Back to Authors

Hungria, Vânia

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4327-1957

Mayo Clinic

São Germano Oncologia

Citations 27

Updated Analysis of Bellini, a Phase 3 Study of Venetoclax or Placebo in Combination with Bortezomib and Dexamethasone in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma
Rubia, Javier de la , Popat, Rakesh , Gasparetto, Cristina , Suzuki, Kenshi , Kim, Inho , Punnoose, Elizabeth A. , Hong, Wan‐Jen , Sood, Anjla, Jalaluddin, Muhammad, Ward, James E., Maciag, Paulo , Kumar, Shaji , Moreau, Philippe , Harrison, Simon J , Cavo, Michèle , Popat, Rakesh , Hungria, Vânia , Salwender, Hans Jürgen , Gay, Francesca , Mikala, Gábor , Jalaluddin, Muhammad, Ross, Jeremy A.

Blood | November 14, 2019 | Volume: 134 | Issue: Supplement_1 | Pages: 1888-1888

10.1182/blood-2019-126015 Get It

Background: Venetoclax (Ven) is a highly selective, potent, oral BCL-2 inhibitor that induces apoptosis in multiple myeloma (MM) cells and has shown synergistic activity with the proteasome inhibitor (PI) bortezomib (B) and dexamethasone (d). Ven ± d had encouraging clinical efficacy in both t(11;14) MM and in pts irrespective of genetic background when administered with B, with a tolerable safety profile in Phase 1 studies. Here, we provide updated efficacy and safety of Ven vs placebo (Pbo) + Bd in pts with relapsed/refractory (RR) MM, including subgroup analyses, in the BELLINI study. Methods: BELLINI (NCT02755597) was a Phase 3, randomized, double-blind, multicenter study of Ven or Pbo + Bd in pts with RRMM who received 1 - 3 prior therapies and were either sensitive or naïve to PIs. Pts were randomized 2:1 to receive Ven 800 mg/day or Pbo + Bd. Cycles 1-8 were 21-day with B 1.3 mg/m2 on Days 1, 4, 8, 11 + d 20 mg on Days 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, 12. Cycles 9+ were 35-day with B 1.3 mg/m2 on Days 1, 8, 15, 22 + d 20 mg Day 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16, 22, 23. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) by independent review committee (IRC). Results: A total of 291 pts were randomized, 194 to the Ven arm and 97 to the Pbo arm. Median age was 66 (range, 36 - 87); 53% had ISS II/III disease; 54% received 2 or 3 prior lines of therapy; 59% had prior stem cell transplant; 70% had prior PI, 68% had prior immunomodulatory drug, 41% had both. Among pts with evaluable results, 18% had high-risk cytogenetics, 13% had MM positive for t(11;14), and 79% had high levels of BCL-2 protein by immunohistochemistry (IHC). In the primary endpoint analysis per IRC, the median PFS was 22.4 months (m) in Ven vs 11.5 m in Pbo (HR=0.630, p=0.01), with a median follow-up of 18.7 m (as of 26 Nov 2018). As of updated analysis based on a data cut-off of 18 March 2019, the median PFS (per investigator [INV]) was 22.9 m in Ven vs 11.4 m in Pbo (HR=0.587, p=0.001; Table 1), with a median follow-up of 22.7 m. Per INV, higher overall response (ORR, 84% vs 70%, p=0.009) and very good partial or better response (≥VGPR, 61% vs 40%, p<0.001; Table 2) rates were observed in Ven vs Pbo. Minimal residual disease negativity rate (by next-generation sequencing) was also higher in the Ven arm vs Pbo (MRD- [10-5], 13% vs 1%). Median duration of response was 23.4 m for Ven and 12.8 m for Pbo. In the overall population, median overall survival (OS) was not reached in either arm but continued to favor Pbo (HR 1.474, 95% CI=0.870-2.498). A total of 70 deaths have been reported, 51 (26%) in the Ven arm and 19 (20%) in the Pbo arm. In the safety population (N=289), the most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs; Ven/Pbo) were diarrhea (59%/48%), nausea (37%/22%), constipation (35%/31%), and fatigue (31%/32%). The most common Grade 3/4 TEAEs were neutropenia (18%/8%), pneumonia (17%/12%), anemia (16%/15%), thrombocytopenia (15%/30%), and diarrhea (15%/12%); 23%/12% discontinued Ven due to a TEAE. The rates of serious AEs (51%/51%) and serious infections (30%/28%) were comparable between arms. There were 69 deaths in the safety population: in the Ven arm, 14 were treatment-emergent (TE; treatment start to 30 days after discontinuation) and 36 were non-TE (>30 days after treatment discontinuation); in the Pbo arm, 1 was TE and 18 were non-TE. In the t(11;14) subgroup, median PFS has not been reached for pts receiving Ven, but was 9.3 m for Pbo (HR=0.095; per INV). In the