Explore the vast range of titles available.

Among patients with thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura, the addition of caplacizumab, an anti–von Willebrand factor humanized, bivalent variable-domain-only immunoglobulin fragment, to daily plasma exchange resulted in faster platelet recovery, fewer TTP-related deaths, and fewer recurrences and thromboembolic events.

Venetoclax is a highly selective, potent, oral BCL-2 inhibitor, which induces apoptosis in multiple myeloma cells. Venetoclax plus bortezomib and dexamethasone has shown encouraging clinical efficacy with acceptable safety and tolerability in a phase 1 trial. The aim of this study was to evaluate venetoclax plus bortezomib and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. In this randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3 trial, patients aged 18 years or older with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or less, who had received one to three previous therapies were enrolled from 90 hospitals in 16 countries. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (2:1) centrally using an interactive response technology system and a block size of three to receive venetoclax (800 mg per day orally) or placebo with bortezomib (1·3 mg/m2 subcutaneously or intravenously and dexamethasone (20 mg orally). Treatment was given in 21-day cycles for the first eight cycles and 35-day cycles from the ninth cycle until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or patient withdrawal. Randomisation was stratified by previous exposure to a proteasome inhibitor and the number of previous therapies. Sponsors, investigators, study site personnel, and patients were masked to the treatment allocation throughout the study. The primary endpoint was independent review committee-assessed progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses were done in patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02755597. Between July 19, 2016, and Oct 31, 2017, 291 patients were randomly assigned to receive venetoclax (n=194) or placebo (n=97). With a median follow-up of 18·7 months (IQR 16·6–21·0), median progression-free survival according to independent review committee was 22·4 months (95% CI 15·3–not estimable) with venetoclax versus 11·5 months (9·6–15·0) with placebo (hazard ratio [HR] 0·63 [95% CI 0·44–0·90]; p=0·010). The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-emergent adverse events were neutropenia (35 [18%] of 193 patients in the venetoclax group vs seven [7%] of 96 patients in the placebo group), pneumonia (30 [16%] vs nine [9%]), thrombocytopenia (28 [15%] vs 29 [30%]), anaemia (28 [15%] vs 14 [15%]), and diarrhoea (28 [15%] vs 11 [11%]). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 93 (48%) patients in the venetoclax group and 48 (50%) patients in the placebo group, with eight (4%) treatment-emergent fatal infections reported in the venetoclax group and none reported in the placebo group. Three deaths in the venetoclax group (two from pneumonia and one from septic shock) were considered treatment-related; no deaths in the placebo group were treatment-related. The primary endpoint was met with a significant improvement in independent review committee-assessed progression-free survival with venetoclax versus placebo plus bortezomib and dexamethasone. However, increased mortality was seen in the venetoclax group, mostly because of an increased rate of infections, highlighting the importance of appropriate selection of patients for this treatment option. AbbVie and Genentech.

New treatment options are needed for patients with multiple myeloma that is refractory to proteasome inhibitors and immunomodulatory drugs. We assessed daratumumab, a novel CD38-targeted monoclonal antibody, in patients with refractory multiple myeloma. In this open-label, multicentre, phase 2 trial done in Canada, Spain, and the USA, patients (age ≥18 years) with multiple myeloma who were previously treated with at least three lines of therapy (including proteasome inhibitors and immunomodulatory drugs), or were refractory to both proteasome inhibitors and immunomodulatory drugs, were randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to receive intravenous daratumumab 8 mg/kg or 16 mg/kg in part 1 stage 1 of the study, to decide the dose for further assessment in part 2. Patients received 8 mg/kg every 4 weeks, or 16 mg/kg per week for 8 weeks (cycles 1 and 2), then every 2 weeks for 16 weeks (cycles 3–6), and then every 4 weeks thereafter (cycle 7 and higher). The allocation schedule was computer-generated and randomisation, with permuted blocks, was done centrally with an interactive web response system. In part 1 stage 2 and part 2, patients received 16 mg/kg dosed as in part 1 stage 1. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (partial response [PR] + very good PR + complete response [CR] + stringent CR). All patients who received at least one dose of daratumumab were included in the analysis. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01985126. The study is ongoing. In part 1 stage 1 of the study, 18 patients were randomly allocated to the 8 mg/kg group and 16 to the 16 mg/kg group. Findings are reported for the 106 patients who received daratumumab 16 mg/kg in parts 1 and 2. Patients received a median of five previous lines of therapy (range 2–14). 85 (80%) patients had previously received autologous stem cell transplantation, 101 (95%) were refractory to the most recent proteasome inhibitors and immunomodulatory drugs used, and 103 (97%) were refractory to the last line of therapy. Overall responses were noted in 31 patients (29·2%, 95% CI 20·8–38·9)—three (2·8%, 0·6–8·0) had a stringent CR, ten (9·4%, 4·6–16·7) had a very good PR, and 18 (17·0%, 10·4–25·5) had a PR. The median time to first response was 1·0 month (range 0·9–5·6). Median duration of response was 7·4 months (95% CI 5·5–not estimable) and progression-free survival was 3·7 months (95% CI 2·8–4·6). The 12-month overall survival was 64·8% (95% CI 51·2–75·5) and, at a subsequent cutoff, median overall survival was 17·5 months (95% CI 13·7–not estimable). Daratumumab was well tolerated; fatigue (42 [40%] patients) and anaemia (35 [33%]) of any grade were the most common adverse events. No drug-related adverse events led to treatment discontinuation. Daratumumab monotherapy showed encouraging efficacy in heavily pretreated and refractory patients with multiple myeloma, with a favourable safety profile in this population of patients. Janssen Research & Development.

