Explore the vast range of titles available.

Proteasome inhibitors are one of the most important classes of agents to have emerged for the treatment of multiple myeloma in the past two decades, and now form one of the backbones of treatment. Three agents in this class have been approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration—the first-in-class compound bortezomib, the second-generation agent carfilzomib, and the first oral proteasome inhibitor, ixazomib. The success of this class of agents is due to the exquisite sensitivity of myeloma cells to the inhibition of the 26S proteasome, which plays a critical role in the pathogenesis and proliferation of the disease. Proteasome inhibition results in multiple downstream effects, including the inhibition of NF-κB signaling, the accumulation of misfolded and unfolded proteins, resulting in endoplasmic reticulum stress and leading to the unfolded protein response, the downregulation of growth factor receptors, suppression of adhesion molecule expression, and inhibition of angiogenesis; resistance to proteasome inhibition may arise through cellular responses mediating these downstream effects. These multiple biologic consequences of proteasome inhibition result in synergistic or additive activity with other chemotherapeutic and targeted agents for myeloma, and proteasome inhibitor-based combination regimens have become established as a cornerstone of therapy throughout the myeloma treatment algorithm, incorporating agents from the other key classes of antimyeloma agents, including the immunomodulatory drugs, monoclonal antibodies, and histone deacetylase inhibitors. This review gives an overview of the critical role of the proteasome in myeloma and the characteristics of the different proteasome inhibitors and provides a comprehensive summary of key clinical efficacy and safety data with the currently approved proteasome inhibitors.

BCMA targeting chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy has shown deep and durable responses in multiple myeloma. However, relapse following therapy is frequently observed, and mechanisms of resistance remain ill-defined. Here, we perform single cell genomic characterization of longitudinal samples from a patient who relapsed after initial CAR T cell treatment with lack of response to retreatment. We report selection, following initial CAR T cell infusion, of a clone with biallelic loss of BCMA acquired by deletion of one allele and a mutation that creates an early stop codon on the second allele. This loss leads to lack of CAR T cell proliferation following the second infusion and is reflected by lack of soluble BCMA in patient serum. Our analysis suggests the need for careful detection of BCMA gene alterations in multiple myeloma cells from relapse following CAR T cell therapy. Relapse following BCMA targeted CAR T-cell therapy is frequently observed in patients with multiple myeloma (MM). Here, by single cell transcriptome profiling on serially collected bone marrow samples, the authors report biallelic loss of BCMA as the mechanism of resistance underlying both relapse and lack of response to a second CAR T infusion in a patient with MM.

The multiple myeloma (MM) bone marrow (BM) microenvironment consists of different types of accessory cells. Both soluble factors (i.e., cytokines) secreted from these cells and adhesion of MM cells to these cells play crucial roles in activation of intracellular signaling pathways mediating MM cell growth, survival, migration, and drug resistance. Importantly, there is crosstalk between the signaling pathways, increasing the complexity of signal transduction networks in MM cells in the BM microenvironment, highlighting the requirement for combination treatment strategies to blocking multiple signaling pathways.

The approval of the first two monoclonal antibodies targeting CD38 (daratumumab) and SLAMF7 (elotuzumab) in late 2015 for treating relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) was a critical advance for immunotherapies for multiple myeloma (MM). Importantly, the outcome of patients continues to improve with the incorporation of this new class of agents with current MM therapies. However, both antigens are also expressed on other normal tissues including hematopoietic lineages and immune effector cells, which may limit their long-term clinical use. B cell maturation antigen (BCMA), a transmembrane glycoprotein in the tumor necrosis factor receptor superfamily 17 (TNFRSF17), is expressed at significantly higher levels in all patient MM cells but not on other normal tissues except normal plasma cells. Importantly, it is an antigen targeted by chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cells, which have already shown significant clinical activities in patients with RRMM who have undergone at least three prior treatments, including a proteasome inhibitor and an immunomodulatory agent. Moreover, the first anti-BCMA antibody-drug conjugate also has achieved significant clinical responses in patients who failed at least three prior lines of therapy, including an anti-CD38 antibody, a proteasome inhibitor, and an immunomodulatory agent. Both BCMA targeting immunotherapies were granted breakthrough status for patients with RRMM by FDA in Nov 2017. Other promising BCMA-based immunotherapeutic macromolecules including bispecific T-cell engagers, bispecific molecules, bispecific or trispecific antibodies, as well as improved forms of next generation CAR T cells, also demonstrate high anti-MM activity in preclinical and even early clinical studies. Here, we focus on the biology of this promising MM target antigen and then highlight preclinical and clinical data of current BCMA-targeted immunotherapies with various mechanisms of action. These crucial studies will enhance selective anti-MM response, transform the treatment paradigm, and extend disease-free survival in MM.