t(11;14)-negative (neg) subgroup, median PFS was 22.4 m and 10.7 m for Ven and Pbo, respectively (HR=0.627; per INV). Median OS has not been reached in either arm for the t(11;14) and t(11;14)-neg subgroups, although the HR favored Ven in t(11;14) pts, and Pbo in t(11;14)-neg pts. Analyses indicate that low BCL-2 expression by IHC and high-risk cytogenetics (defined as t(4;14, t(14;16), or del(17p)) were associated with decreased PFS and OS in the Ven arm (Table 1). In the high-risk cytogenetics pts, median PFS was 11.4 m in both arms (HR=0.99), and median OS has not been reached in either arm but favors Pbo (HR=10.6). In the subgroup with low BCL-2 expression by IHC, median PFS was 11.7 m and 17.0 m for Ven and Pbo, respectively (HR=1.42), and median OS was 21.3 m in the Ven arm and not reached in Pbo (HR=4.58). Conclusions: Updated analysis of BELLINI continue to reflect a favorable benefit-risk profile in t(11;14) pts, with meaningful clinical responses and improvement in PFS, as well as a positive trend in OS in this subgroup when treated with Ven + Bd. Disclosures Moreau: Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria. Harrison:Janssen Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; GSK: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: investigator on studies, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Cavo:sanofi: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel accommodations, Speakers Bureau; celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel accommodations, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; bms: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; novartis: Honoraria. De La Rubia:Janssen: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy; AMGEN: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy. Popat:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: travel support to meetings; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Gasparetto:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations, or other expenses paid or reimbursed ; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations, or other expenses paid or reimbursed ; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations, or other expenses paid or reimbursed . Hungria:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Salwender:Amgen: Honoraria, Other: Travel or accommodations; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel or accommodations; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Other: Travel or accommodations; Sanofi: Honoraria, Other: Travel or accommodations; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Travel or accommodations; AbbVie: Honoraria; Janssen Cilag: Honoraria, Other: Travel or accommodations. Suzuki:Ono: Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Gay:Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Mikala:Takeda: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria; AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding. Punnoose:Genentech, Inc.: Employment; Roche: Other: Stock/stock options. Hong:Genentech Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership; Roche: Equity Ownership. Sood:AbbVie: Employment, Other: Stock/stock options. Jalaluddin:AbbVie: Employment, Other: Stock/stock options. Ross:AbbVie: Employment, Other: Stock/stock options. Ward:AbbVie: Employment, Other: Stock/stock options. Maciag:AbbVie: Employment, Other: Stock/stock options. Kumar:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: Venetoclax is a BCL-2 inhibitor that is FDA-approved in some indications. This presentation will focus on venetoclax for treatment of multiple myeloma, which is not an approved indication.
IgM Myeloma: A Multicenter Retrospective Study of 159 Patients
Czepiel, Jacek , Gozzetti, Alessandro , Gustine, Joshua , Hájek, Roman , Jayabalan, David , Laubach, Jacob P. , Lewicka, Barbara , Manasanch, Elisabeth E., Niesvizky, Rubén, Paba‐Prada, Claudia E., Pika, Tomáš, Pour, Luděk , Richardson, Paul G. , Shah, Jatin J., Vij, Ravi , Waszczuk, Anna, Hajek, Roman , Gozzetti, Alessandro , Castillo, Jorge J. , Jurczyszyn, Artur , Crusoé, Edvan de Queiroz , Dávila, Julio , Dispenzieri, Angela , Eveillard, Marion , Fiala, Mark A. , Ghobrial, Irene M. , Hungria, Vânia , Jarkovský, Jiří , Maisnar, Vladimír , Moreau, Philippe , Nahi, Hareth , Reagan, John L. , Richardson, Paul Gerard Guy , Špıčka, Ivan , Gertz, Morie A.

