Back to Authors

Cohen, Yaël C.

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9061-7287

Mayo Clinic

Tel Aviv University

Citations 13

The Clinical Characteristics and Outcomes of Multiple Myeloma Patients With Oligo or Non–Secretory Relapse—A Retrospective Cohort Study
Zamir, Itai, Cohen, Inbar , Fridberg, Gil , Shragai, Tamir , Trestman, Svetlana, Ziv‐Baran, Tomer , Shmuel, Ronit, Melamed, Natan, Levy, Shai , Avivi, Irit, Raanani, Pia, Dispenzieri, Angela, Gertz, Morie A., Cohen, Yaël C. , Vaxman, Iuliana , Shragai, Tamir , Levy, Shai , Gertz, Morie A , Vaxman, Iuliana , Luttwak, Efrat , Avivi, I., Raanani, Pia , Dispenzieri, Angela , Gertz, Morie A.

Hematological Oncology | April 7, 2026 | Volume: 44 | Issue: 3 | Pages: No page available

10.1002/hon.70192 Get It

ABSTRACT Oligo‐secretory and non‐secretory MM present a clinical challenge due to the difficulties in initial diagnosis, response to treatment assessment, and relapse detection. They are excluded from most clinical trials, which typically require measurable disease. We describe the characteristics and outcomes of 86 patients with secretory myeloma at diagnosis who developed an OSR, matched 1:1 to a cohort with secretory relapse (SR). With a median follow‐up of 9.3 years, 16.6% (48/289) of evaluable patients developed an OSR. Lower levels of light chains at presentation, and younger age are predictive of an OSR. The median OS since relapse of the OSR group was 4.01 (95% CI 1.625–6.395) versus 3.25 (95% CI 2.255–4.245) years in the SR control group ( p = 0.4). A third of our OSR cohort had a subsequent SR. We did not find any predictive factor for SR after OSR. The median OS of the subgroup of patients who developed a SR after OSR was 3.35 years (95% CI 1.541–5.159), versus 5.8 years (95% CI 2.072–9.528) in the group that remained oligo‐secretory ( p = 0.336). The median TTNT of the SR after OSR group was 1.68 years (95% CI 0.341–0.919) versus 4.58 (95% CI not reached‐not reached) in the group that remained oligo‐secretory ( p < 0.001).
Extramedullary Disease—Achilles Heel in Myeloma?
Kumar, Shaji, Richter, Joshua , Cohen, Yaël C. , Ye, J. Christine , Mateos, María‐Victoria, Hungria, Vania, Zamagni, Elena, Hungria, Vânia , Zamagni, Elena , Kumar, Shaji K , Cohen, Yael C , Hungria, Vania , Richter, Joshua , Zamagni, Elena , Kumar, Shaji , Usmani, Saad Z. , Mateos, María‐Victoria

American Journal of Hematology | December 30, 2025 | Volume: 101 | Issue: 3 | Pages: 521-536

10.1002/ajh.70138 Get It

ABSTRACT Despite advances in therapy, extramedullary disease (EMD) remains an aggressive form of multiple myeloma associated with poor outcomes. Patients with true EMD, in which plasmacytomas have become completely independent of bone, have a particularly poor prognosis. The pathogenesis of EMD is driven by complex mechanisms involving loss of adhesion molecules, heterogeneous genetic and epigenetic changes, and a solid tumor‐like architecture within the microenvironment. Although the introduction of advanced imaging techniques and immunotherapy has led to improved detection and more promising outcomes and regimens, respectively, more prospective studies dedicated to true EMD are needed.
Efficacy and safety of talquetamab + teclistamab in patients with Relapsed/Refractory multiple myeloma and extramedullary disease: Updated Phase 2 results from the redirectt-1 study with extended follow-up
Kumar, Shaji, Mateos, María‐Victoria , Ye, J Christine, Magen, Hila , Trudel, Suzanne , Richter, Joshua R. , Chuah, Hun , Yoon, Dok Hyun, Matous, Jeffrey, Dachs, Laura Rosiñol, Onodera, Koichi , Maffucci, Carmela, Heuck, Christoph, Henninger, Todd, O’Rourke, Lisa, Thakkar, Payal, Festa, M, Zhou, Jiangxiu, Takamoto, Mikihiro, Pei, Lixia, Lu, Jiashen, Au, Nicholas T., Krevvata, Maria, Cohen, Yaël C. , Usmani, Saad Z. , Kumar, Shaji , Atrash, Shebli , Quach, Hang , Chu, Michael, Rodríguez‐Otero, Paula , Gatt, Moshe E. , Medvedova, Eva , Raza, Shahzad , Yoon, Dok Hyun , Ishida, Tadao , Scott, Emma , Zhang, Jing , Festa, Mariacristina, Huang, Lin , Lu, Jiashen