Several haematological malignancies, including multiple myeloma (MM) and acute myeloid leukaemia (AML), have well-defined precursor states that precede the development of overt cancer. MM is almost always preceded by monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS), and at least a quarter of all patients with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) have disease that evolves into AML. In turn, MDS are frequently anteceded by clonal haematopoiesis of indeterminate potential (CHIP). The acquisition of additional genetic and epigenetic alterations over time clearly influences the increasingly unstable and aggressive behaviour of neoplastic haematopoietic clones; however, perturbations in the bone-marrow microenvironment are increasingly recognized to have key roles in initiating and supporting oncogenesis. In this Review, we focus on the concept that the haematopoietic neoplasia-microenvironment relationship is an intimate rapport between two partners, provide an overview of the evidence supporting a role for the bone-marrow niche in promoting neoplasia, and discuss the potential for niche-specific therapeutic targets.

Bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRd) is a standard therapy for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Carfilzomib, a next-generation proteasome inhibitor, in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone (KRd), has shown promising efficacy in phase 2 trials and might improve outcomes compared with VRd. We aimed to assess whether the KRd regimen is superior to the VRd regimen in the treatment of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma in patients who were not being considered for immediate autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT). In this multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised controlled trial (the ENDURANCE trial; E1A11), we recruited patients aged 18 years or older with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were ineligible for, or did not intend to have, immediate ASCT. Participants were recruited from 272 community oncology practices or academic medical centres in the USA. Key inclusion criteria were the absence of high-risk multiple myeloma and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–2. Enrolled patients were randomly assigned (1:1) centrally by use of permuted blocks to receive induction therapy with either the VRd regimen or the KRd regimen for 36 weeks. Patients who completed induction therapy were then randomly assigned (1:1) a second time to either indefinite maintenance or 2 years of maintenance with lenalidomide. Randomisation was stratified by intent for ASCT at disease progression for the first randomisation and by the induction therapy received for the second randomisation. Allocation was not masked to investigators or patients. For 12 cycles of 3 weeks, patients in the VRd group received 1·3 mg/m2 of bortezomib subcutaneously or intravenously on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 of cycles 1–8, and day 1 and day 8 of cycles nine to twelve, 25 mg of oral lenalidomide on days 1–14, and 20 mg of oral dexamethasone on days 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, and 12. For nine cycles of 4 weeks, patients in the KRd group received 36 mg/m2 of intravenous carfilzomib on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16, 25 mg of oral lenalidomide on days 1–21, and 40 mg of oral dexamethasone on days 1, 8, 15, and 22. The coprimary endpoints were progression-free survival in the induction phase, and overall survival in the maintenance phase. The primary analysis was done in the intention-to-treat population and safety was assessed in patients who received at least one dose of their assigned treatment. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01863550. Study recruitment is complete, and follow-up of the maintenance phase is ongoing. Between Dec 6, 2013, and Feb 6, 2019, 1087 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to either the VRd regimen (n=542) or the KRd regimen (n=545). At a median follow-up of 9 months (IQR 5–23), at a second planned interim analysis, the median progression-free survival was 34·6 months (95% CI 28·8–37·8) in the KRd group and 34·4 months (30·1–not estimable) in the VRd group (hazard ratio [HR] 1·04, 95% CI 0·83–1·31; p=0·74). Median overall survival has not been reached in either group. The most common grade 3–4 treatment-related non-haematological adverse events included fatigue (34 [6%] of 527 patients in the VRd group vs 29 [6%] of 526 in the KRd group), hyperglycaemia (23 [4%] vs 34 [6%]), diarrhoea (23 [5%] vs 16 [3%]), peripheral neuropathy (44 [8%] vs four [<1%]), dyspnoea (nine [2%] vs 38 [7%]), and thromboembolic events (11 [2%] vs 26 [5%]). Treatment-related deaths occurred in two patients (<1%) in the VRd group (one cardiotoxicity and one secondary cancer) and 11 (2%) in the KRd group (four cardiotoxicity, two acute kidney failure, one liver toxicity, two respiratory failure, one thromboembolic event, and one sudden death). The KRd regimen did not improve progression-free survival compared with the VRd regimen in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, and had more toxicity. The VRd triplet regimen remains the standard of care for induction therapy for patients with standard-risk and intermediate-risk newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, and is a suitable treatment backbone for the development of combinations of four drugs. US National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, and Amgen.

