Subcutaneous daratumumab in patients with multiple myeloma who have been previously treated with intravenous daratumumab: A multicenter, randomized, phase II study (LYNX).

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS8553-TPS8553
Author(s):  
Nizar J. Bahlis ◽  
Jeffrey A. Zonder ◽  
Susan Wroblewski ◽  
Ming Qi ◽  
Thomas Renaud ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Partial Response ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Similar Efficacy ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Duration Of Response

TPS8553 Background: The intravenous (IV) formulation of daratumumab (DARA), a human CD38-targeted monoclonal antibody, is approved in many countries for use as monotherapy in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) and in combination with standard-of-care regimens in RRMM or newly diagnosed MM. A subcutaneous (SC) formulation of DARA is under investigation in several ongoing studies. In the phase 3 COLUMBA study, DARA SC was shown to be non-inferior to DARA IV, demonstrating similar efficacy and pharmacokinetics, with a significantly decreased rate of infusion-related reactions and reduced administration time. The phase 2 LYNX (MMY2065) study will evaluate the efficacy and safety of retreatment with DARA. Methods: In this ongoing, multicenter, open-label, randomized phase 2 study, ~230 patients (pts) with prior exposure to DARA will be randomized 1:1 to receive carfilzomib and dexamethasone (Kd) ± DARA. Pts must have received 1 to 2 prior lines of therapy (at least one of which included DARA IV), with DARA-based therapy completed ≥3 months prior to randomization. Eligible pts have achieved a partial response or better (IMWG criteria) to DARA-based therapy, with a duration of response of ≥4 months. Pts must not have discontinued DARA due to a related adverse event or received prior treatment with carfilzomib. Pts will receive 20 mg/m2 carfilzomib IV on Day 1 of Cycle 1, escalated to 70 mg/m2 on Days 8 and 15; carfilzomib 70 mg/m2 will be administered on Days 1, 8, and 15 of each 28-day cycle thereafter. Dexamethasone 40 mg will be administered (IV or PO) QW for Cycles 1-9 and then on Days 1, 8 and 15 from Cycle 10 onwards. Pts in the D-Kd group will also receive DARA SC (1,800 mg co-formulated with recombinant human hyaluronidase PH20 [rHuPH20; Halozyme]) QW in Cycles 1-2, Q2W in Cycles 3-6, and Q4W thereafter. The primary endpoint is the rate of pts achieving a very good partial response or better. Secondary endpoints include overall response rate, rate of pts achieving complete response or better, progression-free survival, overall survival, overall minimal residual disease-negativity rate, time to next treatment, pharmacokinetics, and safety. Clinical trial information: NCT03871829 .

DREAMM-9: Phase III study of belantamab mafodotin plus VRd versus VRd alone in transplant-ineligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (TI NDMM).

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS8556-TPS8556 ◽  
Author(s):  
Saad Zafar Usmani ◽  
Evangelos Terpos ◽  
Wojt Janowski ◽  
Hang Quach ◽  
Sarah West ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Clinical Activity ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Open Label

TPS8556 Background: Bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRd) is the standard of care for transplant-eligible and TI NDMM, but relapse is usually inevitable. The median progression-free survival (PFS) is ~3 years for patients with TI NDMM, and with each relapse, the duration of response (DoR) diminishes, highlighting the need for novel, effective, targeted agents. Single-agent belantamab mafodotin is a first-in-class B-cell maturation antigen–binding, humanized, afucosylated, monoclonal immunoconjugate, showing deep and durable responses in heavily pretreated patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma ( Lancet Oncol2020). Preclinical work suggests belantamab mafodotin plus bortezomib or lenalidomide enhances anti-myeloma activity. Therefore, studying clinical activity of belantamab mafodotin in combination with these agents is warranted. Methods: DREAMM-9 (NCT04091126) is a two-part, open-label study to determine efficacy and safety of single-agent belantamab mafodotin with VRd vs. VRd alone in patients with TI NDMM. Patients aged ≥18 years with ECOG status 0–2 and adequate organ system functions will be eligible. Part 1 (dose selection) will evaluate safety/tolerability of belantamab mafodotin with VRd administered by single (Day 1) or split dosing (Days 1 and 8) in ≤5 cohorts (n = 12/cohort): 1.9 mg/kg, 2.5 mg/kg split and single, and 3.4 mg/kg split and single. Six more patients may be added to cohort(s) most likely to be selected as recommended Phase III dose (RP3D). Dose-limiting toxicities and adverse events (AEs) will be assessed, and belantamab mafodotin RP3D determined through modified toxicity probability interval criteria. Part 2 (randomized Phase III) will determine efficacy and safety of belantamab mafodotin at RP3D with VRd vs. VRd alone (n = 750) in two arms randomized 1:1. Dual primary endpoints will be rate of minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity and PFS. Secondary endpoints will be response rates (overall response, complete response, very good partial response or better, sustained MRD negativity), DoR, time to progression, and overall survival. Safety assessment will include AEs, serious AEs and ocular findings. In both parts, belantamab mafodotin will be given with VRd for eight induction cycles and then with Rd for maintenance until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Funding: GlaxoSmithKline (209664). Drug linker technology licensed from Seattle Genetics; monoclonal antibody produced using POTELLIGENT Technology licensed from BioWa. Clinical trial information: NCT04091126 .

