Li, Quanlin

Abstract Introduction: The CARTITUDE-4 study (NCT04181827), which enrolled patients with lenalidomide-refractory multiple myeloma (MM) after 1–3 prior lines of therapy (pLOT), demonstrated a significant benefit of ciltacabtagene autoleucel (cilta-cel) over established triplet regimens. However, the benefit of cilta-cel for patients with standard-risk cytogenetics remains less defined. Here, we report outcomes in patients with standard-risk cytogenetics from the intent-to-treat and as-treated populations in CARTITUDE-4. Methods: InCARTITUDE-4, patients randomized to the cilta-cel arm underwent apheresis and bridging treatment with either pomalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (PVd) or daratumumab, pomalidomide, and dexamethasone (DPd), followed by lymphodepletion therapy with cyclophosphamide and fludarabine, and then a single cilta-cel infusion. Progression-free survival (PFS) was assessed using a validated computerized algorithm. The intent-to-treat population included 208 patients; 32 patients progressed or died on bridging therapy, resulting in an as-treated population of 176 patients. Patients with high-risk cytogenetics, defined as del(17p), t(14;16), t(4;14), gain/amp(1q) (n=105), or with unknown cytogenetics (n=12), were excluded from the as-treated analysis. The 12-month minimal residual disease (MRD)-negative complete response (CR) was defined per the International Myeloma Working Group criteria as the proportion of participants with CR or better prior to and at 12 months (±3 months), achieving MRD-negative status at 12 months (+3 months) after cilta-cel infusion, as determined by next-generation sequencing (10-5), prior to progressive disease or subsequent anti-myeloma therapy. For the as-treated population, PFS rates were measured from the time of cilta-cel infusion. Results: In CARTITUDE-4, in the intent-to-treat population, at a median follow-up of 33.6 months, patients with standard-risk cytogenetics had a 30-month PFS rate (95% CI) of 71.0% (58.8–80.2) in the cilta-cel arm (N=69) vs 43.2% (31.3–54.5) in the standard-of-care (SOC) arm (N=70). Patients with standard-risk cytogenetics in the as-treated population (n=59) had a 30-month PFS rate of 80.5% (95% CI, 67.2–88.8). In CARTITUDE-1 (NCT03548207), which evaluated cilta-cel in patients with heavily pretreated relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM; ≥3 pLOT), the 30-month PFS rate among patients with standard-risk cytogenetics (negative for del(17p), t(14;16), or t(4;14); n=68) was 59.9% (95% CI, 47.2–70.5). In the CARTITUDE-4 as-treated population with standard-risk cytogenetics, 8 PFS events occurred within 1 year and 4 PFS events beyond 1 year of cilta-cel infusion. Twenty-six patients achieved MRD-negative CR at 12 months after cilta-cel; 100.0% of these patients were progression free at 30 months. Fourteen patients were not evaluable for MRD due to: calibration failure (n=12), no sample availability for testing (n=1), or indeterminate results post baseline (n=1). Conclusions: The PFS rate at 2.5 years for patients with standard-risk RRMM was higher in CARTITUDE-4 compared with CARTITUDE-1, supporting the use of cilta-cel as early as second line in the treatment course. In CARTITUDE-4 (as-treated population), 80.0% of patients with standard-risk cytogenetics were progression free and off treatment at 2.5 years. In patients with standard-risk disease who achieved MRD-negative CR at 1 year, this rate increased to 100.0%. The low rate of progression events in cilta-cel-treated patients with standard-risk cytogenetics shows the profound benefit of a single cilta-cel infusion in this population.