In this Policy Review, the Bone Working Group of the International Myeloma Working Group updates its clinical practice recommendations for the management of multiple myeloma-related bone disease. After assessing the available literature and grading recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) method, experts from the working group recommend zoledronic acid as the preferred bone-targeted agent for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, with or without multiple myeloma-related bone disease. Once patients achieve a very good partial response or better, after receiving monthly zoledronic acid for at least 12 months, the treating physician can consider decreasing the frequency of or discontinuing zoledronic acid treatment. Denosumab can also be considered for the treatment of multiple myeloma-related bone disease, particularly in patients with renal impairment. Denosumab might prolong progression-free survival in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who have multiple myeloma-related bone disease and who are eligible for autologous stem-cell transplantation. Denosumab discontinuation is challenging due to the rebound effect. The Bone Working Group of the International Myeloma Working Group also found cement augmentation to be effective for painful vertebral compression fractures. Radiotherapy is recommended for uncontrolled pain, impeding or symptomatic spinal cord compression, or pathological fractures. Surgery should be used for the prevention and restoration of long-bone pathological fractures, vertebral column instability, and spinal cord compression with bone fragments within the spinal route.

Certain clinical features predict progression from smoldering to overt multiple myeloma. Patients with high-risk features who were treated with lenalidomide and dexamethasone were less likely to have disease progression and had a higher rate of survival than untreated patients. Smoldering multiple myeloma is a plasma-cell proliferative disorder characterized by a monoclonal component of at least 3 g per deciliter, a level of plasma-cell infiltration into bone marrow of at least 10%, or both features. 1 Currently, patients with smoldering myeloma are not treated until symptomatic disease develops. 2 In the past, few drugs were effective against myeloma, and the available treatments, mainly alkylating agents, led to concerns about long-term toxicity. Attempts at early intervention with alkylating agents, 3 – 5 bisphosphonates, 6 – 8 antagonists of the receptor of interleukin-1β, 9 or thalidomide 10 – 13 failed to show a significant benefit. Although the risk of progression to . . .

