1
|
Bar N, Firestone RS, Usmani SZ. Aiming for the cure in myeloma: Putting our best foot forward. Blood Rev 2023; 62:101116. [PMID: 37596172 DOI: 10.1016/j.blre.2023.101116] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/20/2023] [Revised: 07/12/2023] [Accepted: 07/13/2023] [Indexed: 08/20/2023]
Abstract
Frontline therapy for multiple myeloma (MM) is evolving to include novel combinations that can achieve unprecedented deep response rates. Several treatment strategies exist, varying in induction regimen composition, use of transplant and or consolidation and maintenance. In this sea of different treatment permutations, the overarching theme is the powerful prognostic factors of disease risk and achievement of minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity. MM has significant inter-patient variability that requires treatment to be individualized. Risk-adapted and response-adapted strategies which are increasingly being explored to define the extent and duration of therapy, and eventually aim for functional curability. In addition, with T-cell redirection therapies rapidly revolutionizing myeloma treatments, the current standard of care for myeloma will change. This review analyzes the current relevant literature in upfront therapy for fit myeloma patients and provides suggestions for treatment approach while novel clinical trials are maturing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Noffar Bar
- Section of Hematology, Department of Internal Medicine, Yale School of Medicine University, New Haven, CT, USA.
| | - Ross S Firestone
- Multiple Myeloma Service, Department of medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
| | - Saad Z Usmani
- Multiple Myeloma Service, Department of medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
van de Donk NWCJ, Minnema MC, van der Holt B, Schjesvold F, Wu KL, Broijl A, Roeloffzen WWH, Gadisseur A, Pietrantuono G, Pour L, van der Velden VHJ, Lund T, Offidani M, Grasso M, Giaccone L, Razawy W, Tacchetti P, Mancuso K, Silkjaer T, Caers J, Zweegman S, Hájek R, Benjamin R, Vangsted AJ, Boccadoro M, Gay F, Sonneveld P, Musto P. Treatment of primary plasma cell leukaemia with carfilzomib and lenalidomide-based therapy (EMN12/HOVON-129): final analysis of a non-randomised, multicentre, phase 2 study. Lancet Oncol 2023; 24:1119-1133. [PMID: 37717583 DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(23)00405-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/01/2023] [Revised: 08/01/2023] [Accepted: 08/10/2023] [Indexed: 09/19/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Primary plasma cell leukaemia is a rare and aggressive plasma cell disorder with a poor prognosis. The aim of the EMN12/HOVON-129 study was to improve the outcomes of patients with primary plasma cell leukaemia by incorporating carfilzomib and lenalidomide in induction, consolidation, and maintenance therapy. METHODS The EMN12/HOVON-129 study is a non-randomised, phase 2, multicentre study conducted at 19 academic centres and hospitals in seven European countries (Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, Italy, Norway, The Netherlands, and the UK) for previously untreated patients with primary plasma cell leukaemia aged 18 years or older. Inclusion criteria were newly diagnosed primary plasma cell leukaemia (defined as >2 ×109 cells per L circulating monoclonal plasma cells or plasmacytosis >20% of the differential white cell count) and WHO performance status 0-3. Patients aged 18-65 years (younger patients) and 66 years or older (older patients) were treated in age-specific cohorts and were analysed separately. Younger patients were treated with four 28-day cycles of carfilzomib (36 mg/m2 intravenously on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16), lenalidomide (25 mg orally on days 1-21), and dexamethasone (20 mg orally on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16, 22, and 23). Carfilzomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (KRd) induction was followed by double autologous haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT), four cycles of KRd consolidation, and then maintenance with carfilzomib (27 mg/m2 intravenously on days 1, 2, 15, and 16 for the first 12 28-day cycles, and then 56 mg/m2 on days 1 and 15 in all subsequent cycles) and lenalidomide (10 mg orally on days 1-21) until progression. Patients who were eligible for allogeneic HSCT, could also receive a single autologous HSCT followed by reduced-intensity conditioning allogeneic HSCT and then carfilzomib-lenalidomide maintenance. Older patients received eight cycles of KRd induction followed by maintenance therapy with carfilzomib and lenalidomide until progression. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival. The primary analysis population was the intention-to-treat population, irrespective of the actual treatment received. Data from all participants who received any study drug were included in the safety analyses. The trial was registered at www.trialregister.nl (until June 2022) and https://trialsearch.who.int/ as NTR5350; recruitment is complete and this is the final analysis. FINDINGS Between Oct 23, 2015, and Aug 5, 2021, 61 patients were enrolled and received KRd induction treatment (36 patients aged 18-65 years [20 (56%) were male and 16 (44%) female], and 25 aged ≥66 years [12 (48%) were male and 13 (52%) female]). With a median follow-up of 43·5 months (IQR 27·7-67·8), the median progression-free survival was 15·5 months (95% CI 9·4-38·4) for younger patients. For older patients, median follow-up was 32·0 months (IQR 24·7-34·6), and median progression-free survival was 13·8 months (95% CI 9·2-35·5). Adverse events were most frequently observed directly after treatment initiation, with infections (two of 36 (6%) younger patients and eight of 25 (32%) older patients) and respiratory events (two of 36 [6%] younger patients and four of 25 [16%] older patients) being the most common grade 3 or greater events during the first four KRd cycles. Treatment-related serious adverse events were reported in 26 (72%) of 36 younger patients and in 19 (76%) of 25 older patients, with infections being the most common. Treatment-related deaths were reported in none of the younger patients and three (12%) of the older patients (two infections and one unknown cause of death). INTERPRETATION Carfilzomib and lenalidomide-based therapy provides improved progression-free survival compared with previously published data. However, results remain inferior in primary plasma cell leukaemia compared with multiple myeloma, highlighting the need for new studies incorporating novel immunotherapies. FUNDING Dutch Cancer Society, Celgene (a BMS company), and AMGEN.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Niels W C J van de Donk
- Department of Hematology, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
| | - Monique C Minnema
- University Medical Center Utrecht, Department of Hematology, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - Bronno van der Holt
- HOVON Foundation, Rotterdam, Netherlands; Department of Hematology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Fredrik Schjesvold
- Oslo Myeloma Center, Department of Hematology, Oslo University Hospital and KG Jebsen Center for B cell malignancies, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Ka Lung Wu
- Department of Hematology, ZNA Stuivenberg, Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Annemiek Broijl
- Department of Hematology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Wilfried W H Roeloffzen
- Department of Hematology, University Medical Center Groningen, University Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
| | - Alain Gadisseur
- Department of Haematology, Antwerp University Hospital, Edegem, Belgium
| | - Giuseppe Pietrantuono
- Unit of Hematology, Centro di Riferimento Oncologico della Basilicata, Rionero in Vulture, Italy
| | - Ludek Pour
- Department of Internal Medicine, Hematology and Oncology, University Hospital Brno, Brno, Czech Republic
| | | | | | | | | | - Luisa Giaccone
- Department of Oncology and Hematology, SSD Stem Cell Transplant Center, AOU Citta della Salute e della Scienza di Torino, Torino, Italy
| | | | - Paola Tacchetti
- IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Istituto di Ematolgia Seràgnoli, Bologna, Italy
| | - Katia Mancuso
- IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Istituto di Ematolgia Seràgnoli, Bologna, Italy; Dipartimento di Scienze Mediche e Chirurgiche, Università di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | | | - Jo Caers
- Department of Hematology, CHU Liege, Liege, Belgium
| | - Sonja Zweegman
- Department of Hematology, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Roman Hájek
- Department of Hematooncology, University Hospital Ostrava, Ostrava, Czech Republic; Department of Hematooncology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ostrava, Ostrava, Czech Republic
| | | | - Annette Juul Vangsted
- Department of Hematology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | | | - Francesca Gay
- Division of Hematology, Department of Molecular Biotechnology and Health Sciences, University of Torino, Torino, Italy
| | - Pieter Sonneveld
- Department of Hematology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Pellegrino Musto
- Department of Precision and Regenerative Medicine and Ionian Area, Aldo Moro University School of Medicine, and Hematology and Stem Cell Transplantation Unit, AOU Consorziale Policlinico, Bari, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Tan CR, Derkach A, Nemirovsky D, Ciardiello A, Diamond B, Hultcrantz M, Hassoun H, Mailankody S, Shah U, Maclachlan K, Patel D, Lahoud OB, Landau HJ, Chung DJ, Shah GL, Scordo M, Giralt SA, Lesokhin A, Usmani SZ, Landgren O, Korde N. Bortezomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone (VRd) vs carfilzomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone (KRd) as induction therapy in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Blood Cancer J 2023; 13:112. [PMID: 37491332 PMCID: PMC10368661 DOI: 10.1038/s41408-023-00882-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/21/2023] [Revised: 06/17/2023] [Accepted: 07/11/2023] [Indexed: 07/27/2023] Open