Blood | October 11, 2019 | Volume: 128 | Issue: 22 | Pages: 3276-3276

10.1182/blood.v128.22.3276.3276 Get It

Abstract Introduction: IgM-secreting myeloma is rare, encompassing about 1% of all the myeloma cases. Given its rarity, the characteristics and survival of these patients have not been extensively studied. Therefore, we carried out a multicenter retrospective study in patients with IgM myeloma. Methods: The study protocol was reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board of each participating institution. Clinical data were gathered and included age, sex, hemoglobin, calcium, LDH, estimated glomerular filtration rate (GFR), presence of lytic bone lesions, International Staging System score, cytogenetic abnormalities, final outcome and overall survival (OS) time. OS was defined as the time in months from diagnosis to last follow-up or death. The Chi-square and the rank-sum tests were used to compare categorical and continuous variables, respectively. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate OS and the log-rank waas used to compare groups. The Cox proportional-hazard regression method was used to fit univariate and multivariate survival models, reported as hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). All reported p-values are two-sided, and were considered significant if less than 0.05. Results: A total of 159 patients with IgM myeloma from 20 centers from Europe, USA and Latin America were included in this analysis. Patients were diagnosed between 1996 and 2015. The median age at diagnosis was 65 years (range 37-86 years) with a male predominance (68%). The median serum IgM level was 2510 mg/dl (range 27-12,100 mg/dl) with 25% of patients having a serum IgM within normal limits but an IgM monoclonal spike detectable in serum electrophoresis. Hemoglobin levels <10 g/dl were seen in 49 patients (32%), serum calcium was elevated in 24 (16%), estimated GFR of 60 ml/min or less in 56 (37%), lytic lesions were detected in 86 (58%), and serum LDH was elevated in 28 (24%). ISS scores of 1, 2 and 3 were seen in 53 (36%), 63 (43%) and 31 (21%) of patients, respectively. Although immunohistochemistry and/or flow cytometry data were limited, CD20 expression was seen in 15/26 (58%) and cyclin D1 in 10/15 (67%) patients. The most common cytogenetic abnormalities were t(11;14) in 26/67 (39%), del13q in 25/76 (33%) and del17p in 6/76 (8%) patients. 149 patients (94%) received at least one line of systemic therapy for myeloma of which 13 (9%) received rituximab as part of initial therapy. After a median follow-up of 47 months, 74 patients (47%) have died. The median OS was 62 months (95% CI 51-79 months). Cause of death was known in 38 patients, and the most common was myeloma progression (74%). IN the univariate analysis, prognostic factors associated with a worse OS were age (HR 1.03, 95% CI 1.01-1.06; p=0.01) and ISS score (ISS 2: HR 1.43, 95% CI 0.83-2.48; p=0.2, and ISS 3: HR 3.03, 