Blood | December 5, 2025 | Volume: 146 | Issue: Supplement 1 | Pages: 698-698

10.1182/blood-2025-698 Get It

Abstract Introduction: Patients (pts) with soft tissue plasmacytomas noncontiguous with bone (true extramedullary disease [EMD]) have poor outcomes with standard therapies shown by low overall response rates (ORRs), which are not durable. Talquetamab (Tal; anti-GPRC5D×CD3) and teclistamab (Tec; anti-BCMA×CD3) are first-in-class bispecific antibodies (BsAbs) approved as monotherapies for triple-class exposed (TCE) relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Primary analysis from the RedirecTT-1 (NCT04586426) dedicated phase 2 EMD cohort (March 2025 data cut; median follow-up [mFU] 12.6 mo) showed Tal + Tec elicited an ORR of 78.9% (assessed by independent review committee) and a 12-mo progression-free survival (PFS) of 61.0%. Here, we report updated efficacy, using investigator assessment, and safety results from the phase 2 RedirecTT-1 EMD cohort with Tal + Tec. Importantly, we report EMD location and a novel analysis of tumor burden as a prognostic indicator of ORR. Methods: Pts had TCE RRMM and true EMD defined as ≥1 nonradiated soft tissue plasmacytoma noncontiguous with bone ≥2 cm in 1 dimension (with or without paramedullary plasmacytomas). Nonsecretory/oligosecretory disease was permitted. Prior CAR-T and non-BCMA/-GPRC5D BsAb therapies were permitted. Pts received Tal 0.8 mg/kg + Tec 3.0 mg/kg Q2W, preceded by step-up doses, with a permitted switch to monthly dosing at investigator's discretion after cycle 6 or after cycle 4 with confirmed ≥VGPR. Response was assessed per IMWG; EMD response was assessed by PET-CT or MRI whole-body scans. Tumor burden was assessed by total EMD tumor volume. Results: As of July 2025, 90 pts received Tal + Tec, with a median follow-up of 16.3 mo (range 0.5–23.7). Baseline characteristics were as previously reported; 39% had nonsecretory/oligosecretory disease, 20% had prior anti-BCMA CAR-T therapy, and 9% had prior BsAb therapy (all anti-FcRH5). The median number of plasmacytomas was 2 (range 1–7); 17 (18.9%), 29 (32.2%), and 74 (82.2%) pts, respectively, had ≥1 nodal, organ, or soft tissue EMD, while 11 (12.2%) also had ≥1 additional paramedullary plasmacytoma. Of 268 EMDs across all pts, 95 (35.4%) were nodal EMD, 77 (28.7%) were organ EMD (most commonly liver), and 64 (23.9%) were soft tissue EMD; 32 (11.9%) were paramedullary. Baseline EMD tumor volume was &lt;25 cm2in 43 (47.8%) pts, 25–50 cm2 in 21 (23.3%) pts, and &gt;50 cm2 in 26 (28.9%) pts. Per investigator assessment, ORR (95% CI) was 77.8% (67.8–85.9); 50.0% had a ≥CR. Median duration of response (DOR) was not estimable (NE; 12-mo DOR rate, 60.1%), 12-mo PFS was 55.6%, and median overall survival (OS) was NE (12-mo OS rate 73.8%). ORR was 90.7% (77.9–97.4; ≥CR 60.5%) in pts with EMD tumor volume &lt;25 cm2, 66.7% (43.0–85.4; ≥CR 52.4%) for 25–50 cm2, and 65.4% (44.3–82.8; ≥CR 30.8%) for &gt;50 cm2. Common adverse events (AEs) included CRS (77.8%; no grade [gr] 3/4) and neutropenia (72.2%; gr 3/4 62.2%). Taste changes (78.9%), non-rash skin AEs (68.9%), and nail AEs (55.6%) were all gr 1/2, and rash AEs (30.0%) were mostly gr 1/2. ICANS occurred in 11 (12.2%) pts (gr 3, 1.1%; gr 4, 1.1%). Infections occurred in 72 (80.0%) pts (gr 3/4 40.0%), most commonly upper respiratory tract infection (26.7%; gr 3/4 5.6%); IVIG was highly recommended to prevent and manage hypogammaglobulinemia and infection. Ten (11.1%) pts discontinued Tal + Tec due to treatment-emergent AEs (4 pts due to infections and 6 due to gr 5 AEs). Two pts discontinued Tal only due to AEs. In total, 11 (12.2%) pts had gr 5 AEs (6 due to infections), 6 of which were deemed to be drug related by investigators. Data will be updated with an additional 4 mo of follow-up for the presentation. Conclusions: With longer follow-up in pts with TCE RRMM with true EMD regardless of baseline tumor characteristics, Tal + Tec efficacy exceeded all approved therapies, including T-cell redirecting and cellular therapies, noting limitations of cross-study comparisons. Lower total EMD tumor volume was associated with a higher ORR but low pt numbers in each group and lack of statistical testing limits robust interpretation. The safety profile of Tal + Tec was generally consistent with each monotherapy; AEs were not exacerbated with the combination. These data continue to highlight the clinical benefit of the novel combination of Tal + Tec in pts with true EMD, a population with high disease burden and significant unmet need.
Daratumumab monotherapy versus active monitoring in patients with high-risk smoldering multiple myeloma: Aquila outcomes based on mayo 2018/IMWG 2020 risk stratification, IMWG 2020 plus cytogenetic criteria, and age
Voorhees, Peter M. , Cohen, Yaël C. , Lindsay, Jindriska, Suzuki, Kenshi , Beksaç, Meral , Magen, Hila , Garate, Gonzalo, Theunissen, Koen, Mylin, Anne K., Hallam, Simon , Bringhen, Sara, Uttervall, Katarina , Ye, J Christine, Cowan, Andrew J. , Mateos, María‐Victoria , Goldschmidt, Hartmut , Vieyra, Diego, Raval, Ashta, Sha, Linlin, Rousseau, Els, Dennis, Robyn M., Carson, Robin, Dimopoulos, Meletios Α. , Schjesvold, Fredrik , Hungria, Vânia , Sandhu, Irwindeep , Baker, Ross , Kosugi, Hiroshi , Levin, Mark-David , Stockerl‐Goldstein, Keith , Oriol, Albert , Mikala, Gábor , Špıčka, Ivan , Bringhen, Sara, Puła, Bartosz , Khan, Abdullah , Medvedova, Eva , Moreau, Philippe, Raval, Ashta, Li, Liang , Carson, Robin, Rajkumar, S. Vincent