Abstract
Lenalidomide and dexamethasone with bortezomib (VRd) or carfilzomib (KRd) are commonly used induction regimens in the U.S. This single-center, retrospective study evaluated outcomes and safety of VRd and KRd. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Of 389 patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, 198 received VRd and 191 received KRd. Median PFS was not reached (NR) in both groups; 5-year PFS was 56% (95%CI, 48-64%) for VRd and 67% (60-75%) for KRd (P = 0.027). Estimated 5-year EFS was 34% (95%CI, 27-42%) for VRd and 52% (45-60%) for KRd (P < 0.001) with corresponding 5-year OS of 80% (95%CI, 75-87%) and 90% (85-95%), respectively (P = 0.053). For standard-risk patients, 5-year PFS was 68% (95%CI, 60-78%) for VRd and 75% (65-85%) for KRd (P = 0.20) with 5-year OS of 87% (95%CI, 81-94%) and 93% (87-99%), respectively (P = 0.13). For high-risk patients, median PFS was 41 months (95%CI, 32.8-61.1) for VRd and 70.9 months (58.2-NR) for KRd (P = 0.016). Respective 5-year PFS and OS were 35% (95%CI, 24-51%) and 69% (58-82%) for VRd and 58% (47-71%) and 88% (80-97%, P = 0.044) for KRd. Overall, KRd resulted in improved PFS and EFS with a trend toward improved OS compared to VRd with associations primarily driven by improvements in outcome for high-risk patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carlyn Rose Tan
- Myeloma Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
| | - Andriy Derkach
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - David Nemirovsky
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Amanda Ciardiello
- Myeloma Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Benjamin Diamond
- Myeloma Division, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Malin Hultcrantz
- Myeloma Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Hani Hassoun
- Myeloma Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Sham Mailankody
- Myeloma Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Urvi Shah
- Myeloma Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Kylee Maclachlan
- Myeloma Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Dhwani Patel
- Myeloma Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Oscar B Lahoud
- Adult Bone Marrow Transplant Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Heather J Landau
- Adult Bone Marrow Transplant Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - David J Chung
- Adult Bone Marrow Transplant Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Gunjan L Shah
- Adult Bone Marrow Transplant Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Michael Scordo
- Adult Bone Marrow Transplant Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Sergio A Giralt
- Adult Bone Marrow Transplant Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Alexander Lesokhin
- Myeloma Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Saad Z Usmani
- Myeloma Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Ola Landgren
- Myeloma Division, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Neha Korde
- Myeloma Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Tan CR, Derkach A, Nemirovsky D, Ciardiello A, Diamond B, Hultcrantz M, Hassoun H, Mailankody S, Shah U, Maclachlan K, Patel D, Lahoud O, Landau H, Chung D, Shah G, Scordo M, Giralt S, Lesokhin A, Usmani S, Landgren O, Korde N. Bortezomib, Lenalidomide and Dexamethasone (VRd) vs Carfilzomib, Lenalidomide and Dexamethasone (KRd) as Induction Therapy in Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma. Res Sq 2023:rs.3.rs-2583053. [PMID: 36865246 PMCID: PMC9980212 DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-2583053/v1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/04/2023]
Abstract
Lenalidomide and dexamethasone with bortezomib (VRd) or carfilzomib (KRd) are commonly used induction regimens in the U.S. This single-center, retrospective study evaluated outcomes and safety of VRd and KRd. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Of 389 patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, 198 received VRd and 191 received KRd. Median PFS was not reached (NR) in both groups; 5-year PFS was 56% (95%CI, 48%-64%) for VRd and 67% (60%-75%) for KRd (P = 0.027). Estimated 5-year EFS was 34% (95%CI, 27%-42%) for VRd and 52% (45%-60%) for KRd (P < 0.001) with corresponding 5-year OS of 80% (95%CI, 75%-87%) and 90% (85%-95%), respectively (P = 0.053). For standard-risk patients, 5-year PFS was 68% (95%CI, 60%-78%) for VRd and 75% (65%-85%) for KRd (P = 0.20) with 5-year OS of 87% (95%CI, 81%-94%) and 93% (87%-99%), respectively (P = 0.13). For high-risk patients, median PFS was 41 months (95%CI, 32.8-61.1) for VRd and 70.9 months (58.2-NR) for KRd (P = 0.016). Respective 5-year PFS and OS were 35% (95%CI, 24%-51%) and 69% (58%-82%) for VRd and 58% (47%-71%) and 88% (80%-97%, P = 0.044) for KRd. Overall, KRd resulted in improved PFS and EFS with a trend toward improved OS compared to VRd with associations primarily driven by improvements in outcome for high-risk patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Urvi Shah
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Ola Landgren
- Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami
| | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
Kazandjian D, Landgren O. Novel Quadruplets and the Age of Immunotherapies in the Treatment of Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma. JAMA Oncol 2022; 8:1260-1262. [PMID: 35862054 DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2022.2421] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/14/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Dickran Kazandjian
- Myeloma Division, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami, Miami, Florida
| | - Ola Landgren
- Myeloma Division, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami, Miami, Florida
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Derman BA, Kansagra A, Zonder J, Stefka AT, Grinblatt DL, Anderson LD, Gurbuxani S, Narula S, Rayani S, Major A, Kin A, Jiang K, Karrison T, Jasielec J, Jakubowiak AJ. Elotuzumab and Weekly Carfilzomib, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Without Transplant Intent: A Phase 2 Measurable Residual Disease-Adapted Study. JAMA Oncol 2022; 8:1278-1286. [PMID: 35862034 DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2022.2424] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
Importance Treatment of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) with a quadruplet regimen consisting of a monoclonal antibody, proteasome inhibitor, immunomodulatory imide, and corticosteroid has been associated with improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared with triplet regimens. The optimal quadruplet combination, and whether this obviates the need for frontline autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT), remains unknown. We evaluated elotuzumab and weekly carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (Elo-KRd) without ASCT in NDMM. Objective To investigate the efficacy of Elo-KRd using a measurable residual disease (MRD)-adapted design in NDMM regardless of ASCT eligibility. Design, Setting, and Participants This multicenter, single-arm, phase 2 study enrolled patients between July 2017 and February 2021. Median follow-up was 29 months. Interventions Twelve to 24 cycles of Elo-KRd; consecutive MRD-negative results at 10-6 by next-generation sequencing (NGS) after cycles 8 (C8) and 12 determined the duration of Elo-KRd. This was followed by Elo-Rd (no carfilzomib) maintenance therapy until disease progression. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary end point was the rate of stringent complete response (sCR) and/or MRD-negativity (10-5) after C8 Elo-KRd. Secondary end points included safety, rate of response, MRD status, PFS, and overall survival (OS). As an exploratory analysis, MRD was assessed using liquid chromatography mass spectrometry (MS) on peripheral blood samples. Results Forty-six patients were enrolled (median age 62 years, 11 [24%] aged >70 years). Overall, 32 (70%) were White, 6 (13%) were Black, 3 (6%) were more than 1 race, and 5 (11%) were of unknown race. Thirty-three (72%) were men and 13 (28%) were women. High-risk cytogenetic abnormalities were present in 22 (48%) patients. The rate of sCR and/or MRD-negativity after C8 was 26 of 45 (58%), meeting the predefined statistical threshold for efficacy. Responses deepened over time, with the MRD-negativity (10-5) rate increasing to 70% and MS-negativity rate increasing to 65%; concordance between MRD by NGS and MS increased over time. The most common (>10%) grade 3 or 4 adverse events were lung and nonpulmonary infections (13% and 11%, respectively). There was 1 grade 5 myocardial infarction. The estimated 3-year PFS was 72% overall and 92% for patients with MRD-negativity (10-5) at C8. Conclusions and Relevance An MRD-adapted design using elotuzumab and weekly KRd without ASCT showed a high rate of sCR and/or MRD-negativity and durable responses. This approach provides support for further evaluation of MRD-guided deescalation of therapy to decrease treatment exposure while sustaining deep responses. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02969837.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Ankit Kansagra
- Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
| | - Jeffrey Zonder
- Karmanos Cancer Institute, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan
| | | | | | - Larry D Anderson
- Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
| | | | - Sunil Narula
- University of Chicago Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois
| | - Shayan Rayani
- University of Chicago Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois
| | - Ajay Major
- University of Chicago Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois
| | - Andrew Kin
- Karmanos Cancer Institute, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan
| | - Ken Jiang
