Banerjee, Rahul

Patients with plasma cell leukemia (PCL) are generally excluded from pivotal T-cell redirecting bispecific antibody (BsAb) trials. We evaluated real-world outcomes in a multicenter retrospective study of 122 patients with primary or secondary PCL across 15 academic centers, categorized as 'active' (≥5% circulating plasma cells within 30 days of BsAb initiation) or 'historical'. In a heavily pretreated population, patients received teclistamab (37%), elranatamab (11%), talquetamab as a line of therapy (Tal LOT, 42%), or talquetamab as bridging therapy to CAR-T (Tal Bridge, 11%). Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) was grade 1-2 in 56% and grade 3-4 in 4%, whereas neurotoxicity was grade 1-2 in 16% and grade 3-4 in 5%. Among 110 evaluable patients, the overall response rate (ORR) was 55%, including 61% with Tal LOT, 58% with Tal Bridge, 46% with elranatamab, and 33% with teclistamab. With a median follow-up of 8.3 months, talquetamab demonstrated superior survival. Tal LOT showed a median progression-free survival (mPFS) of 5.5 months and a median overall survival (mOS) of 11.5 months, and both were unreached in the Tal Bridge cohort. In contrast, teclistamab and elranatamab showed a mPFS of 1.2 and 1.6 months and mOS of 8.1 and 3.6 months, respectively (P=0.007, P=0.023). In active PCL, Tal LOT achieved mPFS/mOS of 6.9/12.2 months versus 0.7/1.4 months with teclistamab and 1.0/3.1 months with elranatamab, respectively (P<0.001, P=0.002). Multivariable analysis associated active PCL with worse survival and Tal LOT with improved outcomes. BsAbs were safe in PCL, with talquetamab showing superior outcomes compared with BCMA-directed BsAbs.

This guideline has been updated. This ASCO Living Guideline is reviewed on an eight-week cycle. Please see the online dynamic version for the latest updates. Living guidelines are developed for selected topic areas with rapidly evolving evidence that drives frequent change in recommended clinical practice. Living guidelines are updated on a regular schedule by a standing expert panel that systematically reviews the health literature on a continuous basis, as described in the ASCO Guidelines Methodology Manual . ASCO Living Guidelines follow the ASCO Conflict of Interest Policy Implementation for Clinical Practice Guidelines . Living Guidelines and updates are not intended to substitute for independent professional judgment of the treating clinician and do not account for individual variation among patients. See appendix for disclaimers and other important information ( Appendix 1 and Appendix 2 ). Updates are published regularly and can be found on the ASCO Publications website .

Abstract Recent therapeutic advances, including bispecific antibodies (bsAbs), have improved outcomes for patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). However, early mortality (EM) remains a significant challenge, even in the era of novel immunotherapies. We conducted a multicenter, retrospective analysis of real-world patients with RRMM treated with commercial bsAbs to evaluate the incidence and causes of EM. Between May 2022 and June 2025, a total of 441 patients were treated across 7 countries. EM, defined as death within 12 months of therapy initiation, occurred in 148 patients (34%), with a median time from bsAb initiation to death of 2.87 months (interquartile range, 1.38-6.85). The leading cause of EM was progressive disease (72%), followed by infection (13%); regardless of the cause of death, 82% had active disease at the time of death. Our findings highlight that despite encouraging efficacy, EM remains high among real-world bsAb recipients, emphasizing the need for improved disease control strategies and supportive care interventions.

This guideline has been updated. This ASCO Living Guideline is reviewed on an eight-week cycle. Please see the online dynamic version for the latest updates. ASCO Guidelines provide recommendations with comprehensive review and analyses of the relevant literature for each recommendation, following the guideline development process as outlined in the ASCO Guidelines Methodology Manual . ASCO Guidelines follow the ASCO Conflict of Interest Policy for Clinical Practice Guidelines . Clinical Practice Guidelines and other guidance (“Guidance”) provided by ASCO is not a comprehensive or definitive guide to treatment options. It is intended for voluntary use by clinicians and should be used in conjunction with independent professional judgment. Guidance may not be applicable to all patients, interventions, diseases or stages of diseases. Guidance is based on review and analysis of relevant literature, and is not intended as a statement of the standard of care. ASCO does not endorse third-party drugs, devices, services, or therapies and assumes no responsibility for any harm arising from or related to the use of this information. See complete disclaimer in Appendix 1 and Appendix 2 (online only) for more . PURPOSE To provide updated guidance regarding the therapy for multiple myeloma. METHODS ASCO and Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario) convened a joint Expert Panel and conducted an updated systematic review of the literature. RESULTS The updated review identified a total of 161 relevant randomized trials. UPDATED RECOMMENDATIONS Daratumumab therapy may be offered to patients with high-risk smoldering myeloma. Quadruplet therapy with daratumumab or isatuximab, combined with bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone, should be offered as initial therapy for transplant eligible patients. They should also be offered at least lenalidomide maintenance, with or without daratumumab, carfilzomib, and/or dexamethasone. Quadruplet therapy with daratumumab or isatuximab, combined with bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone, should be offered as therapy for suitable transplant-ineligible patients. Patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma should be offered triplet therapy or T-cell redirecting therapies according to a set of recommended principles. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/hematologic-malignancies-guidelines .