95% CI 1.54-5.98; p=0.001, using ISS 1 as reference group), while male sex was associated with a better OS (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.34-0.90; p=0.02). Hemoglobin, calcium, estimated GFR and lytic lesions were not associated with OS. In the multivariate analysis, male sex was associated with a better OS (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.35-0.95; p=0.03) and ISS with worse OS (ISS 2: HR 1.57, 95% CI 0.89-2.74; p=0.12, and ISS 3: HR 2.76, 95% CI 1.38-5.55; p=0.004, using ISS 1 as reference group). Conclusion: Patients with IgM myeloma apparently present with similar clinical characteristics as patients with non-IgM myeloma. Pathologically, CD20 and cyclin D1 expression is common. The most common cytogenetic abnormalities identified were t(11;14) and del13q. Survival does not appear shorter than non-IgM myeloma patients, and the ISS appears to have similar prognostic value. Disclosures Castillo: Millennium: Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; Otsuka: Consultancy; Biogen: Consultancy; Abbvie: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria. Ghobrial:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Noxxon: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria. Hájek:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy. Hungria:International Myeloma Foundation Latin America: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Bristol: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Niesvizky:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Reagan:Alexion: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Richardson:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Spicka:Janssen Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millenium: Honoraria. Gertz:Celgene: Honoraria; Med Learning Group: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Research to Practice: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Alnylam Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Prothena Therapeutics: Research Funding; Ionis: Research Funding; NCI Frederick: Honoraria; Sandoz Inc: Honoraria; GSK: Honoraria; Annexon Biosciences: Research Funding.
PF596 EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF DARATUMUMAB, BORTEZOMIB, AND DEXAMETHASONE (D‐VD) IN RELAPSED OR REFRACTORY MULTIPLE MYELOMA (RRMM): UPDATED SUBGROUP ANALYSIS OF CASTOR BASED ON CYTOGENETIC RISK
Spencer, Andrew , Lentzsch, Suzanne , Spicka, I., Lauri, Birgitta, Lee, J.‐J., Nooka, A., Munder, Markus , Lee, C., Barreto, Wolney, Min, Chang‐Ki , Chanan‐Khan, A.A., Horvath, Noemi , Capra, Marcelo , Ovilla, Roberto, Jo, Jin-Hyeong, Shin, Ho‐Jin , Sonneveld, Pieter , Soong, David, Casneuf, Tineke, Ukropec, Jon, Qi, Ming , Mateos, M.‐V., Weisel, Katja C , Avet‐Loiseau, Hervé , Mark, Tomer M , Spicka, I., Masszi, Tamás , Levin, Mark-David , Bosi, Alberto , Hungria, Vânia , Cavo, Michèle , Quach, Hang , Corradini, Paolo , Beksaç, Meral , Chiu, C., Amin, H., Qi, M.

