Project description: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.
Project description:With increasing number of therapies available for the treatment of multiple myeloma, it is timely to examine the course of patients' journeys. We investigated patient characteristics, treatment durations and outcomes, and symptom burden across the treatment pathway in Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Switzerland and the UK. In total, 435 physicians retrospectively reviewed 4997 patient charts. Profiles of patients diagnosed with multiple myeloma during the last 12 months were similar across countries; bone pain was the most common presentation. Median duration of first-line therapy was 6 months, followed by a median treatment-free interval of 10 months; both these decreased with increasing lines of therapy, as did time to progression. Depth of response, as assessed by the treating physician, also decreased with each additional line of therapy: 74% of patients achieved at least a very good partial response at first line, compared with only 11% at fifth line. Deeper responses were associated with longer time to progression, although these were physician-judged. Toxicities and co-morbidities increased with later treatment lines, and were more likely to have led to discontinuation of treatment. These real-world data provide an insight into patient outcomes and treatment decisions being made in clinical practice.
Project description:Multiple Myeloma (MM) is a hematologic malignancy characterized by a wide clinical and biological heterogeneity leading to different patient outcomes. Various prognostic tools to stratify newly diagnosed (ND)MM patients into different risk groups have been proposed. At baseline, the standard-of-care prognostic score is the Revised International Staging System (R-ISS), which stratifies patients according to widely available serum markers (i.e., albumin, β 2-microglobulin, lactate dehydrogenase) and high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities detected by fluorescence in situ hybridization. Though this score clearly identifies a low-risk and a high-risk population, the majority of patients are categorized as at "intermediate risk". Although new prognostic factors identified through molecular assays (e.g., gene expression profiling, next-generation sequencing) are now available and may improve risk stratification, the majority of them need specialized centers and bioinformatic expertise that may preclude their broad application in the real-world setting. In the last years, new tools to monitor response and measurable residual disease (MRD) with very high sensitivity after the start of treatment have been developed. MRD analyses both inside and outside the bone marrow have a strong prognostic impact, and the achievement of MRD negativity may counterbalance the high-risk behavior identified at baseline. All these techniques have been developed in clinical trials. However, their efficient application in real-world clinical practice and their potential role to guide treatment-decision making are still open issues. This mini review will cover currently known prognostic factors identified before and during first-line treatment, with a particular focus on their potential applications in real-world clinical practice.
Project description:IntroductionBelantamab mafodotin (BM) is a new anti-BCMA antibody-drug conjugate, recently approved for triple-class relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). We assessed real-world outcomes with BM in patients under the Spanish Expanded Access Program (EAP).MethodsWe conducted an observational, retrospective, multicenter study including RRMM patients who received ≥ 1 dose of BM (Nov 2019 to Jun 2021). The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs).ResultsThirty-three patients were included with a median of 70 years of age (range, 46-79 years). Median time from diagnosis was 71 months (range, 10-858 months). Median prior lines was 5 (range, 3-8 lines); 90% of patients were triple-/quad-/penta-refractory; 48% showed high-risk cytogenetics. Median BM doses was 3 (range 1-16 doses), with a median follow-up of 11 months (6-15 months). ORR was 42.2% (≥ VGPR, 18.2%). Median PFS was 3 months (95% CI 0.92-5.08) in the overall population, and 11 months (HR 0.26; 95% CI 0.10-0.68) for patients who achieved ≥ PR. PFS was not significantly different according to age, cytogenetic risk, and prior therapy lines. OS was 424 days (95% CI 107-740). Non-hematological TEAEs (57.6% of patients; 30.3% ≥ G3) included keratopathy (51.5%; 21.2% ≥ G3) and patient-reported vision-related symptoms (45.5%). Keratopathy was resolved in 70.6% of patients. G3 hematological TEAEs was 18.2%, thrombocytopenia (21.2%). Dose reductions due to TEAEs: 30.3%; delays: 36.4%. Treatment discontinuation causes: progression (54.5%), toxicity (non-ocular; 6%/ocular; 6% /ocular + non-ocular toxicity; 3%), death (6%), and patient's decision (3%).ConclusionsBM showed relevant anti-myeloma activity in RRMM with a manageable safety profile. These results corroborate those observed in the BM pivotal trial.
