Efficacy and safety of frontline regimens for older transplant-ineligible patients with multiple myeloma: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Comparison of Time to Next Treatment or Death Between Front-Line Daratumumab, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone (DRd) Versus Bortezomib, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone (VRd) Among Transplant-Ineligible Patients With Multiple Myeloma

INTRODUCTION

Daratumumab, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (DRd) and bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRd) are the only preferred treatment regimens for patients with transplant-ineligible (TIE) newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). As there are no randomized head-to-head studies of DRd versus VRd, this analysis aimed to compare real-world time-to-next-treatment (TTNT) or death in this population.

METHODS

Patients with NDMM who received front-line (FL) DRd or VRd were identified from the Acentrus database (January 1, 2018 to May 31, 2023). Those with a record of a stem cell transplant or aged < 65 years were excluded to limit analysis to the TIE population. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to balance baseline patient characteristics. A doubly robust Cox proportional hazards model was used to compare TTNT or death between cohorts.

RESULTS

A total of 149 and 494 patients who initiated DRd and VRd, respectively, were identified. After weighting (weighted NDRd = 302, weighted NVRd = 341), cohorts had similar baseline characteristics. Of these, 98 (32.4%) DRd and 175 (51.2%) VRd patients either received a subsequent line of therapy or died, with a median TTNT or death of 37.8 months in the DRd cohort and 18.7 months in the VRd cohort (hazard ratio: 0.58, 95% confidence interval: 0.35, 0.81; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Treatment of TIE NDMM patients with DRd led to a significantly longer TTNT or death compared to VRd, evidenced by a 42% risk reduction, supporting the effectiveness of DRd over VRd as FL treatment in this patient population.

Personalized Treatment of Multiple Myeloma in Frail Patients

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

As the treatment landscape for multiple myeloma (MM) continues to expand at a rapid pace, management of older adults and frail patients becomes increasingly challenging. As these patients have traditionally been underrepresented on clinical trials, there is limited guidance on the optimal approach to frail patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM).

RECENT FINDINGS

Frailty is an independent predictor of tolerability and response to antineoplastic treatment. Stringent eligibility criteria have often excluded these patients, but recently some large trials have included frailty sub-analyses to help guide management. In general, triplet regimens are preferred to doublet regimens in this population and enrollment on a clinical trial should be prioritized when possible. In this review, we summarize the MM frailty scoring tools that have been developed to identify and assess this vulnerable population. We present the clinical trials over the past decade that have enrolled frail patients and/or have included subgroup analyses to help elucidate the response and tolerability of different regimens in this underrepresented group. We provide practical advice regarding assessment and management of frail patients NDMM and RRMM.

Daratumumab-based immunotherapy vs. lenalidomide, bortezomib and dexamethasone in transplant-ineligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: a systemic review

Background

Since no randomized controlled trials have directly compared the efficacy and safety of immunotherapy with daratumumab versus lenalidomide/bortezomib/dexamethasone (RVD) in the frontline treatment of transplant-ineligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (TIE-NDMM), this study systematically reviewed the clinical studies regarding immunotherapy with daratumumab and RVD regimen in the treatment of TIE-NDMM to explore the optimization direction of the best first-line therapy.

Methods

The Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases were searched to collect studies on regimens containing daratumumab or RVD/RVD-lite for TIE-NDMM. Pooled and meta-analysis was then performed to compare the overall response rate (ORR), stringent complete remission (sCR) and CR rate, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and treatment-related discontinuation rate between daratumumab-containing immunotherapy regimen and RVD/RVD-lite regimen by using R 4.3.1 software.

Results

Nine prospective clinical trials were included, including 1795 TIE-NDMM or NDMM without intent for immediate ASCT. Among them, 938 patients were treated with daratumumab-based immunotherapy and 857 with RVD/RVD-lite regimens. Meta-analysis results showed that The daratumumab-based regimen showed a significantly higher CR/sCR rate than RVD/RVD-lite for TIE-NDMM (47% vs. 24%, P<0.01). The median PFS of the daratumumab-based and RVD/RVD-lite groups were 52.6 months and 35.1 months respectively (HR 0.77, 95%CI, 0.66-0.90). The median OS of both groups was not reached, and there were no significant differences in OS between the two groups (HR 1.03, 95%CI, 0.86-1.23). The therapy discontinuation rate led by adverse events was significantly higher in the RVD/RVD-lite group than in the daratumumab-based regimen group for the TIE-NDMM (16% vs. 7%, P=0.03).

Conclusion

This meta-analysis suggests that daratumumab-containing immunotherapy is superior to RVD in the depth of treatment efficacy, progression-free survival, and lower treatment-related discontinuation rates. Limited by the lack of head-to-head clinical trials, this conclusion needs to be verified by concurrent cohort studies.

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.