scholarly journals Daratumumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: extended follow-up of POLLUX, a randomized, open-label, phase 3 study

Leukemia ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 34 (7) ◽  
pp. 1875-1884 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nizar J. Bahlis ◽  
Meletios A. Dimopoulos ◽  
Darrell J. White ◽  
Lotfi Benboubker ◽  
Gordon Cook ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Refractory Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Open Label Phase ◽  
Intent To Treat ◽  
Line Of Therapy

Abstract In POLLUX, daratumumab (D) plus lenalidomide/dexamethasone (Rd) reduced the risk of disease progression or death by 63% and increased the overall response rate (ORR) versus Rd in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Updated efficacy and safety after >3 years of follow-up are presented. Patients (N = 569) with ≥1 prior line received Rd (lenalidomide, 25 mg, on Days 1–21 of each 28-day cycle; dexamethasone, 40 mg, weekly) ± daratumumab at the approved dosing schedule. Minimal residual disease (MRD) was assessed by next-generation sequencing. After 44.3 months median follow-up, D-Rd prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) in the intent-to-treat population (median 44.5 vs 17.5 months; HR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.35–0.55; P < 0.0001) and in patient subgroups. D-Rd demonstrated higher ORR (92.9 vs 76.4%; P < 0.0001) and deeper responses, including complete response or better (56.6 vs 23.2%; P < 0.0001) and MRD negativity (10–5; 30.4 vs 5.3%; P < 0.0001). Median time to next therapy was prolonged with D-Rd (50.6 vs 23.1 months; HR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.31–0.50; P < 0.0001). Median PFS on subsequent line of therapy (PFS2) was not reached with D-Rd versus 31.7 months with Rd (HR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.42–0.68; P < 0.0001). No new safety concerns were reported. These data support using D-Rd in patients with RRMM after first relapse.

Bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRd) ± daratumumab (DARA) in patients (pts) with transplant-eligible (TE) newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM): A multicenter, randomized, phase III study (PERSEUS).

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS8055-TPS8055 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pieter Sonneveld ◽  
Annemiek Broijl ◽  
Francesca Gay ◽  
Mario Boccadoro ◽  
Hermann Einsele ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Stem Cell ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Related Quality ◽  
Duration Of Response ◽  
Line Of Therapy

