Correlation of immune fitness with response to teclistamab in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma in MajesTEC-1

Teclistamab, an off-the-shelf B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA) × CD3 bispecific antibody that mediates T-cell activation and subsequent lysis of BCMA-expressing myeloma cells, is approved for the treatment of patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). As a T-cell redirection therapy, clinical outcomes with teclistamab may be influenced by patient immune fitness and tumor antigen expression. We correlated tumor characteristics and baseline immune profiles with clinical response and disease burden in patients with RRMM from the pivotal phase 1/2 MajesTEC-1 study, focusing on patients treated with 1.5 mg/kg of teclistamab (N = 165). Peripheral blood samples were collected at screening and bone marrow samples were collected at screening and cycle 3. Better clinical outcomes to teclistamab correlated with higher baseline total T-cell counts in the periphery. In addition, responders (partial response or better) had a lower proportion of immunosuppressive regulatory T cells, T cells expressing co-inhibitory receptors (CD38, PD-1, PD-1/TIM-3), and soluble BCMA, and a T-cell profile suggestive of a more cytolytic potential, compared with nonresponders. Neither frequency of baseline bone marrow BCMA expression nor BCMA receptor density were associated with clinical response to teclistamab. Improved progression-free survival was observed in patients with a lower frequency of T cells expressing exhaustion markers and immunosuppressive regulatory T cells. Overall, response to teclistamab was associated with baseline immune fitness; nonresponders had immune profiles suggestive of immune suppression and T-cell dysfunction. These findings illustrate the importance of the contribution of the immune landscape to T-cell redirection therapy response. This trial was registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03145181/NCT04557098.

Nursing Considerations for Cytokine Release Syndrome in Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma: Experience with Teclistamab from the MajesTEC-1 Study

OBJECTIVES

Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) is a systemic inflammatory response that is commonly observed as a class effect of T-cell-redirecting therapies. This article provides important practical guidance for nurses relating to the diagnosis, monitoring, and management of CRS in patients receiving teclistamab, based on experience from the MajesTEC-1 clinical trial and real-life nursing practice.

METHODS

MajesTEC-1 is a phase 1/2 study of teclistamab in heavily pretreated patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. To mitigate the risk of high-grade CRS, patients were carefully monitored for early signs and symptoms of CRS (including fever, which must have fully resolved before teclistamab administration).

RESULTS

A survey of nurses from several of the study sites provided additional real-life insights into nursing best practices for managing CRS from four academic institutions in three countries.

CONCLUSIONS

In MajesTEC-1, 72% of patients treated with teclistamab experienced CRS, the majority of which was low grade. All cases resolved and none led to treatment discontinuation. Real-life supportive measures for CRS are generally aligned with those outlined in the study.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE

Because nurses are on the frontline of patient care, they play a crucial role in promptly recognizing the signs and symptoms of CRS and responding with timely and appropriate supportive treatment. This review provides important practical guidance for nurses on diagnosis, monitoring, and management of CRS in patients receiving teclistamab, based on experience from the MajesTEC-1 trial and real-life nursing practice.

Incidence, timing, and management of infections in patients receiving teclistamab for the treatment of relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma in the MajesTEC-1 study

BACKGROUND

Patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma are at increased risk of infection. Infections during treatment with teclistamab, the first B-cell maturation antigen-directed bispecific antibody approved for triple-class-exposed relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma, was examined in the phase 1/2 MajesTEC-1 study.

METHODS

Patients (N = 165) received subcutaneous teclistamab 1.5 mg/kg weekly after a step-up dosing schedule (0.06 mg/kg and 0.3 mg/kg, each separated by 2-4 days). Patients were monitored frequently for infections; prophylaxis and management were per institutional guidelines.

RESULTS

At a median follow-up of 22.8 months (range, 0.3-33.6), infections were reported in 132 patients (80.0%). Grade 3/4 infections occurred in 91 patients (55.2%), including COVID-19 (21.2%), respiratory infections (19.4%), Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (4.2%), viral infections (4.2%), and gastrointestinal infections (1.2%). Twenty-one patients died from infections (18 from COVID-19). Median time to first onset of any-grade and grade 3 to 5 infections was 1.7 and 4.2 months, respectively. Overall, 70.9% of patients had ≥1 postbaseline immunoglobulin G (IgG) level <400 mg/dL; median time to IgG <400 mg/dL was 1.2 months (range, 0.2-19.8) and 46.1% received ≥1 dose of IgG replacement. Grade 3/4 neutropenia occurred in 65.5% of patients (median time to grade ≥3 neutropenia/febrile neutropenia was 2.3 months [range, 0-18.1]).

CONCLUSION

Based on the infection profile of B-cell maturation antigen-targeted bispecific antibodies such as teclistamab, it is recommended that clinicians and patients remain vigilant for a range of infection types throughout treatment to facilitate prompt intervention. Appropriate screening, prophylaxis, and management of infections, hypogammaglobulinemia, and neutropenia are important.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03145181/NCT04557098 (ClinicalTrials.gov) PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Before starting teclistamab, patients should be up to date with vaccinations (including COVID-19) and screened for hepatitis B and C and HIV. Teclistamab should not be given to patients with any active infections. Prophylactic antimicrobials should be administered per institutional guidelines. Prophylaxis for Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia and herpes simplex/varicella zoster virus is recommended during teclistamab treatment. Close monitoring of infections and immunoglobulin G (IgG) levels should continue throughout teclistamab treatment. IgG replacement (administered every 3-6 weeks) should be used to maintain IgG ≥400 mg/dL. Growth factors should be considered for grade ≥3 neutropenia with infection/fever and grade 4 neutropenia.

Teclistamab Improves Patient-Reported Symptoms and Health-Related Quality of Life in Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma: Results From the Phase II MajesTEC-1 Study

INTRODUCTION

Patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) report significantly lower HRQoL compared with patients with newly diagnosed MM and experience further deterioration in HRQoL with each relapse and subsequent treatment. Therefore, consideration of the impact of treatment on HRQoL in addition to clinical outcomes is vital.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In the phase I/II MajesTEC-1 (NCT03145181, NCT04557098) study, patients with RRMM who received teclistamab, an off-the-shelf, T-cell redirecting BCMA × CD3 bispecific antibody, had deep and durable responses with manageable safety. HRQoL was assessed using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire core 30-item and the EuroQol 5 Dimension 5 Level descriptive questionnaire. Changes over time from baseline were measured with a repeated measures mixed-effects model. Proportions of patients with clinically meaningful improvement after starting treatment and time to clinically meaningful worsening were assessed.

RESULTS

Compliance was maintained throughout the study. Compared with baseline, positive changes were observed for pain, global health status, and emotional functioning with treatment; other assessments were largely unchanged from baseline. Post hoc analysis showed patients with deeper clinical response generally reported improved HRQoL outcomes. Following an initial decline in HRQoL in some scales, the proportion of patients reporting clinically meaningful improvements increased, while the proportion reporting clinically meaningful worsening decreased over time. Clinically meaningful improvements in pain were reported in ≥40% of patients at most assessment time points.

CONCLUSIONS

These results complement previously reported clinical benefits and support teclistamab as a promising therapeutic option for patients with RRMM.

Comparative Effectiveness of Teclistamab Versus Real-World Physician's Choice of Therapy in LocoMMotion and MoMMent in Triple-Class Exposed Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma

INTRODUCTION

Teclistamab is the first approved B cell maturation antigen × CD3 bispecific antibody with precision dosing for the treatment of triple-class exposed (TCE) relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). We compared the effectiveness of teclistamab in MajesTEC-1 versus real-world physician's choice of therapy (RWPC) in patients from the prospective, non-interventional LocoMMotion and MoMMent studies.

METHODS

Patients treated with teclistamab from MajesTEC-1 (N = 165) were compared with an external control arm from LocoMMotion (N = 248) or LocoMMotion + MoMMent pooled (N = 302). Inverse probability of treatment weighting adjusted for imbalances in prognostic baseline characteristics. The relative effect of teclistamab versus RWPC for overall response rate (ORR), very good partial response or better (≥ VGPR) rate, and complete response or better (≥ CR) rate was estimated with an odds ratio using weighted logistic regression transformed into a response-rate ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Weighted proportional hazards regression was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were well balanced between treatment cohorts after reweighting. Patients treated with teclistamab had significantly improved outcomes versus RWPC in LocoMMotion: ORR (RR [95% CI], 2.44 [1.79-3.33]; p < 0.0001), ≥ VGPR (RR 5.78 [3.74-8.93]; p < 0.0001), ≥ CR (RR 113.73 [15.68-825.13]; p < 0.0001), DOR (HR 0.39 [0.24-0.64]; p = 0.0002), PFS (HR 0.48 [0.35-0.64]; p < 0.0001), and OS (HR 0.64 [0.46-0.88]; p = 0.0055). Teclistamab versus RWPC in LocoMMotion + MoMMent also had significantly improved outcomes: ORR (RR 2.41 [1.80-3.23]; p < 0.0001), ≥ VGPR (RR 5.91 [3.93-8.88]; p < 0.0001), ≥ CR (RR 132.32 [19.06-918.47]; p < 0.0001), DOR (HR 0.43 [0.26-0.71]; p = 0.0011), PFS (HR 0.49 [0.37-0.66]; p < 0.0001), and OS (HR 0.69 [0.50-0.95]; p = 0.0247).

CONCLUSION

Teclistamab demonstrated significantly improved effectiveness over RWPC in LocoMMotion ± MoMMent, emphasizing its clinical benefit as a highly effective treatment for patients with TCE RRMM.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

MajesTEC-1, ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03145181 (phase 1) and NCT04557098 (phase 2); LocoMMotion, ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04035226; MoMMent, ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05160584.

Teclistamab impairs humoral immunity in patients with heavily pretreated myeloma: importance of immunoglobulin supplementation

ABSTRACT

Teclistamab and other B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA)-targeting bispecific antibodies (BsAbs) have substantial activity in patients with heavily pretreated multiple myeloma (MM) but are associated with a high rate of infections. BCMA is also expressed on normal plasma cells and mature B cells, which are essential for the generation of a humoral immune response. The aim of this study was to improve the understanding of the impact of BCMA-targeting BsAbs on humoral immunity. The impact of teclistamab on polyclonal immunoglobulins and B cell counts was evaluated in patients with MM who received once-weekly teclistamab 1.5 mg/kg subcutaneously. Vaccination responses were assessed in a subset of patients. Teclistamabinduced rapid depletion of peripheral blood B cells in patients with MM and eliminated normal plasma cells in ex vivo assays. In addition, teclistamab reduced the levels of polyclonal immunoglobulins (immunoglobulin G [IgG], IgA, IgE, and IgM), without recovery over time while receiving teclistamab therapy. Furthermore, response to vaccines against Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae type B, and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 was severely impaired in patients treated with teclistamab compared with vaccination responses observed in patients with newly diagnosed MM or relapsed/refractory MM. Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) use was associated with a significantly lower risk of serious infections among patients treated with teclistamab (cumulative incidence of infections at 6 months: 5.3% with IVIG vs 54.8% with observation only [P < .001]). In conclusion, our data show severe defects in humoral immunity induced by teclistamab, the impact of which can be mitigated by the use of immunoglobulin supplementation. This trial was registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov as #NCT04557098.

