Network meta-analysis of randomized trials in multiple myeloma: Efficacy and safety in frontline therapy for patients not eligible for transplant

Efficacy and safety of anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: a systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials

Objectives

The current study aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) among patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) through meta-analysis.

Methods

As of June 2023, we searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase and the Cochrane Library. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) which compared the clinical outcomes of anti-CD38 mAbs plus immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs) or proteasome inhibitors (PIs) plus dexamethasone and IMiDs (or PIs) and dexamethasone alone for RRMM patients were included. Efficacy outcomes were mainly evaluated with progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). The safety was analyzed with hematologic and nonhematologic treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). All results were pooled using hazard ratio (HR), relative risk (RR), and their 95% confidence interval (CI) and prediction interval (PI).

Results

This meta-analysis included 11 RCTs in total. Compared with IMiDs (or PIs) and dexamethasone alone, anti-CD38 mAbs in combination with IMiDs (or PIs) and dexamethasone significantly prolonged PFS (HR: 0.552, 95% CI = 0.461 to 0.659, 95% PI = 0.318 to 0.957) and OS (HR: 0.737, 95% CI = 0.657 to 0.827, 95% PI = 0.626 to 0.868) in patients with RRMM. Additionally, RRMM patients receiving anti-CD38 mAbs in combination with IMiDs (or PIs) and dexamethasone achieved higher rates of overall response (RR: 1.281, 95% CI = 1.144 to 1.434, 95% PI = 0.883 to 1.859), complete response or better (RR: 2.602, 95% CI = 1.977 to 3.424, 95% PI = 1.203 to 5.628), very good partial response (VGPR) or better (RR: 1.886, 95% CI = 1.532 to 2.322, 95% PI = 0.953 to 3.731), and minimum residual disease (MRD)-negative (RR: 4.147, 95% CI = 2.588 to 6.644, 95% PI = 1.056 to 16.283) than those receiving IMiDs (or PIs) and dexamethasone alone. For TEAEs, the rates of hematologic and nonhematologic TEAEs, including thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, upper respiratory tract infection (URTI), pneumonia, bronchitis, dyspnea, diarrhea, pyrexia, back pain, arthralgia, fatigue, insomnia, and hypertension, were higher in the anti-CD38 mAbs in combination with IMiDs (or PIs) and dexamethasone group than in the IMiDs (or PIs) and dexamethasone group.

Conclusion

Our study showed that anti-CD38 mAbs in combination with IMiDs (or PIs) and dexamethasone improved PFS and OS, and achieved higher rates of overall response, complete response or better, VGPR or better, and MRD-negative, as well as higher rates of thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, URTI, pneumonia, bronchitis, dyspnea, diarrhea, pyrexia, back pain, arthralgia, fatigue, insomnia, and hypertension in RRMM patients.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42023431071.

Immunotherapy of Multiple Myeloma: Current Status as Prologue to the Future

The landscape of therapeutic measures to treat multiple myeloma has undergone a seismic shift since the dawn of the current century. This has been driven largely by the introduction of new classes of small molecules, such as proteasome blockers (e.g., bortezomib) and immunomodulators (e.g., lenalidomide), as well as by immunotherapeutic agents starting with the anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody daratumumab in 2015. Recently, other immunotherapies have been added to the armamentarium of drugs available to fight this malignancy. These include the bispecifics teclistamab, talquetamab, and elranatamab, and the chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell products idecabtagene vicleucel (ide-cel) and ciltacabtagene autoleucel (cilta-cel). While the accumulated benefits of these newer agents have resulted in a more than doubling of the disease's five-year survival rate to nearly 60% and improved quality of life, the disease remains incurable, as patients become refractory to the drugs and experience relapse. This review covers the current scope of antimyeloma immunotherapeutic agents, both those in clinical use and in development. Included in the discussion are additional monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs), bi- and multitargeted mAbs, and CAR T-cells and emerging natural killer (NK) cells, including products intended for "off-the-shelf" (allogeneic) applications. Emphasis is placed on the benefits of each along with the challenges that need to be surmounted if MM is to be cured.

Role of daratumumab in the frontline management of multiple myeloma: a narrative review

INTRODUCTION

The prevalence of multiple myeloma (MM) has gradually increased over the last few decades in India due to growing population, better disease awareness, and improved diagnostic procedures. Despite such advances, MM remains an incurable and relapsing disease due to its heterogeneity and genomic instability. With the inclusion of monoclonal antibodies, especially daratumumab in the frontline regimen, the management landscape of MM has improved significantly resulting in better disease control and patient outcomes.

AREAS COVERED

This review aims to provide an in-depth summary of efficacy and safety of frontline daratumumab therapy in treatment of MM including patients with high-risk cytogenetic profile.

EXPERT OPINION

Based on the review of literature, daratumumab in frontline therapy has demonstrated improved efficacy in terms of reduction in disease progression or death, and superior minimal residual disease (MRD)-negativity rates with an acceptable safety profile in patients with newly diagnosed MM (NDMM) including patients with high-risk cytogenetic profile. Daratumumab alone or in combination with other drugs has shown similar clinical outcomes in patients with relapsed/refractory MM. Hence, daratumumab can be used upfront in patients with MM.

Molecular-Biology-Driven Frontline Treatment for Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

The treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) currently relies on the use of chemo-immunotherapy, Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitors, or BCL2 inhibitors alone or combined with an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody. However, the availability of multiple choices for the first-line setting and a lack of direct head-to-head comparisons pose a challenge for treatment selection. To overcome these limitations, we performed a systematic review and a network meta-analysis on published randomized clinical trials performed in the first-line treatment setting of CLL. For each study, we retrieved data on progression-free survival (according to del17/P53 and IGHV status), overall response rate, complete response, and incidence of most frequent grade 3-4 adverse event. We identified nine clinical trials encompassing 11 different treatments, with a total of 5288 CLL patients evaluated. We systematically performed separated network meta-analyses (NMA) to evaluate the efficacy/safety of each regimen in the conditions previously described to obtain the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) score, which was subsequently used to build separated ranking charts. Interestingly, the combination of obinutuzumab with acalabrutinib reached the top of the chart in each sub-analysis performed, with the exception of the del17/P53mut setting, where it was almost on par with the aCD20 mAbs/ibrutinib combination (SUCRA aCD20-ibrutinib and O-acala: 93.5% and 91%, respectively) and of the safety evaluation, where monotherapies (acalabrutinib in particular) gave better results. Finally, considering that NMA and SUCRA work for single endpoints only, we performed a principal component analysis to recapitulate in a cartesian plane the SUCRA profiles of each schedule according to the results obtained in each sub-analysis, confirming again the superiority of aCD20/BTKi or BCL2i combinations in a first-line setting. Overall, here we demonstrated that: (1) a chemotherapy-free regimen, such as the combination of aCD20 with a BTKi or BCL2i, should be the preferred treatment choice despite biological/molecular characteristics (preferred regimen O-acala); (2) there is less and less room for chemotherapy in the first line treatment of CLL.