Blood | December 5, 2025 | Volume: 146 | Issue: Supplement 1 | Pages: 372-372

10.1182/blood-2025-372 Get It

Abstract Introduction : Current standard of care for smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM), an asymptomatic precursor of multiple myeloma (MM), is observation until progression to active MM. Increasing evidence suggests that patients (pts) with SMM at high risk for progression to active MM may benefit from early treatment (tx). In AQUILA, a phase 3 study in pts with high-risk SMM (NCT03301220), daratumumab (Dara) monotherapy significantly reduced risk of progression to active MM or death with a trend of extending overall survival (OS) vs active monitoring (ActMon), with no new safety concerns. Given the evolution in SMM risk stratification, a post hoc analysis was performed to assess outcomes using the IMWG 2020 and IMWG 2020 plus cytogenetic risk models to assess which AQUILA pts benefited most from Dara monotherapy. Safety and efficacy analysis by age and stem cell collection outcomes were also assessed. Methods: Eligible pts with a confirmed diagnosis (≤5 y) of high-risk SMM per IMWG 2014 criteria, defined as clonal bone marrow plasma cells (BMPC) ≥10% and ≥1 risk factor (IgA SMM, serum protein ≥30 g/dL, serum involved:uninvolved free light chain [I/U FLC] ratio ≥8 and &lt;100, immunoparesis with reduction of 2 uninvolved Ig isotypes, and/or clonal BMPC &gt;50% to &lt;60%) at study entry, were randomized 1:1 to receive subcutaneous Dara or ActMon for 39 cycles, 36 months, or until confirmed disease progression (PD), whichever came first. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) assessed by independent review committee, defined as progression to active MM (based on IMWG SLiM-CRAB diagnostic criteria) or death. Secondary endpoints included time to first-line (1L) MM tx and OS. For this post hoc analysis, we assessed outcomes by age, IMWG 2020 high-risk SMM criteria (BMPC &gt;20%, monoclonal spike &gt;2 g/dL, serum FLC ratio &gt;20; ≥2 factors=high risk; also known as the Mayo 2018 or the 20-2-20 criteria), and the IMWG 2020 plus cytogenetic criteria (IMWG 2020 criteria + presence of ≥1 high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities [t(4;14), t(14;16), +1q and/or del13q]; ≥3 factors=high risk). Results : Dara tx showed a PFS benefit across all IMWG 2020 risk subgroups (low: hazard ratio [HR], 0.59; intermediate: HR, 0.70), with the largest benefit in the high-risk subgroup, where the PD/death rate in the ActMon arm was ~1.6-fold that in the Dara arm (62.8% vs 37.5%; HR, 0.36). This benefit of Dara vs ActMon was preserved over time, with 5-year PFS rates of 78.2% vs 71.6%, 56.2% vs 42.9%, and 60.4% vs 23.6% in IMWG 2020 low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups, respectively. There was a positive trend favoring Dara for time to 1L MM treatment across all IMWG 2020 risk groups (low-risk HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.22–1.80; intermediate-risk HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.35–0.92; high-risk HR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.25–0.62). IMWG 2020 plus cytogenetic risk classification results will be available at the time of presentation. When comparing the younger (&lt;65y HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.32–0.79) vs the older (≥65y, HR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.32–0.77) pt population, a PFS benefit was observed regardless of age. Similarity was also observed in TEAE incidence rate when looking into &lt;65, 65 to &lt;75, and ≥75 y subgroups (82.7%, 81.1%, and 87.5% with ActMon; 96.2%, 98.5%, and 95.2% with Dara); however, serious TEAEs were more frequently observed in older ActMon pts (12.2%, 18.9%, and 50.0% with ActMon; 24.8%, 35.8%, and 28.6% with Dara). Across all pts treated/monitored in AQUILA, 23 (11.9%) and 41 (20.9%) pts in the Dara and ActMon arms, respectively, received autologous stem cell transplant as part of their first tx after progressing to active MM, with very limited plerixafor use (Dara, 3 [1.6%] vs ActMon, 9 [4.6%]). Median (range) CD34+ cell yield was 5.0 (2–20)×106 cells/kg body weight among 22 pts in the Dara arm and 5.1 (2–21)×106 cells/kg body weight among 39 pts in the ActMon arm. Conclusions : In this analysis, pts with high-risk SMM from the phase 3 AQUILA study treated with Dara monotherapy experienced long-term PFS benefit across IMWG 2020 subgroups, with the most pronounced benefit in the high-risk subgroup. No notable differences in PFS or safety were observed across age subgroups. Early Dara tx for high-risk SMM did not have a detrimental impact on stem cell yield. Although mature OS analyses are forthcoming, overall, these results further support early intervention with Dara monotherapy vs ActMon among pts with high-risk SMM, regardless of risk stratification criteria used.
Current experiences with teclistamab in patients with multiple myeloma and renal impairment
Cohen, Yaël C. , Pianko, Matthew J. , Faber, Edward A., Mateos, María‐Victoria , Dimopoulos, Meletios Α. , Perrot, Aurore , Leung, Nelson , Nooka, Ajay K.