Introduction: Cilta-cel is approved in the US and EU for the treatment (tx) of patients (pts) with len-refractory MM after ≥1 line based on the randomized, phase 3 CARTITUDE-4 trial (NCT04181827). At the first interim analysis (15.9-month [mo] median follow-up), cilta-cel significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) vs SoC (hazard ratio [HR], 0.26 [protocol-specified weighted analysis]; P<0.0001). At the second interim analysis, overall survival (OS) was significantly improved with cilta-cel vs SoC (HR, 0.55; P=0.0009). MRD negativity is a prognostic marker of prolonged survival outcomes for pts with MM. We report MRD negativity, including overall and sustained MRD negativity, overall MRD-negative complete response or better (≥CR), and MRD-negative ≥CR at mo 12, from the prespecified second interim analysis of CARTITUDE-4. Methods: Eligibility criteria were previously described. Pts were assigned 1:1 to cilta-cel or SoC (pomalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone [PVd]/daratumumab, pomalidomide, and dexamethasone [DPd]). Pts in the cilta-cel arm underwent apheresis, received bridging therapy (PVd/DPd), and then a single cilta-cel infusion (target dose, 0.75×106 CAR+ viable T cells/kg) 5-7 days (d) after the start of lymphodepletion. PFS was the primary endpoint; ≥CR rate, overall response rate, overall MRD-negativity rate, and OS were key secondary endpoints. MRD was assessed centrally via next-generation sequencing (clonoSEQ v2.0; Adaptive Biotechnologies). MRD was evaluated at d 56 post infusion in the cilta-cel arm; and in both arms at suspected ≥CR and at 6, 12, 18, and 24 mo post infusion (cilta-cel arm) or cycle 1 d 1 (SoC arm), as well as yearly until progression/start of subsequent therapy in pts in ≥CR. Sustained MRD negativity (10−5) was defined as confirmed MRD negativity ≥12 mo apart and without MRD positivity in between. Pts were evaluable for sustained MRD negativity if they achieved MRD negativity and had ≥1 evaluable MRD sample ≥12 mo after the first negative result or progressed/died/started subsequent tx <12 mo after the first negative result. Results: 419 pts were randomized (intent-to-treat [ITT] set; cilta-cel, n=208; SoC, n=211); 176 pts in the cilta-cel arm received cilta-cel as study tx. As of May 1, 2024, median follow-up for the study was 33.6 mo. At the 10−5 threshold, 145 pts in the cilta-cel arm and 103 in the SoC arm were evaluable for MRD. MRD-negativity rates (10−5) in the ITT set and the MRD-evaluable subset were higher with cilta-cel vs SoC (ITT, 62% vs 18%; MRD evaluable, 89% vs 38%; both P<0.0001). Across subgroups, cilta-cel vs SoC consistently increased overall MRD-negativity rates (10−5). In the ITT set, 48% of the cilta-cel arm achieved MRD negativity (10−5) by d 56, with the MRD-negative rate rising to 60% by 6 mo post cilta-cel infusion. Overall MRD-negativity rates at the 10−6 threshold in the ITT set were higher with cilta-cel vs SoC (57% vs 9%; P<0.0001). In the cilta-cel arm, 119 (57%) pts vs 26 (12%) in the SoC arm achieved overall MRD-negative (10−5) ≥CR (P<0.0001). At the 12-mo MRD assessment, 92 (44%) pts in the cilta-cel arm vs 17 (8%) in the SoC arm (P<0.0001) had MRD-negative (10−5) ≥CR. In pts with MRD-negative (10−5) ≥CR at mo 12, median PFS was not reached (NR; 95% CI, not estimable [NE]-NE) with cilta-cel and 37.8 mo (95% CI, 25.0-NE) with SoC; median OS was NR (95% CI, NE-NE) and NR (95% CI, 37.8 mo-NE), respectively. Sustained MRD-negativity rates (10−5) in the ITT set were 40% in the cilta-cel arm vs 6% in the SoC arm (P<0.0001); among 110 and 26 evaluable pts for sustained MRD, sustained MRD-negativity rates were 75% vs 50% (P=0.0159). Among the 176 pts who received cilta-cel as study tx, overall MRD negativity at 10−5 was achieved by 129 (73%) pts (89% of 145 evaluable pts). Conclusions: At 33.6-mo median follow-up in CARTITUDE-4, cilta-cel vs SoC significantly increased overall MRD-negativity rates >3-fold in the ITT set, with pts achieving MRD negativity rapidly post cilta-cel. The prognostic value of MRD-negative ≥CR at mo 12 was shown, as median PFS was >3 years in pts with MRD-negative ≥CR at mo 12, regardless of tx. These data further underscore the benefit of cilta-cel, which led to significant >3-fold increases vs SoC in rates of MRD-negative ≥CR at any time and at mo 12, and sustained MRD negativity. Our MRD data demonstrate higher rates of deep and sustained MRD negativity achieved with cilta-cel vs SoC in tx of len-refractory MM as early as first relapse.