Real-World Treatment of Patients With Relapsed/Refractory Myeloma

Current Treatment Strategies for Multiple Myeloma at First Relapse

Multiple myeloma (MM), the second most common hematologic cancer, remains an incurable malignancy, characterized by an initial response to therapy followed by successive relapses. The upfront treatment typically involves induction therapy, autologous stem cell transplantation for eligible patients, and long-term maintenance therapy. It is important to note that the anticipated duration of myeloma response diminishes with each subsequent relapse. Therefore, the first relapse represents a critical juncture in treatment, where refractoriness to key drug classes emerges as a significant challenge. Addressing the optimal management in this setting requires careful consideration of disease biology, prior therapies, and patient-specific factors to optimize outcomes. Cilta-cel, a chimeric antigen receptor T-cell construct, has emerged as the most promising therapeutic option at first relapse, resulting in long-term remissions with a significant treatment-free interval. However, availability and accessibility are not universal and treatment logistics are complex. Triplet regimens based on carfilzomib, pomalidomide or selinexor, remain the cornerstone of treatment at first relapse, whereas the optimal combination is based on refractoriness to prior drugs, especially anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies and lenalidomide, and patient comorbidities. With the rapidly expanding therapeutic landscape, clinicians face increasing complexity in selecting the most appropriate regimens for individual patients. This review aims to guide clinicians through these evolving options by consolidating evidence-based strategies and highlighting emerging therapies, ensuring a personalized approach to managing first-relapse MM.

Therapeutic Effect and Adverse Event Rate of Different Treatment Methods in Patients with Multiple Myeloma and Renal Insufficiency

INTRODUCTION

This study involves the collation and analysis of clinical characteristics and laboratory findings in patients with multiple myeloma (MM) combined with renal insufficiency. The objective was to assess the impact of various treatment methods on patient outcomes and the incidence of adverse events in individuals with MM and renal insufficiency.

METHODS

We analyzed the correlation between clinical characteristics, gene loci, fluorescence in situ hybridization, treatment methods, and prognosis in patients with MM and renal insufficiency. The differences in hematological and therapeutic efficacy indexes between two groups subjected to different treatments were evaluated. The assessment of treatment effectiveness was based on the total effective rate, calculated as the sum of stringent CR rate, complete remission rate, very good partial remission rate, and partial remission rate.

RESULTS

(1) The renal insufficiency group exhibited higher percentages of bone marrow abnormal plasma cells, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), blood calcium, white blood cell count, percentage of neutrophils, and blood β2-microglobulin (β2-MG) levels compared to the normal renal function group. Conversely, hemoglobin levels and lymphocyte percentage were lower in the renal insufficiency group. Binary logistic regression analysis identified hemoglobin, blood calcium values, blood β2-MG, and LDH as independent risk factors for the development of renal insufficiency in patients with MM (p < 0.05). (2) Based on the Durie-Salmon staging criteria, the proportion of Stage III patients was the highest (up to 81.8%), indicating that patients with MM usually suffer from insidious disease, often with high tumor load and late-disease stage at the time of consultation. International Staging System (ISS) and Revised ISS staging also revealed a higher proportion of Stage III patients in the renal insufficiency group (p < 0.05), indicating a worse long-term prognosis in patients with MM and renal insufficiency. (3) Before treatment, there was no significant difference between the two groups in the analysis of various indices. Complications such as sepsis, herpes zoster, peripheral neuropathy, thrombosis, secondary pulmonary infection, and cardiac complications were significantly lower in the BCD group (Bortezomib + Cyclophosphamide + Dexamethasone) compared to the BD group (Bortezomib + Dexamethasone) (χ2 = 6.333, p < 0.05), suggesting fewer complications with the BCD regimen. (4) The clinical treatment effects analysis indicated that the BCD group demonstrated a more significant impact than the BD group in the treatment of MM.

CONCLUSION

The application of the BCD regimen in the treatment of MM has shown significant efficiency, effectively alleviating clinical symptoms with fewer adverse reactions and high safety.

