Explore the vast range of titles available.

Minimal residual disease (MRD) assessment is incorporated in an increasing number of multiple myeloma (MM) clinical trials as a correlative analysis, an endpoint or even as a determinant of subsequent therapy. There is substantial heterogeneity across clinical trials in how MRD is assessed and reported, creating challenges for data interpretation and for the design of subsequent studies. We convened an international panel of MM investigators to harmonize how MRD should be assessed and reported in MM clinical trials. The panel provides consensus on which MM trials should include MRD, the recommended time points for MRD assessment, and expected analytical validation for MRD assays. We subsequently outlined parameters for reporting MRD results implementing the intention-to-treat principle. The panel provides guidance regarding the incorporation of newer peripheral blood-based and imaging-based approaches to detection of residual disease. Recommendations are summarized in 13 consensus statements that should be followed by sponsors, investigators, editors, and reviewers engaged in designing, performing, and interpreting MM trials.

Extramedullary involvement (or extramedullary disease, EMD) represents an aggressive form of multiple myeloma (MM), characterized by the ability of a clone and/or subclone to thrive and grow independent of the bone marrow microenvironment. Several different definitions of EMD have been used in the published literature. We advocate that true EMD is restricted to soft-tissue plasmacytomas that arise due to hematogenous spread and have no contact with bony structures. Typical sites of EMD vary according to the phase of MM. At diagnosis, EMD is typically found in skin and soft tissues; at relapse, typical sites involved include liver, kidneys, lymph nodes, central nervous system (CNS), breast, pleura, and pericardium. The reported incidence of EMD varies considerably, and differences in diagnostic approach between studies are likely to contribute to this variability. In patients with newly diagnosed MM, the reported incidence ranges from 0.5% to 4.8%, while in relapsed/refractory MM the reported incidence is 3.4 to 14%. Available data demonstrate that the prognosis is poor, and considerably worse than for MM without soft-tissue plasmacytomas. Among patients with plasmacytomas, those with EMD have poorer outcomes than those with paraskeletal involvement. CNS involvement is rare, but prognosis is even more dismal than for EMD in other locations, particularly if there is leptomeningeal involvement. Available data on treatment outcomes for EMD are derived almost entirely from retrospective studies. Some agents and combinations have shown a degree of efficacy but, as would be expected, this is less than in MM patients with no extramedullary involvement. The paucity of prospective studies makes it difficult to justify strong recommendations for any treatment approach. Prospective data from patients with clearly defined EMD are important for the optimal evaluation of treatment outcomes.

Since MGUS is generally an asymptomatic condition and the timing of onset prior to iStopMM screening is unknown, we included diagnoses of alopecia both before and after the identification of MGUS. Multivariable logistic regression, adjusted for age and sex, was performed, and multivariate odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and p-values were calculated. [...]the generalizability of these findings is needed in other populations given the ethnic homogeneity in Iceland.

This study aimed to provide real-world evidence on progression risk in patients with high-risk smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM). This retrospective, observational study leveraged data from the Flatiron Health database. Eligible patients had SMM and relevant measures to apply Mayo 2018, International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) 2020, and AQUILA trial risk criteria. Time to progression to active MM (TTP), progression or death (PFS), and death or progression on first-line MM therapy (PFS2) were evaluated using Kaplan–Meier methods and multivariate Cox regression models adjusted for age, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and time from SMM diagnosis to risk classification date. Across the three risk models (Mayo 2018, IMWG 2020, and AQUILA trial), high-risk patients with SMM had 3.0–4.0 times the risk of TTP, 2.1–3.5 times the risk of PFS, and 1.7–3.2 times the risk of PFS2 versus non-high-risk patients ( p  < 0.001 for all comparisons). Similar results were observed when patients with early treatment, early progression, and/or bone disease were excluded. This study demonstrates that high-risk patients with SMM have worse prognoses than non-high-risk patients, regardless of the criteria used, and highlights a need for early intervention testing.

