that affect MRD and for identifying the prognostic potential of MRD-negative status. The evaluation of MRD was carried out by genetic (cytogenetic and FISH) analysis of bone marrow plasma cells and PET-CT with 18-FDG before ASCT and on 100 day post ASCT. The results. The MFC MRD- (<10-4) before carrying out an ASCT reached 22.2% (4/18), the MFC MRD- (<10-5) - 0% and was not depended on the variant of pre-transplantation regimen. After the ASCT had been carried out there was a tendency to decrease the tumor burden in bone marrow from 0.65% to 0.1% and to increase the frequency of MFC MRD- (<10-4) status to 44.4% (8/18), of which MFC MRD- (<10-5) was 16.7% (3/18). MRD status was determined before ASCT and after ASCT by MFC and FISH in patients with high risk. The use of maintenance therapy with bortezomib (n = 5) or lenalidomide (n = 13) did not increase the frequency of MRD status. The PFS median in MFC MRD+ (>10-4) group was 23 months, in the MFC MRD- (<10-4) was not achieved; 2-year PFS was 43% and 100%, respectively (p=.04) We compared PFC between MFC MRD+ (>10-4) before ASCT (n = 4) and MFC MRD- (<10-4) after ASCT (n = 6) to assess the effect of ASCT in MM. The median PFS was not reached in both groups; 2-year PFS was 67% and 100%, respectively. The reliable difference between PFS in MFC MRD- (10-4-10-5) group and MFC MRD- (<10-5) was absent: the median of PFS was not achieved in both groups. PET-CT has been tested on 15 patients, PET-CT- response was achieved in 53% (8/15) patients. The PFS median in PET-CT+ group and PET-CT- group was not achieved. The 2-year PFS was higher in PET-CT+ group then PET-CT- probably due to patients with MFC MRD-. The 2-year PFS in «MFC MRD-PET-CT-» group was 100% to 55% in other patients. Conclusion. Carrying out ASCT demonstrated a tendency to increase the percentage of MFC MRD negative responses and improvement of PFS. The use of MFC in evaluation of MRD should be complemented with PET-CT and genetic methods for further analysis of the MFC MRD role status on MM patients. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document