Isatuximab, carfilzomib and dexamethasone (Isa-Kd) for the management of relapsed multiple myeloma

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rahul Banerjee ◽  
Mimi Lo ◽  
Thomas G Martin

The treatment of relapsed multiple myeloma remains challenging. Based on interim data from the randomized Phase III IKEMA study demonstrating a progression-free survival benefit with a combination of isatuximab (Isa, a CD38-targeted monoclonal antibody) and carfilzomib/dexamethasone (Kd) versus Kd alone, Isa-Kd recently received regulatory approval in the USA and Europe for patients with multiple myeloma who have received at least one prior line of therapy (in the USA, up to three prior lines). In this review we discuss the rationale and clinical trial experience to date with Isa-Kd. Although final IKEMA results are pending, Isa-Kd has emerged as an effective and tolerable therapy for patients with relapsed multiple myeloma. Given the growing number of antibody-containing triplet regimens in this setting, potential niches and limitations for Isa-Kd are also discussed.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin J Solomon ◽  
Cai Cun Zhou ◽  
Alexander Drilon ◽  
Keunchil Park ◽  
Jürgen Wolf ◽  
...  

Selpercatinib, a novel, highly selective and potent, inhibitor of RET, demonstrated clinically meaningful antitumor activity with manageable toxicity in heavily pretreated and treatment-naive RET fusion-positive non-small-cell lung cancer patients in a Phase I/II clinical trial. LIBRETTO-431 (NCT04194944) is a randomized, global, multicenter, open-label, Phase III trial, evaluating selpercatinib versus carboplatin or cisplatin and pemetrexed chemotherapy with or without pembrolizumab in treatment-naive patients with locally advanced/metastatic RET fusion-positive nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer. The primary end point is progression-free survival by independent review. Key secondary end points include overall survival, response rate, duration of response and progression-free survival. Clinical trial registration: NCT04194944 (ClinicalTrials.gov)


Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 32-33
Author(s):  
Zahoor Ahmed ◽  
Karun Neupane ◽  
Rabia Ashraf ◽  
Amna Khan ◽  
Moazzam Shahzad ◽  
...  

Introduction: Daratumumab (Dara) is a human anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody approved for multiple myeloma (MM) treatment. Dara has a promising efficacy and a favorable safety profile in newly diagnosed MM (NDMM) patients. This study is focused on the efficacy and safety of Dara when added to the standard care regimen in transplant ineligible NDMM in phase III clinical trials. Methods: We performed a comprehensive database search on four major databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Clinicaltrials.gov). Our search strategy included MeSH (Medical Subject Headings) terms and key words for multiple myeloma and Dara including trade names and generic names from date of inception to May 2020. Initial search revealed 587 articles. After excluding review articles, duplicates, and non-relevant articles, two phase III clinical trials were included which reported overall response rate (ORR), and progression free survival (PFS) of transplant ineligible NDMM patients with Dara addition to standard care regimen. Odds ratios (OR) of ORR were computed and hazard ratios (HR) of PFS (along with 95% confidence intervals; CI) were extracted to compute a pooled HR using a fixed effect model in RevMan v.5.4. Results: A total of 1453 transplant ineligible NDMM patients were enrolled and evaluated in two phase III randomized clinical trials. Seven hundred and eighteen patients were in Dara group and 735 patients were in control group. Bahlis et al. (2019) studied Dara + lenolidamide (R) and dexamethasone (d) vs Rd in NDMM pts (n=737) in MAIA phase III trial. Similarly, Mateos et al. (2018) reported the role of Dara + bortezomib (V) + melphalan (M), and prednisone (P) vs VMP in NDMM pts (n=706) in a phase III trial (Alcyone). A pooled analysis of these phase III trials showed ORR (OR: 3.26, 95% CI 2.36-4.49; p < 0.00001, I2 = 0%), and progression free survival (PFS) (HR: 0.53, 95% CI 0.43-0.65; p < 0.00001, I2 = 0%). Achievement of minimal residual disease (MRD) negative status was significant in Dara based regimen as compared to control group (OR: 4.49, 95% CI 3.31-6.37; p < 0.00001, I2 = 0%). Dara addition to standard care regimen (Rd and VMP) decreased the risk of progression/death to 42% (HR: 0.58, 95% CI 0.48-0.70; p < 0.00001, I2 = 0%). The addition of Dara increased the risk of neutropenia (OR: 1.41, 95% CI 1.07-1.85; p < 0.02, I2 = 44%), and pneumonia (OR: 2.25, 95% CI 1.54-3.29; p < 0.0001, I2 = 37%) vs control group. However, decreased risk of anemia (OR: 0.64, 95% CI 0.49-0.85: p < 0.002, I2=30%) was observed in Dara group vs control group (Figure 1). Conclusion: Addition of Dara to the standard care regimen for transplant ineligible NDMM achieved the surrogate end points with improved efficacy and MRD negative status with manageable toxicity. However, data from more randomized controlled trials is needed. Table Disclosures Anwer: Incyte, Seattle Genetics, Acetylon Pharmaceuticals, AbbVie Pharma, Astellas Pharma, Celegene, Millennium Pharmaceuticals.: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.