TPS8055 Background: DARA, a human, CD38-targeting, IgGκ monoclonal antibody, is approved in many countries for use as monotherapy in relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM), and in combination with standard-of-care regimens in RRMM and transplant-ineligible NDMM. Given the initial safety and efficacy observed with DARA plus VRd (D-VRd) in the safety run-in cohort of the ongoing phase 2 GRIFFIN study in TE NDMM pts, the phase 3 PERSEUS study will evaluate the efficacy and safety of D-VRd versus VRd alone in TE NDMM. Methods: This is an ongoing multicenter, open-label, randomized phase 3 study of D-VRd versus VRd alone in TE NDMM pts. Approximately 690 pts across Europe will be stratified by ISS stage and cytogenetic risk (high risk defined as presence of del17p, t[4;14], or t[14;16]) and randomized in a 1:1 ratio. All pts will receive VRd (V: 1.3 mg/m2 SC Days 1, 4, 8, 11; R: 25 mg PO Days 1-21; d: 40 mg PO Days 1-4, 9-12) for 4 pre-transplant induction and 2 post-transplant consolidation cycles (all 28-d cycles), followed by R (10 mg PO Days 1-28) maintenance until progressive disease (PD). Pts in the DARA group will also receive subcutaneous DARA (1,800 mg co-formulated with recombinant human hyaluronidase PH20 [rHuPH20; Halozyme]) QW in Cycles 1-2, Q2W in Cycles 3-6, and Q4W in maintenance Cycles 7+ until PD. After induction, pts will undergo melphalan 200 mg/m2 conditioning and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). Pts in the DARA group who achieve sustained minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity (10–5 threshold; assessed by NGS) for 12 months after ≥24 months of maintenance will stop DARA but continue R maintenance until PD; upon loss of CR or MRD-negative status, pts will restart DARA treatment. All pts will receive preinfusion medications. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints include MRD-negative rate, overall response rate, PFS on next line of therapy, overall survival, time to and duration of response, health-related quality of life, pharmacokinetics, immunogenicity, stem cell yield after mobilization, time to engraftment post-ASCT, and safety. Clinical trial information: NCT03710603.

Daratumumab (DARA) in combination with carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (KRd) in patients (pts) with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MMY1001): An open-label, phase 1b study.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 8000-8000 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrzej J. Jakubowiak ◽  
Ajai Chari ◽  
Sagar Lonial ◽  
Brendan M. Weiss ◽  
Raymond L. Comenzo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Partial Response ◽  
Safety Profile ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Frontline Treatment ◽  
Grade 3

8000 Background: DARA in combination with established standard of care regimens prolongs PFS, deepens responses, and demonstrates a favorable safety profile in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (MM). The tolerability and efficacy of DARA-KRd in newly diagnosed MM pts was examined. Methods: Newly diagnosed pts regardless of transplantation eligibility were enrolled. Pts received DARA 16 mg/kg QW for Cycles 1-2, Q2W for Cycles 3-6, and Q4W thereafter. All pts received the 1st dose of DARA split over 2 days. Carfilzomib (K) was administered on Days 1, 8 and 15 of each 28-day cycle (20 mg/m2 on C1D1, 36 or 70 mg/m2 subsequently based on tolerability of first dose) for ≤13 cycles or elective discontinuation for ASCT. Lenalidomide 25 mg was given on Days 1-21 and dexamethasone 20-40 mg per week. The primary endpoint was tolerability. Results: Twenty-two pts (median [range] age, 60 [34-74] y) were enrolled and received a median of 8 (1-10) treatment cycles. Nineteen pts escalated K dose to 70 mg/m2 by C1D15. Median (range) duration of follow-up was 7.4 (4.0-9.3) months. Six (27%) pts discontinued treatment (1 AE [pulmonary embolism]; 1 PD; 4 other [ASCT]). Serious AEs occurred in 46% of pts, and 14% were possibly related to DARA; 18 (82%) experienced a grade 3/4 TEAE. The most common grade 3/4 TEAEs (>10%) were lymphopenia (50%) and neutropenia (23%); 1 (5%) cardiac grade 3 TEAE was observed (congestive heart failure) which resolved; pt quickly resumed study treatment with reduced K dose. No grade 5 TEAE was reported. All DARA-associated infusion reactions (27% of pts) were grade ≤2. Treatment with DARA-KRd yielded an ORR (≥partial response) of 100% (5% complete response, 86% ≥very good partial response) in 21 response-evaluable pts. The 6-month PFS rate was 100%. Conclusions: The addition of DARA to KRd was well tolerated; the overall safety profile was consistent with that previously reported for KRd, with no additional toxicity observed with the addition of DARA. Deep and durable responses were observed. These data support further investigation of DARA-KRd as a frontline treatment regimen. Updated data will be presented based on longer follow up. Clinical trial information: NCT01998971.

FRACTION-RCC: Innovative, high-throughput assessment of nivolumab + ipilimumab for treatment-refractory advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC).