Abstract Ciltacabtagene autoleucel (cilta-cel) and idecabtagene vicleucel (ide-cel), 2 B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA)–directed chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapies, have transformed outcomes for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma; however, the 6 to 8 weeks manufacturing time risks disease progression or death in up to 10% of patients. Talquetamab, a G-protein–coupled receptor, family C, group 5, member D (GPRC5D)–targeting bispecific antibody, represents a promising option. We performed a multi-institutional retrospective analysis across 20 centers (18 United States, 2 Germany) evaluating talquetamab as a bridging therapy prior to cilta-cel or ide-cel. Among 134 patients receiving talquetamab, 119 proceeded to CAR-T (n = 98 cilta-cel, n = 21 ide-cel). Reasons for not proceeding (n = 15) included progression (n = 7), manufacturing failure (n = 6), or patient decision (n = 2). Median age was 65 years and had median 5 prior lines of therapy. Notably, 85% would not have met CARTITUDE-1/KarMMa eligibility criteria. Talquetamab was administered for a median 23 days. Toxicity was manageable: no grade ≥3 cytokine release syndrome (CRS), 2% grade 3 immune effector cell–associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS) and grade 1 to 2 talquetamab unique toxicities (70% oral, 38% skin, and 17% nail; 60% resolved). Talquetamab achieved 71% response rate. After CAR-T, 88% responded (54% complete response), with low-grade toxicities (2 grade ≥3 CRS, 1 grade 3 ICANS, and 5% grade ≥3 infections). Two cases of facial palsy and 1 acute myeloid leukemia occurred. Talquetamab correlated with sustained soluble BCMA decline and peak CAR-T expansion around day 14. Talquetamab bridging appears safe, enabling the majority of difficult-to-treat patients to successfully proceed to BCMA CAR-T therapy.

Abstract Teclistamab is an anti-CD3-/B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA) bispecific antibody approved for use in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. We undertook a retrospective study of post-approval, real-world outcomes with teclistamab in the US Multiple Myeloma Immunotherapy Consortium. Among 509 patients, 89% would have been ineligible for the MajesTEC-1 trial, primarily due to prior BCMA-directed therapy, cytopenias, or diminished performance status. Cytokine release syndrome occurred in 54% (1.4% grade ≥3) and immune effector cell–associated neurotoxicity syndrome in 11% (2.2% grade ≥3), with no fatal events. Infections occurred in 42% and contributed to death in 5%. Partial response (PR) or better was achieved in 53% and very good PR or better in 45%. With 10.1 months of median follow-up, the estimated median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.8 months and 12-month overall survival was 61%. Independent predictors of less than very good PR and shorter PFS included BCMA-directed chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy in the previous 9 months, high disease burden, lymphopenia, and elevated ferritin. Significance: T cell–engaging bispecific antibodies such as teclistamab represent an important new treatment modality for multiple myeloma and other blood cancers. This study evaluates the real-world safety and efficacy of teclistamab, including its activity in populations not represented in the initial phase I/II study, and identifies clinical variables associated with treatment response. See related commentary by Zweegman et al., p. 542

Abstract Outcomes of bispecific antibodies in patients with renal impairment (RI) are not well characterized, given the exclusion of these patients from clinical trials. Herein, we evaluated patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma and RI treated with standard-of-care teclistamab. RI was defined as creatinine clearance (CrCl) <40 mL/min. CrCl <30 mL/min or dialysis dependence was defined as severe RI. Of the 384 included patients, 81 (21%) had RI, including 45 (18%) with severe RI, and 18 (5%) on dialysis. Patients with RI were more likely to be older (median age, 71 vs 67 years; P = .002) and have a higher median number of previous lines of therapy (7 vs 6; P = .04). Rates and severity of cytokine release syndrome (51% vs 59%; grade ≥3: 1.2% vs 1%) and immune effector cell–associated neurotoxicity syndrome (16% vs 13%; grade ≥3: 2.5% vs 2.6%) were similar in patients with and without RI, respectively. Patients with RI had higher baseline and day 30 post-teclistamab grade ≥3 anemia and grade ≥3 thrombocytopenia. Renal function did not worsen after teclistamab initiation in most patients with RI outside of the context of disease progression. Overall response rate (52% vs 56%; P = .61) and survival outcomes (median progression-free survival, 4.6 vs 6.5 months; P = .62) were comparable in patients with and without RI, respectively, after a median follow-up of 9.9 months. No differences in overall survival or non-relapse mortality were noted. Our findings suggest that treatment with teclistamab is feasible in patients with RI, including those on dialysis, with a similar safety and efficacy profile to patients without RI.