2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e19513-e19513
Author(s):  
Alexandre Tungesvik ◽  
Praneeth Reddy Sudalagunta ◽  
Jessica Huang ◽  
Elizabeth Dimaggio ◽  
Gabe De Avila ◽  
...  

e19513 Background: Although there is much to be optimistic about in the multiple myeloma community as the approval of new therapies and regimen-combinations for relapsed refractory disease continues to grow, determining the best option for a patient can be complicated. Both carfilzomib- (C) and daratumumab- (D) based regimens have demonstrated superior efficacy in this setting, but there is a paucity of data supporting which should be selected first, and if regimen sequence influences outcomes. The aim of this study is to describe sequencing patterns in the era of these newer agents and to determine if there is a difference in outcomes for patients with RRMM who received one of the following treatment sequences: C-regimen with a D-regimen given immediately prior (DC); C-regimen without any prior D (C only); D-regimen with a C-regimen given immediately prior (CD); or D-regimen without any prior C (D only). Methods: This is a retrospective analysis of patients with RRMM consecutively treated at Moffitt Cancer Center between 1/1/2015 and 6/25/18. Response to therapy was assessed using the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) criteria. Progression-free survival (PFS) was measured in days from the start of therapy to progression. Time to response (TTR) was measured in days from the start of therapy to first response. Results: 132 patients with RRMM who received 1-3 prior lines of therapy with at least one line of therapy containing either C or D were identified. Overall, the majority of patients were treated with C only (n = 101), 10 received DC, 31 received D only, and 35 received CD. In patients that received C only, partial response (PR) was achieved in 38%, very good partial response (VGPR) was 20%, and stringent complete response (sCR) was 2%. In patients that received DC, PR was 20% and VGPR was 10%; no patient achieved a sCR. Of the patients that received D only, PR was 29%, VGPR was 10%, and sCR was 3%. In patients that received CD, PR was 31% and VGPR was 26%; no patient achieved sCR. Median PFS in patients who received C only, DC, D only, and CD was 117 days, 126 days, 104 days, and 190 days, respectively. TTR in patients who received C only, DC, D only, and CD was 82 days, 39 days, 98 days, and 88 days, respectively. Conclusions: The data suggests that RRMM patients who receive either CD or DC appear to have a PFS advantage over those patients who did not. Notably, an early TTR was found in patients that received DC. Further analysis is ongoing.


2019 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 204062071881669 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert M. Rifkin ◽  
Rohan Medhekar ◽  
E. Susan Amirian ◽  
Kathleen M. Aguilar ◽  
Thomas Wilson ◽  
...  