Teclistamab: Mechanism of action, clinical, and translational science

Multiple myeloma (MM) remains incurable despite improvements in treatment options. B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA) is predominantly expressed in B-lineage cells and represents a promising new target for MM. Teclistamab (TECVAYLITM ) is the first T-cell redirecting bispecific antibody approved for patients with MM. Targeting both CD3 receptor complex on T cells and BCMA on myeloma cells, teclistamab leads to T-cell activation and subsequent lysis of BCMA+ cells. The recommended dose of teclistamab is 1.5 mg/kg subcutaneous weekly after two step-up doses of 0.06 and 0.3 mg/kg, which was selected after review of safety, efficacy, pharmacokinetic, and pharmacodynamic data. Exposure-response analyses of efficacy and safety data were also used to confirm the teclistamab dose. Teclistamab resulted in a high rate of deep and durable responses (63% overall response, 45.5% complete response or better, with 22 months median duration of response) in patients with triple-exposed relapsed/refractory MM. Common adverse reactions included cytokine release syndrome, hematologic abnormalities, and infections. Teclistamab is currently being investigated as monotherapy as well as combination therapy across different MM indications.

Population Pharmacokinetics and Exposure-Response with Teclistamab in Patients With Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma: Results From MajesTEC-1

BACKGROUND

Teclistamab, a B-cell maturation antigen × CD3 bispecific antibody, is approved in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) who have previously received an immunomodulatory agent, a proteasome inhibitor, and an anti-CD38 antibody.

OBJECTIVE

We report the population pharmacokinetics of teclistamab administered intravenously and subcutaneously (SC) and exposure-response relationships from the phase I/II, first-in-human, open-label, multicenter MajesTEC-1 study.

METHODS

Phase I of MajesTEC-1 consisted of dose escalation and expansion at the recommended phase II dose (RP2D; 1.5 mg/kg SC weekly, preceded by step-up doses of 0.06 and 0.3 mg/kg); phase II investigated the efficacy of teclistamab RP2D in patients with RRMM. Population pharmacokinetics and the impact of covariates on teclistamab systemic exposure were assessed using a 2-compartment model with first-order absorption for SC and parallel time-independent and time-dependent elimination pathways. Exposure-response analyses were conducted, including overall response rate (ORR), duration of response (DoR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and the incidence of grade ≥ 3 anemia, neutropenia, lymphopenia, leukopenia, thrombocytopenia, and infection.

RESULTS

In total, 4840 measurable serum concentration samples from 338 pharmacokinetics-evaluable patients who received teclistamab were analyzed. The typical population value of time-independent and time-dependent clearance were 0.449 L/day and 0.547 L/day, respectively. The time-dependent clearance decreased rapidly to < 10% after 8 weeks of teclistamab treatment. Patients who discontinue teclistamab after the 13th dose are expected to have a 50% reduction from Cmax in teclistamab concentration at a median (5th to 95th percentile) time of 15 days (7-33 days) after Tmax and a 97% reduction from Cmax in teclistamab concentration at a median time of 69 days (32-163 days) after Tmax. Body weight, multiple myeloma type (immunoglobulin G vs non-immunoglobulin G), and International Staging System (ISS) stage (II vs I and III vs I) were statistically significant covariates on teclistamab pharmacokinetics; however, these covariates had no clinically relevant effect on the efficacy of teclistamab at the RP2D. Across all doses, ORR approached a plateau at the concentration range associated with RP2D, and in patients who received the RP2D, a flat exposure-response curve was observed. No apparent relationship was observed between DoR, PFS, OS, and the incidence of grade ≥3 adverse events across the predicted exposure quartiles.

CONCLUSION

Body weight, myeloma type, and ISS stage impacted systemic teclistamab exposure without any clinically relevant effect on efficacy. The exposure-response analyses for ORR showed a positive trend with increasing teclistamab systemic exposure, with a plateau at the RP2D, and there was no apparent exposure-response trend for safety or other efficacy endpoints. These analyses support the RP2D of teclistamab in patients with RRMM.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03145181 (phase I, 09 May 2017); NCT04557098 (phase II, 21 September 2020).

Detailed overview of incidence and management of cytokine release syndrome observed with teclistamab in the MajesTEC-1 study of patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma

BACKGROUND

Teclistamab, a B-cell maturation antigen × CD3 bispecific antibody, demonstrated an overall response rate of 63.0% in 165 heavily pretreated patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma in the phase 1/2 MajesTEC-1 study. Cytokine release syndrome (CRS), a known manifestation of T-cell redirection, was observed in 119 of 165 patients (72.1%).

METHODS

Patients received once-weekly teclistamab 1.5 mg/kg subcutaneously after two step-up doses (0.06 and 0.3 mg/kg). CRS was graded according to American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy criteria and managed according to the study protocol, including use of tocilizumab and/or steroids.

RESULTS

Most cases of CRS occurred during the step-up dosing schedule of teclistamab and were grade 1 (50.3% of patients) or grade 2 (21.2% of patients); a single case of grade 3 CRS was reported in a patient with concurrent grade 3 pneumonia. All CRS cases resolved and none led to treatment discontinuation. Overall, 33.3% of patients had >1 CRS event; CRS recurrence was reduced when tocilizumab was administered for the first CRS event compared with when it was not (20.0% vs. 62.2%, respectively). Baseline characteristics such as tumor burden and cytokine levels did not appear to predict CRS incidence or severity.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings of this study support the need for preemptive planning and prompt management of CRS in patients treated with T-cell-engaging bispecific antibodies. Intervention with tocilizumab for CRS appears to decrease the likelihood of patients experiencing subsequent CRS events without compromising response to teclistamab.

PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY

Cytokine release syndrome (CRS), observed in 72.1% of patients treated with teclistamab in the MajesTEC-1 study, was mostly grade 1 or 2 and manageable, without requiring treatment discontinuation. Most CRS occurred during the step-up schedule, requiring vigilance during treatment initiation. Ensure fever is resolved and patients have no signs of infection before initiating the teclistamab step-up schedule or administering the next teclistamab dose, to avoid exacerbating CRS. Tocilizumab reduced the risk of subsequent CRS in patients receiving it for their first CRS event (20.0% vs. 62.2% in those not receiving it), without affecting response to teclistamab. No baseline characteristics, including tumor burden or cytokine levels, appeared to clearly predict for CRS occurrence or severity.

Teclistamab versus real-world physician's choice of therapy in triple-class exposed relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma

Aim: We compared the effectiveness of teclistamab versus real-world physician's choice of therapy (RWPC) in triple-class exposed relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. Materials & methods: MajesTEC-1 eligibility criteria were applied to the RWPC cohort. Baseline covariate imbalances were adjusted using inverse probability of treatment weighting. Overall survival, progression-free survival and time to next treatment were compared. Results: After inverse probability of treatment weighting, baseline characteristics were similar between cohorts (teclistamab, n = 165; RWPC, n = 364 [766 observations]). Teclistamab treated patients had numerically better overall survival (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.82 [95% CI: 0.59-1.14]; p = 0.233) and significantly greater progression-free survival (HR: 0.43 [0.33-0.56]; p < 0.0001) and time to next treatment (HR: 0.36 [0.27-0.49]; p < 0.0001) versus the RWPC cohort. Conclusion: Teclistamab offered clinical benefit over RWPC in triple-class exposed relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.

Plain language summary of the MajesTEC-1 study of teclistamab for the treatment of people with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?

This is a summary of a phase 1-2 clinical trial called MajesTEC-1. This trial tested the cancer drug teclistamab in people with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma, a cancer that forms in a certain type of white blood cells known as plasma cells. Most participants who took part in the study had at least 3 prior treatments for multiple myeloma before their cancer came back.

HOW WAS THE STUDY IN THIS SUMMARY CONDUCTED?

A total of 165 participants from 9 countries were included in this study. All participants were given teclistamab once per week and monitored for side effects. Once participants started taking teclistamab, they were checked regularly to monitor if their cancer had no change, improved (responded to treatment), or worsened or spread (known as disease progression).

WHAT WERE THE RESULTS OF THE STUDY?

After approximately 14.1 months of follow-up (from 2020 to 2021), 63% of participants who were given teclistamab had a decrease in myeloma burden, meaning that they responded to treatment with teclistamab. Participants who responded to teclistamab lived without their myeloma coming back for approximately 18.4 months. The most common side effects were infections, cytokine release syndrome, abnormally low white and red blood cell counts (neutropenia, lymphopenia, and anemia), and low platelet cell counts (thrombocytopenia). Approximately 65% of participants experienced serious side effects.

WHAT DO THE RESULTS OF THIS STUDY MEAN?

Overall, more than half of the participants (63%) in the MajesTEC-1 study responded to treatment with teclistamab despite previous myeloma treatment failures. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03145181, NCT04557098 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Comparative Efficacy of Teclistamab Versus Current Treatments in Real-World Clinical Practice in the Prospective LocoMMotion Study in Patients with Triple-Class-Exposed Relapsed and/or Refractory Multiple Myeloma

INTRODUCTION

Patients with triple-class-exposed relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (TCE-RRMM) have a poor prognosis and limited treatment options. Teclistamab, a B-cell maturation antigen × CD3 bispecific antibody, was studied in patients with TCE-RRMM in the single-arm MajesTEC-1 study. To assess the relative effectiveness of teclistamab versus real-world physician's choice of therapy (RWPC), adjusted comparisons were performed using individual patient data from MajesTEC-1 and LocoMMotion, a prospective study of patients with TCE-RRMM.

METHODS

An external control arm for MajesTEC-1 was created from patients in LocoMMotion (n = 248; clinical cut-off: November 2, 2021) and compared with treated patients (n = 165) from MajesTEC-1 (teclistamab 1.5 mg/kg weekly; clinical cut-off: March 16, 2022). Inverse probability weighting was used to adjust for imbalances in baseline covariates. For binary endpoints [overall response rate (ORR), very good partial response or better (≥ VGPR) rate, complete response or better (≥ CR)], relative effect of teclistamab versus RWPC was estimated with an odds ratio and relative response rate and 95% confidence interval (CI), derived from weighted logistic regression. Weighted Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% CIs for time-to-event endpoints [duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS)].