HemaSphere | June 17, 2019 | Volume: 3 | Issue: S1 | Pages: 251

10.1097/01.hs9.0000560672.85259.7d Get It

Background:Patients (pts) with multiple myeloma associated with high cytogenetic risk abnormalities have poor outcomes. In CASTOR, D‐Vd prolonged progression‐free survival (PFS) vs bortezomib and dexamethasone (Vd) alone, and exhibited a manageable safety profile in pts with RRMM. We conducted a subgroup analysis of D‐Vd vs Vd in CASTOR, based on cytogenetic risk.Aims:The purpose of this analysis was to determine the efficacy and safety of D‐Vd in CASTOR based on cytogenetic risk status.Methods:Eligible pts received ≥1 prior line of therapy. Cytogenetic risk was based on a combined analysis of next‐generation sequencing (NGS) and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH)/karyotype testing. High‐risk pts had t(4;14), t(14;16), or del17p abnormalities. Standard (std)‐risk pts were confirmed negative for all 3 abnormalities. Minimal residual disease (MRD; 10–5) was assessed via NGS using clonoSEQ® assay V2.0.Results:In CASTOR (D‐Vd, n = 251; Vd, n = 247), high‐risk was confirmed in 26.7% and 25.9% of pts in the D‐Vd and Vd groups, respectively. At a median follow up of 40.0 months (mo), D‐Vd prolonged PFS vs Vd in pts with high‐ (median 13.4 vs 7.2 mo; HR, 0.40 [95% CI, 0.24–0.65]; P = 0.0002) or std‐risk (median 18.4 vs 6.8 mo; HR, 0.28 [95% CI, 0.20–0.37]; P <0.0001). Higher ORR was seen with D‐Vd vs Vd (high risk: 84.8% vs 60.0%; P = 0.0226; std risk: 85.4% vs 65.0%; P <0.0001), including deep responses of ≥CR (high risk: 33.3% vs 8.3%; std risk: 29.9% vs 10.2%) and ≥VGPR (high risk: 65.2% vs 35.0%; P = 0.0049; std risk: 64.3% vs 28.0%; P <0.0001). Higher rates of MRD negativity (high risk: 17.9% vs 0%; P = 0.0003; std risk: 13.3% vs 2.4%; P = 0.0003), and sustained MRD negativity for ≥6 mo (high risk: 16.4% vs 0%; P = 0.0006; std risk: 6.1% vs 1.8%; P = 0.0859) and ≥12 mo (high risk: 7.5% vs 0%; P = 0.0581; std risk: 1.8% vs 0%; P = 0.2477) were seen with D‐Vd vs Vd. D‐Vd significantly prolonged PFS vs Vd in pts with one prior line of therapy only (high risk: median 20.1 vs 8.4 mo; HR, 0.30 [95% CI, 0.14–0.64]; P = 0.0012; std risk: median 32.6 vs 7.9 mo; HR, 0.18 [95% CI, 0.11–0.29]; P <0.0001; Figure). Additionally, D‐Vd significantly prolonged PFS2 (high risk: median 27.9 vs 18.6 mo; HR, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.37–0.94]; P = 0.0258; std risk: median 40.1 vs 21.6 mo; HR, 0.43 [95% CI, 0.32–0.59]; P <0.0001) regardless of cytogenetic risk status.Additional data including safety analyses will be presented.Summary/Conclusion:Adding daratumumab to Vd demonstrates significant efficacy in pts with high‐risk RRMM including PFS2. Among high‐risk RRMM pts, MRD negativity was only achieved with D‐Vd. These findings support use of D‐Vd for high‐risk RRMM. NCT02136134image
Efficacy of daratumumab in combination with lenalidomide plus dexamethasone (DRd) or bortezomib plus dexamethasone (DVd) in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) based on cytogenetic risk status.
Leiba, Merav , Suzuki, Kenshi , Kumar, Shaji , Lentzsch, Suzanne , Hájek, Roman , Sonneveld, Pieter , Wu, Kaida, Qin, Xiang , Soong, David, Qi, Ming , Schecter, Jordan M. , Hajek, Roman , Weisel, Katja C , Miguel, Jesús F. San , Cook, Gordon , Cavo, Michèle , Avet‐Loiseau, Hervé , Quach, Hang , Hungria, Vânia , Chiu, Christopher, Dimopoulos, Meletios Α.

Journal of Clinical Oncology | September 6, 2018 | Volume: 35 | Issue: 15_suppl | Pages: 8006-8006