The primary analysis of the ICARIA-MM study showed significant improvement in progression-free survival with addition of isatuximab to pomalidomide–dexamethasone in relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma. Here, we report a prespecified updated overall survival analysis at 24 months after the primary analysis. In this randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 3 study adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma who had received at least two previous lines of therapy, including lenalidomide and a proteasome inhibitor, and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–2 were recruited from 102 hospitals in 24 countries across Europe, North America, and the Asia-Pacific regions. Patients were excluded if they had anti-CD38 refractory disease or previously received pomalidomide. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1), using an interactive response technology with permuted blocked randomisation (block size of four) and stratified by number of previous treatment lines (2–3 vs >3) and aged (<75 vs ≥75 years), to isatuximab–pomalidomide–dexamethasone (isatuximab group) or pomalidomide–dexamethasone (control group). In the isatuximab group, intravenous isatuximab 10 mg/kg was administered on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of the first 4-week cycle, and then on days 1 and 15 of subsequent cycles. Both groups received oral pomalidomide 4 mg on days 1–21 of each cycle, and weekly oral or intravenous dexamethasone 40 mg (20 mg if aged ≥75 years) on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of each cycle. Treatment was continued until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal of consent. Here' we report a prespecified second interim analysis of overall survival (time from randomisation to any-cause death), a key secondary endpoint, in the intention-to-treat population (ie, all patients who provided informed consent and allocated a randomisation number) at 24 months after the primary analysis. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose or part dose of study treatment. The prespecified stopping boundary for the overall survival analysis was when the derived p value was equal to or less than 0·0181. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02990338, and is active, but not recruiting. Between Jan 10, 2017, and Feb 2, 2018, 387 patients were screened and 307 randomly assigned to either the isatuximab (n=154) or control group (n=153). Median follow-up at data cutoff (Oct 1, 2020) was 35·3 months (IQR 33·5–37·4). Median overall survival was 24·6 months (95% CI 20·3–31·3) in the isatuximab group and 17·7 months (14·4–26·2) in the control group (hazard ratio 0·76 [95% CI 0·57–1·01]; one-sided log-rank p=0·028, not crossing prespecified stopping boundary). The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-emergent adverse events in the isatuximab group versus the control group were neutropenia (76 [50%] of 152 patients vs 52 [35%] of 149 patients), pneumonia (35 [23%] vs 31 [21%]), and thrombocytopenia (20 [13%] vs 18 [12%]). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events were observed in 111 (73%) patients in the isatuximab group and 90 (60%) patients in the control group. Two (1%) treatment-related deaths occurred in the isatuximab group (one due to sepsis and one due to cerebellar infarction) and two (1%) occurred in the control group (one due to pneumonia and one due to urinary tract infection). Addition of isatuximab plus pomalidomide–dexamethasone resulted in a 6·9-month difference in median overall survival compared with pomalidomide–dexamethasone and is a new standard of care for lenalidomide-refractory and proteasome inhibitor-refractory or relapsed multiple myeloma. Final overall survival analysis follow-up is ongoing. Sanofi.

In multiple myeloma, next-generation sequencing (NGS) has expanded our knowledge of genomic lesions, and highlighted a dynamic and heterogeneous composition of the tumor. Here we used NGS to characterize the genomic landscape of 418 multiple myeloma cases at diagnosis and correlate this with prognosis and classification. Translocations and copy number abnormalities (CNAs) had a preponderant contribution over gene mutations in defining the genotype and prognosis of each case. Known and novel independent prognostic markers were identified in our cohort of proteasome inhibitor and immunomodulatory drug-treated patients with long follow-up, including events with context-specific prognostic value, such as deletions of the PRDM1 gene. Taking advantage of the comprehensive genomic annotation of each case, we used innovative statistical approaches to identify potential novel myeloma subgroups. We observed clusters of patients stratified based on the overall number of mutations and number/type of CNAs, with distinct effects on survival, suggesting that extended genotype of multiple myeloma at diagnosis may lead to improved disease classification and prognostication.