RESULTS

After weighting, baseline characteristics were balanced across cohorts. In adjusted comparisons, teclistamab-treated patients were 2.3-fold, 5.2-fold and 148.3-fold, more likely to reach ORR [response-rate ratio (RR) = 2.31, 95% CI 1.77-2.85, p < 0.0001], ≥ VGPR (RR = 5.19, 95% CI 3.26-7.12, p < 0.0001) and ≥ CR (RR = 148.25, 95% CI 20.63-1065.40, p < 0.0001), respectively, versus patients receiving RWPC. Following adjustment, DOR (HR 0.32, 95% CI 0.19-0.54, p < 0.0001) and PFS (HR 0.48, 95% CI 0.35-0.65, p < 0.0001) were significantly longer with teclistamab versus RWPC. OS was numerically better with teclistamab versus RWPC [HR 0.77 (0.55-1.09), p = 0.1419].

CONCLUSION

Teclistamab demonstrated improved effectiveness versus RWPC, highlighting its clinical benefit as a novel and effective treatment for patients with TCE-RRMM.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Majest TEC-1, ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04557098; LocoMMotion, ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04035226.

Comparative Efficacy of Teclistamab Versus Physician's Choice of Therapy in the Long-term Follow-up of APOLLO, POLLUX, CASTOR, and EQUULEUS Clinical Trials in Patients With Triple-Class Exposed Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and safety of teclistamab in patients with RRMM who received ≥3 prior lines of therapy and were triple-class exposed (TCE) are being evaluated in the single-arm, multicohort, phase I/II MajesTEC-1 trial (NCT04557098). We evaluated the comparative effectiveness of teclistamab versus physician's choice (PC) of therapy in TCE RRMM patients.

METHODS

Individual patient-level data from MajesTEC-1 patients who received teclistamab (1.5 mg/kg weekly; clinical cutoff March 16, 2022) were included. An external control arm was created from patients in long-term follow-up of 4 clinical trials of daratumumab who were treated with PC therapy after discontinuation of trial treatments. In the primary analysis, inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to adjust for imbalances in 9 baseline covariates. A fully adjusted model included 5 additional prognostic factors. Outcomes included overall response rate (ORR), very good partial response or better (≥VGPR) rate, overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and time to next treatment (TTNT).

RESULTS

After adjustment, baseline characteristics were balanced between cohorts. In the primary analysis, outcomes were significantly improved with teclistamab versus PC: ORR (OR [95% CI] 4.81 [3.04-7.72]; P < .0001); ≥VGPR rate (OR, 12.07 [6.91-22.11]; P < .0001); OS (HR, 0.54 [0.40-0.73]; P < .0001); PFS (HR, 0.59 [0.46-0.78]; P = .0001); and TTNT (HR, 0.32 [0.24-0.42]; P < .0001). Results of the fully adjusted model were consistent with the primary analysis.

CONCLUSION

Teclistamab showed significantly improved effectiveness versus PC on all outcomes, highlighting its clinical benefit in patients with TCE RRMM and limited treatment options.

Teclistamab in Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma

BACKGROUND

Teclistamab is a T-cell-redirecting bispecific antibody that targets both CD3 expressed on the surface of T cells and B-cell maturation antigen expressed on the surface of myeloma cells. In the phase 1 dose-defining portion of the study, teclistamab showed promising efficacy in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma.

METHODS

In this phase 1-2 study, we enrolled patients who had relapsed or refractory myeloma after at least three therapy lines, including triple-class exposure to an immunomodulatory drug, a proteasome inhibitor, and an anti-CD38 antibody. Patients received a weekly subcutaneous injection of teclistamab (at a dose of 1.5 mg per kilogram of body weight) after receiving step-up doses of 0.06 mg and 0.3 mg per kilogram. The primary end point was the overall response (partial response or better).

RESULTS

Among 165 patients who received teclistamab, 77.6% had triple-class refractory disease (median, five previous therapy lines). With a median follow-up of 14.1 months, the overall response rate was 63.0%, with 65 patients (39.4%) having a complete response or better. A total of 44 patients (26.7%) were found to have no minimal residual disease (MRD); the MRD-negativity rate among the patients with a complete response or better was 46%. The median duration of response was 18.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 14.9 to not estimable). The median duration of progression-free survival was 11.3 months (95% CI, 8.8 to 17.1). Common adverse events included cytokine release syndrome (in 72.1% of the patients; grade 3, 0.6%; no grade 4), neutropenia (in 70.9%; grade 3 or 4, 64.2%), anemia (in 52.1%; grade 3 or 4, 37.0%), and thrombocytopenia (in 40.0%; grade 3 or 4, 21.2%). Infections were frequent (in 76.4%; grade 3 or 4, 44.8%). Neurotoxic events occurred in 24 patients (14.5%), including immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome in 5 patients (3.0%; all grade 1 or 2).

CONCLUSIONS

Teclistamab resulted in a high rate of deep and durable response in patients with triple-class-exposed relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. Cytopenias and infections were common; toxic effects that were consistent with T-cell redirection were mostly grade 1 or 2. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; MajesTEC-1 ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT03145181 and NCT04557098.).

Indirect treatment (tx) comparison of teclistamab (tec) in MajesTEC-1 versus physician’s choice of therapy in the long-term follow-up of the CASTOR, POLLUX, EQUULEUS, and APOLLO trials in patients (pts) with triple-class exposed (TCE), relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM)

8034

Background: Tec is a B-cell maturation antigen × CD3 bispecific antibody currently being evaluated in the single-arm, phase 1/2 MajesTEC-1 trial (NCT04557098) in pts with RRMM who had received ≥3 prior lines of therapy (LOT) and were TCE to an immunomodulatory agent, a proteasome inhibitor, and an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody. The aim of this study is to evaluate the comparative efficacy of tec versus physician’s choice of therapy, as no head-to-head trials have been conducted. Methods: An external control arm for MajesTEC-1 was created from pts in the long-term follow-up of 4 clinical trials of daratumumab (CASTOR, POLLUX, EQUULEUS, and APOLLO) who met the eligibility criteria for MajesTEC-1. These pts (N = 427) were subsequently treated with physician’s choice of therapy after discontinuing trial txs, and disease progression and best tx response were based on the investigator’s assessment. Individual pt-level data from MajesTEC-1 pts who received tec (1.5 mg/kg weekly) at a clinical cutoff of Sep 7, 2021 were included. Inverse probability of tx weighting (IPTW) with average tx effect on the treated population was used to adjust for imbalances in baseline covariates of prognostic significance: refractory status, progression on last LOT, cytogenetic risk, International Staging System stage, number of prior LOT, extramedullary plasmacytoma, time since diagnosis, age, and hemoglobin. Overall response rate (ORR), rate of complete response or better (≥CR), rate of very good partial response or better (≥VGPR), progression-free survival (PFS), time to next tx (TTNT), and overall survival (OS) were assessed. For binary endpoints (ORR, ≥CR rate, ≥VGPR rate), the relative effect of tec vs physician’s choice of therapy was estimated with an odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) derived from a weighted logistic regression analysis. A weighted Cox proportional hazards model was used to compute hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for time-to-event endpoints (PFS, OS, and TTNT). Several sensitivity analyses were conducted. Results: After IPTW, baseline characteristics were comparable between the 2 cohorts. Pts treated with tec had improved outcomes vs physician’s choice of therapy: ORR (OR 4.58; 95% CI 2.83–7.53; P < 0.0001); ≥CR rate (OR 12.62; 95% CI 5.20–38.55; P< 0.0001); ≥VGPR rate (OR 11.64; 95% CI 6.49–21.98; P< 0.0001); PFS (HR 0.62; 95%CI 0.45–0.84; P= 0.0024); TTNT (HR 0.38; 95% CI 0.27–0.52; P< 0.0001); and OS (HR 0.47; 95% CI 0.32–0.69; P= 0.0001). Results were similar for all sensitivity analyses. Conclusions: Tec showed improved efficacy versus physician’s choice of therapy in all clinical outcomes, highlighting its therapeutic potential to address unmet needs in pts with TCE RRMM who received ≥3 prior LOT.

MajesTEC-3: Randomized, phase 3 study of teclistamab plus daratumumab versus investigator’s choice of daratumumab, pomalidomide, and dexamethasone or daratumumab, bortezomib, and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma

TPS8072

Background: Patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) after prior therapy with a proteasome inhibitor (PI) and lenalidomide are challenging to treat. Daratumumab in combination with pomalidomide and dexamethasone (DPd) or bortezomib and dexamethasone (DVd) are approved for pts with RRMM; however, disease control could be further improved. There is an unmet need for new therapeutic options with different modes of action. Teclistamab (tec; JNJ-64007957) is a B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA) × CD3 bispecific antibody that redirects CD3+ T cells to mediate T-cell activation and subsequent lysis of BCMA-expressing myeloma cells. In the phase 1, MajesTEC-1 study (NCT03145181), tec monotherapy was well-tolerated and showed encouraging efficacy in heavily pretreated pts with RRMM. The combination of tec and daratumumab (tec-dara) in the phase 1b TRIMM-2 study (NCT04108195) was also well-tolerated with promising efficacy. MajesTEC-3 (NCT05083169) is a multicenter, open-label, randomized phase 3 study that will compare the efficacy of tec-dara versus investigator’s choice of DPd or DVd in pts with RRMM. Methods: Pts (≥18 years old) must have documented MM per International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) criteria; measurable disease; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0–2; received 1–3 prior treatment (tx) lines, including a PI and lenalidomide (pts with 1 prior tx line must be lenalidomide-refractory); with progressive disease on or after their last tx (or within 60 days of completing lenalidomide). Pts who received prior BCMA-directed tx or who are refractory to an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody will be excluded. ̃560 pts will be randomized 1:1 to receive 28-day cycles of tec-dara or investigator’s choice of DPd or DVd (stratified by investigator’s choice of DPd or DVd, ISS stage, and number of lines of prior tx). Step-up doses of tec will be given prior to the first tx dose. Dara, DPd and DVd will be administered per approved schedules. Pts will be treated until disease progression, death, intolerable toxicity, withdrawal of consent or end of study, whichever occurs first. Response will be assessed per 2016 IMWG criteria. The primary endpoint will be progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints include overall response rate, complete response or better, MRD negativity, PFS on next-line tx (PFS2), overall survival, and incidence and severity of AEs. Adverse events (AEs) will be graded by Common Terminology Criteria for AEs v5.0, except for cytokine release syndrome and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome, which will be graded by American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy guidelines. The study opened in October 2021 and enrollment is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT05083169.

