Explore the vast range of titles available.

In the primary analysis of the phase 3 MAIA trial (median follow-up 28·0 months), a significant improvement in progression-free survival was observed with daratumumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone versus lenalidomide and dexamethasone alone in transplantation-ineligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Here, we report the updated efficacy and safety results from a prespecified interim analysis for overall survival. MAIA is an ongoing, multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial that enrolled patients at 176 hospitals in 14 countries across North America, Europe, the Middle East, and the Asia-Pacific region. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0–2, and were ineligible for high-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem-cell transplantation because of their age (≥65 years) or comorbidities. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using randomly permuted blocks (block size 4) by an interactive web response system to receive 28-day cycles of intravenous daratumumab (16 mg/kg, once per week during cycles 1–2, once every 2 weeks in cycles 3–6, and once every 4 weeks thereafter) plus oral lenalidomide (25 mg on days 1–21 of each cycle) and oral dexamethasone (40 mg on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of each cycle; daratumumab group) or lenalidomide and dexamethasone alone (control group). Randomisation was stratified by International Staging System disease stage, geographical region, and age. Neither patients nor investigators were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, which was centrally assessed, and a secondary endpoint was overall survival (both assessed in the intention-to-treat population). The safety population included patients who received at least one dose of the study treatment. The results presented here are from a prespecified interim analysis for overall survival, for which the prespecified stopping boundary was p=0·0414. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02252172. Between March 18, 2015, and Jan 15, 2017, 952 patients were assessed for eligibility, of whom 737 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the daratumumab group (n=368) or the control group (n=369). At a median follow-up of 56·2 months (IQR 52·7–59·9), median progression-free survival was not reached (95% CI 54·8–not reached) in the daratumumab group versus 34·4 months (29·6–39·2) in the control group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·53 [95% CI 0·43–0·66]; p<0·0001). Median overall survival was not reached in either group (daratumumab group, 95% CI not reached–not reached; control group, 95% CI 55·7–not reached; HR 0·68 [95% CI 0·53–0·86]; p=0·0013). The most common (>15%) grade 3 or higher treatment-emergent adverse events were neutropenia (197 [54%] patients in the daratumumab group vs 135 [37%] patients in the control group), pneumonia (70 [19%] vs 39 [11%]), anaemia (61 [17%] vs 79 [22%]), and lymphopenia (60 [16%] vs 41 [11%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 281 (77%) patients in the daratumumab group and 257 (70%) patients in the control group. Treatment-related deaths occurred in 13 (4%) patients in the daratumumab group and ten (3%) patients in the control group. Daratumumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone increased overall survival and progression-free survival in patients ineligible for stem-cell transplantation with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. There were no new safety concerns. Our results support the frontline use of daratumumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone for patients with multiple myeloma who are ineligible for transplantation. Janssen Research & Development.