Key Points Multiple myeloma is a currently incurable B-cell malignancy characterized by excess monotypic plasma cells in the bone marrow in association with an excess of monoclonal protein in serum and/or urine. Multiple myeloma has complex heterogeneous cytogenetic abnormalities. Approximately 55–60% of patients have a hyperdiploid karyotype, which confers a better prognosis than those with non-hyperdiploid disease. Most non-hyperdiploid tumours have IgH translocations that involve several recurrent chromosomal loci, including 11q13 (cyclin D1), 6p21 (cyclin D3), 4p16 ( FGFR3 and MMSET ), 16q23 ( MAF ) and 20q11 ( MAFB ). Recent genomic and expression-profiling studies have both identified new therapeutic targets and provided the framework for a genetically based prognostic classification of multiple myeloma. These constitutive genetic alterations in multiple myeloma cells and changes in gene-expression profiles mediate the protective effects of the bone marrow microenvironment on multiple myeloma cells. Multiple myeloma cells that home to the bone marrow have important functional sequelae. Specifically, the adhesion of multiple myeloma cells to extracellular matrix proteins confers cell adhesion-mediated drug resistance (CAMDR), and the binding of multiple myeloma cells to bone marrow accessory cells triggers the secretion of cytokines, which not only promote growth, survival and migration of multiple myeloma cells, but also confer resistance to conventional chemotherapy. Targeting these mechanisms offers a potential therapeutic strategy to overcome drug resistance. Several factors, including MIP1α and RANKL, stimulate osteoclast activity; on the other hand, DKK1 inhibits osteoblastogenesis in multiple myeloma. This imbalance between bone formation and resorption results in osteolytic lesions, which are a hallmark of multiple myeloma. New agents that target multiple myeloma cells, tumour–bone marrow interactions, or the bone marrow milieu, used alone or in combination, have shown promise in overcoming conventional drug resistance and improving patient outcome in multiple myeloma. Oncogenomics will allow for both patient selection and rational combination therapeutics. Multiple myeloma is an incurable B-cell malignancy that is actively sustained by the bone marrow microenvironment. Targeting myeloma cells and their bone marrow interactions seems a promising strategy to overcome drug resistance and improve patient outcome. Multiple myeloma is a plasma cell malignancy characterized by complex heterogeneous cytogenetic abnormalities. The bone marrow microenvironment promotes multiple myeloma cell growth and resistance to conventional therapies. Although multiple myeloma remains incurable, novel targeted agents, used alone or in combination, have shown great promise to overcome conventional drug resistance and improve patient outcome. Recent oncogenomic studies have further advanced our understanding of the molecular pathogenesis of multiple myeloma, providing the framework for new prognostic classification and identifying new therapeutic targets.

Substantial improvements in survival have been seen in multiple myeloma (MM) over recent years, associated with the introduction and widespread use of multiple novel agents and regimens, as well as the emerging treatment paradigm of continuous or long-term therapy. However, these therapies and approaches may have limitations in the community setting, associated with toxicity burden, patient burden, and other factors including cost. Consequently, despite improvements in efficacy in the rigorously controlled clinical trials setting, the same results are not always achieved in real-world practice. Furthermore, the large number of different treatment options and regimens under investigation in various MM settings precludes the feasibility of obtaining head-to-head clinical trial data, and there is a temptation to use cross-trial comparisons to evaluate data across regimens. However, multiple aspects, including patient-related, disease-related, and treatment-related factors, can influence clinical trial outcomes and lead to differences between studies that may confound direct comparisons between data. In this review, we explore the various factors requiring attention when evaluating clinical trial data across available agents/regimens, as well as other considerations that may impact the translation of these findings into everyday MM management. We also investigate discrepancies between clinical trial efficacy and real-world effectiveness through a literature review of non-clinical trial data in relapsed/refractory MM on novel agent−based regimens and evaluate these data in the context of phase 3 trial results for recently approved and commonly used regimens. We thereby demonstrate the complexity of interpreting data across clinical studies in MM, as well as between clinical studies and routine-care analyses, with the aim to help clinicians consider all the necessary issues when tailoring individual patients’ treatment approaches.