Among patients with smoldering multiple myeloma at high risk for progression, progression-free survival at 5 years was 63.1% with daratumumab monotherapy, as compared with 40.8% with active monitoring.

Multiple myeloma is a malignancy of terminally differentiated plasma cells, and patients typically present with bone marrow infiltration of clonal plasma cells and monoclonal protein in the serum and/or urine. The diagnosis of multiple myeloma is made when clear end-organ damage attributable to the plasma cell proliferative disorder or when findings that suggest a high likelihood of their development are present. Distinguishing symptomatic multiple myeloma that requires treatment from the precursor stages of monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance and smouldering multiple myeloma is important, as observation is the standard for those conditions. Much progress has been made over the past decade in the understanding of disease biology and individualized treatment approaches. Several new classes of drugs, such as proteasome inhibitors and immunomodulatory drugs, have joined the traditional armamentarium (corticosteroids, alkylating agents and anthracyclines) and, along with high-dose therapy and autologous haemopoietic stem cell transplantation, have led to deeper and durable clinical responses. Indeed, an increasing proportion of patients are achieving lasting remissions, raising the possibility of cure for this disease. Success will probably depend on using combinations of effective agents and treating patients in the early stages of disease, such as patients with smouldering multiple myeloma. Multiple myeloma — a malignancy of terminally differentiated plasma cells — is the second most common haematological malignancy. This Primer by Kumar et al . highlights the mechanisms and epidemiology of multiple myeloma, and describes how updates to the diagnostic criteria have impacted patient management.

Advances in the understanding of disease biology, drug development, and supportive care have led to improved outcomes in multiple myeloma. Given that these improvements have been reported in clinical trial and referral center populations, questions remain about the generalizability of this observation to patients treated in the community. Contrasting the overall survival experience of 3783 patients seen at Mayo Clinic and 57,654 patients followed in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program (SEER) between 2004 and 2018, we observed different mortality trends across patient populations and subgroups. Early mortality decreased and estimated 5-year overall survival increased over time in both patient populations. Excess mortality (compared to the general population) declined over time in Mayo Clinic patients and remained largely unchanged in SEER patients. Improvements over time were primarily observed in patients with favorable disease characteristics and older patients with multiple myeloma remain a vulnerable population with significant excess mortality compared to the United States general population. Patients with unfavorable disease characteristics have derived disproportionately less benefit from recent advances in the field. Future efforts need to focus on the development of safe and effective therapies for these patients and on increasing timely access to specialized care for patients in the community.

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.

Multiple myeloma (MM) is a plasma cell disorder that is on the rise throughout the world, especially in the US, Australia, and Western Europe. In the US, MM accounts for almost 2% of cancer diagnoses and over 2% of cancer deaths (more than double the global proportion). Incidence has risen by 126% globally and over 40% in the US since 1990, while global mortality has risen by 94% and US mortality has fallen by 18%. The 5 year survival in the US has more than doubled over the past decades with the introduction of new targeted therapies and transplant techniques. Risk factors for MM include age (average age of diagnosis is 69), race (African Americans are over double as likely to be diagnosed), sex (men are at a 1.5× risk), and family history. Diagnosis includes serum or urine electrophoresis and free light-chain assay but requires bone marrow biopsy. It is distinguished from smoldering myeloma and monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance by a high (>3 g/dL) level of M-protein (monoclonal light chains) and the presence of CRAB (Hypercalcemia, Renal failure, Anemia, Bone pain) symptoms, which include hypercalcemia, renal failure, anemia, and bone pain, suggesting an end-organ damage. International staging system staging involves beta 2 microglobulin and albumin levels, while the revised system considers prognostic factors such as lactate dehydrogenase levels and chromosomal abnormalities. Front-line management includes induction regimen, maintenance therapy and hematopoietic cell transplantation for eligible patients and bisphosphonates or bone-stimulating agents for the prevention of skeletal events. Treatment for relapsed disease includes newly approved monoclonal antibodies like the CD38-targeting daratumumab, proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulating agents, and investigational therapies such as B cell maturation antigen Chimeric antigen receptor T cells.

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.