Efficacy and safety of teclistamab (tec), a B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA) x CD3 bispecific antibody, in patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) after exposure to other BCMA-targeted agents

8013

Background: Tec (JNJ-64007957) is a BCMA x CD3 bispecific antibody (Ab) that redirects CD3+ T cells to mediate T-cell activation and subsequent lysis of BCMA-expressing myeloma cells. MajesTEC-1 is a multicohort, open-label phase 1/2 study of tec in pts with RRMM who previously received ≥3 prior lines of therapy (LOT). Results from a pooled analysis of phase 1 and phase 2 cohort A (median follow-up 7.8 mo) demonstrated an overall response rate (ORR) of 62.0% in pts with no prior anti-BCMA treatment (tx). We present initial results from cohort C, in which pts had prior exposure to an anti-BCMA tx. Methods: Eligible pts (age ≥18 y) had documented MM per IMWG criteria and had received ≥3 prior LOT including a PI, an IMiD, an anti-CD38 Ab, and an anti-BCMA tx (chimeric antigen receptor T [CAR-T] or Ab drug conjugate [ADC]). Pts were enrolled into a Simon’s stage design, receiving weekly subcutaneous tec 1.5 mg/kg preceded by step-up doses of 0.06 and 0.3 mg/kg. Primary endpoint was ORR (per IMWG 2016 criteria). AEs were graded per CTCAE v4.03; cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and immune effector cell–associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS) were graded per ASTCT guidelines. Results: As of Sep 7, 2021, 38 pts in cohort C received tec (63% male; median age 63.5 y [range 32–82]; median prior LOT 6 [range 3–14]). 32 (84%) pts were refractory to last LOT; 25 (66%) were refractory to an anti-BCMA tx. Of 25 pts evaluated for efficacy, 16 (64%) had prior ADC, 11 (44%) prior CAR-T (2 pts received both). With median follow-up of 6.9 mo (range 0.7–8.7), ORR was 40% (95% CI 21–61). 5 pts (20%) achieved a complete response or better. The ORR (95% CI) was 38% (15–65) in ADC-exposed pts and 45% (17–77) in CAR-T–exposed pts. Most responses occurred rapidly; 7/25 pts had responses that deepened over time. Median time (range) to first and best response was 1.2 mo (0.2–4.9) and 2.1 mo (1.1–5.7), respectively. Median duration of response was not reached. The safety profile was comparable with that observed in BMCA tx-naive pts, with no new safety concerns. 16 pts (42%; grade 3/4 26%) had infections. Most common AEs (n = 38) were CRS (63%; all grade 1/2; median [range] time to CRS onset: 3 d [2–6], duration of CRS: 2 d [1–4]), neutropenia (55%; grade 3/4 50%), thrombocytopenia (42%; grade 3/4 29%), anemia (39%; grade 3/4 29%), and lymphopenia (40%; grade 3/4 37%). One pt had grade 3 ICANS that resolved with supportive care; pt remains on tx. No pts developed anti-tec Abs. Baseline BCMA expression was comparable with that observed in BCMA tx-naive pts. Updated efficacy and safety data will be presented for 40 pts. Conclusions: Initial results of serial targeting of BCMA with tec following ADC or CAR-T tx suggest a promising ORR with responses occurring early and deepening over time. A well-tolerated safety profile was observed in pts previously treated with anti-BCMA tx. Clinical trial information: NCT04557098.

Matching-adjusted indirect treatment comparison (MAIC) of teclistamab (tec) versus belantamab mafodotin (belamaf) for the treatment of patients (pts) with triple-class exposed (TCE), relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM)

8035

Background: Pts with RRMM who are TCE to immunomodulatory drugs, proteasome inhibitors, and anti-CD38 antibodies have limited treatment options. While there is no standard of care for treatment of pts with TCE RRMM, belamaf is a recently approved, novel therapeutic option. MajesTEC-1 (NCT04557098) is a single-arm phase 1/2 study evaluating tec, a B-cell maturation antigen × CD3 bispecific antibody in pts with TCE RRMM who received ≥3 prior lines of therapy (LOT). Given the absence of a control arm in MajesTEC-1, we compared efficacy outcomes of pts who received tec at the recommended phase 2 dose in MajesTEC-1 with those of pts treated with belamaf in the phase 2 DREAMM-2 trial (NCT03525678). Methods: An unanchored MAIC was performed using individual pt-level data (IPD) from MajesTEC-1 (tec 1.5 mg/kg weekly; N = 150) at a clinical cutoff of Sep 7, 2021, and published summary-level data from pts who received the approved dose of belamaf in DREAMM-2 (2.5 mg/kg every 3 weeks; N = 97). The DREAMM-2 eligibility criteria were applied to pts from the intent-to-treat population of MajesTEC-1. IPD from MajesTEC-1 were weighted to match the aggregated DREAMM-2 baseline pt characteristics. Baseline characteristics of prognostic significance (refractory status, cytogenetic profile, International Staging System stage, presence of extramedullary disease, and number of prior LOT) were adjusted for in the analysis. Comparative efficacy of tec vs belamaf was estimated for overall response rate (ORR), complete response or better (≥CR) rate, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and duration of response (DOR). For binary endpoints (ORR and ≥CR rate), the relative effects of tec vs belamaf were quantified using an odds ratio (OR) and 95% CI derived from a weighted logistic regression analysis, while time-to-event endpoints (DOR, PFS, OS) were estimated using a weighted Cox proportional hazards model. Results: After adjustment, the effective sample size (ESS) of the MajesTEC-1 cohort was 33 and baseline characteristics for the reweighted MajesTEC-1 population were balanced with the DREAMM-2 population. Pts treated with tec had an improved ORR (OR 2.05; 95% CI 0.92–4.57; P= 0.0786), ≥CR rate (OR 2.13; 95% CI 0.80–5.65; P= 0.1283), PFS (HR 0.63; 95% CI 0.34–1.15; P= 0.1338), OS (HR 0.95; 95% CI 0.47–1.92; P= 0.8897), and DOR (hazard ratio [HR] 0.19; 95% CI 0.05–0.73; P= 0.0149) compared with belamaf. The reduced ESS following adjustment may account for the lack of statistical significance for most outcomes. Conclusions: These analyses demonstrated statistically improved DOR for tec vs belamaf and numerically favorable results for other outcomes, highlighting its potential as a treatment for pts with TCE RRMM who received ≥3 prior LOT.

Matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) of teclistamab (tec) versus selinexor-dexamethasone (sel-dex) for the treatment of patients (pts) with triple-class exposed (TCE) relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM)

e20028

Background: Tec is a B-cell maturation antigen × CD3 bispecific antibody being evaluated in MajesTEC-1 (NCT04557098), a single-arm, phase 1/2 study in pts with RRMM who were exposed to ≥3 lines of therapy (LOT), including an immunomodulatory drug, a proteasome inhibitor, and an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody. While there is currently no standard of care for treatment of pts with TCE RRMM, sel-dex is a recently approved, novel therapeutic option. Given the absence of a control arm in MajesTEC-1, we used an unanchored MAIC to compare efficacy outcomes of pts who received tec in MajesTEC-1 vs pts treated with sel-dex in the single-arm, phase 2b STORM Part 2 trial (NCT02336815). Methods: An unanchored MAIC was performed with individual pt-level data (IPD) from pts treated with tec (1.5 mg/kg weekly) in MajesTEC-1 at a clinical cutoff of Sep 7, 2021 (N = 150) and published summary-level data from pts who received sel-dex in STORM Part 2 (N = 122). After applying the STORM Part 2 eligibility criteria (penta-exposed, triple-class refractory, and refractory to last LOT), IPD from pts in MajesTEC-1 (N = 69) were weighted to match the aggregated baseline pt characteristics from STORM Part 2. Baseline characteristics of prognostic significance (refractory status, cytogenetic profile, revised International Staging System stage, presence of extramedullary disease, and number of prior LOT) were adjusted for in the analysis. Comparative efficacy of tec vs sel-dex was estimated for overall response rate (ORR), complete response or better (≥CR) rate, progression-free survival (PFS), duration of response (DOR), and overall survival (OS). For binary endpoints (ORR and ≥CR rate), the relative effects of tec vs sel-dex were estimated using an odds ratio (OR) and 95% CI derived from a weighted logistic regression. Time-to-event endpoints (PFS, OS, and DOR) were estimated using a weighted Cox proportional hazards model. Results: After adjustment, the effective sample size (ESS) of the MajesTEC-1 cohort was 37. Baseline characteristics were balanced between the 2 cohorts. Pts treated with tec had improved ORR (OR 3.14; 95% CI 1.48–6.69; P= 0.0029), ≥CR rate (OR 16.3; 95% CI 3.5–77.1; P= 0.0004), PFS (HR 0.58; 95% CI 0.30–1.11; P= 0.1007), DOR (hazard ratio [HR] 0.04; 95% CI 0.01–0.10; P< 0.0001), and OS (HR 0.52; 95% CI 0.28–0.95; P= 0.0344) compared with sel-dex. Despite a reduced ESS that reduced limited power to detect statistically significant differences, the majority of outcomes was statistically significant in favor of tec. Conclusions : In this MAIC, tec showed significantly improved efficacy over sel-dex for all outcomes except PFS, which was numerically in favor of tec, highlighting its potential as a highly effective treatment option for pts with TCE RRMM who received ≥3 prior LOT.