10.1200/jco.2017.35.15_suppl.8006 Get It

8006 Background: In 2 randomized phase 3 trials of RRMM patients (pts), DRd (POLLUX) or DVd (CASTOR) significantly improved PFS and deepened responses compared with Rd or Vd alone, respectively. The novel mechanism of action of daratumumab (D) may improve the poor prognosis associated with high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities in RRMM. Therefore, we examined the efficacy of DRd and DVd among RRMM pts with standard (std) or high cytogenetic risk status. Methods: Bone marrow aspirates were collected at screening and assessed centrally via next generation sequencing (NGS). Pts with high-risk cytogenetics included those who had ≥1 of the following abnormalities: t(4;14), t(14;16), or del17p; std-risk pts were defined as those confirmed negative for these abnormalities. Efficacy analyses included PFS and ORR. Results: Samples from 311/569 pts in POLLUX and 353/498 pts in CASTOR were assessed via NGS. In POLLUX, the median duration of follow-up was 17.3 months. Significantly longer median PFS and numerically higher ORR were observed with DRd vs Rd among high-risk patients, and significant improvements in these outcomes were observed in std-risk patients (Table). In CASTOR, the median duration of follow-up was 13.0 months. Significantly longer median PFS and higher ORR were observed with DVd vs Vd among both high- and std-risk pts (Table). Concordance rates for t(4;14), t(14;16), and del17p were high (88%-98%) between NGS and FISH. Updated data, including subgroup analyses, will be presented. Conclusions: In RRMM pts, the addition of D to standard-of-care regimens improved outcomes regardless of cytogenetic risk status. Targeting CD38 by combining D with Rd or Vd appears to improve the poor outcomes associated with high-risk cytogenetic status. See table. Clinical trial information: NCT02136134 and NCT02076009. [Table: see text]
Phase III randomized controlled study of daratumumab, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (DVd) versus bortezomib and dexamethasone (Vd) in patients (pts) with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM): CASTOR study.
Palumbo, Antonio, Chanan‐Khan, Asher , Mateos, María‐Victoria , Qi, Ming , Schecter, Jordan M. , Amin, Himal, Qin, Xiang , Deraedt, William , Ahmadi, Tahamtan , Spencer, Andrew , Sonneveld, Pieter , Weisel, Katja C , Nooka, Ajay K. , Masszi, Tamás , Beksaç, Meral , Špıčka, Ivan , Hungria, Vânia , Mark, Tomer M , Qi, Ming

Journal of Clinical Oncology | September 6, 2018 | Volume: 34 | Issue: 15_suppl | Pages: LBA4-LBA4

10.1200/jco.2016.34.15_suppl.lba4 Get It

Phase III randomized controlled study of daratumumab, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (DVd) versus bortezomib and dexamethasone (Vd) in patients (pts) with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM): CASTOR study.
Palumbo, Antonio , Chanan‐Khan, Asher , Mateos, María‐Victoria , Qi, Ming , Schecter, Jordan M. , Amin, Himal, Qin, Xiang , Deraedt, William , Ahmadi, Tahamtan , Spencer, Andrew , Sonneveld, Pieter , Weisel, Katja C , Nooka, Ajay K. , Masszi, Tamás , Beksaç, Meral , Špıčka, Ivan , Hungria, Vânia , Mark, Tomer M

Journal of Clinical Oncology | May 11, 2017 | Volume: 34 | Issue: 18_suppl | Pages: LBA4-LBA4