- University of Chicago Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Davies FE, Pawlyn C, Usmani SZ, San-Miguel JF, Einsele H, Boyle EM, Corre J, Auclair D, Cho HJ, Lonial S, Sonneveld P, Stewart AK, Bergsagel PL, Kaiser MF, Weisel K, Keats JJ, Mikhael JR, Morgan KE, Ghobrial IM, Orlowski RZ, Landgren CO, Gay F, Caers J, Chng WJ, Chari A, Walker BA, Kumar SK, Costa LJ, Anderson KC, Morgan GJ. Perspectives on the Risk-Stratified Treatment of Multiple Myeloma. Blood Cancer Discov 2022; 3:273-284. [PMID: 35653112 PMCID: PMC9894570 DOI: 10.1158/2643-3230.bcd-21-0205] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
The multiple myeloma treatment landscape has changed dramatically. This change, paralleled by an increase in scientific knowledge, has resulted in significant improvement in survival. However, heterogeneity remains in clinical outcomes, with a proportion of patients not benefiting from current approaches and continuing to have a poor prognosis. A significant proportion of the variability in outcome can be predicted on the basis of clinical and biochemical parameters and tumor-acquired genetic variants, allowing for risk stratification and a more personalized approach to therapy. This article discusses the principles that can enable the rational and effective development of therapeutic approaches for high-risk multiple myeloma.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Charlotte Pawlyn
- Division of Cancer Therapeutics, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
- The Royal Marsden Hospital, Department of Haematology, London, United Kingdom
| | - Saad Z. Usmani
- Myeloma Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | | | - Hermann Einsele
- Department of Internal Medicine II, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
| | | | - Jill Corre
- Unité de Génomique du Myélome, Institut Universitaire du Cancer, Toulouse France. Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale, Paris, France
| | - Daniel Auclair
- The Multiple Myeloma Research Foundation, Norwalk, Connecticut
| | - Hearn Jay Cho
- The Multiple Myeloma Research Foundation, Norwalk, Connecticut
- Multiple Myeloma Center of Excellence, Icahn School of Medicine at Mt. Sinai, New York, New York
| | - Sagar Lonial
- Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Pieter Sonneveld
- Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Department of Hematology, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - A. Keith Stewart
- University Health Network and the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | | | - Martin F. Kaiser
- The Royal Marsden Hospital, Department of Haematology, London, United Kingdom
- Division of Genetics and Epidemiology, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom
| | - Katja Weisel
- Department of Oncology, Hematology and Bone Marrow Transplantation with Section of Pneumology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Jonathan J. Keats
- Integrated Cancer Genomics, Translational Genomics Research Institute, Phoenix, Arizona
| | - Joseph R. Mikhael
- Translational Genomics Research Institute, City of Hope Cancer Center, Phoenix, Arizona
| | | | - Irene M. Ghobrial
- Department of Medical Oncology, Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Robert Z. Orlowski
- Department of Lymphoma/Myeloma, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - C. Ola Landgren
- Myeloma Program, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami, Miami, Florida
| | - Francesca Gay
- Division of Hematology, University of Torino, Torino, Italy
| | - Joseph Caers
- Department of Hematology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) de Liège, Liège, Belgium
| | - Wee Joo Chng
- Melvin and Bren Simon Comprehensive Cancer Center, Division of Hematology Oncology, Indiana University, Indianapolis, Indiana
- Department of Hematology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
- Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama
| | - Ajai Chari
- Multiple Myeloma Center of Excellence, Icahn School of Medicine at Mt. Sinai, New York, New York
| | - Brian A. Walker
- Melvin and Bren Simon Comprehensive Cancer Center, Division of Hematology Oncology, Indiana University, Indianapolis, Indiana
| | - Shaji K. Kumar
- Department of Hematology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Luciano J. Costa
- Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama
| | - Kenneth C. Anderson
- Department of Medical Oncology, Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
Landgren O, Kazandjian D, Roussel M, Jasielec J, Dytfeld D, Anderson A, Kervin TA, Iskander K, McFadden I, Jakubowiak AJ. Efficacy and safety of carfilzomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: pooled analysis of four single-arm studies. Leuk Lymphoma 2022; 63:2413-2421. [DOI: 10.1080/10428194.2022.2068001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Ola Landgren
- Division of Hematology, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami Health System, Miami, FL, USA
| | | | - Murielle Roussel
- Institut Universitaire du Cancer de Toulouse-Oncopole, Toulouse, France
| | - Jagoda Jasielec
- Internal Medicine - Hematology, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Dominik Dytfeld
- Department of Hematology, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Poznan, Poland
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Imtiaz H, Khan M, Ehsan H, Wahab A, Rafae A, Khan AY, Jamil A, Sana MK, Jamal A, Ali TJ, Ansar I, Khan MM, Khouri J, Anwer F. Efficacy and Toxicity Profile of Carfilzomib-Based Regimens for Treatment of Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: A Systematic Review. Onco Targets Ther 2021; 14:4941-4960. [PMID: 34629878 PMCID: PMC8493667 DOI: 10.2147/ott.s317570] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/26/2021] [Accepted: 08/19/2021] [Indexed: 11/26/2022] Open
Abstract
Carfilzomib (CFZ) is a proteasome inhibitor currently approved for the treatment of relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Multiple trials are ongoing to evaluate its efficacy and safety in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). The use of CFZ-based two- or three-drug combination regimens as induction for the management of NDMM is an emerging approach. CFZ-based regimens include combinations of immunomodulators, alkylating agents, and monoclonal antibodies along with dexamethasone. In this review, we assess the efficacy and toxicity of CFZ-based regimens in NDMM. We reviewed a total of 27 studies (n=4538 patients) with overall response rates (ORR) ranging between 80% and 100%. Studies evaluating the combination of CFZ with daratumumab reported an ORR of approximately 100%. Achievement of minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity, measured by multi-parameter flow cytometry (MPFC), ranged between 60% and 95% in 4 (n=251) out of 6 studies that measured MRD-negativity. The interim results of the ENDURANCE trial failed to show superior efficacy and progression-free survival (PFS) of carfilzomib-lenalidomide when compared to bortezomib–lenalidomide combination, albeit with a lower incidence of neuropathy. Hematological toxicity was the most common adverse event observed with these regimens, and the most common non-hematological adverse events were related to cardiovascular and electrolyte disturbances. We need to further evaluate the role of CFZ in NDMM by conducting more Phase III trials with different combinations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hassaan Imtiaz
- Department of Internal Medicine, King Edward Medical University, Lahore, Punjab, Pakistan
| | - Maimoona Khan
- Department of Medicine, Shifa College of Medicine, Islamabad, Pakistan
| | - Hamid Ehsan
- Department of Hematology/Oncology, Levine Cancer Institute, Atrium Health, Charlotte, NC, USA
| | - Ahsan Wahab
- Hospital Medicine/Internal Medicine, Baptist Medical Center South, Montgomery, AL, USA
| | - Abdul Rafae
- Department of Internal Medicine, McLaren Regional Medical Center, Flint, MI, USA
| | - Ali Y Khan
- Department of Internal Medicine, St. Joseph Mercy Oakland Hospital, Pontiac, MI, USA
| | - Abdur Jamil
- Department of Internal Medicine, Central Michigan University, Saginaw, MI, USA
| | - Muhammad Khawar Sana
- Department of Internal Medicine, John H. Stroger Jr. Hospital of Cook County, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Abdullah Jamal
- Department of Internal Medicine, King Edward Medical University, Lahore, Punjab, Pakistan
| | - Taimoor Jaffar Ali
- Department of Internal Medicine, King Edward Medical University, Lahore, Punjab, Pakistan
| | - Iqraa Ansar
- Department of Medicine, Shifa College of Medicine, Islamabad, Pakistan
| | - Muzammil M Khan
- Department of Gastroenterology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Jack Khouri
- Hematology, Oncology, Stem Cell Transplantation, Multiple Myeloma Program, Taussig Cancer Center, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA
| | - Faiz Anwer
- Hematology, Oncology, Stem Cell Transplantation, Multiple Myeloma Program, Taussig Cancer Center, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Kazandjian D, Hill E, Dew A, Morrison C, Roswarski J, Korde N, Emanuel M, Petrosyan A, Bhutani M, Calvo KR, Dulau-Florea A, Kwok M, Lee MJ, Lee S, Lindenberg L, Mailankody S, Manasanch E, Maric I, Mena E, Patel N, Tageja N, Trepel JB, Turkbey B, Wang HW, Wang W, Yuan C, Zhang Y, Braylan R, Choyke P, Stetler-Stevenson M, Steinberg SM, Figg WD, Roschewski M, Landgren O. Carfilzomib, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone Followed by Lenalidomide Maintenance for Prevention of Symptomatic Multiple Myeloma in Patients With High-risk Smoldering Myeloma: A Phase 2 Nonrandomized Controlled Trial. JAMA Oncol 2021; 7:1678-1685. [PMID: 34529025 DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2021.3971] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/14/2022]
Abstract