Comparative efficacy of teclistamab (tec) versus current treatments (tx) in real-world clinical practice in the prospective LocoMMotion study in patients (pts) with triple-class exposed (TCE) relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM)

8016

Background : Pts with TCE RRMM who have been exposed to ≥3 lines of therapy (LOT) have a poor prognosis and limited tx options. Tec is a B-cell maturation antigen × CD3 bispecific antibody being evaluated in MajesTEC-1 (NCT04557098), a single-arm, phase 1/2 study in pts with RRMM who were TCE to an immunomodulatory drug, a proteasome inhibitor, and an anti-CD38 antibody and received ≥3 LOT. Since MajesTEC-1 lacks a control arm, we assessed the comparative efficacy of tec vs tx currently used in real-world clinical practice (RWCP) by creating an external real-world control arm from LocoMMotion (NCT04035226), a prospective study of RWCP efficacy and safety outcomes in pts with TCE RRMM who received ≥3 LOT. Methods: An external control arm for MajesTEC-1 was created from pts in LocoMMotion (248 pts, clinical cutoff May 21, 2021) who met MajesTEC-1 eligibility criteria. Individual pt-level data from MajesTEC-1 were included from 150 pts treated with tec (1.5 mg/kg weekly) at a clinical cutoff of Sep 7, 2021. Inverse probability of tx weighting with average tx effect on the treated was used to adjust for imbalances in baseline covariates of prognostic significance (refractory status, International Staging System stage, time to progression on prior LOT, extramedullary disease, number of prior LOT, time since diagnosis, average duration of prior LOT, age, hemoglobin, lactate dehydrogenase, creatinine clearance, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, gender, type of MM, and prior transplant). Comparative efficacy of tec vs RWCP was estimated for overall response rate (ORR), very good partial response (VGPR) rate, complete response or better (≥CR) rate, duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). For binary endpoints (ORR, VGPR rate, and ≥CR rate), relative effect of tec vs RWCP was estimated with an odds ratio, transformed into a response-rate ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI), derived from weighted logistic regression. A weighted Cox proportional hazards model was used to compute hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for time-to-event endpoints (DOR, PFS, and OS). Results: Baseline characteristics were well balanced between the 2 cohorts after reweighting the external RWCP cohort. Pts treated with tec had improved outcomes vs tx used in RWCP: ORR (RR 2.31; 95% CI 1.75–2.87; P< 0.0001), VGPR rate (RR 5.54; 95% CI 3.38–7.70; P< 0.0001), ≥CR rate (RR 91.50; 95% CI 12.66–661.43; P< 0.0001), DOR (HR 0.17; 95% CI 0.08–0.36; P< 0.0001), PFS (HR 0.47; 95% CI 0.34–0.67; P< 0.0001), and OS (HR 0.69; 95% CI 0.46–1.05; P= 0.08). Conclusions : Tec showed significantly improved efficacy over RWCP for almost all outcomes, highlighting its potential as a highly effective tx option for pts with TCE RRMM who have been exposed to ≥3 LOT.

Comparative effectiveness of teclistamab versus real-world treatments for patients with triple-class exposed (TCE), relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM)

8036

Background: Teclistamab is a B-cell maturation antigen × CD3 bispecific antibody currently being evaluated in MajesTEC-1 (NCT04557098), an open-label, single-arm, phase 1/2 trial in patients with RRMM who had received ≥3 prior lines of therapy (LOT) and were TCE to an immunomodulatory agent, a proteasome inhibitor, and an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody. Given the absence of a control arm in MajesTEC-1, we assessed the comparative effectiveness of teclistamab versus treatment regimens using an external control arm from a real-world database. Methods: An external control arm for MajesTEC-1 was created from eligible patients in the nationwide de-identified electronic health record-derived Flatiron Health multiple myeloma cohort database who started a new line of therapy (physician’s choice) following triple-class exposure between January 2011 and August 2021, received ≥3 prior LOT, and satisfied key MajesTEC-1 eligibility criteria. Individual patient data from MajesTEC-1 included patients who received teclistamab (1.5 mg/kg weekly) at a clinical cutoff of Sep 7, 2021. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to adjust for imbalances in baseline covariates of prognostic significance: refractory status, progression on last LOT, cytogenetic risk, International Staging System stage, number of prior LOT, time since diagnosis, age, and hemoglobin. Outcomes of interest included progression-free survival (PFS), time to next treatment (TTNT), and overall survival (OS); these outcomes were analyzed as time-to-event data using IPTW adjusted Kaplan-Meier estimates and a weighted Cox proportional hazards model. Several sensitivity analyses were conducted. Results: After IPTW, baseline characteristics were comparable between the 2 cohorts. Patients treated with teclistamab had improved PFS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.43; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.32–0.59; P< 0.0001), TTNT (HR 0.42; 95% CI 0.31–0.58; P< 0.0001), and OS (HR 0.73; 95% CI 0.48–1.09; P= 0.13) versus assessed real-world treatments. Results were similar for all sensitivity analyses. Conclusions: Teclistamab showed improved effectiveness for PFS, TTNT, and OS, compared with real-world treatments used in patients with TCE RRMM who received ≥3 prior LOT. These findings highlight the therapeutic potential of teclistamab in patients with RRMM who have limited treatment options.

Daratumumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone in transplant-ineligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: frailty subgroup analysis of MAIA

In the phase 3 MAIA study of patients with transplant-ineligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM), daratumumab plus lenalidomide/dexamethasone (D-Rd) improved progression-free survival (PFS) versus lenalidomide/dexamethasone (Rd). We present a subgroup analysis of MAIA by frailty status. Frailty assessment was performed retrospectively using age, Charlson comorbidity index, and baseline Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score. Patients were classified as fit, intermediate, non-frail (fit + intermediate), or frail. Of the randomized patients (D-Rd, n = 368; Rd, n = 369), 396 patients were non-frail (D-Rd, 196 [53.3%]; Rd, 200 [54.2%]) and 341 patients were frail (172 [46.7%]; 169 [45.8%]). After a 36.4-month median follow-up, non-frail patients had longer PFS than frail patients, but the PFS benefit of D-Rd versus Rd was maintained across subgroups: non-frail (median, not reached [NR] vs 41.7 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.48; P < 0.0001) and frail (NR vs 30.4 months; HR, 0.62; P = 0.003). Improved rates of complete response or better and minimal residual disease (10^-5) negativity were observed for D-Rd across subgroups. The most common grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse event in non-frail and frail patients was neutropenia (non-frail, 45.4% [D-Rd] and 37.2% [Rd]; frail, 57.7% and 33.1%). These findings support the clinical benefit of D-Rd in transplant-ineligible NDMM patients enrolled in MAIA, regardless of frailty status.

Recommendations on eliminating racial disparities in multiple myeloma therapies: a step toward achieving equity in healthcare

African Americans are at higher risk of multiple myeloma (MM) yet underrepresented in clinical trials and reap less benefits from novel therapies of the disease. To improve representation of African Americans in MM clinical trials, researchers, providers, patients, industry partners and regulators at the FDA-AACR workshop developed recommendations to all stakeholders. The outlined principles offer a roadmap to addressing disparities broadly in clinical trials.

Evaluation of Sustained Minimal Residual Disease Negativity With Daratumumab-Combination Regimens in Relapsed and/or Refractory Multiple Myeloma: Analysis of POLLUX and CASTOR

In relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma, daratumumab reduced the risk of progression or death by > 60% in POLLUX (daratumumab/lenalidomide/dexamethasone [D-Rd]) and CASTOR (daratumumab/bortezomib/dexamethasone [D-Vd]). Minimal residual disease (MRD) is a sensitive measure of disease control. Sustained MRD negativity and outcomes were evaluated in these studies.

Health-Related Quality of Life in Transplant-Ineligible Patients With Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: Findings From the Phase III MAIA Trial

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effects of daratumumab, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (D-Rd) versus lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rd) on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in the phase III MAIA study.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

PROs were assessed on the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30-item and the EuroQol 5-dimensional descriptive system at baseline and every 3 months during treatment. By mixed-effects model, changes from baseline are presented as least squares means with 95% CIs.

RESULTS

A total of 737 transplant-ineligible (TIE) patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma were randomly assigned to D-Rd (n = 368) or Rd (n = 369). Compliance with PRO assessments was high at baseline (> 90%) through month 12 (> 78%) for both groups. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30-item global health status scores improved from baseline in both groups and were consistently greater with D-Rd at all time points. A global health status benefit was achieved with D-Rd, regardless of age (< 75 and ≥ 75 years), baseline Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status score, or depth of response. D-Rd treatment resulted in significantly greater reduction in pain scores as early as cycle 3 (P = .0007 v Rd); the magnitude of change was sustained through cycle 12. Reductions in pain with D-Rd were clinically meaningful in patients regardless of age, ECOG status, or depth of response. Similarly, PRO improvements were observed with D-Rd and Rd on the EuroQol 5-dimensional descriptive system visual analog scale score.

CONCLUSION

D-Rd compared with Rd was associated with faster and sustained clinically meaningful improvements in PROs, including pain, in transplant-ineligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma regardless of age, baseline ECOG status, or depth of treatment response.

Daratumumab-lenalidomide-dexamethasone vs standard-of-care regimens: Efficacy in transplant-ineligible untreated myeloma

Daratumumab in combination with lenalidomide‐dexamethasone (D‐Rd) recently received FDA approval for the treatment of transplant‐ineligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). The present PEGASUS study compared progression‐free survival (PFS) in patients treated with D‐Rd in the MAIA trial and patients treated with common standard‐of‐care regimens from the Flatiron Health electronic health record‐derived deidentified database, which has data from patients treated primarily at community‐based oncology practices in the United States. Individual‐level patient data from both data sources were used to perform an anchored indirect treatment comparison (ITC) of D‐Rd to bortezomib‐lenalidomide‐dexamethasone (VRd) and bortezomib‐dexamethasone (Vd); lenalidomide‐dexamethasone (Rd) was the common anchor for the ITC. Hazard ratios (HRs) reflecting direct comparisons of PFS within MAIA (D‐Rd vs Rd) and Flatiron Health (VRd vs Rd; Vd vs Rd) were used to make ITCs for D‐Rd vs VRd and Vd, respectively. After application of MAIA inclusion/exclusion criteria and propensity‐score weighting, the Flatiron Health patients resembled the MAIA trial population on measured baseline characteristics. Based on the direct comparison within MAIA, treatment with D‐Rd was associated with a significantly lower risk of progression or death compared to Rd (HR 0.54; 95% CI 0.42, 0.71). Based on the ITCs, D‐Rd was associated with a significantly lower risk of progression or death compared to VRd (HR 0.68; 95% CI 0.48, 0.98) and Vd (HR 0.48; 95% CI 0.33, 0.69). In the absence of head‐to‐head trials comparing D‐Rd to VRd or Vd, the present ITC may help inform treatment selection in transplant‐ineligible patients with NDMM.