Panobinostat is a potent oral pan-deacetylase inhibitor that in preclinical studies has synergistic anti-myeloma activity when combined with bortezomib and dexamethasone. We aimed to compare panobinostat, bortezomib, and dexamethasone with placebo, bortezomib, and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma. PANORAMA1 is a multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind phase 3 trial of patients with relapsed or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma who have received between one and three previous treatment regimens. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via an interactive web-based and voice response system, stratified by number of previous treatment lines and by previous use of bortezomib, to receive 21 day cycles of placebo or panobinostat (20 mg; on days 1, 3, 5, 8, 10, 12, orally), both in combination with bortezomib (1·3 mg/m2 on days 1, 4, 8, 11, intravenously) and dexamethasone (20 mg on days 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, 12, orally). Patients, physicians, and the investigators who did the data analysis were masked to treatment allocation; crossover was not permitted. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (in accordance with modified European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation criteria and based on investigators' assessment) and was analysed by intention to treat. The study is ongoing, but no longer recruiting, and is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01023308. 768 patients were enrolled between Jan 21, 2010, and Feb 29, 2012, with 387 randomly assigned to panobinostat, bortezomib, and dexamethasone and 381 to placebo, bortezomib, and dexamethasone. Median follow-up was 6·47 months (IQR 1·81–13·47) in the panobinostat group and 5·59 months (2·14–11·30) in the placebo group. Median progression-free survival was significantly longer in the panobinostat group than in the placebo group (11·99 months [95% CI 10·33–12·94] vs 8·08 months [7·56–9·23]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·63, 95% CI 0·52–0·76; p<0·0001). Overall survival data are not yet mature, although at the time of this analysis, median overall survival was 33·64 months (95% CI 31·34–not estimable) for the panobinostat group and 30·39 months (26·87–not estimable) for the placebo group (HR 0·87, 95% CI 0·69–1·10; p=0·26). The proportion of patients achieving an overall response did not differ between treatment groups (235 [60·7%, 95% CI 55·7–65·6] for panobinostat vs 208 [54·6%, 49·4–59·7] for placebo; p=0·09); however, the proportion of patients with a complete or near complete response was significantly higher in the panobinostat group than in the placebo group (107 [27·6%, 95% CI 23·2–32·4] vs 60 [15·7%, 12·2–19·8]; p=0·00006). Minimal responses were noted in 23 (6%) patients in the panobinostat group and in 42 (11%) in the placebo group. Median duration of response (partial response or better) was 13·14 months (95% CI 11·76–14·92) in the panobinostat group and 10·87 months (9·23–11·76) in the placebo group, and median time to response (partial response or better) was 1·51 months (1·41–1·64) in the panobinostat group and 2·00 months (1·61–2·79) in the placebo group. Serious adverse events were reported in 228 (60%) of 381 patients in the panobinostat group and 157 (42%) of 377 patients in the placebo group. Common grade 3–4 laboratory abnormalities and adverse events (irrespective of association with study drug) included thrombocytopenia (256 [67%] in the panobinostat group vs 118 [31%] in the placebo group), lymphopenia (202 [53%] vs 150 [40%]), diarrhoea (97 [26%] vs 30 [8%]), asthenia or fatigue (91 [24%] vs 45 [12%]), and peripheral neuropathy (67 [18%] vs 55 [15%]). Our results suggest that panobinostat could be a useful addition to the treatment armamentarium for patients with relapsed or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma. Longer follow up will be necessary to determine whether there is any effect on overall survival. Novartis Pharmaceuticals.

The standard of care for smouldering multiple myeloma is observation. We did the QuiRedex study to compare early treatment with lenalidomide plus dexamethasone with observation in patients with high-risk smouldering multiple myeloma. Here we report the long-term follow-up results of the trial. We did this open-label, randomised, controlled phase 3 study at 19 centres in Spain and three centres in Portugal. Patients aged 18 years or older with high-risk smouldering multiple myeloma were randomly assigned (1:1), via a computerised random number generator, to receive either early treatment with lenalidomide plus dexamethasone or observation, with dynamic balancing to maintain treatment balance within the two groups. Randomisation was stratified by time from diagnosis of smouldering multiple myeloma to study enrolment (≤6 months vs >6 months). Patients in the treatment group received nine 4-week induction cycles (lenalidomide 25 mg per day on days 1–21, plus dexamethasone 20 mg per day on days–1–4 and days 12–15), followed by maintenance therapy (lenalidomide 10 mg per day on days 1–21 of each 28-day cycle) up to 2 years. Group allocation was not masked from study investigators or patients. The primary endpoint was time from randomisation to progression to symptomatic myeloma. The primary analysis was based on the per-protocol population, restricted to patients who fulfilled the protocol in terms of eligibility. Safety assessments were based on the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00480363. Between Nov 8, 2007, and June 9, 2010, 125 patients were enrolled and underwent randomisation. 119 patients comprised the per-protocol population and were randomly assigned to receive either lenalidomide plus dexamethasone (n=57) or observation (n=62). The cutoff date for this update was June 30, 2015. Median follow-up for surviving patients was 75 months (IQR 67–85). Lenalidomide plus dexamethasone continued to provide a benefit on time to progression compared with observation (median time to progression not reached [95% CI 47 months–not reached] vs 23 months [16–31]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·24 [95% CI 0·14–0·41]; p<0·0001). Progression to multiple myeloma occurred in 53 (86%) of 62 patients in the observation group compared with 22 (39%) of 57 patients in the treatment group. At data cutoff, ten (18%) patients had died in the treatment group and 22 (36%) patients had died in the observation group; median overall survival from the time of study entry had not been reached in either group (95% CI 65 months–not reached vs 53 months–not reached; HR 0·43 [95% CI 0·21–0·92], p=0·024). Survival in patients who had received subsequent treatments at the time of progression to active disease did not differ between groups (HR 1·34 [95% CI 0·54–3·30]; p=0·50). The most frequently reported grade 3 adverse events in patients given lenalidomide plus dexamethasone were infection (four [6%]), asthenia (four [6%]), neutropenia (three [5%]), and skin rash (two [3%]); these events all occurred during induction therapy. No grade 4 adverse events occurred, but one (2%) patient in the lenalidomide plus dexamethasone group died from a respiratory infection during induction therapy The frequency of second primary malignancies was higher in patients in the treatment group than in those in the observation group (six [10%] of 62 patients vs one [2%] of 63 patients), but the cumulative risk of development did not differ significantly between the groups (p=0·070). This study is, to our knowledge, the first randomised trial in which early treatment has been assessed in selected patients with high-risk smouldering multiple myeloma. Positive results from ongoing trials would support the use of early treatment for patients with high-risk disease in the near future. Pethema (Spanish Program for the Treatment of Hematologic Diseases).