Importance High-risk smoldering myeloma has a 5-year risk of progression to symptomatic multiple myeloma of approximately 75%. Treatment with lenalidomide decreases the risk of progression; however, novel triplet regimens are superior, and earlier disease may be more treatment sensitive. Objective To evaluate the use of carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (KRd) with lenalidomide maintenance therapy as early intervention in high-risk smoldering myeloma and to determine the rates of minimal residual disease (MRD)-negative complete response (CR). Design, Setting, and Participants In this single-arm, single-center, phase 2 nonrandomized controlled trial, responses were evaluated at every cycle during KRd treatment and every 3 cycles subsequently. Bone marrow biopsies and imaging were performed by cycle 8 and then annually. The study enrolled patients from May 29, 2012, to July 23, 2020, at the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center, a highly specialized tertiary cancer center. Patient key eligibility criteria included a diagnosis of high-risk smoldering myeloma based on the Mayo Clinic, Spanish, and/or Rajkumar, Mateos, and Landgren criteria. Interventions Patients received eight 4-week cycles of intravenous carfilzomib 36 mg/m2 (first 2 doses, 20 mg/m2), dexamethasone (20 mg, cycles 1-4; 10 mg, cycles 5-8 twice weekly), and lenalidomide 25 mg (days 1-21) followed by twenty-four 28-day cycles of maintenance lenalidomide 10 mg (days 1-21). Stem cell harvest and storage were optional. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was the MRD-negative CR rate. Key secondary outcomes included duration of MRD-negative CR and progression to multiple myeloma. Results A total of 54 patients (median age, 59 years [range, 40-79 years]; 30 men [55.6%]; and 2 Asian [3.7%], 15 Black [27.8%], 1 Hispanic [1.9%], and 36 White [66.7%] patients) were enrolled, with a median potential follow-up time of 31.9 months (range, 6.7-102.9 months). The MRD-negative CR rate was 70.4% (95% CI, 56.4%-82.0%), with a median sustained duration of 5.5 years (95% CI, 3.7 years to not estimable). The 8-year probability of being free from progression to multiple myeloma was 91.2% (95% CI, 67.4%-97.9%), and no deaths occurred. Nonhematologic grade 3 adverse events occurred in 21 patients (38.9%) and included thromboembolism, rash, and lung infection, with no grade 4 events. Conclusions and Relevance Results of this phase 2 nonrandomized controlled trial suggest that treatment of high-risk smoldering myeloma with novel triplet regimens, such as KRd and lenalidomide maintenance therapy, may alter the natural history of smoldering myeloma by significantly delaying development of end-organ disease. Randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm this favorable benefit-to-risk profile. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01572480.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dickran Kazandjian
- Multiple Myeloma Program, Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.,Multiple Myeloma Program, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami, Miami, Florida
| | - Elizabeth Hill
- Multiple Myeloma Program, Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Alexander Dew
- Multiple Myeloma Program, Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.,Hematology-Oncology Department, John P. Murtha Cancer Center, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Candis Morrison
- Multiple Myeloma Program, Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Joseph Roswarski
- Multiple Myeloma Program, Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.,Hematology-Oncology Department, John P. Murtha Cancer Center, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Neha Korde
- Multiple Myeloma Program, Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.,Myeloma Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Michael Emanuel
- Multiple Myeloma Program, Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Ani Petrosyan
- Multiple Myeloma Program, Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Manisha Bhutani
- Multiple Myeloma Program, Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.,Levine Cancer Institute, Charlotte, North Carolina
| | - Katherine R Calvo
- Hematology Service, Department of Laboratory Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Alina Dulau-Florea
- Hematology Service, Department of Laboratory Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Mary Kwok
- Multiple Myeloma Program, Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.,Division of Hematology, University of Washington, Seattle
| | - Min-Jung Lee
- Developmental Therapeutics Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Sunmin Lee
- Developmental Therapeutics Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Liza Lindenberg
- Molecular Imaging Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Sham Mailankody
- Multiple Myeloma Program, Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.,Myeloma Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Elisabet Manasanch
- Multiple Myeloma Program, Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.,Department of Lymphoma and Myeloma, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Irina Maric
- Hematology Service, Department of Laboratory Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Nisha Patel
- Hematology Service, Department of Laboratory Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Nishant Tageja
- Multiple Myeloma Program, Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.,University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
| | - Jane B Trepel
- Developmental Therapeutics Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Baris Turkbey
- Molecular Imaging Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Hao-Wei Wang
- Laboratory of Pathology, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Weixin Wang
- Hematology Service, Department of Laboratory Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Constance Yuan
- Laboratory of Pathology, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Yong Zhang
- Multiple Myeloma Program, Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Raul Braylan
- Hematology Service, Department of Laboratory Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Peter Choyke
- Molecular Imaging Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Maryalice Stetler-Stevenson
- Laboratory of Pathology, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Seth M Steinberg
- Biostatistics & Data Management Section, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - William D Figg
- Molecular Pharmacology Section, Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Mark Roschewski
- Multiple Myeloma Program, Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Ola Landgren
- Multiple Myeloma Program, Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.,Multiple Myeloma Program, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami, Miami, Florida
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Derman BA, Kosuri S, Jakubowiak A. Knowing the unknowns in high risk multiple myeloma. Blood Rev 2021; 51:100887. [PMID: 34479756 DOI: 10.1016/j.blre.2021.100887] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/16/2021] [Revised: 08/18/2021] [Accepted: 08/26/2021] [Indexed: 12/28/2022]
Abstract
High risk multiple myeloma (HRMM) continues to portend worse outcomes despite the many advances in anti-myeloma therapeutics. The optimal approach to treatment is not clearly defined on account of the variable definitions of HRMM and the paucity of studies dedicated to the treatment of HRMM. In this review, we use a case-based approach to review the definitions of HRMM, and evaluate the evidence for induction, stem cell transplantation, and post-transplant therapy approaches for HRMM.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Benjamin A Derman
- Section of Hematology/Oncology, University of Chicago Medical Center, Chicago, IL, United States of America.
| | - Satyajit Kosuri
- Section of Hematology/Oncology, University of Chicago Medical Center, Chicago, IL, United States of America
| | - Andrzej Jakubowiak
- Section of Hematology/Oncology, University of Chicago Medical Center, Chicago, IL, United States of America
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Ziccheddu B, Biancon G, Bagnoli F, De Philippis C, Maura F, Rustad EH, Dugo M, Devecchi A, De Cecco L, Sensi M, Terragna C, Martello M, Bagratuni T, Kastritis E, Dimopoulos MA, Cavo M, Carniti C, Montefusco V, Corradini P, Bolli N. Integrative analysis of the genomic and transcriptomic landscape of double-refractory multiple myeloma. Blood Adv 2020; 4:830-44. [PMID: 32126144 DOI: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2019000779] [Citation(s) in RCA: 45] [Impact Index Per Article: 15.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/12/2019] [Accepted: 01/29/2020] [Indexed: 12/23/2022] Open
Abstract
In multiple myeloma, novel treatments with proteasome inhibitors (PIs) and immunomodulatory agents (IMiDs) have prolonged survival but the disease remains incurable. At relapse, next-generation sequencing has shown occasional mutations of drug targets but has failed to identify unifying features that underlie chemotherapy resistance. We studied 42 patients refractory to both PIs and IMiDs. Whole-exome sequencing was performed in 40 patients, and RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) was performed in 27. We found more mutations than were reported at diagnosis and more subclonal mutations, which implies ongoing evolution of the genome of myeloma cells during treatment. The mutational landscape was different from that described in published studies on samples taken at diagnosis. The TP53 pathway was the most frequently inactivated (in 45% of patients). Conversely, point mutations of genes associated with resistance to IMiDs were rare and were always subclonal. Refractory patients were uniquely characterized by having a mutational signature linked to exposure to alkylating agents, whose role in chemotherapy resistance and disease progression remains to be elucidated. RNA-seq analysis showed that treatment or mutations had no influence on clustering, which was instead influenced by karyotypic events. We describe a cluster with both amp(1q) and del(13) characterized by CCND2 upregulation and also overexpression of MCL1, which represents a novel target for experimental treatments. Overall, high-risk features were found in 65% of patients. However, only amp(1q) predicted survival. Gene mutations of IMiD and PI targets are not a preferred mode of drug resistance in myeloma. Chemotherapy resistance of the bulk tumor population is likely attained through differential, yet converging evolution of subclones that are overall variable from patient to patient and within the same patient.