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

The treatment scenario for newly-diagnosed transplant-ineligible multiple myeloma patients (NEMM) is quickly evolving. Currently, combinations of proteasome inhibitors and/or immunomodulatory drugs +/- the monoclonal antibody Daratumumab are used for first-line treatment, even if head-to-head comparisons are lacking. To compare efficacy and safety of these regimens, we performed a network meta-analysis of 27 phase 2/3 randomized trials including a total of 12,935 patients and 23 different schedules. Four efficacy/outcome and one safety indicators were extracted and integrated to obtain (for each treatment) the surface under the cumulative ranking-curve (SUCRA), a metric used to build a ranking chart. With a mean SUCRA of 83.8 and 80.08 respectively, VMP + Daratumumab (DrVMP) and Rd + Daratumumab (DrRd) reached the top of the chart. However, SUCRA is designed to work for single outcomes. To overcome this limitation, we undertook a dimensionality reduction approach through a principal component analysis, that unbiasedly grouped the 23 regimens into three different subgroups. On the bases of our results, we demonstrated that first line treatment for NEMM should be based on DrRd (most active, but continuous treatment), DrVMP (quite "fixed-time" treatment), or, alternatively, VRD and that, surprisingly, melphalan as well as Rd doublets still deserve a role in this setting.

Treatment Regimens for Transplant-Ineligible Patients With Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: A Systematic Literature Review and Network Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Many treatment regimens have been evaluated in transplant-ineligible (TIE) patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of relevant therapies for the treatment of TIE patients with NDMM.

METHODS

Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) from large randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating different treatment options for TIE patients with NDMM were compared in a network meta-analysis (NMA). The NMA includes recent primary and long-term OS readouts from SWOG S0777, ENDURANCE, MAIA, and ALCYONE. Relevant trials were identified through a systematic literature review. Relative efficacy measures (i.e., hazard ratios [HRs] for PFS and OS) were extracted and synthesised in random-effects NMAs.

RESULTS

A total of 122 publications describing 45 unique RCTs was identified. Continuous lenalidomide/dexamethasone (Rd) was selected as the referent comparator. Daratumumab-containing treatments (daratumumab/lenalidomide/dexamethasone [D-Rd], daratumumab/bortezomib/melphalan/prednisone [D-VMP]) and bortezomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone (VRd) had the highest probabilities of being more effective than Rd continuous for PFS (HR: D-Rd, 0.53; D-VMP, 0.57, VRd, 0.77) and OS (HR: D-Rd, 0.68; VRd, 0.77, D-VMP, 0.78). D-Rd had the highest chance of being ranked as the most effective treatment with respect to PFS and OS. Results using a smaller network focusing on only those regimens that are relevant in Europe were consistent with the primary analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

These comparative effectiveness data may help inform treatment selection in TIE patients with NDMM.

Efficacy of first-line treatment options in transplant-ineligible multiple myeloma: A network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Despite major therapeutic advances, the rational choice of the most appropriate first-line regimen in newly diagnosed transplant-ineligible multiple myeloma (TIE-MM) is currently undefined.

AIM

We aimed to identify the most effective first-line treatment for TIE-MM patients.

METHODS

A total of 37 articles, including 34 treatments and 16,681 patients, were included in this Bayesian network meta-analysis. The outcomes of interest were risk ratios (RR) for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Based on surface under cumulative ranking curve values, daratumumab-bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone (Dara-VMP) and daratumumab-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (Dara-Rd28) showed superiority compared to other combinations regarding 12-, 24-, 36-, and 48-month PFS. Dara-VMP also ranked first for 12-, 24-, 36-, and 48-month OS.

CONCLUSION

Our finding supports the incorporation of daratumumab into first-line regimens. Additionally, these results highlight the relative benefit of incorporating novel agents like monoclonal antibodies, immunomodulatory derivatives, and proteasome inhibitors in combination with the currently existing treatment options.

A comprehensive approach to therapy of haematological malignancies in older patients

Haematological malignancies are a heterogeneous group of diseases with diverse incidence. In Europe, the median age at diagnosis across all disease entities is 69 years. Incidence generally increases with age, reaching a maximum at 75-99 years, with the notable exceptions of Hodgkin lymphoma and acute lymphocytic leukaemia. Overall survival for patients aged 75 years and older with haematological malignancies is generally poor, particularly for acute leukaemias. Understanding the heterogeneity in outcomes for haematological malignancies, treatment challenges, and management of frailty and comorbidities among older patients could help physicians to better address the haematological cancer burden and mortality in ageing populations. The aim of this Series paper is to provide an updated overview of the knowledge accumulated over the past decade regarding treatment options and broader management considerations in older adults with haematological malignancies, focusing on the most common entities encountered across lymphoma, acute leukaemia, chronic leukaemia, and multiple myeloma disease categories. Future strategies, such as increasing enrolment rates of older adults in clinical trials and incorporating patient-reported outcome measurements in daily clinical practice, will assist in providing more individualised health care.