Expert Review of Hematology | September 29, 2025 | Volume: 18 | Issue: 12 | Pages: 1035-1042

10.1080/17474086.2025.2567296 Get It

Pridopidine for the Treatment of ALS–Improvements in the Subgroup of Definite, Probable, and Early (
Geva, Michal , Meltzer, May, Cohen, Yaël C. , Hand, Randal, Leitner, Melanie , Shefner, Jeremy M. , Oskarsson, Björn , Lichtenstein, Rachel G. , Meltzer, May, Chen, Kelly , Paganoni, Sabrina , Cudkowicz, Merit , Hayden, Michael R.

Neurology | April 7, 2025 | Volume: 104 | Issue: 7_Supplement_1 | Pages: No page available

10.1212/wnl.0000000000211988 Get It

Pridopidine in Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis
Hayden, Douglas, Lai, Po-Ying, Donahue, Rachel, Chen, H.Y., Mathai, Nithya, Lopes, Gabriela, McCaffrey, Alexandra, Scalia, Jennifer , Luppino, Sarah , Lagier‐Tourenne, Clotilde , Sadri‐Vakili, Ghazaleh , Heintzman, Sarah, Sufit, Robert , Szymanski, April, Jenkins, Liberty, Martin, A. D. , Greene, Ericka , Thonhoff, Jason R., Liao, Bing , Whitaker, Charles H. , Clawson, Lora , Uchil, Alpa, Riley, Kristen M., Arneklev, JinAe, Grogan, James , Su, Xiaowei , Mamarabadi, Mansoureh , Malcolm, Amber, Bazan, Tracy, Rad, Nassim, Wang, Leo H. , Piccione, Ezequiel, Thaisetthawatkul, Pariwat , Farmakidis, Constantine , Jabari, Duaa, Pasnoor, Mamatha , Brown, Robert H. , Ghasemi, Mehdi, Houmani, Hajar, Douthwright, Catherine, Daniello, Kate, Suresh, Niraja, Farias, Jerrica, Chen, I-Hweii A. , Steijlen, Kara , Bhavaraju‐Sanka, Ratna, Jacobsen, Bill , Milliard, Jourdan, Bowser, Robert , Deboo, Anahita, Cartwright, Michael S. , Nance, Christopher , Yasek, Julia , Harms, Matthew , Burford, Matthew, Shrilla, David, Jones, Sarah , Solórzano, Guillermo, Li, Xiaoyan , Mahuwala, Zabeen , Kumaraswamy, Vishakhadatta Mathur, Baer, Michael , Bhuvaneswaran, Karthikeyan, Maiser, Sam , Mundwiler, Andrew, Meyer, Jenny, Soliven, Betty , Roos, Raymond P. , Habib, Ali A. , Mozaffar, Tahseen , Korb, Manisha Kak , Mullen, Jeffrey, Stommel, Elijah W. , Carberry, Nathan , Govindarajan, Raghav , Glass, Jonathan D. , Fournier, Christina , Darki, Leila, Rodriguez, Rodrigo , McNeely, Whitney, Diaz‐Abad, Montserrat , Jin, Peter H., Chauhan, Chandana, Bobenhouse, James, Hayat, Ghazala , Bailey, Abbey, Bailey, Jesse, Barlow, Victoria , Bulat, Allison, Changkuon, Genevive, Cirino, Melissa, Deignan, Cristina, Deirmendjian, Emma, Mattos, Annette De, DiStefano, Sofia, Drake, Kristin, Estes, Michaela, Faulconer, Kenneth, Figueroa-Szostek, Precious, Garozzo, Tessa, Hasenoehrl, Meredith Gibbons, Henrique, Jennifer, Henrique, Natalie, Hurwitz, Samuel , Igne, Courtney, Irwin, L. R., Jentoft, Katie, Jordan, Boglarka, Katsovskiy, Igor, Kharakozova, Olga, Kolvek, Taylor, Korin, Alexander, La, Thuong, Li, Haining , Nguyen, Joey, Novak, Ilya, Ortiz, Ricardo, Ostrow, Joe, Pagliaro, Jaclyn , Palillo, Jack, Patel, Payal , Patterson, Janae, Phan, Minh , Popel, Najla , Proueng, Serena, Rosenthal, Jesse, Small, Catherine B. , Tarasenko, Natalia, Thomas, Mirna, Vigneswaran, Prasha, Wahab, Yusra, Whitworth, Isaac, Wright, Spencer, Connolly, Mariah, Santiago, Diana De, Felix, A. John