Background: Most multiple myeloma (MM) patients ultimately progress, with remission duration decreasing after first relapse. Recently, novel agents have been approved for the treatment of relapsed MM. There is a paucity of real-world data on these treatments. We sought to compare time to next treatment (TTNT) in MM patients in their second line of therapy (LOT2), treated with common proteasome inhibitor (PI)-based triplets. Methods: Adult MM patients who received carfilzomib (K) between 1 November 2013 and 29 February 2016 at US Oncology Network (USON) clinics utilizing iKnowMed™ electronic health records (EHRs) were identified. Patients were included if they were ⩾18 years of age, not enrolled in clinical trials, had ⩾2 visits at a USON clinic and received LOT2 regimens consisting of: K+lenalidomide with steroid (KRd), bortezomib+lenalidomide with steroid (VRd), or bortezomib+cyclophosphamide with steroid (VCyd). TTNT was estimated from LOT2 initiation to LOT3 initiation using the Kaplan–Meier method, and hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated using Cox modeling. Results: A total of 718 patients received a K-containing regimen sometime during their MM treatment (LOT1 to LOT5). Of these, 156 patients received: KRd ( n = 112; 71.8%), VRd ( n =27; 17.3%), or VCyd ( n = 17; 10.9%). Baseline characteristics were similar between groups (mean age: 64.8 years; 58% male). Median TTNT was longest for KRd [25.3 months; 95% confidence interval (CI): 19.71–NR], versus VRd or VCyd (VRd median TTNT: 10.2 months, 95% CI: 4.24–12.71; VCyd: 6.5 months, 95% CI: 3.02–12.78; log-rank p < 0.0001). The adjusted HR for KRd was 0.19 (95% CI: 0.11–0.37), compared with VRd. Conclusions: Considering the real-world nature of these data, the median TTNT observed with KRd was relatively consistent, with progression-free survival (PFS) for KRd observed in the phase III ASPIRE trial (median PFS: ITT population = 26.3 months; LOT2 = 29.6 months). Patients who received KRd at first relapse had significantly longer TTNT, compared with those on VRd or VCyd, confirming the value of KRd as an important treatment option for relapsed MM.


2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (11) ◽  
pp. 631-641 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fredrik Schjesvold ◽  
Pawel Robak ◽  
Ludek Pour ◽  
Johan Aschan ◽  
Pieter Sonneveld

Melflufen is a novel peptide–drug conjugate that rapidly delivers a cytotoxic payload into tumor cells. It has emerged as a potential new multiple myeloma treatment, particularly for late-stage forms of the disease. Here we describe the rationale and design of OCEAN (NCT03151811), a randomized, head-to-head, superiority, open-label, global, Phase III study evaluating the efficacy and safety of melflufen + dexamethasone versus pomalidomide + dexamethasone. Eligible patients with relapsed refractory multiple myeloma have received 2–4 previous treatments and are refractory to both lenalidomide and their last treatment. Patients are excluded if they have previously received pomalidomide. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival, and key secondary endpoints include overall response rate, duration of response and overall survival.


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 11505-11505
Author(s):  
Brian Andrew Van Tine ◽  
Sant P. Chawla ◽  
Jonathan C. Trent ◽  
Breelyn A. Wilky ◽  
Rashmi Chugh ◽  
...  

11505 Background: AL3818 (Catequentinib, Anlotinib) is a novel, orally administered, small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitor. The primary objective of this Phase 3 study is to evaluate the efficacy of AL3818 monotherapy in patients (pts) with synovial sarcoma (SS) comparing with dacarbazine in randomization setting. Methods: Patients with a diagnosis of synovial sarcoma requiring second line or further line treatment were eligible for enrollment. The regimen was a 21-day cycle with oral AL3818 administered on 14 days on and 7 days off. This phase 3 trial is randomized in 2:1 ratio of AL3818 comparing to dacarbazine with option of crossover after PD of dacarbazine treatment. Progression free survival (PFS) with Log Rank test is the primary endpoint and this trial for SS is currently completed enrolled in US and Italy. Results: Total 79 pts initiated treatment and are evaluable, 52 received AL3818 as treatment arm (T), and 27 received dacarbazine (D) as control arm (C). Arms T/C median ages were 40.5/42.0 years (range: 18-70+) and 20/16 (38.5%/59.3%) were male. Overall, PFS was 2.89 months (95% CI: 2.73 – 6.87) for AL3818 and 1.64 (95% CI: 1.45 – 2.70) for D. The PFS of study met the primary endpoint with a p-value of 0.0015 and a HR of 0.449 (95% CI: 0.270– 0.744). At the month 4, 6, and 12, the percentages of progression free patients for AL3818 were 48.1%, 42.3% and 26.9%; and for D were 14.85%, 11.1% and 3.7%. For grade 3 treatment-related adverse events, 12(23.1%) of pts experienced for AL3818 and 7(25.9%) of pts experienced for D. The most common AL3818 related grade 3 AEs were diarrhea (5.8%) and hypertension (3.8%). Conclusions: This phase III trial demonstrates improved disease control and superior progression free survival for AL3818 vs dacarbazine in advanced SS. In addition, the study further confirms the acceptable benefit-risk profile of AL3818 from the prior randomized Phase 2b soft tissue sarcoma study (NCT02449343). AL3818 is a meaningful treatment option for pts with advanced SS. Clinical trial information: NCT 03016819 Clinical trial information: NCT03016819.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document