Characterize, Optimize, and Harmonize: Caring for Older Adults With Hematologic Malignancies

With the aging of the population, the number of older adults with hematologic malignancies is growing, and treatment paradigms for these patients are rapidly evolving. Use of allogeneic stem cell transplant has been expanding to include septuagenarians but remains a potentially morbid procedure, creating an opportunity for a geriatric-focused evaluation to improve assessment of the individual's risk in undergoing the procedure. Although age alone should not be the sole determinant for transplant eligibility, geriatric assessment often identifies vulnerabilities that are not captured in assessing performance status and comorbidities alone. Those vulnerabilities may be optimized in an approach employing three sequential steps: characterize resiliency, bolster resilience, and harmonize with patient goals. Data are emerging that show that this approach is associated with lower nonrelapse mortality, shorter length of stay, and better survival after transplant. In older adults with myeloma, treatment recommendations also aim to balance the expected efficacy and toxicity profile and incorporate the patient's goals and preferences. Assessment of frailty allows for more personalized estimates of risk of toxicity. Currently, the European Myeloma Network currently recommends using the International Myeloma Working Group frailty scale as a standard approach to defining frail or at-risk populations with myeloma. In addition to treatment selection, the care of older adults with myeloma must include consideration of other issues, including reducing early mortality with antibiotic prophylaxis, polypharmacy, depression, cognition, and falls. Overall, appreciation of the aging-associated vulnerabilities will allow for the ultimate personalized care and treatment of older adults with hematologic malignancies.

Cost-Effectiveness of First-Line Versus Second-Line Use of Daratumumab in Older, Transplant-Ineligible Patients With Multiple Myeloma

PURPOSE

The MAIA trial found that addition of daratumumab to lenalidomide and dexamethasone (DRd) significantly prolonged progression-free survival in transplant-ineligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, compared with lenalidomide and dexamethasone alone (Rd). However, daratumumab is a costly treatment and is administered indefinitely until disease progression. Therefore, it is unclear whether it is cost-effective to use daratumumab in the first-line setting compared with reserving its use until later lines of therapy.

METHODS

We created a Markov model to compare healthcare costs and clinical outcomes of transplant-ineligible patients treated with daratumumab in the first-line setting compared with a strategy of reserving daratumumab until the second-line. We estimated transition probabilities from randomized trials using parametric survival modeling. Lifetime direct healthcare costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated for first-line daratumumab versus second-line daratumumab from a US payer perspective.

RESULTS

First-line daratumumab was associated with an improvement of 0.52 QALYs and 0.66 discounted life-years compared with second-line daratumumab. While both treatment strategies were associated with considerable lifetime expenditures ($1,434,937 v $1,112,101 in US dollars), an incremental cost of $322,836 for first-line daratumumab led to an ICER of $618,018 per QALY. The cost of daratumumab would need to be decreased by 67% for first-line daratumumab to be cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000 per QALY.

CONCLUSION

Using daratumumab in the first-line setting for transplant-ineligible patients may not be cost-effective under current pricing. Delaying daratumumab until subsequent lines of therapy may be a reasonable strategy to limit healthcare costs without significantly compromising clinical outcomes. Mature overall survival data are necessary to more fully evaluate cost-effectiveness in this setting.

Transplant-ineligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: Current and future approaches to clinical care: A Young International Society of Geriatric Oncology Review Paper

Multiple myeloma is the second most common hematological malignancy in the USA and Europe. Despite improvements in the 5-year and overall survival rates over the past decade, older adults (aged ≥65 years) with multiple myeloma continue to experience disproportionately worse outcomes than their younger counterparts. These differences in outcomes arise from the increased prevalence of vulnerabilities such as medical comorbidities and frailty seen with advancing age that can influence treatment-delivery and tolerance and impact survival. In general, geriatric assessments can help identify those patients more likely to benefit from enhanced toxicity risk-prediction and aid treatment decision-making. Despite the observed benefits of geriatric assessments and other screening frailty tools, provider and systems-level barriers continue to influence the overall perception of the feasibility of geriatric assessments in clinical practice settings. Clinical trials are underway evaluating the efficacy and safety of various multiple myeloma therapies in less fit/frail older adults, with a minority examining fitness-based/risk-adapted approaches. Thus, significant gaps exist in knowing which myeloma therapies are most appropriate for older and more vulnerable adults with multiple myeloma. The purpose of this Review is to discuss how geriatric assessments can be used to guide the management of transplant-ineligible patients; and to highlight frontline therapies for standard-risk and high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities [i.e., t(4;14), t(14;16), and del(17p)] associated with multiple myeloma. We also discuss the current shortcomings of the existing clinical approaches to care and highlight ongoing clinical trials evaluating newer fitness-based approaches to managing transplant-ineligible patients.