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 5007-5007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Toni K. Choueiri ◽  
Harriet M. Kluger ◽  
Saby George ◽  
Scott S. Tykodi ◽  
Timothy M. Kuzel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Partial Response ◽  
Adaptive Design ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitor ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Duration Of Response

5007 Background: The immuno-oncology (I-O) combination nivolumab + ipilimumab (NIVO+IPI) is approved for first-line (1L) and NIVO is approved for second-line treatment post TKI therapy in aRCC. The open-label, randomized, phase 2 Fast Real-Time Assessment of Combination Therapies in Immuno-Oncology (FRACTION-RCC; NCT02996110) platform study has an adaptive design allowing rapid evaluation of I-O therapies, including NIVO+IPI or other investigational combinations. This FRACTION analysis reports preliminary outcomes with NIVO+IPI in aRCC pts after progression on checkpoint inhibitor therapy. Methods: All pts, except 1, had previously received and progressed on checkpoint inhibitor treatment. Pts received NIVO+IPI (NIVO 3 mg/kg + IPI 1 mg/kg Q3W ×4, then after 6 weeks, NIVO 480 mg Q4W), up to 2 years or until progression, toxicity, or protocol-specified discontinuation. Primary endpoints were confirmed objective response rate (ORR; per investigator using RECIST v1.1), duration of response (DOR), and progression-free survival probability at week 24. Safety outcomes were reported. Results: 46 pts were randomized to NIVO+IPI. Pts had 0 (n = 1), 1 (n = 10), 2 (n = 12), 3 (n = 10), or ≥4 (n = 13) prior lines of therapy. All pretreated pts had prior anti-PD-(L)1-, none had prior anti-CTLA-4- therapy, and 37 had prior TKI-based therapy; 45 pts progressed on anti-PD-(L)1 as the most recent therapy. Most pts had clear cell aRCC (n = 44). After a median study follow-up of 8.9 months, ORR was 15.2%; no pts achieved complete response and 7 achieved partial response. DOR ranged from 2–19+ months (n = 7); 5 pts had ongoing response. Six of 7 responders had received ≥2 prior lines of therapy. Any-grade treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were reported in 36 pts (78.3%; fatigue, rash [both 19.6%], and diarrhea [17.4%] were most common). Grade 3–4 treatment-related AEs were reported in 13 pts (28.3%; diarrhea [8.7%], ↑amylase and ↑lipase [both 6.5%] were most common). Treatment-related immune-mediated AEs of any grade were reported in 22 pts (47.8%; rash [19.6%], diarrhea [17.4%], and ↑alanine aminotransferase [8.7%]). No treatment-related deaths were reported. Updated and expanded results with an additional 3 months of follow-up will be presented. Conclusions: These results suggest that NIVO+IPI may provide durable partial response in some pts with prior progression on checkpoint inhibitors, including some heavily pretreated pts. The safety profile of NIVO+IPI in FRACTION pts was similar to historic data in aRCC with this combination. Clinical trial information: NCT02996110 .

scholarly journals Evaluation of Sustained Minimal Residual Disease Negativity With Daratumumab-Combination Regimens in Relapsed and/or Refractory Multiple Myeloma: Analysis of POLLUX and CASTOR

2021 ◽  
pp. JCO.20.01814
Author(s):  
Hervé Avet-Loiseau ◽  
Jesus San-Miguel ◽  
Tineke Casneuf ◽  
Shinsuke Iida ◽  
Sagar Lonial ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Minimal Residual Disease ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Refractory Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Intention To Treat ◽  
Risk Of Progression ◽  
Minimal Residual