Lenalidomide plus dexamethasone is a reference treatment for patients with newly diagnosed myeloma. The combination of the proteasome inhibitor bortezomib with lenalidomide and dexamethasone has shown significant efficacy in the setting of newly diagnosed myeloma. We aimed to study whether the addition of bortezomib to lenalidomide and dexamethasone would improve progression-free survival and provide better response rates in patients with previously untreated multiple myeloma who were not planned for immediate autologous stem-cell transplant. In this randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial, we recruited patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma aged 18 years and older from participating Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG) and National Clinical Trial Network (NCTN) institutions (both inpatient and outpatient settings). Key inclusion criteria were presence of CRAB (C=calcium elevation; R=renal impairment; A=anaemia; B=bone involvement) criteria with measurable disease (measured by assessment of free light chains), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0–3, haemoglobin concentration 9 g/dL or higher, absolute neutrophil count 1 × 103 cells per mm3 or higher, and a platelet count of 80 000/mm3 or higher. We randomly assigned (1:1) patients to receive either an initial treatment of bortezomib with lenalidomide and dexamethasone (VRd group) or lenalidomide and dexamethasone alone (Rd group). Randomisation was stratified based on International Staging System stage (I, II, or III) and intent to transplant (yes vs no). The VRd regimen was given as eight 21-day cycles. Bortezomib was given at 1·3 mg/m2 intravenously on days 1, 4, 8, and 11, combined with oral lenalidomide 25 mg daily on days 1–14 plus oral dexamethasone 20 mg daily on days 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, and 12. The Rd regimen was given as six 28-day cycles. The standard Rd regimen consisted of 25 mg oral lenalidomide once a day for days 1–21 plus 40 mg oral dexamethasone once a day on days 1, 8, 15, and 22. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival using a prespecified one-sided stratified log rank test at a significance level of 0·02. Analyses were intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00644228. Between April, 2008, and February, 2012, we randomly assigned 525 patients at 139 participating institutions (264 to VRd and 261 to Rd). In the randomly assigned patients, 21 patients in the VRd group and 31 in the Rd group were deemed ineligible based mainly on missing, insufficient, or early or late baseline laboratory data. Median progression-free survival was significantly improved in the VRd group (43 months vs 30 months in the Rd group; stratified hazard ratio [HR] 0·712, 96% CI 0·56–0·906; one-sided p value 0·0018). The median overall survival was also significantly improved in the VRd group (75 months vs 64 months in the Rd group, HR 0·709, 95% CI 0·524–0·959; two-sided p value 0·025). The rates of overall response (partial response or better) were 82% (176/216) in the VRd group and 72% (153/214) in the Rd group, and 16% (34/216) and 8% (18/214) of patients who were assessable for response in these respective groups had a complete response or better. Adverse events of grade 3 or higher were reported in 198 (82%) of 241 patients in the VRd group and 169 (75%) of 226 patients in the Rd group; 55 (23%) and 22 (10%) patients discontinued induction treatment because of adverse events, respectively. There were no treatment-related deaths in the Rd group, and two in the VRd group. In patients with newly diagnosed myeloma, the addition of bortezomib to lenalidomide and dexamethasone resulted in significantly improved progression-free and overall survival and had an acceptable risk-benefit profile. NIH, NCI, NCTN, Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Takeda Oncology Company, and Celgene Corporation.

The addition of elotuzumab (a monoclonal antibody against SLAMF7) to lenalidomide plus dexamethasone produced a significant increase in progression-free survival as compared with lenalidomide plus dexamethasone alone. Multiple myeloma, a malignant disease of monoclonal plasma cells, has a median overall survival of approximately 5 years. 1 Despite improvements in treatment outcomes with proteasome inhibitors and immunomodulatory drugs, most patients continue to have a relapse, and new treatment approaches are needed. Combination therapy may be key to overcoming drug resistance and improving long-term treatment outcomes. Lenalidomide, an immunomodulatory drug, in combination with dexamethasone is a standard regimen in patients with relapsed or refractory disease. 2 , 3 Three-drug combinations are emerging for patients with previously treated multiple myeloma 3 but may be limited by toxic effects. Agents with new mechanisms of action . . .

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.

Background Proteasome inhibitors (PIs) are one of the most important classes of drugs for the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM). However, almost all patients with MM develop PI resistance, resulting in therapeutic failure. Therefore, the mechanisms underlying PI resistance in MM require further investigation. Methods We used several MM cell lines to establish PI-resistant MM cell lines. We performed RNA microarray and EccDNA-seq in MM cell lines and collected human primary MM samples to explore gene profiles. We evaluated the effect of MUC20 on cuproptosis of PI-resistant MM cells using Co-immunoprecipitation (Co-IP), Seahorse bioenergetic profiling and in vivo assay. Results This study revealed that the downregulation of Mucin 20 (MUC20) could predict PI sensitivity and outcomes in MM patients. Besides, MUC20 attenuated PI resistance in MM cells by inducing cuproptosis via the inhibition of cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 2 A expression (CDKN2A), which was achieved by hindering MET proto-oncogene, receptor tyrosine kinase (MET) activation. Moreover, MUC20 suppressed MET activation by repressing insulin-like growth factor receptor-1 (IGF-1R) lactylation in PI-resistant MM cells. This study is the first to perform extrachromosomal circular DNA (eccDNA) sequencing for MM, and it revealed that eccDNA induced PI resistance by amplifying kinesin family member 3 C (KIF3C) to reduce MUC20 expression in MM. Conclusion Our findings indicated that MUC20 regulated by eccDNA alleviates PI resistance of MM by modulating cuproptosis, which would provide novel strategies for the treatment of PI-resistant MM.

