Explore the vast range of titles available.

CD38-targeting immunotherapy is approved in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) that are transplant ineligible (TI) and is considered the best standard of care (SOC). To improve current SOC, we evaluated the added value of weekly bortezomib (V) to isatuximab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone (IsaRd versus Isa-VRd). This Intergroupe Francophone of Myeloma phase 3 study randomized 270 patients with NDMM that were TI, aged 65–79 years, to IsaRd versus Isa-VRd arms. The primary endpoint was a minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity rate at 10 −5 by next-generation sequencing at 18 months from randomization. Key secondary endpoints included response rates, MRD assessment rates, survival and safety. The 18-month MRD negativity rates at 10 −5 were reported in 35 patients (26%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 19–34) in IsaRd versus 71 (53%, 95% CI 44–61) in Isa-VRd (odds ratio for MRD negativity 3.16, 95% CI 1.89–5.28, P  < 0.0001). The MRD benefit was consistent across subgroups at 10 −5 and 10 −6 , and was already observed at month 12. The proportion of patients with complete response or better at 18 months was higher with Isa-VRd (58% versus 33%; P  < 0.0001), as was the proportion of MRD negativity and complete response or better (37% versus 17%; P  = 0.0003). At a median follow-up of 23.5 months, no difference was observed for survival times (immature data). The addition of weekly bortezomib did not significantly affect the relative dose intensity of IsaRd. Isa-VRd significantly increased MRD endpoints, including the 18-month negativity rate at 10 −5 , the primary endpoint, compared with IsaRd. This study proposes Isa-VRd as a new SOC for patients with NDMM that are TI. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04751877 . In patients with newly diagnosed, transplant-ineligible multiple myeloma, addition of weekly bortzomib to isatuximab, lenalidomide and dexamethasone leads to increased minimal residual disease negativity compared with isatuximab, lenalidomide and dexamethasone.

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.

ABSTRACT Aims/Background Recent agents have profoundly reshaped the multiple myeloma (MM) landscape. Their real‐world impacts need to be assessed over the long term. Methods EMMY is a non‐interventional, prospective dynamic cohort, conducted in France, since 2017, with 900 patients enrolled each year. Newly diagnosed MM (NDMM) who initiated a treatment from 2017 to 2020 are here described. Results A total of 1036 non‐transplant eligible (NTE) patients (median age: 74.9 years) and 561 patients who received autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) (median age: 60.6 years) were enrolled. For ASCT patients, a shift in induction treatment from bortezomib‐thalidomide‐dexamethasone (VTd) (29.1%) to bortezomib‐lenalidomide‐dexamethasone (VRd) (55.1%) marked the period. Maintenance treatment with R after ASCT became a standard (75% of patients). In NTE patients, R‐based regimens were increasingly used from 29.4% in 2017 (of whom Rd.: 17.0%, VRd: 10.6%) to 73.3% in 2020 (of whom Rd.: 21.8%, VRd: 48.5%). Median progression‐free survival (mPFS) was 46.5 months (95% CI: 37.8–50.6) and 18.7 months (95% CI: 16.3–20.8) in ASCT and NTE patients, respectively. In the ASCT group, patients treated with and without R maintenance had a mPFS of 51.8 (95% CI: 44.1–NA) and 29.6 months (95% CI: 21.8–40.9), respectively. In the NTE group, the mPFS was 26.3 (95% CI: 21.9–30.9) and 14.6 months (95% CI: 11.9–17.7) in patients who received an R‐based and non‐R‐based regimen, respectively. The estimated 48‐month overall survival rates were 89% (95% CI: 84.5–92.2) and 63% (95% CI: 58.5–67.1) for ASCT and NTE patients, respectively. Conclusions The 2017–2020 period was marked by the expansion of R use in both NDMM ASCT and NTE patients. A total of 1036 non‐transplant eligible (NTE) patients and 561 patients who received autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) were enrolled in Emmy. In the ASCT group, patients treated with and without R maintenance had a mPFS of 51.8 (95% CI: 44.1–NA) and 29.6 months (95% CI: 21.8–40.9), respectively. In the NTE group, the mPFS was 26.3 (95% CI: 21.9–30.9) and 14.6 months (95% CI: 11.9–17.7) in patients who received an R‐based and non‐R‐based regimen, respectively. The 2017–2020 period was marked by the expansion of R use in both NMDD ASCT and NTE patients.

Bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRd) is a preferred first-line treatment option for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Whether the addition of the anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody isatuximab to the VRd regimen would reduce the risk of disease progression or death among patients ineligible to undergo transplantation is unclear. In an international, open-label, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned, in a 3:2 ratio, patients 18 to 80 years of age with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were ineligible to undergo transplantation to receive either isatuximab plus VRd or VRd alone. The primary efficacy end point was progression-free survival. Key secondary end points included a complete response or better and minimal residual disease (MRD)-negative status in patients with a complete response. A total of 446 patients underwent randomization. At a median follow-up of 59.7 months, the estimated progression-free survival at 60 months was 63.2% in the isatuximab-VRd group, as compared with 45.2% in the VRd group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.60; 98.5% confidence interval, 0.41 to 0.88; P<0.001). The percentage of patients with a complete response or better was significantly higher in the isatuximab-VRd group than in the VRd group (74.7% vs. 64.1%, P = 0.01), as was the percentage of patients with MRD-negative status and a complete response (55.5% vs. 40.9%, P = 0.003). No new safety signals were observed with the isatuximab-VRd regimen. The incidence of serious adverse events during treatment and the incidence of adverse events leading to discontinuation were similar in the two groups. Isatuximab-VRd was more effective than VRd as initial therapy in patients 18 to 80 years of age with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were ineligible to undergo transplantation. (Funded by Sanofi and a Cancer Center Support Grant; IMROZ ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03319667.).

Patients with multiple myeloma treated with lenalidomide maintenance therapy have improved progression-free survival, primarily following autologous stem-cell transplantation. A beneficial effect of lenalidomide maintenance therapy on overall survival in this setting has been inconsistent between individual studies. Minimal data are available on the effect of maintenance lenalidomide in more aggressive disease states, such as patients with cytogenetic high-risk disease or patients ineligible for transplantation. We aimed to assess lenalidomide maintenance versus observation in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, including cytogenetic risk and transplantation status subgroup analyses. The Myeloma XI trial was an open-label, randomised, phase 3, adaptive design trial with three randomisation stages done at 110 National Health Service hospitals in England, Wales, and Scotland. There were three potential randomisations in the study: induction treatment (allocation by transplantation eligibility status); intensification treatment (allocation by response to induction therapy); and maintenance treatment. Here, we report the results of the randomisation to maintenance treatment. Eligible patients for maintenance randomisation were aged 18 years or older and had symptomatic or non-secretory multiple myeloma, had completed their assigned induction therapy as per protocol and had achieved at least a minimal response to protocol treatment, including lenalidomide. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1 from Jan 13, 2011, to Jun 27, 2013, and 2:1 from Jun 28, 2013, to Aug 11, 2017) to lenalidomide maintenance (10 mg orally on days 1–21 of a 28-day cycle) or observation, and stratified by allocated induction and intensification treatment, and centre. The co-primary endpoints were progression-free survival and overall survival, analysed by intention to treat. Safety analysis was per protocol. This study is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN49407852, and clinicaltrialsregister.eu, number 2009-010956-93, and has completed recruitment. Between Jan 13, 2011, and Aug 11, 2017, 1917 patients were accrued to the maintenance treatment randomisation of the trial. 1137 patients were assigned to lenalidomide maintenance and 834 patients to observation. After a median follow-up of 31 months (IQR 18–50), median progression-free survival was 39 months (95% CI 36–42) with lenalidomide and 20 months (18–22) with observation (hazard ratio [HR] 0·46 [95% CI 0·41–0·53]; p<0·0001), and 3-year overall survival was 78·6% (95% Cl 75·6–81·6) in the lenalidomide group and 75·8% (72·4–79·2) in the observation group (HR 0·87 [95% CI 0·73–1·05]; p=0·15). Progression-free survival was improved with lenalidomide compared with observation across all prespecified subgroups. On prespecified subgroup analyses by transplantation status, 3-year overall survival in transplantation-eligible patients was 87·5% (95% Cl 84·3–90·7) in the lenalidomide group and 80·2% (76·0–84·4) in the observation group (HR 0·69 [95% CI 0·52–0·93]; p=0·014), and in transplantation-ineligible patients it was 66·8% (61·6–72·1) in the lenalidomide group and 69·8% (64·4–75·2) in the observation group (1·02 [0·80–1·29]; p=0·88). By cytogenetic risk group, in standard-risk patients, 3-year overall survival was 86·4% (95% CI 80·0–90·9) in the lenalidomide group compared with 81·3% (74·2–86·7) in the observation group, and in high-risk patients, it was 74.9% (65·8–81·9) in the lenalidomide group compared with 63·7% (52·8–72·7) in the observation group; and in ultra-high-risk patients it was 62·9% (46·0–75·8) compared with 43·5% (22·2–63·1). Since these subgroup analyses results were not powered they should be interpreted with caution. The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events for patients taking lenalidomide were haematological, including neutropenia (362 [33%] patients), thrombocytopenia (72 [7%] patients), and anaemia (42 [4%] patients). Serious adverse events were reported in 494 (45%) of 1097 patients receiving lenalidomide compared with 150 (17%) of 874 patients on observation. The most common serious adverse events were infections in both the lenalidomide group and the observation group. 460 deaths occurred during maintenance treatment, 234 (21%) in the lenalidomide group and 226 (27%) in the observation group, and no deaths in the lenalidomide group were deemed treatment related. Maintenance therapy with lenalidomide significantly improved progression-free survival in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma compared with observation, but did not improve overall survival in the intention-to-treat analysis of the whole trial population. The manageable safety profile of this drug and the encouraging results in subgroup analyses of patients across all cytogenetic risk groups support further investigation of maintenance lenalidomide in this setting. Cancer Research UK, Celgene, Amgen, Merck, and Myeloma UK.