The SARS-COV-2 pandemic has led to strict and generalized transmission prevention measures that may have changed the epidemiological landscape of common seasonal respiratory virus (CSRV). Through a prospective CSRV survey program conducted from 2016 onwards in allogeneic stem cell transplant (allo-HSCT) recipients with respiratory symptoms, we aimed to analyze and compare the epidemiology and characteristics of CSRV over three consecutive periods [from February 1 to September 30 of 2018 (P1), 2019 (P2), and 2020 (P3)]. CSRV screening was performed through multiplex PCR assays during the study period. We identified 188 consecutive allo-HSCT recipients with 406 episodes screened for CSRV during the study period, of which 147 developed 300 CSRV. In P1 and P2 we diagnosed 115 (38.3%) and 145 (48.3%) CSRV episodes, respectively, whereas in P3 only 40 (13.3%) episodes were detected (p < 0.001). During P3, we observed a reduction of 80.2% in Ev/Rh, 93.3% in RSV, 80% in hIV, 96.3% HPIV, 68.4% in hMPV, 77.7% in ADV, 100% in HBoV, and 53.6% in HCoV as compared to P1 and P2. Consequently, we also observed a decline in absolute numbers of lower respiratory tract disease (68.1%), co-infections (91.7%), and hospitalizations (72.6%) during P3. We diagnosed SARS-COV-2 in nine allo-HSCT recipients, representing 23% of all CSRV detections in that period. In conclusion, we provide evidence of a significant drop in CSRV circulation during the SARS-COV-2 pandemic in our allo-HSCT recipients, indicating that prevention measures in the general population are highly effective in reducing CSRV prevalence and its complications in immunocompromised patients.

Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) is a genetically and clonally heterogeneous blood malignancy characterized by somatic gene mutations influencing disease biology. Despite advances in genomic analyses, splicing alterations associated with AML mutations remain underexplored. In this study, we systematically analyzed 914 single nucleotide variants previously found in 1540 AML patients and integrated DNA and RNA sequencing data from an additional 639 cases obtained from the BeatAML and TCGA-LAML cohorts. We identified 125 somatic variants in 32 genes with predicted splicing impact, including traditionally categorized missense/nonsense mutations. Among the 36 variants tested experimentally, 17 were validated through RNA-seq and/or minigene assays, with the latter providing support when RNA-seq evidence was limited. Validated splicing-associated variants (SAVs) frequently induced exon skipping or cryptic splice site activation in AML-associated genes such as EZH2 , FLT3 , ASXL1 , IDH1 , and U2AF1 . In several cases, these splicing changes altered conserved protein domains or were predicted to trigger nonsense-mediated decay. Our findings reveal a previously underappreciated contribution of cis -acting SAVs to AML pathogenesis, highlighting the need for integrative prediction–validation strategies to uncover their functional and potential therapeutic relevance.

Although lenalidomide-based combinations, such as lenalidomide plus a proteasome inhibitor or an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody, improve the overall response rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival of patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM), there is a tendency to use these regimens as a frontline treatment. This strategy has led to the development of refractoriness early in the disease course, usually after the patient’s first treatment. Since lenalidomide-free regimens have so far shown limited efficacy in lenalidomide-refractory patients, there is an unmet need for other treatment options. In this review, we discuss the therapeutic options available to treat the general population of lenalidomide-refractory patients (mono, double and triple refractory) and the subpopulation of patients with other high-risk features such as renal failure, extramedullary disease, and high-risk cytogenetics. Moreover, new promising individual therapies and the possible impact of immunotherapy in RRMM patients are debated.