Project description:The objective of our study was to report real-world data on the safety and efficacy of standard-of-care teclistamab in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (MM). This is a multi-institutional retrospective cohort study and included all consecutive patients that received at least one dose of teclistamab up until August 2023. One hundred and ten patients were included, of whom, 86% had triple-class refractory disease, 76% penta-refractory disease, and 35% had prior exposure to B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA)-targeting therapies. The overall response rate (ORR) in our cohort was 62%, with a ≥ very good partial remission (VGPR) rate of 51%. The ORR in patients with and without prior BCMA-targeted therapies was 54% vs 67%, respectively (p = 0.23). At a median follow-up of 3.5 months (range, 0.39-10.92), the estimated 3 month and 6 month progression free survival (PFS) was 57% (95% CI, 48%, 68%) and 52% (95% CI, 42%, 64%) respectively. The incidence of cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and immune effector cell associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS) was 56% and 11% respectively, with grade ≥3 CRS and ICANS noted in 3.5% and 4.6% of patients respectively. 78 unique infections were diagnosed in 44 patients, with the incidence of all-grade and grade ≥3 infections being 40% vs 26% respectively. Primary prophylaxis with intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) was associated with a significantly lower infection risk on multivariate analysis (Hazard ratio [HR] 0.33; 95% CI 0.17, 0.64; p = 0.001).
Project description:Most patients cannot be included in randomized clinical trials. We report real-world outcomes of all Danish patients with multiple myeloma (MM) treated with daratumumab-based regimens until 1 January 2019.MethodsInformation of 635 patients treated with daratumumab was collected retrospectively and included lines of therapy (LOT), hematologic responses according to the International Myeloma Working Group recommendations, time to next treatment (TNT) and the cause of discontinuation of treatment. Baseline characteristics were acquired from the validated Danish Multiple Myeloma Registry (DMMR).ResultsDaratumumab was administrated as monotherapy (Da-mono) in 27.7%, in combination with immunomodulatory drugs (Da-IMiD) in 57.3%, in combination with proteasome inhibitors (Da-PI) in 11.2% and in other combinations (Da-other) in 3.8% of patients. The median number of lines of therapy given before daratumumab was 5 for Da-mono, 3 for Da-IMiD, 4 for Da-PI, and 2 for Da-other. In Da-mono, overall response rate (ORR) was 44.9% and median time to next treatment (mTNT) was 4.9 months. In Da-IMiD, ORR was 80.5%, and mTNT was 16.1 months. In Da-PI, OOR was 60.6% and mTNT was 5.3 months. In patients treated with Da-other, OOR was 54,2% and mTNT was 5.6 months. The use of daratumumab in early LOT was associated with longer TNT (p<0.0001). Patients with amplification 1q had outcome comparable to standard risk patients, while patients with t(4;14), t(14;16) or del17p had worse outcome (p = 0.0001). Multivariate analysis indicated that timing of treatment (timing of daratumumab in the sequence of all LOT that the patients received throughout the course of their disease) was the most important factor for outcome (p<0.0001).ConclusionThe real-world outcomes of multiple myeloma patients treated with daratumumab are worse than the results of clinical trials. Outcomes achieved with daratumumab were best when daratumumab was used in combination with IMIDs and in early LOT. Patients with high-risk CA had worse outcomes, but patients with amp1q had similar outcomes to standard-risk patients.
Project description:Multiple myeloma (MM) is the second most common hematological malignancy, characterized by an abnormal accumulation of plasma cells in the bone marrow. Signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3) is a cytoplasmic transcription factor that modulates the transcription of multiple genes to regulate various principal biological functions, for example, cell proliferation and survival, stemness, inflammation and immune responses. Aberrant STAT3 activation has been identified as a key driver of tumorigenesis in many types of cancers, including MM. Herein, we summarize the current evidence for the role of STAT3 in affecting cancer hallmark traits by: (1) sustaining MM cell survival and proliferation, (2) regulating tumor microenvironment, (3) inducing immunosuppression. We also provide an update of different strategies for targeting STAT3 in MM with special emphasis on JAK inhibitors that are currently undergoing clinical trials. Finally, we discuss the challenges and future direction of understanding STAT3 signaling in MM biology and the clinical development of STAT3 inhibitors.
Project description:Hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) is the preferred treatment for young patients with multiple myeloma (MM), but for older adults there is limited evidence on its effectiveness from clinical trials. We used the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database to identify individuals age 66 years and older with multiple myeloma (MM) who were diagnosed between 2000 and 2007. We used traditional multivariable analysis, propensity score-based analysis, coarsened exact matching, and an instrumental variable analysis to compare survival for individuals who did or did not receive an hematopoietic stem cell transplant. Survival was measured by Cox proportional hazard models. All statistical tests were two-sided. Patients with MM receiving an HSCT were more likely to be white, married, younger, and have fewer comorbidities. Results from all analytic techniques consistently showed that HSCT statistically significantly improved survival, with hazard ratios (HRs) ranging from 0.531 to 0.608 (traditional multivariable analysis: HR = 0.582, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.49 to 0.69; propensity score analysis: HR = 0.572, 95% CI = 0.46 to 0.72; coarsened exact matching: HR = 0.608, 95% CI = 0.49 to 0.76; instrumental variable analysis: HR = 0.531, 95% CI = 0.36 to 0.78, all P values ≤ .001). Overall survival has increased among patients with MM receiving HSCT. This finding was consistent across statistical methods, indicating robustness of our findings.