Multiple myeloma (MM) is a hematologic malignancy characterized by uncontrolled proliferation of plasma cells in the bone marrow. MM patients with aggressive progression have poor survival, emphasizing the urgent need for identifying new therapeutic targets. Here, we show that the leukocyte immunoglobulin-like receptor B1 (LILRB1), a transmembrane receptor conducting negative immune response, is a top-ranked gene associated with poor prognosis in MM patients. LILRB1 deficiency inhibits MM progression in vivo by enhancing the ferroptosis of MM cells. Mechanistic studies reveal that LILRB1 forms a complex with the low-density lipoprotein receptor (LDLR) and LDLR adapter protein 1 (LDLRAP1) to facilitate LDL/cholesterol uptake. Loss of LILRB1 impairs cholesterol uptake but activates the de novo cholesterol synthesis pathway to maintain cellular cholesterol homeostasis, leading to the decrease of anti-ferroptotic metabolite squalene. Our study uncovers the function of LILRB1 in regulating cholesterol metabolism and protecting MM cells from ferroptosis, implicating LILRB1 as a promising therapeutic target for MM patients. Patients with multiple myeloma need new therapeutic targets. The authors identify the transmembrane receptor LILRB1 as a potential target as it protects myeloma cells from ferroptosis by facilitating cholesterol uptake and maintaining cholesterol homeostasis and squalene levels.

Multiple myeloma is a malignancy of immunoglobulin-secreting plasma cells that is now often treated in the newly diagnosed and relapsed and/or refractory settings with monoclonal antibodies targeting lineage-specific markers used either alone or in rationally designed combination regimens. Among these are the anti-CD38 antibodies daratumumab and isatuximab, and the anti-Signaling lymphocytic activation molecule family member 7 antibody elotuzumab, all of which are used in their unconjugated formats. Single-chain variable fragments from antibodies also form a key element of the chimeric antigen receptors (CARs) in the B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA)-targeted CAR T-cell products idecabtagene vicleucel and ciltacabtagene autoleucel, which are approved in the advanced setting. Most recently, the bispecific anti-BCMA and T-cell-engaging antibody teclistamab has become available, again for patients with relapsed/refractory disease. Another format into which antibodies can be converted to exert anti-tumor efficacy is as antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs), and belantamab mafodotin, which also targets BCMA, represented the first such agent that gained a foothold in myeloma. Negative results from a recent Phase III study have prompted the initiation of a process for withdrawal of its marketing authorization. However, belantamab remains a drug with some promise, and many other ADCs targeting either BCMA or other plasma cell surface markers are in development and showing potential. This contribution will provide an overview of some of the current data supporting the possibility that ADCs will remain a part of our chemotherapeutic armamentarium against myeloma moving forward, and also highlight areas for future development.

Anti-multiple myeloma B cell maturation antigen (BCMA)-specific chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapies represent a promising treatment strategy with high response rates in myeloma. However, durable cures following anti-BCMA CAR-T cell treatment of myeloma are rare. One potential reason is that a small subset of minimal residual myeloma cells seeds relapse. Residual myeloma cells following BCMA-CAR-T-mediated treatment show less-differentiated features and express stem-like genes, including CD24. CD24-positive myeloma cells represent a large fraction of residual myeloma cells after BCMA-CAR-T therapy. In this work, we develop CD24-CAR-T cells and test their ability to eliminate myeloma cells. We find that CD24-CAR-T cells block the CD24-Siglec-10 pathway, thereby enhancing macrophage phagocytic clearance of myeloma cells. Additionally, CD24-CAR-T cells polarize macrophages to a M1-like phenotype. A dual-targeted BCMA-CD24-CAR-T exhibits improved efficacy compared to monospecific BCMA-CAR-T-cell therapy. This work presents an immunotherapeutic approach that targets myeloma cells and promotes tumor cell clearance by macrophages. BCMA-specific CAR T-cell therapies have shown high response rates in multiple myeloma (MM), however the majority of patients still relapse. Here the authors show that CD24-positive MM cells increase after BCMA-CAR-T treatment in patients, and that dual-targeted BCMA/CD24 CAR-T cells can improve anti-tumor efficacy in MM preclinical models.