Does the Simultaneous Introduction of Several Pharmaceuticals in the Post-Lenalidomide Era Translate to Better Outcomes in Relapse Refractory Multiple Myeloma? Findings from the Real-World Innovation in Multiple Myeloma (REAL IMM) Study

Newer methodologies are needed to assess the real-world comparative effectiveness of a "generation" of pharmaceutical innovation versus the prior standard of care. This chart review study aimed to first evaluate the cumulative clinical benefits of pharmaceutical innovation in everyday relapse/refractory multiple myeloma before analyzing findings in the context of respective real-world outcomes from the bortezomib/lenalidomide era. Study endpoints included the 52-week PFS rate in second and third line of therapy (LOT), mPFS-2 across the first and second LOT, the ORR, reasons for discontinuation, and the treatment duration per therapeutic algorithm. Data from 107 patients were collected. The median follow-up was 2.0 years. Of the subjects who met the selection criteria for the second LOT, 72.2% maintained the PFS at 52 weeks. In the third-line setting, the PFS rate at 52 weeks was 63.5%. The mPFS across the first and second, the second, and the third LOTs were 26, 17, and 15 months, respectively. The ORR was 76.1% in the second and 69.7% in the third LOT. After non-response or progression, the main reason for drug discontinuation was treatment intolerability. The second-line ORR and the 52-week PFS rate were similar to previous real-world findings from the bortezomib/lenalidomide era. The cumulative mPFS across the second and third LOTs was higher than the respective mPFS across the first and second LOTs. Despite its limitations, the methodology and findings from this study may be used in future clinical and economic evaluations across all hematological malignancies.

The Role of t(11;14) in Tailoring Treatment Decisions in Multiple Myeloma

Multiple myeloma (MM) represents a hematological neoplasia with an uncontrolled proliferation of malignant plasma cells and complex cytogenetic abnormalities. t(11;14) has emerged as a crucial genetic aberration and is one of the most common primary translocations in MM. Patients harboring t(11;14) represent a distinctive subgroup with a clinical profile that differs from t(11;14)-negative MM risk categories. One of the key features linked with t(11;14) is the BCL2 dependency, indicating vulnerability to BCL2 inhibition. BCL2 inhibitors, such as venetoclax, demonstrated impressive efficacy alone or in combination with other anti-myeloma drugs in patients with RRMM accompanied by t(11;14) and BCL2 overexpression. Therefore, t(11;14) plays a key role in both risk stratification and informed decision making towards a tailored therapy. In this review, we highlight the biology of t(11;14) in MM cells, summarize the current evolving role of t(11;14) in the era of novel agents and novel targeted therapies, illuminate current efficacy and safety data of BCL2-based treatment options and explore the future prospects of individualized precision medicine for this special subgroup of patients with MM.

Comparison of health care costs and resource utilization for commonly used proteasome inhibitor-immunomodulatory drug-based triplet regimens for the management of patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma in the United States