PURPOSE In relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma, daratumumab reduced the risk of progression or death by > 60% in POLLUX (daratumumab/lenalidomide/dexamethasone [D-Rd]) and CASTOR (daratumumab/bortezomib/dexamethasone [D-Vd]). Minimal residual disease (MRD) is a sensitive measure of disease control. Sustained MRD negativity and outcomes were evaluated in these studies. METHODS MRD was assessed via next-generation sequencing (10−5) at suspected complete response (CR), 3 and 6 months following confirmed CR (POLLUX), 6 and 12 months following the first dose (CASTOR), and every 12 months post-CR in both studies. Sustained MRD negativity (≥ 6 or ≥ 12 months) was evaluated in the intention-to-treat (ITT) and ≥ CR populations. RESULTS The median follow-up was 54.8 months in POLLUX and 50.2 months in CASTOR. In the ITT population, MRD-negativity rates were 32.5% versus 6.7% for D-Rd versus lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rd) and 15.1% versus 1.6% for D-Vd versus bortezomib and dexamethasone (Vd; both P < .0001). Higher MRD negativity rates were achieved in ≥ CR patients in POLLUX (D-Rd, 57.4%; Rd, 29.2%; P = .0001) and CASTOR (D-Vd, 52.8%; Vd, 17.4%; P = .0035). More patients in the ITT population achieved sustained MRD negativity ≥ 6 months with D-Rd versus Rd (20.3% v 2.1%; P < .0001) and D-Vd versus Vd (10.4% v 1.2%; P < .0001), and ≥ 12 months with D-Rd versus Rd (16.1% v 1.4%; P < .0001) and D-Vd versus Vd (6.8% v 0%). Similar results for sustained MRD negativity were observed among ≥ CR patients. More patients in the daratumumab-containing arms achieved MRD negativity and sustained MRD negativity, which were associated with prolonged progression-free survival. CONCLUSION Daratumumab-based combinations induce higher rates of sustained MRD negativity versus standard of care, which are associated with durable remissions and prolonged clinical outcomes.

Final results from the phase Ib/II study (PX-171-006) of carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and low-dose dexamethasone (CRd) in patients with relapsed or progressive multiple myeloma.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 8529-8529 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Wang ◽  
Thomas Martin ◽  
William Bensinger ◽  
Melissa Alsina ◽  
David Samuel DiCapua Siegel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Phase 1 ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Maximum Tolerated Dose ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
The Us ◽  
Duration Of Response ◽  
Grade 3

8529 Background: Carfilzomib (CFZ) is approved in the US as single-agent treatment for patients with multiple myeloma (MM) who have progressed after bortezomib (BTZ) and an IMiD and are refractory to last line of treatment. We previously reported interim data from PX-171-006 (NCT00603447), a Ph 1b/2 study of CRd in relapsed or progressive MM (Wang et al. ASCO 2011). Herein we report final results. Methods: Patients (1–3 prior treatments) received CRd in 28-day (D) cycles—CFZ IV on D1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16, lenalidomide (LEN) PO D1–21, and dexamethasone (dex) wkly. In phase 1, CFZ (15–27 mg/m2) and LEN (10–25 mg) doses were escalated to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) with a maximum planned dose (MPD) of CFZ 20 mg/m2 D1, 2 of Cycle 1 and 27 mg/m2 thereafter, LEN 25 mg/d, and dex 40 mg/wk, followed by phase 2 expansion at MTD/MPD. Endpoints included IMWG overall response rate (ORR), duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), and safety. Results: A total of 84 patients were enrolled since June 2008. Overall, prior treatment included BTZ (77%/18% refractory) and LEN (70%/35% refractory); 20% had high-risk cytogenetics/FISH. MTD was not reached in Ph 1, supporting expansion at the MPD (n=52, 23% BTZ refractory and 42% LEN refractory). As of Nov 2012 (median follow-up 24.4 mo): ORR was 69% overall and 76.9% at MPD with very good partial response in 36.9% and 38.5% and stringent complete response in 3.6% and 3.8%, respectively; median DOR was 18.8 (95% CI 9.7–41.5) and 22.1 mo (95% CI 9.5–NE) respectively; median PFS was 11.8 (95% CI 7.6–20.7) and 15.4 mo (95% CI 7.9–NE), respectively. Seven responders at MPD pursued other therapy and were censored for PFS.A median of 8.5 (range 1−46) CFZ cycles were started; 4% required CFZ dose reductions; 15% discontinued CFZ due to adverse events (AEs). Grade 3/4 AEs were generally consistent with earlier studies in advanced MM that used similar doses of single-agent CFZ; grade 3/4 peripheral neuropathy was 1%. Conclusions: CRd was well tolerated, providing robust and durable responses in this pt population where 35% were LEN refractory. This combination is being further evaluated in several ongoing phase 2/3 trials. Clinical trial information: NCT00603447.