Standard treatments for indolent non-Hodgkin lymphomas are often toxic, and most patients ultimately relapse. Lenalidomide, an immunomodulatory agent, is effective as monotherapy for relapsed indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma. We assessed the efficacy and safety of lenalidomide plus rituximab in patients with untreated, advanced stage indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma. In this phase 2 trial, undertaken at one instution, patients with follicular lymphoma and marginal zone lymphoma were given lenalidomide, orally, at 20 mg/day on days 1–21 of each 28-day cycle. For patients with small lymphocytic lymphoma, dosing began at 10 mg/day to avoid tumour flare, with an escalation of 5 mg/month to 20 mg/day. Rituximab was given at 375 mg/m2 as an intravenous infusion on day 1 of each cycle. Patients responding after six cycles could continue therapy for up to 12 cycles. The primary endpoint was overall response, defined as the proportion of patients who achieved a partial or complete response; patients were assessed for response if they had any post-baseline tumour assessment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00695786. 110 patients with follicular lymphoma (n=50), marginal zone lymphoma (n=30), and small lymphocytic lymphoma (n=30) were enrolled from June 30, 2008, until Aug 12, 2011. 93 of 103 evaluable patients had an overall response (90%, 95% CI 83–95). Complete responses occurred in 65 (63%, 95% CI 53–72) and partial responses in 28 patients (27%, 19–37). Of 46 evaluable patients with follicular lymphoma, 40 (87%) patients had a complete response and five (11%) had a partial response. Of 27 evaluable patients with marginal zone lymphoma, 18 (67%) had a complete response and six (22%) had a partial response. Of 30 evaluable patients with small lymphocytic lymphoma, seven (23%) had a complete response and 17 (57%) had a partial response. The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were neutropenia (38 [35%] of 110 patients), muscle pain (ten [9%]), rash (eight [7%]), cough, dyspnoea, or other pulmonary symptoms (five [5%]), fatigue (five [5%]), thrombosis (five [5%]), and thrombocytopenia (four [4%]). Lenalidomide plus rituximab is well tolerated and highly active as initial treatment for indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma. An international phase 3 study (NCT01476787) to compare this regimen with chemotherapy in patients with untreated follicular lymphoma is in progress. Celgene Corporation and Richard Spencer Lewis Memorial Foundation and Cancer Center Support Grant.

Key Points The proteasome is a central component of the protein degradation machinery in eukaryotic cells Both transformed and normal cells depend on the function of the proteasome to control the expression of proteins linked to cell survival and proliferation Clinical trials using proteasome inhibitors in myeloma, mantle-cell lymphoma (MCL) and amyloidosis have transformed the treatment of these diseases by establishing new standards of care Three proteasome inhibitors have received regulatory approval and are used routinely in clinical settings, including bortezomib, carfilzomib and ixazomib Primary resistance to proteasome inhibitors remains a challenge in patients with solid tumours; in addition, acquired resistance can be developed in myeloma and MCL even after initial responses, through mechanisms that are beginning to be understood Clinical evaluation of compounds targeting the upstream regulatory components of the proteasome is underway; in the future, compounds that target proteasome-mediated degradation of specific proteins might also become available By preventing the accumulation of misfolded or damaged proteins, the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway has essential functions in cell homeostasis. Cancer cells produce proteins that promote cell survival and proliferation, and inhibit cell death, and thus, clinical trials have tested the therapeutic effect of proteasome inhibitors on patients with a variety of cancer types, mainly haematological malignancies. Herein, the authors discuss the advances and challenges derived from the introduction of proteasome inhibitors in the clinic, including therapeutic resistance. The ubiquitin proteasome pathway was discovered in the 1980s to be a central component of the cellular protein-degradation machinery with essential functions in homeostasis, which include preventing the accumulation of misfolded or deleterious proteins. Cancer cells produce proteins that promote both cell survival and proliferation, and/or inhibit mechanisms of cell death. This notion set the stage for preclinical testing of proteasome inhibitors as a means to shift this fine equilibrium towards cell death. Since the late 1990s, clinical trials have been conducted for a variety of malignancies, leading to regulatory approvals of proteasome inhibitors to treat multiple myeloma and mantle-cell lymphoma. First-generation and second-generation proteasome inhibitors can elicit deep initial responses in patients with myeloma, for whom these drugs have dramatically improved outcomes, but relapses are frequent and acquired resistance to treatment eventually emerges. In addition, promising preclinical data obtained with proteasome inhibitors in models of solid tumours have not been confirmed in the clinic, indicating the importance of primary resistance. Investigation of the mechanisms of resistance is, therefore, essential to further maximize the utility of this class of drugs in the era of personalized medicine. Herein, we discuss the advances and challenges resulting from the introduction of proteasome inhibitors into the clinic.