Collapse
|
13
|
Maclachlan KH, Came N, Diamond B, Roshal M, Ho C, Thoren K, Mayerhoefer ME, Landgren O, Harrison S. Minimal residual disease in multiple myeloma: defining the role of next generation sequencing and flow cytometry in routine diagnostic use. Pathology 2021; 53:385-399. [PMID: 33674146 DOI: 10.1016/j.pathol.2021.02.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/29/2020] [Revised: 02/01/2021] [Accepted: 02/03/2021] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
For patients diagnosed with multiple myeloma (MM) there have been significant treatment advances over the past decade, reflected in an increasing proportion of patients achieving durable remissions. Clinical trials repeatedly demonstrate that achieving a deep response to therapy, with a bone marrow assessment proving negative for minimal residual disease (MRD), confers a significant survival advantage. To accurately assess for minute quantities of residual cancer requires highly sensitive methods; either multiparameter flow cytometry or next generation sequencing are currently recommended for MM response assessment. Under optimal conditions, these methods can detect one aberrant cell amongst 1,000,000 normal cells (a sensitivity of 10-6). Here, we will review the practical use of MRD assays in MM, including challenges in implementation for the routine diagnostic laboratory, standardisation across laboratories and clinical trials, the clinical integration of MRD status assessment into MM management and future directions for ongoing research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kylee H Maclachlan
- Myeloma Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA; Haematology Service, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, East Melbourne, Vic, Australia; Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Vic, Australia.
| | - Neil Came
- Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Vic, Australia; Pathology Department, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, East Melbourne, Vic, Australia
| | - Benjamin Diamond
- Myeloma Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Mikhail Roshal
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Caleb Ho
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Katie Thoren
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Marius E Mayerhoefer
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Ola Landgren
- Myeloma Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA; Myeloma Program, Department of Medicine, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Simon Harrison
- Haematology Service, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, East Melbourne, Vic, Australia; Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Vic, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Diamond BT, Rustad E, Maclachlan K, Thoren K, Ho C, Roshal M, Ulaner GA, Landgren CO. Defining the undetectable: The current landscape of minimal residual disease assessment in multiple myeloma and goals for future clarity. Blood Rev 2021; 46:100732. [PMID: 32771227 PMCID: PMC9928431 DOI: 10.1016/j.blre.2020.100732] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/07/2020] [Revised: 06/05/2020] [Accepted: 07/06/2020] [Indexed: 01/19/2023]
Abstract
Multiple Myeloma, the second most prevalent hematologic malignancy, yet lacks an established curative therapy. However, overall response rate to modern four-drug regimens approaches 100%. Major efforts have thus focused on the measurement of minute quantities of residual disease (minimal residual disease or MRD) for prognostic metrics and therapeutic response evaluation. Currently, MRD is assessed by flow cytometry or by next generation sequencing to track tumor-specific immunoglobulin V(D)J rearrangements. These bone marrow-based methods can reach sensitivity thresholds of the identification of one neoplastic cell in 1,000,000 (10-6). New technologies are being developed to be used alone or in conjunction with established methods, including peripheral blood-based assays, mass spectrometry, and targeted imaging. Data is also building for MRD as a surrogate endpoint for overall survival. Here, we will address the currently utilized MRD assays, challenges in validation across labs and clinical trials, techniques in development, and future directions for successful clinical application of MRD in multiple myeloma.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | - Caleb Ho
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, USA
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
15
|
Alsina M, Landgren O, Raje N, Niesvizky R, Bensinger WI, Berdeja JG, Kovacsovics T, Vesole DH, Fang B, Kimball AS, Siegel DS. A phase 1b study of once-weekly carfilzomib combined with lenalidomide and dexamethasone in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Am J Hematol 2021; 96:226-233. [PMID: 33125764 PMCID: PMC7898514 DOI: 10.1002/ajh.26041] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/17/2020] [Revised: 10/23/2020] [Accepted: 10/25/2020] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
Twice‐weekly carfilzomib with lenalidomide‐dexamethasone (Rd) is an effective regimen for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). Here we evaluated once‐weekly carfilzomib with Rd (once‐weekly KRd) in NDMM patients. The NDMM patients were enrolled regardless of transplant eligibility. Patients received carfilzomib on days 1, 8, and 15; lenalidomide 25 mg on days 1‐21; and dexamethasone 40 mg on carfilzomib days (also day 22 for cycles 1‐8) for ≤18, 28‐day cycles. Enrollment initiated in a carfilzomib 20/70 mg/m2 (20 mg/m2 on cycle one, day 1; 70 mg/m2 thereafter) NDMM dose‐expansion arm, which was suspended because of serious adverse events. After evaluation of dose‐limiting toxicities in a two‐step‐up dose‐evaluation cohort, an NDMM dose‐expansion arm (carfilzomib 20/56 mg/m2) was opened. Fifty‐one NDMM patients were enrolled in dose‐finding and dose‐expansion cohorts. Results are presented for the carfilzomib 56 mg/m2 NDMM dose‐expansion arm (n = 33). The grade ≥ 3 treatment‐emergent AE (TEAE) rate was 63.6%. Twenty‐five patients underwent stem cell collection; 18 proceeded to auto stem cell transplant, and five resumed KRd on study after autoSCT. The overall response rate (ORR) based on best overall response by cycle four was 97.0% (≥very good partial response [VGPR], 69.7%) in the NDMM 20/56 mg/m2 cohort. In patients who did not receive autoSCT (n = 15), the median number of cycles was 16.0; ORR was 93.3% (≥VGPR, 80.0%). At a median follow‐up of 8.1 months, median progression‐free survival was not reached. Once‐weekly KRd (carfilzomib 56 mg/m2) had a favorable safety profile and promising activity in NDMM, supporting the use of this regimen in this setting.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Ola Landgren
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center New York New York USA
| | - Noopur Raje
- Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center Boston Massachusetts USA
| | - Ruben Niesvizky
- Weill Cornell Medicine New York Presbyterian Hospital New York New York USA
| | | | | | - Tibor Kovacsovics
- Huntsman Cancer Institute at the University of Utah School of Medicine Salt Lake City Utah USA
| | - David H. Vesole
- John Theurer Cancer Center at Hackensack University Medical Center Hackensack New Jersey USA
- Medstar Georgetown University Hospital Washington District of Columbia USA
| | - Belle Fang
- Amgen, Inc. Thousand Oaks California USA
| | | | - David S. Siegel
- John Theurer Cancer Center at Hackensack University Medical Center Hackensack New Jersey USA
- Medstar Georgetown University Hospital Washington District of Columbia USA
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Landgren O, Siegel D, Kazandjian D, Costa L, Jakubowiak A. Treatments for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: when endurance is interrupted. Lancet Oncol 2020; 21:e540. [DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(20)30635-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/07/2020] [Revised: 10/10/2020] [Accepted: 10/12/2020] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
|
17
|
Kazandjian D, Mo CC, Landgren O, Richardson PG. The role of high-dose melphalan with autologous stem-cell transplant in multiple myeloma: is it time for a paradigm shift? Br J Haematol 2020; 191:692-703. [PMID: 32501533 PMCID: PMC8505046 DOI: 10.1111/bjh.16764] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/25/2020] [Accepted: 04/29/2020] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
Recent advances in multiple myeloma include numerous approvals of novel therapies with unprecedented efficacy, a rapid and sustained tempo of new drug development, and further refinements to prognostication to include minimal residual disease (MRD) testing and improved risk stratification. The upfront use of immunomodulatory drug and proteasome inhibitor combinations followed by maintenance has resulted in transformative clinical benefit. Four-drug regimens incorporating monoclonal antibodies are reporting unprecedented rates of complete response and MRD negativity in the absence of intensification. In the context of these advances, the added value of high-dose melphalan with autologous stem-cell transplant (HDM-ASCT) is a key question. From a safety standpoint, HDM-ASCT is associated with both acute toxicities that reduce quality of life and long-term toxicities that may limit life expectancy for some patients. The present review discusses the recent advances in induction therapy, the impact of these advances on HDM-ASCT, the evolving role of MRD testing and the short- and long-term risks of HDM-ASCT. Recognising that prospective data remains limited, we suggest that HDM-ASCT not be considered mandatory for eligible newly diagnosed patients who are treated with highly efficacious regimens and achieve deep responses, but rather be held in reserve without early exposure to the clinical and genomic toxicity inherent to this approach.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dickran Kazandjian
- Multiple Myeloma Program, Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
| | - Clifton C. Mo
- Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Jerome Lipper Multiple Myeloma Center, Boston, MA
| | - Ola Landgren
- Myeloma Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York City, NY
| | - Paul G. Richardson
- Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Jerome Lipper Multiple Myeloma Center, Boston, MA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Gozzetti A, Raspadori D, Bacchiarri F, Sicuranza A, Pacelli P, Ferrigno I, Tocci D, Bocchia M. Minimal Residual Disease in Multiple Myeloma: State of the Art and Applications in Clinical Practice. J Pers Med 2020; 10:jpm10030120. [PMID: 32927719 PMCID: PMC7565263 DOI: 10.3390/jpm10030120] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/19/2020] [Revised: 09/03/2020] [Accepted: 09/08/2020] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Novel drugs have revolutionized multiple myeloma therapy in the last 20 years, with median survival that has doubled to up to 8–10 years. The introduction of therapeutic strategies, such as consolidation and maintenance after autologous stem cell transplants, has also ameliorated clinical results. The goal of modern therapies is becoming not only complete remission, but also the deepest possible remission. In this context, the evaluation of minimal residual disease by techniques such as next-generation sequencing (NGS) and next-generation flow (NGF) is becoming part of all new clinical trials that test drug efficacy. This review focuses on minimal residual disease approaches in clinical trials, with particular attention to real-world practices.