Daratumumab (DARA) maintenance or observation (OBS) after treatment with bortezomib, thalidomide and dexamethasone (VTd) with or without DARA and autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) in patients (pts) with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM): CASSIOPEIA Part 2.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 8004-8004
Author(s):  
Philippe Moreau ◽  
Pieter Sonneveld ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Interim Analysis ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Autologous Stem Cell Transplant ◽  
Second Primary ◽  
Cell Transplant ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Depth Of Response

8004 Background: D-VTd plus ASCT was approved for transplant-eligible (TE) NDMM based on part 1 of CASSIOPEIA. We report a prespecified interim analysis of CASSIOPEIA part 2: DARA maintenance vs OBS in pts with ≥partial response (PR) in part 1, regardless of induction/consolidation (ind/cons) treatment. Methods: CASSIOPEIA is a 2-part, randomized, open-label, phase 3 study in TE NDMM. Pts received 4 cycles ind and 2 cycles cons with D-VTd or VTd. 886 pts who achieved ≥PR were rerandomized to DARA 16 mg/kg IV Q8W for up to 2 yr (n = 442) or OBS (n = 444) until progressive disease per IMWG. Pts were stratified by ind (D-VTd vs VTd) and depth of response (minimum residual disease [MRD] status and post cons response ≥PR). Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) after second randomization. This interim analysis assessed efficacy and safety after 281 PFS events. A preplanned hierarchical procedure tested key secondary endpoints: time to progression (TTP), ≥complete response (CR), MRD negativity rates by NGS and overall survival (OS). Results: At median follow-up of 35.4 mo, median PFS was not reached (NR) with DARA and 46.7 mo with OBS (HR 0.53; 95% CI 0.42–0.68; P <0.0001). PFS advantage for DARA was consistent across most subgroups. However, a prespecified analysis showed significant interaction with ind/cons treatment arm ( P< 0.0001). PFS HR for DARA vs OBS was 0.32 (95% CI 0.23–0.46) in the VTd arm and 1.02 (0.71–1.47) in the D-VTd arm. Median TTP was NR for DARA vs 46.7 mo for OBS (HR 0.49; 95% CI 0.38–0.62; P <0.0001). More pts in the DARA vs OBS arm achieved ≥CR (72.9% vs 60.8%; OR 2.17; 95% CI 1.54–3.07; P <0.0001). MRD negativity (in ≥CR pts at 10-5) was 58.6% with DARA vs 47.1% with OBS (OR 1.80; 95% CI 1.33–2.43; P= 0.0001). Median OS was NR in either arm. Most common (≥2.5%) grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) with DARA vs OBS were pneumonia (2.5% vs 1.4%), lymphopenia (3.6% vs 1.8%), and hypertension (3.0% vs 1.6%). Serious AEs occurred in 22.7% (DARA) vs 18.9% (OBS) of pts; the most common (≥2.5%) was pneumonia (2.5% vs 1.6%). 13 (3.0%) pts discontinued DARA due to an AE. The rate of infusion-related reactions was 54.5% (DARA-naïve pts) and 2.2% (prior DARA pts); 90% were grade 1/2.Second primary malignancies occurred in 5.5% (DARA) vs 2.7% (OBS) of pts. Conclusions: CASSIOPEIA part 2 demonstrated a clinical benefit of DARA maintenance in TE NDMM pts, with significantly longer PFS for DARA vs OBS. With current follow-up, maintenance PFS benefit appeared only in pts treated with VTd as ind/cons. Pts who received D-VTd ind/cons with or without DARA maintenance achieved similar PFS; longer follow-up is needed for PFS2 and OS. DARA significantly increased deeper response and MRD negativity rates vs OBS, and was well tolerated with no new safety signals. Clinical trial information: NCT02541383.