The identification of oncogenic mutations in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) has led to the development of drugs that target essential survival pathways, but whether targeting multiple survival pathways may be curative in DLBCL is unknown. We performed a single-center, phase 1b-2 study of a regimen of venetoclax, ibrutinib, prednisone, obinutuzumab, and lenalidomide (ViPOR) in relapsed or refractory DLBCL. In phase 1b, which included patients with DLBCL and indolent lymphomas, four dose levels of venetoclax were evaluated to identify the recommended phase 2 dose, with fixed doses of the other four drugs. A phase 2 expansion in patients with germinal-center B-cell (GCB) and non-GCB DLBCL was performed. ViPOR was administered every 21 days for six cycles. In phase 1b of the study, involving 20 patients (10 with DLBCL), a single dose-limiting toxic effect of grade 3 intracranial hemorrhage occurred, a result that established venetoclax at a dose of 800 mg as the recommended phase 2 dose. Phase 2 included 40 patients with DLBCL. Toxic effects that were observed among all the patients included grade 3 or 4 neutropenia (in 24% of the cycles), thrombocytopenia (in 23%), anemia (in 7%), and febrile neutropenia (in 1%). Objective responses occurred in 54% of 48 evaluable patients with DLBCL, and complete responses occurred in 38%; complete responses were exclusively in patients with non-GCB DLBCL and high-grade B-cell lymphoma with rearrangements of and or (or both). Circulating tumor DNA was undetectable in 33% of the patients at the end of ViPOR therapy. With a median follow-up of 40 months, 2-year progression-free survival and overall survival were 34% (95% confidence interval [CI], 21 to 47) and 36% (95% CI, 23 to 49), respectively. Treatment with ViPOR was associated with durable remissions in patients with specific molecular DLBCL subtypes and was associated with mainly reversible adverse events. (Funded by the Intramural Research Program of the National Cancer Institute and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03223610.).