Collapse
|
19
|
Kumar SK, Jacobus SJ, Cohen AD, Weiss M, Callander N, Singh AK, Parker TL, Menter A, Yang X, Parsons B, Kumar P, Kapoor P, Rosenberg A, Zonder JA, Faber E, Lonial S, Anderson KC, Richardson PG, Orlowski RZ, Wagner LI, Rajkumar SV. Carfilzomib or bortezomib in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma without intention for immediate autologous stem-cell transplantation (ENDURANCE): a multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised, controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 2020; 21:1317-1330. [PMID: 32866432 DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(20)30452-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 139] [Impact Index Per Article: 34.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/13/2020] [Revised: 06/08/2020] [Accepted: 06/10/2020] [Indexed: 01/02/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRd) is a standard therapy for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Carfilzomib, a next-generation proteasome inhibitor, in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone (KRd), has shown promising efficacy in phase 2 trials and might improve outcomes compared with VRd. We aimed to assess whether the KRd regimen is superior to the VRd regimen in the treatment of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma in patients who were not being considered for immediate autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT). METHODS In this multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised controlled trial (the ENDURANCE trial; E1A11), we recruited patients aged 18 years or older with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were ineligible for, or did not intend to have, immediate ASCT. Participants were recruited from 272 community oncology practices or academic medical centres in the USA. Key inclusion criteria were the absence of high-risk multiple myeloma and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2. Enrolled patients were randomly assigned (1:1) centrally by use of permuted blocks to receive induction therapy with either the VRd regimen or the KRd regimen for 36 weeks. Patients who completed induction therapy were then randomly assigned (1:1) a second time to either indefinite maintenance or 2 years of maintenance with lenalidomide. Randomisation was stratified by intent for ASCT at disease progression for the first randomisation and by the induction therapy received for the second randomisation. Allocation was not masked to investigators or patients. For 12 cycles of 3 weeks, patients in the VRd group received 1·3 mg/m2 of bortezomib subcutaneously or intravenously on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 of cycles 1-8, and day 1 and day 8 of cycles nine to twelve, 25 mg of oral lenalidomide on days 1-14, and 20 mg of oral dexamethasone on days 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, and 12. For nine cycles of 4 weeks, patients in the KRd group received 36 mg/m2 of intravenous carfilzomib on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16, 25 mg of oral lenalidomide on days 1-21, and 40 mg of oral dexamethasone on days 1, 8, 15, and 22. The coprimary endpoints were progression-free survival in the induction phase, and overall survival in the maintenance phase. The primary analysis was done in the intention-to-treat population and safety was assessed in patients who received at least one dose of their assigned treatment. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01863550. Study recruitment is complete, and follow-up of the maintenance phase is ongoing. FINDINGS Between Dec 6, 2013, and Feb 6, 2019, 1087 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to either the VRd regimen (n=542) or the KRd regimen (n=545). At a median follow-up of 9 months (IQR 5-23), at a second planned interim analysis, the median progression-free survival was 34·6 months (95% CI 28·8-37·8) in the KRd group and 34·4 months (30·1-not estimable) in the VRd group (hazard ratio [HR] 1·04, 95% CI 0·83-1·31; p=0·74). Median overall survival has not been reached in either group. The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related non-haematological adverse events included fatigue (34 [6%] of 527 patients in the VRd group vs 29 [6%] of 526 in the KRd group), hyperglycaemia (23 [4%] vs 34 [6%]), diarrhoea (23 [5%] vs 16 [3%]), peripheral neuropathy (44 [8%] vs four [<1%]), dyspnoea (nine [2%] vs 38 [7%]), and thromboembolic events (11 [2%] vs 26 [5%]). Treatment-related deaths occurred in two patients (<1%) in the VRd group (one cardiotoxicity and one secondary cancer) and 11 (2%) in the KRd group (four cardiotoxicity, two acute kidney failure, one liver toxicity, two respiratory failure, one thromboembolic event, and one sudden death). INTERPRETATION The KRd regimen did not improve progression-free survival compared with the VRd regimen in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, and had more toxicity. The VRd triplet regimen remains the standard of care for induction therapy for patients with standard-risk and intermediate-risk newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, and is a suitable treatment backbone for the development of combinations of four drugs. FUNDING US National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, and Amgen.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Susanna J Jacobus
- ECOG-ACRIN Biostatistics Center, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Adam D Cohen
- Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | | | - Natalie Callander
- University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA
| | | | - Terri L Parker
- Department of Hematology, Yale University, Hamden, CT, USA
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Aaron Rosenberg
- University of California Davis Comprehensive Cancer Center, Sacramento, CA, USA
| | - Jeffrey A Zonder
- Department of Malignant Hematology, Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Institute and Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, MI, USA
| | | | - Sagar Lonial
- Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | | | | | | | - Lynne I Wagner
- Wake Forest University Health Sciences, Winston-Salem, NC, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
20
|
Laurent V, Fronteau C, Antier C, Dupuis P, Tessoulin B, Gastinne T, Mahé B, Blin N, Dubruille V, Lok A, Chevallier P, Guillaume T, Garnier A, Peterlin P, Le Bourgeois A, Vantyghem S, Tiab M, Godmer P, Sadot S, Loirat M, Trebouet A, Cormier N, Le Gouill S, Moreau P, Touzeau C. Autologous stem-cell collection following VTD or VRD induction therapy in multiple myeloma: a single-center experience. Bone Marrow Transplant 2021; 56:395-9. [PMID: 32796951 DOI: 10.1038/s41409-020-01033-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/11/2020] [Revised: 07/21/2020] [Accepted: 08/06/2020] [Indexed: 01/23/2023]
Abstract
Triplet-drug regimen bortezomib-thalidomide-dexamethasone (VTD) and bortezomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (VRD) are considered as standard of care induction prior autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) in myeloma. In addition to improve response rate, induction therapy should preserve an adequate stem-cell collection. In the present retrospective study, we analyzed stem-cell collection in 325 newly diagnosed myeloma patients who received either VTD or VRD induction before ASCT. Stem-cell mobilization consisted of intravenous cyclophosphamide plus G-CSF. Plerixafor was administered preemptively to rescue mobilization. In comparison with VTD, VRD induction was associated with a more frequent use of plerixafor (19.3% versus 5.4%, p = 0.004) and with an increased number of apheresis to reach adequate collection (>2 apheresis required in 42.3% versus 30.2%, p = 0.05). Moreover, more patients experienced collection failure in the VRD group (6% versus 1.8%, p = 0.004). The median number of CD34-positive cells (×106/kg) was lower in the VRD group: 8.5 versus 9.3 (p = 0.05) in the VTD group. The vast majority of patients underwent ASCT (93% versus 98%, in VRD and VTD group, respectively). These data highlight the need of optimal stem-cell collection strategy, especially in the context of tandem transplantation and incorporation of anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody into induction.