BACKGROUND: Economic differences among currently available proteasome inhibitors (PI)-based lenalidomide-dexamethasone (Rd)-backbone triplet regimens-ixazomib (I), bortezomib (V), and carfilzomib (K) plus Rd-remain poorly understood. OBJECTIVE: To assess health care resource utilization (HCRU) and health care costs of patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) in the United States treated with IRd, VRd, and KRd. METHODS: This retrospective longitudinal cohort study using IQVIA PharMetrics Plus adjudicated claims US data (January 1, 2015, to September 30, 2020) included adult patients with all available data who initiated IRd, VRd, or KRd in second line of therapy or later (LOT2+) on or after September 1, 2015. The index date was the treatment initiation date for each LOT (multiple LOTs per patient were included) and the baseline was 6 months pre-index. MM-related and all-cause HCRU/costs were assessed during follow-up and reported per patient per month (PPPM; 2020 US Dollars). For MM-related costs only, treatment administration costs were excluded from outpatient (OP) costs and instead summed with pharmacy costs. HCRU/costs were compared between treatment groups using generalized linear models (GLMs). Cost variables were compared using 2-part models and GLM with log transformation and γ distribution. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) adjusted for imbalance of baseline confounders across treatment groups. RESULTS: The study included 511 patients contributing 542 LOTs (IRd: n = 153; VRd: n = 262; KRd: n = 127). Before IPTW, mean observed time spent on therapy was 8.5, 9.3, and 7.3 months for the IRd, VRd, and KRd cohorts, respectively. During follow-up and after IPTW, IRd and VRd were associated with significantly fewer OP visits vs KRd. Post-IPTW comparisons of MM-related costs for IRd vs KRd yielded lower OP costs for IRd (mean diff. PPPM: -$3,428; P < 0.001), contributing to lower total medical costs (-$3,813; P < 0.001) and total health care cost savings with IRd vs KRd (-$5,813; P = 0.001). MM-related OP costs were lower for VRd (mean diff. PPPM: -$3,543; P < 0.001) than KRd, reducing its total MM-related medical costs (-$3,997; P = 0.002), leading to total MM-related health care cost savings with VRd vs KRd (-$12,357; P < 0.001). All-cause cost comparisons yielded similar results (total health care cost savings for IRd and VRd vs KRd: -$6,371 and -$13,629, respectively; all P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: From the US insurance-payer perspective, patients treated with IRd and VRd had significant medical cost savings vs KRd due to lower OP costs when excluding treatment administration costs. The differential economic impacts of PI-Rd regimens in this study may help to inform treatment decisions for patients with MM. DISCLOSURES: This study and article were supported by Takeda Development Center Americas, Inc. Dr Sanchez has no conflicts to declare. Dr Chari has the following relationships: Research Support/Principal Investigator: Amgen, Array Biopharma, Celgene, Glaxo Smith Klein, Janssen, Millenium/Takeda, Novartis Pharmaceuticals, Oncoceutics, Pharmacyclics, Seattle Genetics; Consultant: Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Millenium/Takeda, Janssen, Karyopharm; Scientific Advisory Board: Amgen, Celgene, Millenium/Takeda, Janssen, Karyopharm, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics. Drs Cherepanov, Huang, Dabora, and Noga are current employees of Takeda, while Drs Stull and Young are ex-employees of Takeda; Drs Cherepanov and Huang also own stocks in Takeda. Dr DerSarkissian, Ms Cheng, Ms Zhang, Mr Banatwala, and Dr Duh are employees of Analysis Group, Inc. (AG), a consulting firm that received funding from Takeda to conduct this study. Ms Pi was an employee of AG at the time of the study. Dr Ailawadhi has the following relationships to declare: Research Support and Consulting for BMS, GSK, and Janssen; Research Support from AbbVie, Arch Oncology, Cellectar, Medimmune, Pharmacyclics, and Xencor; Consulting for Beigene, Oncopeptides, Regeneron, Sanofi, and Takeda.

Comparisons of efficacy between frontline treatment with bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone and lenalidomide-dexamethasone for transplant-ineligible multiple myeloma: a multicenter real-world based registry report, CAREMM-2102 study

BACKGROUND

Bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone (VMP) and lenalidomide-dexamethasone (Rd) remain the standard treatments for transplant-ineligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). This study aimed to compare real-world benefits between the two regimens. We also were interested in exploring efficacy according to subsequent therapy following VMP or Rd.

METHODS

A total of 559 NDMM patients treated with VMP (n = 443, 79.2%) or Rd (n = 116, 20.8%) was recruited retrospectively from a multicenter database.

RESULTS

Rd provided more benefits than VMP-overall response rate: 92.2 vs. 81.8%, p = 0.018; median progression-free survival (PFS): 20.0 vs. 14.5 months, p <0.001; second PFS (PFS2): 43.9 vs. 36.9 months, p = 0.012; overall survival (OS): 100.1 vs. 85.0 months, p = 0.017. Multivariable analysis revealed significant benefits of Rd over VMP, with hazard ratios of 0.722, 0.627, and 0.586 for PFS, PFS2, and OS, respectively. In propensity score-matched cohorts with matched VMP (n = 201) and Rd (n = 67) arms to balance baseline characteristics, Rd still showed significantly better outcomes for PFS, PFS2, and OS than VMP. Following VMP failure, triplet therapy showed significant benefits for response and PFS2; after Rd failure, PFS2 with carfilzomib-dexamethasone was significantly better than bortezomib-based doublet treatment.