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.

Multiple myeloma (MM) is a haematological lymphoid malignancy involving tumoural plasma cells and is usually characterized by the presence of a monoclonal immunoglobulin protein. MM is the second most common haematological malignancy, with an increasing global incidence. It remains incurable because most patients relapse or become refractory to treatments. MM is a genetically complex disease with high heterogeneity that develops as a multistep process, involving acquisition of genetic alterations in the tumour cells and changes in the bone marrow microenvironment. Symptomatic MM is diagnosed using the International Myeloma Working Group criteria as a bone marrow infiltration of ≥10% clonal plasma cells, and the presence of at least one myeloma-defining event, either standard CRAB features (hypercalcaemia, renal failure, anaemia and/or lytic bone lesions) or biomarkers of imminent organ damage. Younger and fit patients are considered eligible for transplant. They receive an induction, followed by consolidation with high-dose melphalan and autologous haematopoietic cell transplantation, and maintenance therapy. In older adults (ineligible for transplant), the combination of daratumumab, lenalidomide and dexamethasone is the preferred option. If relapse occurs and requires further therapy, the choice of therapy will be based on previous treatment and response and now includes immunotherapies, such as bi-specific monoclonal antibodies and chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy. Multiple myeloma is a haematological lymphoid malignancy involving tumoural plasma cells. In this Primer, Malard et al. discuss the epidemiology, mechanisms, diagnosis and treatments for multiple myeloma.

SWOG S0777, a randomized phase III trial, compared bortezomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone (VRd) with lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rd). This updated analysis includes 460 patients evaluable for survival endpoints: 225 eligible and analyzable patients were randomized to Rd and 235 to VRd. The 6-month induction was six 28-day cycles of Rd and eight 21-day cycles of VRd followed by Rd maintenance for all patients. Median follow up is 84 months. Median PFS is 41 months for VRd and 29 months for Rd: stratified hazard ratio (96% Wald Confidence Interval) was 0.742 (0.594, 0.928) and one-sided stratified log-rank P-value 0.003. Median OS for VRd is still not reached with median OS for Rd being 69 months: stratified hazard ratio (96% Wald Confidence Interval) was 0.709 (0.543, 0.926) and stratified two-sided P-value was 0.0114. Both PFS and OS were improved with VRd versus Rd adjusting for age (P-values: 0.013 [PFS]; 0.033 [OS])). Median duration of Rd maintenance was 17.1 months. The addition of bortezomib to lenalidomide dexamethasone for induction therapy results in a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in PFS as well as better OS. VRd continues to represent an appropriate standard of care irrespective of age.

Background Patients with non–germinal center B-cell-like (non-GCB) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) often exhibit suboptimal responses to standard rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) therapy. Methods This multicenter, phase II study evaluated the safety and efficacy of zanubrutinib, lenalidomide, and R-CHOP (ZR2-CHOP) in newly diagnosed non-GCB DLBCL. Patients received oral zanubrutinib (160 mg twice daily), lenalidomide (25 mg once daily on Days 1–7), and standard R-CHOP every 21 days for up to six cycles. Results A total of 34 patients were enrolled. The median age was 55 years, with 29.4% over 60 years. Double-expressor lymphoma (DEL) was present in 64.7%, and 39.3% were classified as the MCD genetic subtype. The best overall response rate was 100%. Complete response (CR) was achieved in 70.6% of patients at mid-treatment and 94.1% at end-of-treatment. With a median follow-up of 28 months, the 2-year progression-free survival (PFS) rate was 84.8%, and the 2-year overall survival (OS) rate was 96.8%. In this small cohort, PFS benefit appeared consistent across high-risk subgroups, including those with DEL and MCD subtypes. Plasma ctDNA negativity was achieved in 84% (21/25) of evaluable patients during treatment. Grade 3–4 adverse events occurred in 67.6% of patients, primarily hematologic toxicities. Conclusions ZR2-CHOP demonstrated promising efficacy and manageable toxicity in newly diagnosed non-GCB DLBCL. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05200312 (registered January 20, 2022).