Collapse
|
21
|
Dimopoulos M, Quach H, Mateos MV, Landgren O, Leleu X, Siegel D, Weisel K, Yang H, Klippel Z, Zahlten-Kumeli A, Usmani SZ. Carfilzomib, dexamethasone, and daratumumab versus carfilzomib and dexamethasone for patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (CANDOR): results from a randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 3 study. Lancet 2020; 396:186-197. [PMID: 32682484 DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(20)30734-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 243] [Impact Index Per Article: 60.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/21/2020] [Revised: 03/11/2020] [Accepted: 03/17/2020] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Lenalidomide and bortezomib frontline exposure has raised a growing need for novel treatments for patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. Carfilzomib in combination with daratumumab has shown substantial efficacy with tolerable safety in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma in a phase 1 study. In this study, we aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of carfilzomib, dexamethasone, and daratumumab versus carfilzomib and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. METHODS In this randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 3 study, 466 patients recruited from 102 sites across North America, Europe, Australia, and Asia with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma were randomly assigned 2:1 to carfilzomib, dexamethasone, and daratumumab (KdD) or carfilzomib and dexamethasone (Kd). All patients received twice per week carfilzomib at 56 mg/m2 (20 mg/m2; days 1 and 2 during cycle 1). Daratumumab (8 mg/kg) was administered intravenously on days 1 and 2 of cycle 1 and at 16 mg/kg weekly for the remaining doses of the first two cycles, then every 2 weeks for four cycles (cycles 3-6), and every 4 weeks thereafter. Patients received 40 mg dexamethasone weekly (20 mg for patients ≥75 years old starting on the second week). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival assessed by intention to treat. Adverse events were assessed in the safety population. This trial (NCT03158688) is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, and is active but not recruiting. FINDINGS Between June 13, 2017, and June 25, 2018, 466 patients of 569 assessed for eligibility were enrolled. After median follow-up of approximately 17 months, median progression-free survival was not reached in the KdD group versus 15·8 months in the Kd group (hazard ratio 0·63; 95% CI 0·46-0·85; p=0·0027). Median treatment duration was longer in the KdD versus the Kd group (70·1 vs 40·3 weeks). Grade 3 or higher adverse events were reported in 253 (82%) patients in the KdD group and 113 (74%) patients in the Kd group. The frequency of adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation was similar in both groups (KdD, 69 [22%]; Kd, 38 [25%]). INTERPRETATION KdD significantly prolonged progression-free survival versus Kd in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma and was associated with a favourable benefit-risk profile. FUNDING Amgen.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Meletios Dimopoulos
- National and Kapodistrian University Athens School of Medicine, Athens, Greece
| | - Hang Quach
- University of Melbourne, St Vincent's Hospital, Fitzroy, VIC, Australia
| | - Maria-Victoria Mateos
- Cancer Research Center, University Hospital Salamanca-Instituto de Investigación Biomédica de Salamanca, Salamanca, Spain
| | - Ola Landgren
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Xavier Leleu
- Department of Hematology, CHU la Miletrie and Inserm CIC 1402, Poitiers, France
| | - David Siegel
- John Theurer Cancer Center at Hackensack University Medical Center, Hackensack, NJ, USA
| | - Katja Weisel
- University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
22
|
Maclachlan K, Diamond B, Maura F, Hillengass J, Turesson I, Landgren CO, Kazandjian D. Second malignancies in multiple myeloma; emerging patterns and future directions. Best Pract Res Clin Haematol 2020; 33:101144. [PMID: 32139010 PMCID: PMC7544243 DOI: 10.1016/j.beha.2020.101144] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/30/2019] [Accepted: 01/09/2020] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
The changing landscape of treatment options for multiple myeloma has led to a higher proportion of patients achieving deep, long-lasting responses to therapy. With the associated improvement in overall survival, the development of subsequent second malignancies has become of increased significance. The risk of second malignancy after multiple myeloma is affected by a combination of patient-, disease- and therapy-related risk factors. This review discusses recent data refining our knowledge of these contributing factors, including current treatment modalities which increase risk (i.e. high-dose melphalan with autologous stem cell transplant and lenalidomide maintenance therapy). We highlight emerging data towards individualized risk- and response-adapted treatment strategies and discuss key areas requiring future research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kylee Maclachlan
- Myeloma Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
| | - Benjamin Diamond
- Myeloma Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Francesco Maura
- Myeloma Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Jens Hillengass
- Section of Multiple Myeloma, Department of Medicine, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY, USA
| | - Ingemar Turesson
- Department of Hematology, Skane University Hospital, Malmo, Sweden
| | - C Ola Landgren
- Myeloma Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Dickran Kazandjian
- Multiple Myeloma Program, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Kazandjian D, Dew A, Hill E. The changing role of high dose melphalan with stem cell rescue in the treatment of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma in the era of modern therapies-back to the future! Best Pract Res Clin Haematol 2020; 33:101150. [PMID: 32139015 DOI: 10.1016/j.beha.2020.101150] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/28/2019] [Accepted: 01/09/2020] [Indexed: 12/28/2022]
Abstract
State of the art treatment for myeloma involves using 3-drug combinations incorporating immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs) and proteasome inhibitors (PIs). Clinical trials for 4-drug combinations incorporating monoclonal antibodies added to IMiD and PI based backbones are underway. Recent retrospective analyses show that patients who attain MRD negativity have similar long term outcomes regardless of early or delayed high dose melphalan with autologous stem cell support (HDM-ASCT). Given HDM-ASCT toxicity, not "overtreating" would be beneficial. Short of data from future prospective clinical trials addressing the question of the role of HDM-ASCT in MRD negative patients, varying expert opinions inherently arise. In this paper, we present the historical context of HDM-ASCT and data supporting 3-drug combinations. We then propose that a viable option for patients who reach MRD negativity is to transition to maintenance therapy directly without early HDM-ASCT, and reserving stem cell harvest to cases where HDM-ASCT is a possibility at relapse.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dickran Kazandjian
- Multiple Myeloma Program, Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr., Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA.
| | - Alexander Dew
- Hematology-Oncology Department, John P. Murtha Cancer Center, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, 4954 North Palmer Rd., Bethesda, MD, 20889, USA.
| | - Elizabeth Hill
- Multiple Myeloma Program, Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr., Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Yellapantula V, Hultcrantz M, Rustad EH, Wasserman E, Londono D, Cimera R, Ciardiello A, Landau H, Akhlaghi T, Mailankody S, Patel M, Medina-Martinez JS, Arango Ossa JE, Levine MF, Bolli N, Maura F, Dogan A, Papaemmanuil E, Zhang Y, Landgren O. Comprehensive detection of recurring genomic abnormalities: a targeted sequencing approach for multiple myeloma. Blood Cancer J 2019; 9:101. [PMID: 31827071 DOI: 10.1038/s41408-019-0264-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 35] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/30/2019] [Revised: 10/31/2019] [Accepted: 11/15/2019] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Recent genomic research efforts in multiple myeloma have revealed clinically relevant molecular subgroups beyond conventional cytogenetic classifications. Implementing these advances in clinical trial design and in routine patient care requires a new generation of molecular diagnostic tools. Here, we present a custom capture next-generation sequencing (NGS) panel designed to identify rearrangements involving the IGH locus, arm level, and focal copy number aberrations, as well as frequently mutated genes in multiple myeloma in a single assay. We sequenced 154 patients with plasma cell disorders and performed a head-to-head comparison with the results from conventional clinical assays, i.e., fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) and single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) microarray. Our custom capture NGS panel had high sensitivity (>99%) and specificity (>99%) for detection of IGH translocations and relevant chromosomal gains and losses in multiple myeloma. In addition, the assay was able to capture novel genomic markers associated with poor outcome such as bi-allelic events involving TP53. In summary, we show that a multiple myeloma designed custom capture NGS panel can detect IGH translocations and CNAs with very high concordance in relation to FISH and SNP microarrays and importantly captures the most relevant and recurrent somatic mutations in multiple myeloma rendering this approach highly suitable for clinical application in the modern era.