Daratumumab, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone in relapsed/refractory myeloma: a cytogenetic subgroup analysis of POLLUX

High cytogenetic risk abnormalities confer poor outcomes in multiple myeloma patients. In POLLUX, daratumumab/lenalidomide/dexamethasone (D-Rd) demonstrated significant clinical benefit versus lenalidomide/dexamethasone (Rd) in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) patients. We report an updated subgroup analysis of POLLUX based on cytogenetic risk. The cytogenetic risk was determined using fluorescence in situ hybridization/karyotyping; patients with high cytogenetic risk had t(4;14), t(14;16), or del17p abnormalities. Minimal residual disease (MRD; 10^–5) was assessed via the clonoSEQ^® assay V2.0. 569 patients were randomized (D-Rd, n = 286; Rd, n = 283); 35 (12%) patients per group had high cytogenetic risk. After a median follow-up of 44.3 months, D-Rd prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) versus Rd in standard cytogenetic risk (median: not estimable vs 18.6 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.43; P < 0.0001) and high cytogenetic risk (median: 26.8 vs 8.3 months; HR, 0.34; P = 0.0035) patients. Responses with D-Rd were deep, including higher MRD negativity and sustained MRD-negativity rates versus Rd, regardless of cytogenetic risk. PFS on subsequent line of therapy was improved with D-Rd versus Rd in both cytogenetic risk subgroups. The safety profile of D-Rd by cytogenetic risk was consistent with the overall population. These findings demonstrate the improved efficacy of daratumumab plus standard of care versus standard of care in RRMM, regardless of cytogenetic risk.

A Multicenter Randomized Three-Arm Phase II Study of (1) Everolimus, (2) Estrogen Deprivation Therapy (EDT) with Leuprolide + Letrozole, and (3) Everolimus + EDT in Patients with Unresectable Fibrolamellar Carcinoma

LESSONS LEARNED

FLC is a complex cancer with many implicated oncogenic pathways. Single or dual targeting does not appear to alter the natural history of the cancer, and novel therapeutics are needed. Estrogen deprivation therapy with letrozole and leuprolide, alone or in combination with the mTOR inhibitor, everolimus, did not demonstrate clinical activity in advanced fibrolamellar carcinoma. The study drugs were well tolerated when administered as single agents or in combination in this patient population. This study demonstrates that, despite the rarity of FLC, multicenter therapeutic clinical trials are feasible and support the value of this consortium.

BACKGROUND

Fibrolamellar carcinoma (FLC) is an uncommon malignancy in young people and is sometimes associated with pregnancy and oral contraceptive use. Immunohistochemical staining and genetic profiling of FLC tumor specimens have revealed aromatase overexpression. The overexpression of mTOR and S6 kinase has been noted in 25% of FLC. On the basis of interaction between estrogen and the PI3K/Akt/mTOR pathway, we hypothesized that suppression of estrogen and mTOR signaling could have antineoplastic activity in FLC.

METHODS

Patients were randomized to arm A (everolimus), arm B (letrozole/leuprolide; estrogen deprivation therapy [EDT]), or arm C (everolimus/letrozole/leuprolide). Upon disease progression, patients in arm A or B could proceed to part 2 (everolimus/letrozole/leuprolide). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) at 6 months (PFS6) assessed using a Simon's minimax two-stage design, hypothesizing an improvement in PFS6 from 40% to 64% with the study regimen.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight patients were enrolled. An unplanned analysis was performed because of perceived concern for lack of efficacy. Stable disease was observed in 9 of 26 evaluable patients (35%). PFS6 was 0%. Median overall survival (OS) was 12.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 7.4-20.9) for the whole study cohort. Grade 3 adverse events in ≥10% of patients were nausea (11%), vomiting (11%), anemia (11%), elevated aspartate transaminase (AST; 32%), alanine transaminase (ALT; 36%), and alkaline phosphatase (14%). All 28 patients experienced an event for PFS outcome, and four deaths were due to disease progression.

CONCLUSION

Neither EDT nor mTOR inhibition improved outcomes in FLC. Other treatment strategies are needed.

Off-the-shelf EBV-specific T cell immunotherapy for rituximab-refractory EBV-associated lymphoma following transplantation

BACKGROUNDAdoptive transfer of donor-derived EBV-specific cytotoxic T-lymphocytes (EBV-CTLs) can eradicate EBV-associated lymphomas (EBV-PTLD) after transplantation of hematopoietic cell (HCT) or solid organ (SOT) but is unavailable for most patients.METHODSWe developed a third-party, allogeneic, off-the-shelf bank of 330 GMP-grade EBV-CTL lines from specifically consented healthy HCT donors. We treated 46 recipients of HCT (n = 33) or SOT (n = 13) with established EBV-PTLD, who had failed rituximab therapy, with third-party EBV-CTLs. Treatment cycles consisted of 3 weekly infusions of EBV-CTLs and 3 weeks of observation.RESULTSEBV-CTLs did not induce significant toxicities. One patient developed grade I skin graft-versus-host disease. Complete remission (CR) or sustained partial remission (PR) was achieved in 68% of HCT recipients and 54% of SOT recipients. For patients who achieved CR/PR or stable disease after cycle 1, one year overall survival was 88.9% and 81.8%, respectively. In addition, 3 of 5 recipients with POD after a first cycle who received EBV-CTLs from a different donor achieved CR or durable PR (60%) and survived longer than 1 year. Maximal responses were achieved after a median of 2 cycles.CONCLUSIONThird-party EBV-CTLs of defined HLA restriction provide safe, immediately accessible treatment for EBV-PTLD. Secondary treatment with EBV-CTLs restricted by a different HLA allele (switch therapy) can also induce remissions if initial EBV-CTLs are ineffective. These results suggest a promising potential therapy for patients with rituximab-refractory EBV-associated lymphoma after transplantation.TRIAL REGISTRATIONPhase II protocols (NCT01498484 and NCT00002663) were approved by the Institutional Review Board at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, the FDA, and the National Marrow Donor Program.FUNDINGThis work was supported by NIH grants CA23766 and R21CA162002, the Aubrey Fund, the Claire Tow Foundation, the Major Family Foundation, the Max Cure Foundation, the Richard "Rick" J. Eisemann Pediatric Research Fund, the Banbury Foundation, the Edith Robertson Foundation, and the Larry Smead Foundation. Atara Biotherapeutics licensed the bank of third-party EBV-CTLs from Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in June 2015.

Daratumumab, bortezomib, and dexamethasone in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma: subgroup analysis of CASTOR based on cytogenetic risk

Background

Multiple myeloma (MM) patients with high cytogenetic risk have poor outcomes. In CASTOR, daratumumab plus bortezomib/dexamethasone (D-Vd) prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) versus bortezomib/dexamethasone (Vd) alone and exhibited tolerability in patients with relapsed or refractory MM (RRMM).

Methods

This subgroup analysis evaluated D-Vd versus Vd in CASTOR based on cytogenetic risk, determined using fluorescence in situ hybridization and/or karyotype testing performed locally. High-risk patients had t(4;14), t(14;16), and/or del17p abnormalities. Minimal residual disease (MRD; 10⁻⁵ sensitivity threshold) was assessed via the clonoSEQ® assay V2.0. Of the 498 patients randomized, 40 (16%) in the D-Vd group and 35 (14%) in the Vd group were categorized as high risk.

Results

After a median follow-up of 40.0 months, D-Vd prolonged median PFS versus Vd in patients with standard (16.6 vs 6.6 months; HR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.19-0.37; P < 0.0001) and high (12.6 vs 6.2 months; HR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.21–0.83; P = 0.0106) cytogenetic risk. D-Vd achieved deep responses, including higher rates of MRD negativity and sustained MRD negativity versus Vd, regardless of cytogenetic risk. The safety profile was consistent with the overall population of CASTOR.

Conclusion

These updated data reinforce the effectiveness and tolerability of daratumumab-based regimens for RRMM, regardless of cytogenetic risk status.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02136134. Registered 12 May 2014

Phase II Multicenter, Open-Label Study of Oral ENMD-2076 for the Treatment of Patients with Advanced Fibrolamellar Carcinoma

LESSONS LEARNED

The fibrolamellar carcinoma-associated DNAJB1-PRKACA gene fusion transcript RNA codes for the catalytic domain of protein kinase A and, thus, overexpression of Aurora kinase A. ENMD-2076 showed a favorable toxicity profile. The limited results, one patient (3%) with a partial response and 57% of patients with stable disease, do not support further evaluation of ENMD-2076 as single agent. Future studies will depend on the simultaneous targeting approach of DNAJB1-PRKACA and the critical downstream components.

BACKGROUND

Fibrolamellar carcinoma (FLC) represents approximately 0.85% of liver cancers. The associated DNAJB1-PRKACA gene fusion transcript RNA codes for the catalytic domain of protein kinase A and overexpression of Aurora kinase A (AURKA). ENMD-2076 is a selective anti-AURKA inhibitor.

METHODS

Patients aged >12 years with pathologically confirmed incurable FLC, with measurable disease, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-2 or Lansky 70-100, and adequate organ function were eligible. Patients were prescribed ENMD-2076 based on body surface area. The primary endpoint was overall objective response rate by RECIST v1.1, with a null hypothesis of true response rate of 2% versus one-sided alternative of 15%. Secondary endpoints included 6-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate (Fig. 1), median PFS, time to progression (TTP), and overall survival (OS). Safety was evaluated throughout the study.

RESULTS

Of 35 patients who enrolled and received treatment, 1 (3%) had a partial response (PR) and 20 (57%) had stable disease (SD). Median TTP, PFS, and OS were 5, 3.9, and 19 months, respectively. The most frequently reported drug-related serious adverse event was hypertension in three patients. Three deaths were reported on-study-two due to disease progression and one due to pulmonary embolism not related to ENMD-2076.

CONCLUSION

The study provided no rationale for further studying ENMD-2076 as a single agent in FLC.

Overall survival with daratumumab, bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (ALCYONE): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Standard-of-care treatment for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma includes combination therapies for patients who are not eligible for autologous stem-cell transplantation. At the primary analysis for progression-free survival of the phase 3 ALCYONE trial, progression-free survival was significantly longer with daratumumab in combination with bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone (D-VMP) versus bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone (VMP) alone in patients with transplant-ineligible, newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Here we report updated efficacy and safety results from a prespecified, interim, overall survival analysis of ALCYONE with more than 36 months of follow-up.

METHODS

ALCYONE was a multicentre, randomised, open-label, active-controlled, phase 3 trial that enrolled patients between Feb 9, 2015, and July 14, 2016, at 162 sites in 25 countries across North America, South America, Europe, and the Asia-Pacific region. Patients were eligible for inclusion if they had newly diagnosed multiple myeloma and were ineligible for high-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem-cell transplantation, because of their age (≥65 years) or because of substantial comorbidities. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio and by permuted block randomisation to receive D-VMP or VMP. An interactive web-based randomisation system was used. Randomisation was stratified by International Staging System disease stage, geographical region, and age. There was no masking to treatment assignments. All patients received up to nine 6-week cycles of subcutaneous bortezomib (1·3 mg/m² of body surface area on days 1, 4, 8, 11, 22, 25, 29, and 32 of cycle one and on days 1, 8, 22, and 29 of cycles two through nine), oral melphalan (9 mg/m² once daily on days 1 through 4 of each cycle), and oral prednisone (60 mg/m² once daily on days 1 through 4 of each cycle). Patients in the D-VMP group also received intravenous daratumumab (16 mg/kg of bodyweight, once weekly during cycle one, once every 3 weeks in cycles two through nine, and once every 4 weeks thereafter as maintenance therapy until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, which has been reported previously. Results presented are from a prespecified interim analysis for overall survival. The primary analysis population (including for overall survival) was the intention-to-treat population of all patients who were randomly assigned to treatment. The safety population included patients who received any dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02195479.