CONCLUSION

These real-world findings may assist with better selection between VMP and Rd as well as subsequent therapy for NDMM.

Real-World Effectiveness and Safety of Belantamab Mafodotin Monotherapy in Triple-Class Refractory Multiple Myeloma

B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA) is a promising therapeutic target for multiple myeloma (MM). The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness and tolerability of monotherapy with the conjugated anti-BCMA monoclonal antibody belantamab mafodotin in triple-class refractory patients with MM in real-world practice. Patients refractory to at least one proteasome inhibitor, one immunomodulatory drug, and one anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody received belantamab mafodotin at 2.5 mg/kg intravenously every 3 weeks. Overall, 27 patients with a median age of 65 years (range 41-81) were included. Of these, 52% were male and the median number of prior lines of treatment was 5 (4-10). The overall response rate (partial response or better) was 52%, whereas the disease control rate (stable disease or better) was 70%. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 2 months (95%CI: 0-7), whereas the median PFS among the responders was 12 months (95%CI: 6-18). Regarding the toxicity profile, the most common toxicity was eye toxicity, in 44% of the patients. Keratopathy grade 2-3 was reported in 33.3% of the patients. In conclusion, belantamab mafodotin showed a safety and efficacy profile consistent with the results of the registrational study. Importantly, heavily pretreated patients who responded to treatment derived a substantial survival benefit.

Current status of drug development for patients with multiple myeloma: a review of comparison in China and the rest of world

Multiple myeloma (MM) is a highly heterogeneous malignancy. The treatment of MM has been significantly advanced in recent years. B cell maturation antigen (BCMA)-targeted immunotherapy and chimeric antigen receptor T (CAR-T) cell therapy have been approved for the treatment of relapsed and refractory MM (RRMM), which will be launched in China shortly. The CD38 (cluster of differentiation 38) antibody, daratumumab, improves the clinical outcomes both RRMM and newly diagnosed MM patients. The combination of daratumumab, bortezomib and dexamethasone achieved favorable outcomes as the first-line therapy in China. However, high-risk patients have limited benefits from these advanced therapeutics, and usually relapse early, progressing into aggressive end-stage MM. Therefore, novel therapies are sought to improve the cancer prognosis in these patients. This review furnishes an overview of the recent clinical developments of these novel drugs and compares the drug candidates under development in China to the rest of the world.

Non-selective proteasome inhibitors in multiple myeloma and future perspectives

INTRODUCTION

: The ubiquitination system is the most important cascade of protein degradation independently of lysosomal function. The proteasome system is actively involved in cell cycle regulation. Therefore, proteasome inhibition can lead to inhibition of tumor cell proliferation, and therefore it constitutes a potential therapeutic anticancer approach especially in the therapeutic algorithm of patients with multiple myeloma.

AREAS COVERED

Three different proteasome inhibitors are currently approved, bortezomib, carfilzomib and ixazomib, and they have been investigated in multiple myeloma and other hematological malignancies. Multiple myeloma cells are extremely sensitive to this inhibition which leads to accumulation of proteins and endoplasmic reticulum stress, leading finally to apoptosis. However, these agents lack specificity, since they target both the constitutive proteasome and the immunoproteasome. Targeting the constitutive proteasome is the main reason for side toxicity due to the effect on normal tissues. In contrary, immunoproteasome inhibition may reduce the adverse events while maintaining the therapeutic efficacy. In this review the authors present the role of the available proteasome inhibitors in myeloma therapeutics and future perspectives of both selective and non-selective proteasome inhibitors.

EXPERT OPINION

The available non-selective proteasome inhibitors have changed the therapeutics of multiple myeloma the last 10 years and have significantly improved the clinical outcomes of the patients. Furthermore, selective proteasome inhibitors are now under preclinical investigation and there is hope that their optimization will come with an improved safety profile with at least comparable efficacy.