William , Garrett, Karly, Hamilton, Jenny, Khan, Kamran , Lovett, Marlee, Nelson, Linda S., Pabon, Marissa, Rede, Diana, Bolger, Patrick, Fetouh, Ahmed , Woodcook, Joan, Kamp, Cornelia , Kennedy, Julie, McGarry, Andrew , Torti, Margherita , Quintana, Melanie , Saville, Benjamin R. , Detry, Michelle A. , Vestrucci, Matteo, Marion, Joe , Heiman‐Patterson, Terry , Chase, Marianne, Pothier, Lindsay , Harkey, Brittney, Yu, Hong , Sherman, Alexander , Hall, Meghan, Kittle, Gale, Andrews, Jinsy , D’Agostino, Derek, Tustison, Eric, Scirocco, Erica , Alameda, Gustavo, Locatelli, Eduardo, Ho, Doreen , Quick, Adam , Ajroud‐Driss, Senda , Katz, Jonathan, Heitzman, Daragh, Appel, Stanley H. , Shroff, Sheetal , Felice, Kevin J. , Maragakis, Nicholas J., Simmons, Zachary , Olney, Nicholas , Weiss, Michael D. , Fernandes, Joseph Americo, Jawdat, Omar, Owegi, Margaret, Foster, Laura A. , Ilieva, Hristelina , Newman, Daniel S. , Arcila-Londono, Ximena , Jackson, Carlayne E. , Lewis, Richard A. , Fee, Dominic , Elliott, Matthew, Bedlack, Richard , Kasarskis, Edward J. , Elman, Lauren , Rosenfeld, Jeffrey , Walk, David , McIlduff, Courtney, Twydell, Paul, Young, Eufrosina , Johnson, Kristin, Rezania, Kourosh , Goyal, Namita , Benatar, Michael , Jones, Vovanti , Shah, Jaimin , Beydoun, Said R., Wymer, James , Zilliox, Lindsay , Nayar, Shakti, Pattee, Gary L. , Martinez‐Thompson, Jennifer M. , Leitner, Melanie , Chen, Kelly , Goldberg, Y. Paul, Cohen, Yaël C. , Geva, Michal , Hayden, Michael R. , Group, HEALEY ALS Platform Trial Study, Scirocco, Erica , Martinez-Thompson, Jennifer, Simmons, Zachary , Bedlack, Richard S , Walk, David , Wang, Jianing , Mathai, N. M., Kolb, Stephen J. , Szymanski, April L., Martin, Alan, Liao, Bing, Arneklev, JinAe, Malcolm, Amber, Feldman, Eva L. , Statland, Jeffrey , Dimachkie, Mazen M. , Ghasemi, Mehdi , Houmani, Hajar, Pasinelli, Piera , Milliard, Jourdan, Gutmann, Ludwig , Harms, Matthew B. , Diaz, Frank , Shrilla, David, Rakočević, Goran , Quinn, Colin , Borg, David, Bhuvaneswaran, Karthikeyan, Kaur, Jasdeep, Rutkove, Seward B. , Rao, Pooja, Robbins, Nathaniel M. , Granit, Volkan , Chuquilin, Miguel , McNeely, Whitney, Bobenhouse, James, Staff, Nathan P. , Arroyave, Luisa, Bulat, Allison , Changkuon, Genevive, Cirino, Melissa, Deignan, Cristina, Deirmendjian, Emma, Figueroa-Szostek, Precious, Garozzo, Tessa, Henrique, Jennifer, Henrique, Natalie, Hurwitz, Samuel, Irwin, Liam, Kolvek, Taylor, Korin, Alexander, Ostrow, Joe, Palillo, Jack, Phan, Minh, Proueng, Serena, Rosenthal, Jesse, Small, Catherine, Thomas, Mirna, Garrett, Karly, Nelson, Linda, Rede, Diana, Bolger, Patrick, Fetouh, Ahmed, Woodcook, Joan, Kennedy, Julie, Shefner, Jeremy M. , Oskarsson, Björn , Macklin, Eric A. , Chibnik, Lori Beth , McGlothlin, Anna , Berry, James D. , Babu, Suma , Giacomelli, Elisa , Maragakis, Nicholas J. , Mill, Jonathan , Goutman, Stephen A. , Fernandes, J. Americo, Vu, Tuan , Newman, Daniel S., Ladha, Shafeeq , Caress, James B. , Swenson, Andrea , Peltier, Amanda , Johnson, Kristin, Cohen, Jeffrey Allen , Goldberg, Y. Paul, Paganoni, Sabrina , Cudkowicz, Merit