MASS-FIX versus standard methods to predict for PFS and OS among multiple myeloma patients participating on the STAMINA trial.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 8009-8009
Author(s):  
Angela Dispenzieri ◽  
Amrita Y. Krishnan ◽  
Bonnie Arendt ◽  
Surendra Dasari ◽  
Yvonne Adeduni Efebera ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mass Spectrometry ◽  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Flow Cytometry ◽  
Multiple Testing ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Independent Effect ◽  
Next Generation ◽  
Different Response

8009 Background: Measuring response among patients with multiple myeloma is essential for the care of patients. Deeper responses have been associated with better progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Serum (SIFE) and urine immunofixation are the currently used markers for biochemical documentation of CR after which marrow is tested for plasma cell clearance. Next generation flow cytometry and sequencing are used to document the presence of minimal residual disease (MRD). Mass spectrometry of blood by MALDI (Mass-Fix) is a new simple, inexpensive, sensitive, and specific means of detecting monoclonal immunoglobulins. To better test the hypothesis that Mass-Fix is superior to existing methodologies to predict for survival outcomes—especially SIFE-- samples from the STAMINA trial (NCT01109004), a trial comparing 3 transplant approaches among patients who have already received induction, were employed. Methods: Five-hundred and seventy-five patients were included. Samples from enrollment post-induction (post-I) and 1-year post enrollment (1YR) were tested when available. Four response parameters were assessed univariately: Mass-Fix, SIFE, complete response, and MRD by next generation flow cytometry. Mass spectrometry spectra were evaluated in a blinded fashion. Complete response was according to the 2006 International Myeloma Working Group criteria. Multivariate Cox proportional hazard models using stepwise regression were developed to explore the independent effect of the different response parameters on PFS and OS and interactions with other risk factors. Results: Of the 4 response measures, only MRD and Mass-Fix predicted for PFS and OS at multiple testing points on multivariate analyses (Table). Of the 4 post-I measurements, only MRD predicted for PFS; however, Mass-Fix was the only post-I measurement to predict for OS. Of all the 1-year measures, both 1YR Mass-Fix and 1YR MRD positivity predicted for inferior PFS and OS. In models including MRD and Mass-Fix, SIFE and CR were not prognostic for PFS or OS. Conclusions: Mass-Fix is a powerful means to track monoclonal proteins. The full utility of Mass-Fix was not exploited given the absence of a diagnostic sample and the fact that only serum (and not urine) was tested. Despite these limitations, it performed well at pre-induction and at 1 year. Mass-Fix provides a convenient and non-invasive means of predicting for myeloma outcomes. Clinical trial information: NCT01109004. [Table: see text]

Consolidation and Maintenance in Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma

2021 ◽  
pp. JCO.21.01045
Author(s):  
Pieter Sonneveld ◽  
Meletios A. Dimopoulos ◽  
Meral Beksac ◽  
Bronno van der Holt ◽  
Sara Aquino ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Minimal Residual Disease ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Primary Study ◽  
Controlled Clinical Trial ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Consolidation Treatment ◽  
Minimal Residual

PURPOSE To address the role of consolidation treatment for newly diagnosed, transplant eligible patients with multiple myeloma in a controlled clinical trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS The EMN02/HOVON95 trial compared consolidation treatment with two cycles of bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRD) or no consolidation after induction and intensification therapy, followed by continuous lenalidomide maintenance. Primary study end point was progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS Eight hundred seventy-eight eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive VRD consolidation (451 patients) or no consolidation (427 patients). At a median follow-up of 74.8 months, median PFS with adjustment for pretreatment was prolonged in patients randomly assigned to VRD consolidation (59.3 v 42.9 months, hazard ratio [HR] = 0.81; 95% CI, 0.68 to 0.96; P = .016). The PFS benefit was observed across most predefined subgroups, including revised International Staging System (ISS) stage, cytogenetics, and prior treatment. Revised ISS3 stage (HR, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.41 to 2.86) and ampl1q (HR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.37 to 2.04) were significant adverse prognostic factors. The median duration of maintenance was 33 months (interquartile range 13-86 months). Response ≥ complete response (CR) after consolidation versus no consolidation before start of maintenance was 34% versus 18%, respectively ( P < .001). Response ≥ CR on protocol including maintenance was 59% with consolidation and 46% without ( P < .001). Minimal residual disease analysis by flow cytometry in a subgroup of 226 patients with CR or stringent complete response or very good partial response before start of maintenance demonstrated a 74% minimal residual disease–negativity rate in VRD-treated patients. Toxicity from VRD was acceptable and manageable. CONCLUSION Consolidation treatment with VRD followed by lenalidomide maintenance improves PFS and depth of response in newly diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma as compared to maintenance alone.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document