Collapse
|
25
|
Huang PA, Beedie SL, Chau CH, Venzon DJ, Gere S, Kazandjian D, Korde N, Mailankody S, Landgren O, Figg WD. Cereblon gene variants and clinical outcome in multiple myeloma patients treated with lenalidomide. Sci Rep 2019; 9:14884. [PMID: 31619706 PMCID: PMC6795854 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-51446-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/10/2019] [Accepted: 09/03/2019] [Indexed: 12/20/2022] Open
Abstract
Carfilzomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (KRd) therapy has yielded promising results in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). Cereblon (CRBN) is the direct molecular target of lenalidomide and genetic polymorphisms in CRBN have been associated with lenalidomide efficacy. In this study, we assessed the correlation of five single nucleotide variants (SNVs) in the CRBN gene with clinical response and outcomes in patients with NDMM administered KRd therapy with lenalidomide maintenance, achieving favorable trial endpoints in a prospective Phase II study (NCT01402284). Of the observed SNVs, no associations with KRd therapy response were found in this patient cohort, although strong trends in hypoalbuminemia grade and hyperbilirubinemia grade emerged across the CRBN rs1672753 genotype (P = 0.0008) and the rs1714327 genotype (P = 0.0010), respectively. Our results do not provide conclusive support for the predictive utility of CRBN gene polymorphisms as potential biomarkers of clinical response to lenalidomide-based therapy in our patient population. However, these findings remain to be validated in prospective studies using larger patient populations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Phoebe A Huang
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Shaunna L Beedie
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Cindy H Chau
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - David J Venzon
- Biostatistics and Data Management Section, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Sheryl Gere
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Dickran Kazandjian
- Myeloma Program, Lymphoid Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Neha Korde
- Myeloma Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Sham Mailankody
- Myeloma Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Ola Landgren
- Myeloma Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - William D Figg
- Genitourinary Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Kazandjian D, Landgren O. Delaying the use of high-dose melphalan with stem cell rescue in multiple myeloma is ready for prime time. Clin Adv Hematol Oncol 2019; 17:559-568. [PMID: 31730582 PMCID: PMC7451402] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/10/2023]
Abstract
The significant advances made in the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) have allowed for a paradigm shift away from the early use of high-dose melphalan with autologous stem cell transplant (HDM-ASCT). In 2015 alone, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved 4 novel drugs for MM. Novel drugs and regimens have shown unprecedented efficacy, which has increased the tempo of new drug development. Furthermore, the FDA recently approved a diagnostic test to detect minimal residual disease (MRD) that will allow community clinicians to conduct real-time testing of MRD. Most importantly, frontline regimens based on immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs) and proteasome inhibitors (PIs) have shown a large clinical benefit. The next era has begun, as several 4-drug combinations that include monoclonal antibodies are being evaluated in clinical trials in the attempt to replace HDM-ASCT in the treatment of MM. We and others have therefore questioned the need for early HDM-ASCT, especially in light of the possible complications. HDM-ASCT is associated not only with acute toxicities-cytopenia, infection, and even death-but also an increased risk of developing secondary cancers. This article discusses the historic context of HDM-ASCT, the modern role of HDM-ASCT given the availability of highly sensitive MRD testing, and the likely future of quadruplet treatment. In summary, patients who attain deep responses using IMiD- and PI-based regimens may not require early HDM-ASCT. A delayed approach to this treatment is acceptable, and might be preferred by patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dickran Kazandjian
- Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Ola Landgren
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Landgren O, Sonneveld P, Jakubowiak A, Mohty M, Iskander KS, Mezzi K, Siegel DS. Carfilzomib with immunomodulatory drugs for the treatment of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Leukemia 2019; 33:2127-2143. [PMID: 31341235 PMCID: PMC6756042 DOI: 10.1038/s41375-019-0517-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 32] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/21/2019] [Revised: 05/13/2019] [Accepted: 05/20/2019] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
Abstract
Carfilzomib, a selective proteasome inhibitor (PI), is approved for the treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (MM). Combination regimens incorporating a PI and immunomodulatory drug (IMiD) have been associated with deep responses and extended survival in patients with newly diagnosed MM (NDMM). Carfilzomib-based combinations with immunomodulators are being extensively studied in the frontline setting. The objective of this review was to describe efficacy and safety data for carfilzomib-based, PI/immunomodulatory combinations in NDMM. Information sources were articles indexed in PubMed and abstracts from key hematology/oncology congresses published between January 2012 and December 2018. PubMed and congresses were searched for prospective clinical studies assessing the combination of carfilzomib with an IMiD for NDMM treatment. Retrospective and preclinical reports, case reports/series, reviews, and clinical studies not evaluating carfilzomib-immunomodulator combinations in NDMM were excluded based on review of titles and abstracts. A total of nine articles and 72 abstracts were deemed relevant and included in the review. A total of six distinct carfilzomib-based, PI/immunomodulator combination regimens have been evaluated in 12 clinical trials. Overall, treatment with these regimens has resulted in deep responses, including high rates of negativity for minimal residual disease. These deep responses have translated to long progression-free survival and overall survival rates. Efficacy results for these regimens have generally been consistent across subgroups defined by age, transplant eligibility, and cytogenetic risk. The safety profile of carfilzomib in NDMM is consistent with that observed in the relapsed-refractory MM setting. Clinical studies have found that carfilzomib-based combinations with immunomodulators are highly active with a favorable safety profile in NDMM. The carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (KRd) drug backbone is a promising foundation for treatment strategies aimed at achieving long-term, deep responses (functional cures) in the frontline setting. Several ongoing studies are evaluating KRd, with or without anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ola Landgren
- Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
| | | | | | - Mohamad Mohty
- Saint-Antoine Hospital, Sorbonne University, INSERM UMRs 938, Paris, France
| | | | | | - David S Siegel
- John Theurer Cancer Center, Hackensack University Medical Center, Hackensack, NJ, USA
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Rustad EH, Hultcrantz M, Yellapantula VD, Akhlaghi T, Ho C, Arcila ME, Roshal M, Patel A, Chen D, Devlin SM, Jacobsen A, Huang Y, Miller JE, Papaemmanuil E, Landgren O. Baseline identification of clonal V(D)J sequences for DNA-based minimal residual disease detection in multiple myeloma. PLoS One 2019; 14:e0211600. [PMID: 30901326 PMCID: PMC6430394 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0211600] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/28/2018] [Accepted: 01/16/2019] [Indexed: 12/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Tracking of clonal immunoglobulin V(D)J rearrangement sequences by next generation sequencing is highly sensitive for minimal residual disease in multiple myeloma. However, previous studies have found variable rates of V(D)J sequence identification at baseline, which could limit tracking. Here, we aimed to define the factors influencing the identification of clonal V(D)J sequences. Bone marrow mononuclear cells from 177 myeloma patients underwent V(D)J sequencing by the LymphoTrack assays (Invivoscribe). As a molecular control for tumor cell content, we sequenced the samples using our in-house myeloma panel myTYPE. V(D)J sequence clonality was identified in 81% of samples overall, as compared with 95% in samples where tumor-derived DNA was detectable by myTYPE. Clonality was detected more frequently in patients with lambda-restricted disease, mainly because of increased detection of kappa gene rearrangements. Finally, we describe how the tumor cell content of bone marrow aspirates decrease gradually in sequential pulls because of hemodilution: From the initial pull used for aspirate smear, to the final pull that is commonly used for research. In conclusion, baseline clonality detection rates of 95% or higher are feasible in multiple myeloma. Optimal performance depends on the use of good quality aspirates and/or subsequent tumor cell enrichment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Even H. Rustad
- Myeloma Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States of America
- Department of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, NTNU, Trondheim, Norway
| | - Malin Hultcrantz
- Myeloma Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States of America
| | - Venkata D. Yellapantula
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States of America
| | - Theresia Akhlaghi
- Myeloma Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States of America
| | - Caleb Ho
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States of America
| | - Maria E. Arcila
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States of America
| | - Mikhail Roshal
- Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States of America
| | - Akshar Patel
- Center for Hematological Malignancies, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States of America
| | - Denise Chen
- Marie-Josee and Henry R. Kravis Center for Molecular Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States of America
| | - Sean M. Devlin
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States of America
| | | | - Ying Huang
- Invivoscribe, Inc, San Diego, CA, United States of America
| | | | - Elli Papaemmanuil
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States of America
| | - Ola Landgren
- Myeloma Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States of America
- * E-mail:
| |
Collapse
|