JAMA | February 17, 2025 | Volume: 333 | Issue: 13 | Pages: 1128

10.1001/jama.2024.26429 Get It

ImportanceAmyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a fatal disease. The sigma-1 (σ1) receptor emerged as a target for intervention.ObjectiveTo determine the effects of pridopidine, a σ1-receptor agonist, in ALS.Design, Settings, and ParticipantsPridopidine was tested as a regimen of the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial, a phase 2/3, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, platform trial. The study was conducted at 54 sites in the US from January 2021 to July 2022 (final follow-up, July 14, 2022). A total of 163 participants with ALS were randomized to receive pridopidine or placebo. An additional 122 concurrently randomized participants were assigned to receive placebo in other regimens and included in the analyses.InterventionsEligible participants were randomized 3:1 to receive oral pridopidine 45 mg twice daily (n = 121) or matching oral placebo (n = 42) for a planned duration of 24 weeks.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary efficacy outcome was change from baseline through week 24 in ALS disease severity, analyzed using a bayesian shared parameter model, which has components for function (Revised Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Functional Rating Scale [ALSFRS-R]) and survival that were linked through an integrated estimate of treatment-dependent disease slowing across these 2 components. This was denoted as the disease rate ratio (DRR), with DRR less than 1 indicating a slowing in disease progression on pridopidine relative to placebo. There were 5 key secondary end points: time to 2-point or greater reduction in ALSFRS-R total score among participants with bulbar dysfunction at baseline, rate of decline in slow vital capacity among participants with bulbar dysfunction at baseline, percentage of participants with no worsening in the ALSFRS-R bulbar domain score, time to 1-point or greater change in the ALSFRS-R bulbar domain score, and time to death or permanent assisted ventilation.ResultsAmong 162 patients (mean age, 57.5 years; 35% female) who were randomized to receive the pridopidine regimen and included in the primary efficacy analysis, 136 (84%) completed the trial. In the primary analysis comparing pridopidine vs the combined placebo groups, there was no significant difference between pridopidine and placebo in the primary end point (DRR, 0.99 [95% credible interval, 0.80-1.21]; probability of DRR &amp;lt;1, 0.55) and no differences were seen in the components of ALSFRS-R or survival. There was no benefit of pridopidine on the secondary end points. In the safety dataset (pridopidine, n = 121; placebo, n = 163), the most common adverse events were falls (28.1% vs 29.3%, respectively) and muscular weakness (24.0% vs 31.7%, respectively).Conclusions and RelevanceIn this 24-week study, pridopidine did not impact the progression of ALS.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT04297683, NCT04615923
Phase 3 Randomized Study of Daratumumab Monotherapy Versus Active Monitoring in Patients with High-Risk Smoldering Multiple Myeloma: Primary Results of the Aquila Study
Voorhees, Peter M. , Cohen, Yaël C. , Lindsay, Jindriska, Suzuki, Kenshi , Beksac, Meral, Garate, Gonzalo, Theunissen, Koen, Mylin, Anne K., Bringhen, Sara, Uttervall, Katarina , Pula, Bartosz Michal, Medvedova, Eva , Cowan, Andrew J. , Mateos, María‐Victoria , Goldschmidt, Hartmut , Ahmadi, Tahamtan , Sha, Linlin, Rousseau, Els, Dennis, Robyn M., Carson, Robin, Dimopoulos, Meletios Α. , Schjesvold, Fredrik , Hungria, Vânia , Sandhu, Irwindeep , Baker, Ross , Kosugi, Hiroshi , Levin, Mark-David , Stockerl‐Goldstein, Keith , Oriol, Albert , Mikala, Gábor , Špıčka, Ivan , Bringhen, Sara, Moreau, Philippe, Li, Liang , Rajkumar, S. Vincent