Metabolic Disorders in Multiple Myeloma

Multiple myeloma (MM) is the second most common hematological malignancy and is attributed to monoclonal proliferation of plasma cells in the bone marrow. Cancer cells including myeloma cells deregulate metabolic pathways to ensure proliferation, growth, survival and avoid immune surveillance, with glycolysis and glutaminolysis being the most identified procedures involved. These disorders are considered a hallmark of cancer and the alterations performed ensure that enough energy is available for rapid cell proliferation. An association between metabolic syndrome, inflammatory cytokinesand incidence of MM has been also described, while the use of metformin and statins has been identified as a positive prognostic factor for the disease course. In this review, we aim to present the metabolic disorders that occur in multiple myeloma, the potential defects on the immune system and the potential advantage of targeting the dysregulated pathways in order to enhance antitumor therapeutics.

BCMA in Multiple Myeloma-A Promising Key to Therapy

Despite the discoveries of numerous agents including next generation proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulatory drugs, and monoclonal antibodies, multiple myeloma (MM) remains an incurable disease. The field of myeloma treatment in refractory or relapsed patients after standard therapy entered a new era due to the B-cell maturation antigen (BMCA) targeted approach. BCMA is a member of the tumor necrosis factor receptor family with high expression in mature B-lymphocytes and plasma cells. Given the understanding of BCMA mechanism of action in MM, BCMA plays a promising role as a therapeutic target. Several clinical trials are underway to evolve the current BCMA targeted treatment concept such as antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs), bispecific T cell engagers (BITEs) and chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy. Current results of representative BCMA trials may close the gap of the unmet clinical need to further improve the outcome of heavily pretreated MM patients with the potency to change the paradigm in newly diagnosed and refractory MM. This comprehensive review will give an update on various BMCA targeted treatment modalities (ADCs, BITEs, CAR T cell therapy) and its existing results on efficacy and safety from preclinical and clinical trials.

Carfilzomib Improves Bone Metabolism in Patients with Advanced Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma: Results of the CarMMa Study

Simple Summary

Carfilzomib with dexamethasone is an important therapeutic option for patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. We sought to evaluate the effect of this regimen on the bone-related outcomes, which are associated with both quality of life and survival. Among 25 patients, less than one third experienced a new skeletal-related event during treatment, even in the absence of any bone-targeted agent. Interestingly, there was a significant decrease in serum biomarkers of bone resorption, which was at least partially due to the sRANKL/OPG ratio reduction. Furthermore, Kd produced an increase in markers of bone formation. Importantly, these changes were independent of myeloma response to treatment. Therefore, the combination of carfilzomib and dexamethasone improves bone metabolism and bone health in patients with advanced multiple myeloma.

Abstract

Carfilzomib with dexamethasone (Kd) is a well-established regimen for the treatment of relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). There is limited information for the effects of Kd on myeloma-related bone disease. This non-interventional study aimed to assess skeletal-related events (SREs) and bone metabolism in patients with RRMM receiving Kd, in the absence of any bone-targeted agent. Twenty-five patients were enrolled with a median of three prior lines of therapy; 72% of them had evidence of osteolytic bone disease at study entry. During Kd treatment, the rate of new SREs was 28%. Kd produced a clinically relevant (≥30%) decrease in C-telopeptide of collagen type-1 (p = 0.048) and of tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase-5b (p = 0.002) at 2 months. This reduction was at least partially due to the reduction in the osteoclast regulator RANKL/osteoprotegerin ratio, at 2 months (p = 0.026). Regarding bone formation, there was a clinically relevant increase in osteocalcin at 6 months (p = 0.03) and in procollagen type I N-propeptide at 8 months post-Kd initiation. Importantly, these bone metabolism changes were independent of myeloma response to treatment. In conclusion, Kd resulted in a low rate of SREs among RRMM patients, along with an early, sustained and clinically relevant decrease in bone resorption, which was accompanied by an increase in bone formation, independently of myeloma response and in the absence of any bone-targeted agent use.