10.1200/jco.2016.34.18_suppl.lba4 Get It

LBA4 Background: Daratumumab (D), a human anti-CD38 IgGκ mAb, induces deep and durable responses with a favorable safety profile in RRMM pts. We report a pre-specified interim analysis of the first randomized controlled study of D (CASTOR; NCT02136134). Methods: Pts with ≥1 prior line of therapy were randomized (1:1) to 8 cycles (q3w) of bortezomib (V)/dexamethasone (d) (V: 1.3 mg/m2sc on Days 1, 4, 8, 11; d: 20 mg po on Days 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, 12) ± D (16 mg/kg iv qw in Cycles 1-3, Day 1 of Cycles 4-8, then q4w until progression). Primary endpoint was PFS. Results: 498 pts (DVd, 251; Vd, 247) were randomized. Baseline demographics and disease characteristics were well balanced. Pts received a median of 2 prior lines of therapy (range 1-10). 66% received prior V; 76% received prior IMiD; 48% received prior PI and IMiD; 33% were IMiD-refractory; 32% were refractory to last line of prior therapy. With median follow-up of 7.4 months, D significantly improved median PFS (61% reduction in risk of progression) and TTP for DVd vs Vd (Table). D significantly increased ORR (83% vs 63%, P <0.0001), and doubled rates of ≥VGPR (59% vs 29%, P <0.0001), and ≥CR (19% vs 9%, P= 0.0012) for DVd vs Vd, respectively; median duration of response was NR vs 7.9 months, respectively. Most common (>25%) AEs (DVd/Vd) were thrombocytopenia (59%/44%), peripheral sensory neuropathy (47%/ 38%), diarrhea (32%/22%) and anemia (26%/31%). Most common grade 3/4 AEs (>10%) were thrombocytopenia (45%/33%), anemia (14%/16%), neutropenia (13%/4%). 7%/9% of pts discontinued due to a TEAE. D-associated infusion-related reactions (45% of pts) mostly occurred during the first infusion; most were grade 1/2 (grade 3/4, 9%/0%). Conclusions: D significantly improved PFS, TTP, and ORR in combination with Vd vs Vd alone. DVd doubled both VGPR and sCR/CR rates vs Vd alone. Safety of DVd is consistent with the known safety profile of D and Vd. The addition of D to Vd should be considered a new standard of care for RRMM pts currently receiving Vd alone. Clinical trial information: NCT02136134. [Table: see text]
IgM myeloma: A multicenter retrospective study of 134 patients
Castillo, Jorge J. , Brožová, Lucie , Czepiel, Jacek , Dávila, Julio , Ghobrial, Irene M. , Gozzetti, Alessandro , Gustine, Joshua , Hájek, Roman , Jayabalan, David , Laubach, Jacob P. , Lewicka, Barbara , Maisnar, Vladimír , Manasanch, Elisabet E. , Moreau, Philippe , Nahi, Hareth , Niesvizky, Rubén, Paba‐Prada, Claudia E., Pika, Tomáš, Pour, Luděk , Reagan, John L. , Richardson, Paul G. , Shah, Jatin J., Špıčka, Ivan , Vij, Ravi , Jurczyszyn, Artur , Crusoé, Edvan de Queiroz , Dispenzieri, Angela , Eveillard, Marion , Fiala, Mark A. , Hungria, Vânia , Jarkovský, Jiří , Morgan, Elizabeth A. , Richardson, Paul Gerard Guy , Waszczuk‐Gajda, Anna , Gertz, Morie A. , Hajek, Roman , Moreau, Philippe , Castillo, Jorge J , Ghobrial, Irene M , Gozzetti, Alessandro , Nahi, Hareth

American Journal of Hematology | April 6, 2017 | Volume: 92 | Issue: 8 | Pages: 746-751

10.1002/ajh.24753 Get It

AbstractIgM myeloma is a rare hematologic malignancy for which the clinicopathological features and patient outcomes have not been extensively studied. We carried out a multicenter retrospective study in patients with diagnosis of IgM myeloma defined by >10% marrow involvement by monoclonal plasma cells, presence of an IgM monoclonal paraproteinemia of any size, and anemia, renal dysfunction, hypercalcemia, lytic lesions and/or t(11;14) identified by FISH. A total of 134 patients from 20 centers were included in this analysis. The median age at diagnosis was 65.5 years with a male predominance (68%). Anemia, renal dysfunction, elevated calcium and skeletal lytic lesions were found in 37, 43, 19, and 70%, respectively. The median serum IgM level was 2,895 mg dL−1 with 19% of patients presenting with levels >6,000 mg dL−1. International Staging System (ISS) stages 1, 2, and 3 were seen in 40 (33%), 54 (44%), and 29 (24%) of patients, respectively. The malignant cells expressed CD20 (58%) and cyclin D1 (67%), and t(11;14) was the most common cytogenetic finding (39%). The median overall survival (OS) was 61 months. Higher ISS score was associated with worse survival (P = 0.02). Patients with IgM myeloma present with similar characteristics and outcomes as patients with more common myeloma subtypes.