Blood | December 5, 2024 | Volume: 144 | Issue: Supplement 1 | Pages: 773-773

10.1182/blood-2024-201057 Get It

Introduction: High-risk smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM) is an asymptomatic precursor disorder to active multiple myeloma (MM) without approved treatment options. However, recent evidence suggests patients at high risk of progression to MM may benefit from early treatment. Daratumumab (DARA) is a human IgGκ monoclonal antibody targeting CD38 with direct on-tumor and immunomodulatory mechanisms of action. DARA is approved as monotherapy for relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM) and in combination with standard-of-care regimens for RRMM and newly diagnosed MM. Based on the encouraging activity and tolerability observed with DARA monotherapy in patients with intermediate- or high-risk SMM in the phase 2 CENTAURUS study, the phase 3 AQUILA study sought to determine if DARA could delay progression to MM versus active monitoring. Here we report the primary analysis from the AQUILA study. Methods: Eligible patients had a confirmed diagnosis of high-risk SMM for ≤5 years, defined as clonal bone marrow plasma cells (BMPCs) ≥10% and ≥1 risk factor (serum M protein ≥30 g/L, IgA SMM, immunoparesis with reduction of 2 uninvolved Ig isotypes, serum involved:uninvolved free light chain ratio ≥8 and &lt;100, and/or clonal BMPCs &gt;50% to &lt;60%). Focal and lytic lesion assessment was performed in screening by CT and MRI and centrally reviewed prior to study enrollment. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive DARA SC versus active monitoring. DARA (QW in Cycles 1 and 2, Q2W in Cycles 3-6, and Q4W thereafter) was given in 28-day cycles until cycle 39, 36 months, or disease progression, whichever came first. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), defined as progression to active MM as assessed by an independent review committee and according to IMWG diagnostic criteria for MM (SLiM-CRAB) or death. Major secondary endpoints included overall response rate (ORR), PFS on first-line MM treatment (PFS2), and overall survival (OS). Results: A total of 390 patients (DARA, n = 194; active monitoring, n = 196) were randomized. Median (range) age (64 [31-86] years) and time from initial SMM diagnosis to randomization (0.72 [0-5.0] years) were balanced between treatment groups. Median treatment duration in the DARA group was 38 cycles (35.0 months). At a median (range) follow-up of 65.2 (0-76.6) months, PFS was significantly improved with DARA versus active monitoring (HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.36-0.67; P &lt;0.0001). Median PFS was not reached in the DARA group versus 41.5 months for active monitoring; estimated 60-month PFS rates were 63.1% versus 40.8%, respectively. Prespecified analyses showed generally consistent PFS improvement with DARA versus active monitoring across subgroups. ORR was 63.4% with DARA versus 2.0% with active monitoring (P &lt;0.0001). As of the clinical cutoff, 64 (33.0%) patients in the DARA group and 102 (52.0%) patients in the active monitoring group had started first-line MM treatment. Median time from randomization to the date of first-line MM treatment was not reached with DARA versus 50.2 months with active monitoring (HR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.33-0.62; nominal P &lt;0.0001). There was a positive trend in favor of DARA for PFS2 (HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.35-0.96) and OS (60-month OS rates: DARA, 93.0%; active monitoring, 86.9%; HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.27-0.98). A total of 41 deaths were observed, 15 for the DARA group and 26 for the active monitoring group. Grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in 40.4% and 30.1% of patients in the DARA and active monitoring groups, respectively. The most common (≥5% in either group) grade 3/4 TEAE was hypertension (DARA, 5.7%; active monitoring, 4.6%). The frequency of TEAEs leading to DARA discontinuation was low (5.7%), as was the incidence of fatal TEAEs in both groups (DARA, 1.0%; active monitoring, 2.0%). Conclusions: DARA monotherapy was well tolerated and demonstrated a clinically meaningful and significant benefit in preventing or delaying progression to active MM compared with active monitoring in patients with high-risk SMM. ORR was significantly higher and time to first-line MM treatment was prolonged with DARA compared with active monitoring. This was accompanied by positive trends for PFS2 and OS in favor of DARA. These results strongly support the benefit of early intervention with DARA monotherapy versus active monitoring, the current standard of care, in patients with high-risk SMM.