FINDINGS

706 patients were randomly assigned to treatment groups (350 to the D-VMP group, 356 to the VMP group). At a median follow-up of 40·1 months (IQR 37·4-43·1), a significant benefit in overall survival was observed for the D-VMP group. The hazard ratio (HR) for death in the D-VMP group compared with the VMP group was 0·60 (95% CI 0·46-0·80; p=0·0003). The Kaplan-Meier estimate of the 36-month rate of overall survival was 78·0% (95% CI 73·2-82·0) in the D-VMP group and 67·9% (62·6-72·6) in the VMP group. Progression-free survival, the primary endpoint, remained significantly improved for the D-VMP group (HR 0·42 [0·34-0·51]; p<0·0001). The most frequent adverse events during maintenance daratumumab monotherapy in patients in the D-VMP group were respiratory infections (54 [19%] of 278 patients had upper respiratory tract infections; 42 [15%] had bronchitis, 34 [12%] had viral upper respiratory tract infections), cough (34 [12%]), and diarrhoea (28 [10%]).

INTERPRETATION

D-VMP prolonged overall survival in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were ineligible for stem-cell transplantation. With more than 3 years of follow-up, the D-VMP group continued to show significant improvement in progression-free survival, with no new safety concerns.

FUNDING

Janssen Research & Development.

Daratumumab, Bortezomib, and Dexamethasone Versus Bortezomib and Dexamethasone in Patients With Previously Treated Multiple Myeloma: Three-year Follow-up of CASTOR

BACKGROUND

In the phase III CASTOR study in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma, daratumumab, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (D-Vd) demonstrated significant clinical benefit versus Vd alone. Outcomes after 40.0 months of median follow-up are discussed.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eligible patients had received ≥ 1 line of treatment and were administered bortezomib (1.3 mg/m²) and dexamethasone (20 mg) for 8 cycles with or without daratumumab (16 mg/kg) until disease progression.

RESULTS

Of 498 patients in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population (D-Vd, n = 251; Vd, n = 247), 47% had 1 prior line of treatment (1PL; D-Vd, n = 122; Vd, n = 113). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was significantly prolonged with D-Vd versus Vd in the ITT population (16.7 vs. 7.1 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.31; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.25-0.40; P < .0001) and the 1PL subgroup (27.0 vs. 7.9 months; HR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.15-0.32; P < .0001). In lenalidomide-refractory patients, the median PFS was 7.8 versus 4.9 months (HR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.28-0.68; P = .0002) for D-Vd (n = 60) versus Vd (n = 81). Minimal residual disease (MRD)-negativity rates (10^-5) were greater with D-Vd versus Vd (ITT: 14% vs. 2%; 1PL: 20% vs. 3%; both P < .0001). PFS2 was significantly prolonged with D-Vd versus Vd (ITT: HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.38-0.61; 1PL: HR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.24-0.51; P < .0001). No new safety concerns were observed.

CONCLUSION

After 3 years, D-Vd maintained significant benefits in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma with a consistent safety profile. D-Vd provided the greatest benefit at first relapse and increased MRD-negativity rates.

Daratumumab plus Lenalidomide and Dexamethasone for Untreated Myeloma

BACKGROUND

Lenalidomide plus dexamethasone is a standard treatment for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who are ineligible for autologous stem-cell transplantation. We sought to determine whether the addition of daratumumab would significantly reduce the risk of disease progression or death in this population.

METHODS

We randomly assigned 737 patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were ineligible for autologous stem-cell transplantation to receive daratumumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone (daratumumab group) or lenalidomide and dexamethasone alone (control group). Treatment was to continue until the occurrence of disease progression or unacceptable side effects. The primary end point was progression-free survival.

RESULTS

At a median follow-up of 28.0 months, disease progression or death had occurred in 240 patients (97 of 368 patients [26.4%] in the daratumumab group and 143 of 369 patients [38.8%] in the control group). The estimated percentage of patients who were alive without disease progression at 30 months was 70.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 65.0 to 75.4) in the daratumumab group and 55.6% (95% CI, 49.5 to 61.3) in the control group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.73; P<0.001). The percentage of patients with a complete response or better was 47.6% in the daratumumab group and 24.9% in the control group (P<0.001). A total of 24.2% of the patients in the daratumumab group, as compared with 7.3% of the patients in the control group, had results below the threshold for minimal residual disease (1 tumor cell per 10⁵ white cells) (P<0.001). The most common adverse events of grade 3 or 4 were neutropenia (50.0% in the daratumumab group vs. 35.3% in the control group), anemia (11.8% vs. 19.7%), lymphopenia (15.1% vs. 10.7%), and pneumonia (13.7% vs. 7.9%).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were ineligible for autologous stem-cell transplantation, the risk of disease progression or death was significantly lower among those who received daratumumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone than among those who received lenalidomide and dexamethasone alone. A higher incidence of neutropenia and pneumonia was observed in the daratumumab group. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; MAIA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02252172.).

Impact of age on efficacy and safety of daratumumab in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone (D-Rd) in patients (pts) with transplant-ineligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM): MAIA

8035

Background: D-Rd significantly reduced the risk of progression/death by 44% in transplant-ineligible NDMM pts vs Rd in the phase 3 MAIA study. To examine the impact of age on efficacy/safety of D-Rd vs Rd in this population, a subgroup analysis was conducted in pts <75 and ≥75 y of age. Methods: Transplant-ineligible NDMM pts were randomized 1:1 to Rd ± DARA; stratification was based on age (<75 vs ≥75 y), ISS (I, II, III), and region (North America vs Other). Pts received 28-day cycles of either R 25 or 10 mg (based on renal function) PO QD on Days 1-21 and either d 40 or 20 mg (based on age or BMI) PO/IV weekly until progression. In the D-Rd arm, pts received daratumumab 16 mg/kg IV QW for Cycles 1-2, Q2W for Cycles 3-6, and Q4W thereafter until progression. PFS is the primary endpoint. Results: Among 737 randomized pts (D-Rd, n=368; Rd, n=369), 321 (44%) were ≥75 y of age. For D-Rd vs Rd, relative median dose intensity for R was 79% vs 93% for <75 y subgroup and 66% vs 89% for ≥75 y subgroup, respectively. After median follow-up of 28 mo, significant PFS benefit of D-Rd vs Rd was maintained in both <75 and ≥75 y subgroups (Table). Deeper responses and MRD-negative rate (10-5 threshold) remained higher with D-Rd vs Rd in both subgroups (Table). Most common (≥10%; D-Rd/Rd) grade 3/4 TEAEs in ≥75 y pts were neutropenia (60%/41%), lymphopenia (19%/12%), anemia (16%/22%), pneumonia (15%/10%), leukopenia (12%/6%), and thrombocytopenia (8%/11%). Fewer pts receiving D-Rd vs Rd discontinued treatment due to TEAEs (<75 y: 5% vs 12%; ≥75 y: 10% vs 21%). Conclusions: D-Rd pts received less R vs Rd group regardless of age. Efficacy of D-Rd in <75 and ≥75 y pts was consistent with the ITT population, and D-Rd demonstrated acceptable tolerability regardless of age. Together with the phase 3 ALCYONE study, these studies confirm clinical benefit of daratumumab plus standard-of-care in transplant-ineligible NDMM pts ≥75 y of age. Clinical trial information: NCT02252172. [Table: see text]

Maintenance chemotherapy to reduce the risk of a metachronous Wilms tumor in children with bilateral nephroblastomatosis

From 2009 to 2018, 10 consecutive patients with Wilms tumors and bilateral nephroblastomatosis, who had completed standard therapy, were provided a maintenance chemotherapy regimen consisting of vincristine and dactinomycin every 3 months for 12 months in order to prevent an early metachronous Wilms tumor. One patient (10%) with Beckwith-Wiedemann syndrome developed a new tumor, without anaplasia. There were no significant toxicities reported during maintenance. All patients are currently alive with no evidence of disease. Further investigations are recommended to determine the utility of this approach.

Voriconazole Dosing in Children Younger Than 3 Years Undergoing Cancer Chemotherapy or Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation

There are limited pediatric population pharmacokinetic data for voriconazole dosing, particularly in younger children. In a cohort of 34 patients younger than 3 years receiving voriconazole, the majority (n = 23, 68%) had a low initial serum concentration <1 mg/L. Among 23 children <2 years old, 19 (83%) had an initial trough <1 mg/L. There was large intra- and interindividual variability in trough levels. Dosing also varied from 3.3 to 19.6 mg/kg per dose. Only 2 of 34 patients had a documented adverse drug reaction attributable to voriconazole. More data are needed to establish optimal dosing in very young children.

Outcome of children and adolescents with relapsed Hodgkin lymphoma treated with high-dose therapy and autologous stem cell transplantation: the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center experience

To evaluate outcomes and prognostic markers among children with relapsed Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) treated with autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT), we conducted a retrospective analysis of 36 consecutive pediatric patients treated at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center from 1989 to 2013. With a median follow-up of 9.6 years, the 10-year overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS) were 74.1 and 67.1% respectively. Absence of B-symptoms, chemotherapy-sensitive disease, and transplant date after 1997 were each associated with superior EFS [HR 0.12 (p = .0015), 0.18 (p = .0039), and 0.17 (p = .0208), respectively]. Childhood Hodgkin International Prognostic Score at relapse (R-CHIPS) was calculated in a subset of patients (n = 22) and a lower score was associated with improved OS (HR 0.29, p = .0352) and a trend toward improved EFS (HR 0.38, p = .0527). In summary, ASCT results in durable remission for the majority of pediatric patients with relapsed HL. R-CHIPS should be evaluated in larger cohorts as a potential predictive tool.

Acute myeloid leukemia therapy elicits durable complete response in chemoradio-resistant metastatic paraganglioma

Few effective therapeutic options exist for patients with metastatic paraganglioma (PGL). We report the case of a 16-year-old male who developed acute myeloid leukemia (AML) 30 months following the treatment for metastatic PGL. PGL had been refractory to ¹³¹ I-meta-iodobenzylguanidine and temozolomide therapy. However, there was a major reduction in primary tumor allowing its gross total resection, and complete resolution of metastatic disease following AML-directed therapy that included daunorubicin, cytarabine, and etoposide. He remains in remission for both AML and PGL, 48 months post AML chemotherapy. Alternative chemotherapeutic agents should be considered for metastatic PGL resistant to conventional therapy.

Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for nonmalignant hematologic disorders using chemotherapy-only cytoreductive regimens and T-cell-depleted grafts from human leukocyte antigen-matched or -mismatched donors

Nonmalignant hematologic disorders (NMHD) of childhood comprise a variety of disorders, including acquired severe aplastic anemia and inherited marrow failure syndromes. Patients with high-risk NMHD without matched related donors fare poorly with allogeneic hematopoietic alternative donor stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) and are at high risk for developing graft-versus-host disease following unmodified grafts. The authors retrospectively analyzed data on 18 patients affected by NMHD, lacking a human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-identical sibling donor, who underwent an alternative donor allo-HSCT at their institution between April 2005 and May 2013. Fifty percent of the patients had received prior immunosuppressive therapy, 72% had a history of infections, and 56% were transfusion dependent at the time of transplant. Cytoreduction included a combination of 3 of 5 agents: fludarabine, melphalan, thiotepa, busulfan, and cyclophosphamide. Grafts were T-cell depleted. All evaluable patients engrafted. Five died of transplant complications. The cumulative incidence of graft-versus-host disease was 6%. No patient had recurrence of disease. Five-year overall survival was 77%. Age at transplant <6 years was strongly associated with better survival. Based on these results, transplant with chemotherapy-only cytoreductive regimens and T-cell-depleted stem cell transplants could be recommended for patients with high-risk NMHD, especially at a younger age.

Integrating Genomics Into Clinical Pediatric Oncology Using the Molecular Tumor Board at the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center

BACKGROUND

Pediatric oncologists have begun to leverage tumor genetic profiling to match patients with targeted therapies. At the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC), we developed the Pediatric Molecular Tumor Board (PMTB) to track, integrate, and interpret clinical genomic profiling and potential targeted therapeutic recommendations.

PROCEDURE

This retrospective case series includes all patients reviewed by the MSKCC PMTB from July 2014 to June 2015. Cases were submitted by treating oncologists and potential treatment recommendations were based upon the modified guidelines of the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine.

RESULTS

There were 41 presentations of 39 individual patients during the study period. Gliomas, acute myeloid leukemia, and neuroblastoma were the most commonly reviewed cases. Thirty nine (87%) of the 45 molecular sequencing profiles utilized hybrid-capture targeted genome sequencing. In 30 (73%) of the 41 presentations, the PMTB provided therapeutic recommendations, of which 19 (46%) were implemented. Twenty-one (70%) of the recommendations involved targeted therapies. Three (14%) targeted therapy recommendations had published evidence to support the proposed recommendations (evidence levels 1-2), eight (36%) recommendations had preclinical evidence (level 3), and 11 (50%) recommendations were based upon hypothetical biological rationales (level 4).

CONCLUSIONS

The MSKCC PMTB enabled a clinically relevant interpretation of genomic profiling. Effective use of clinical genomics is anticipated to require new and improved tools to ascribe pathogenic significance and therapeutic actionability. The development of specific rule-driven clinical protocols will be needed for the incorporation and evaluation of genomic and molecular profiling in interventional prospective clinical trials.

Proteasome Addiction Defined in Ewing Sarcoma Is Effectively Targeted by a Novel Class of 19S Proteasome Inhibitors

Ewing sarcoma is a primitive round cell sarcoma with a peak incidence in adolescence that is driven by a chimeric oncogene created from the fusion of the EWSR1 gene with a member of the ETS family of genes. Patients with metastatic and recurrent disease have dismal outcomes and need better therapeutic options. We screened a library of 309,989 chemical compounds for growth inhibition of Ewing sarcoma cells to provide the basis for the development of novel therapies and to discover vulnerable pathways that might broaden our understanding of the pathobiology of this aggressive sarcoma. This screening campaign identified a class of benzyl-4-piperidone compounds that selectively inhibit the growth of Ewing sarcoma cell lines by inducing apoptosis. These agents disrupt 19S proteasome function through inhibition of the deubiquitinating enzymes USP14 and UCHL5. Functional genomic data from a genome-wide shRNA screen in Ewing sarcoma cells also identified the proteasome as a node of vulnerability in Ewing sarcoma cells, providing orthologous confirmation of the chemical screen findings. Furthermore, shRNA-mediated silencing of USP14 or UCHL5 in Ewing sarcoma cells produced significant growth inhibition. Finally, treatment of a xenograft mouse model of Ewing sarcoma with VLX1570, a benzyl-4-piperidone compound derivative currently in clinical trials for relapsed multiple myeloma, significantly inhibited in vivo tumor growth. Overall, our results offer a preclinical proof of concept for the use of 19S proteasome inhibitors as a novel therapeutic strategy for Ewing sarcoma. Cancer Res; 76(15); 4525-34. ©2016 AACR.

Second Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation for Acute Leukemia Using a Chemotherapy-Only Cytoreduction with Clofarabine, Melphalan, and Thiotepa

Relapse after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (alloHSCT) remains one of the leading causes of mortality in patients with leukemia. Treatment options in this population remain limited, with concern for both increased toxicity and further relapse. We treated 18 patients with acute leukemia for marrow ± extramedullary relapse after a previous alloHSCT with a myeloablative cytoreductive regimen including clofarabine, melphalan, and thiotepa followed by a second or third transplantation from the same or a different donor. All patients were in remission at the time of the second or third transplantation. All evaluable patients engrafted. The most common toxicity was reversible transaminitis associated with clofarabine. Two patients died from transplantation-related causes. Seven patients relapsed after their second or third transplanation and died of disease. Nine of 18 patients are alive and disease free, with a 3-year 49% probability of overall survival (OS). Patients whose remission duration after initial alloHSCT was >6 months achieved superior outcomes (3-year OS, 74%, 95% confidence interval, 53% to 100%), compared with those relapsing within 6 months (0%) (P < .001). This new cytoreductive regimen has yielded promising results with acceptable toxicity for second or third transplantations in patients with high-risk acute leukemia who relapsed after a prior transplantation, using various graft and donor options. This approach merits further evaluation in collaborative group studies.

Late effects in patients with Fanconi anemia following allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation from alternative donors

Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is curative for hematological manifestations of Fanconi anemia (FA). We performed a retrospective analysis of 22 patients with FA and aplastic anemia, myelodysplastic syndrome or acute myelogenous leukemia who underwent a HSCT at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and survived at least 1 year post HSCT. Patients underwent either a TBI- (N=18) or busulfan- (N=4) based cytoreduction followed by T-cell-depleted transplants from alternative donors. Twenty patients were alive at time of the study with a 5- and 10-year overall survival of 100 and 84% and no evidence of chronic GvHD. Among the 18 patients receiving a TBI-based regimen, 11 (61%) had persistent hemochromatosis, 4 (22%) developed hypothyroidism, 7 (39%) had insulin resistance and 5 (27%) developed hypertriglyceridemia after transplant. Eleven of 16 evaluable patients (68%), receiving TBI, developed gonadal dysfunction. Two patients who received a TBI-based regimen died of squamous cell carcinoma. One patient developed hemochromatosis, hypothyroidism and gonadal dysfunction after busulfan-based cytoreduction. TBI appears to be a risk factor for malignant and endocrine late effects in the FA host. Multidisciplinary follow-up of patients with FA (including cancer screening) is essential for early detection and management of late complications, and improving long-term outcomes.

Prognostic factors in fibrolamellar hepatocellular carcinoma in young people

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

Fibrolamellar hepatocellular carcinoma (FL-HCC) arises in pediatric/adolescent patients without cirrhosis. We retrospectively evaluated the impact of resection, nodal status, metastasis, and PRETEXT stage on overall survival (OS).

METHODS

With IRB approval, we reviewed records of 25 consecutive pediatric patients with FL-HCC treated at our institution from 1981 to 2011. We evaluated associations between OS and PRETEXT stage, nodal involvement, metastasis, and complete resection.

RESULTS

Median age at diagnosis was 17.1years (range, 11.6-20.5). Median follow-up was 2.74years (range, 5-9.5). Five (28%) patients had PRETEXT stage 1 disease, 10 (56%) had stage 2, 2 (11%) had stage 3, and 2 (11%) had stage 4 disease. On presentation, 17 (68%) patients had N1 disease, and 7 (28%) had parenchymal metastases. Complete resection was achieved in 17 (80.9%) of 21 patients who underwent resection. Five-year OS was 42.6%. Survival was positively associated with complete resection (P =0.003), negative regional lymph nodes (P =0.044), and lower PRETEXT stage (P <0.001), with a trend for metastatic disease (P =0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

In young patients with FL-HCC, lower PRETEXT stage and complete resection correlated with prolonged survival, while metastatic disease and positive lymph node status were associated with poor prognosis. Thus, we recommend complete resection and regional lymphadenectomy whenever possible.

Phase II trial of clofarabine with topotecan, vinorelbine, and thiotepa in pediatric patients with relapsed or refractory acute leukemia

BACKGROUND

Outcomes for children with relapsed/refractory (R/R) acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) and acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) are dismal. In an effort to improve outcomes, we performed a phase I/II study of a novel clofarabine based combination regimen called TVTC. Herein, we report the response rates of patients in the phase II portion of the study.

PROCEDURE

Seventeen patients with R/R ALL, AML, or biphenotypic leukemia were enrolled. Sixteen patients were evaluable for response. Patients were treated at the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) from the phase I portion of the study (clofarabine 40 mg/m(2) /day IV × 5 days, topotecan 1 mg/m(2) /day IV continuous infusion × 5 days, vinorelbine 20 mg/m(2) /week IV × 3 weeks, thiotepa 15 mg/m(2)/day IV × 1 day). The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR), defined as CR or CR without platelet recovery (CRp).

RESULTS

The ORR was 69% (10 CR, 1 CRp). Among the 11 responders, 9 (82%) proceeded to hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. The most common grade 3+ non-hematologic toxicities were febrile neutropenia (82%) and transient transaminase elevation (47%).

CONCLUSIONS

TVTC demonstrates significant activity in patients with R/R acute leukemia. The activity in R/R AML patients was very encouraging, with 8 of 12 (67%) patients achieving a CR/CRp. Patients with high risk de novo AML may benefit from incorporation of TVTC therapy into frontline treatment regimens. This regimen warrants further exploration in a larger cohort of patients with R/R leukemia.