Citations

Abstract Introduction Lenalidomide-based therapies are a standard of care for patients with newly diagnosed, transplant-ineligible MM. Daratumumab (DARA) is a human, CD38-targeted, IgG1κ monoclonal antibody which has single-agent activity in heavily pretreated MM patients. As previously reported in 3 phase 3 studies, the addition of DARA to standards of care in both relapsed refractory (D-Rd, DARA plus bortezomib and dexamethasone [D-Vd]) or transplant-ineligible NDMM (DARA plus bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone [D-VMP]) resulted in a ≥50% reduction in the risk of disease progression or death (Palumbo A, et al. N Engl J Med 2016;375:754-766; Dimopoulos MA, et al. N Engl J Med 2016;375:1319-1331; Mateos MV, et al. N Engl J Med 2018;378:518-528). Of these, the POLLUX study with D-Rd showed the greatest benefit with a 63% reduction in risk of disease progression or death in patients with MM who had at least one prior line of therapy. Based on the efficacy and tolerable safety profile of D-Rd, we conducted a phase 3 study (MAIA) to evaluate D-Rd vs Rd in transplant-ineligible NDMM. Here we report the prespecified interim analysis of the MAIA study. Methods Patients ineligible for high-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell transplantation due to age ≥65 years or comorbidities were randomized 1:1 to Rd ± DARA. Stratification was based on International Staging System stage (ISS [I, II, III]), region (North America vs other), and age (<75 vs ≥75 years). All patients received 28-day cycles of treatment with Rd ± DARA. R: 25 mg (oral) QD on Days 1-21; d: 40 mg (oral) on Days 1, 8, 15 and 22. In the D-Rd arm, DARA was given at 16 mg/kg (intravenously) QW for Cycles 1-2, Q2W for Cycles 3-6, and Q4W thereafter. In both arms, patients were treated until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Key secondary endpoints included overall response rate (ORR), minimal residual disease (MRD)-negativity rate (10-5 sensitivity, clonoSEQ® version 2.0), and safety. Results This international study randomized 737 patients (368 to D-Rd; 369 to Rd) from 14 countries. Key baseline characteristics were well balanced between the two arms. The median (range) age was 73 (45-90) years with 44% of patients ≥75 years, and 52% were male. Two thirds of patients had ECOG scores ≥1: ECOG score 0, 34%; 1, 50%; ≥2, 17%. Overall, 27%, 43%, and 29% were ISS stage I, II, and III, respectively. Of 642 patients evaluable for FISH/karyotyping analysis, 86% and 14% were standard and high cytogenetic risk, respectively. The prespecified interim analysis occurred after 239 PFS events on 24 September 2018 with a median follow up of 28 months. For the primary endpoint, the hazard ratio was 0.55 (95% CI, 0.43 to 0.72; P <0.0001), representing a 45% reduction in the risk of progression or death in patients treated with D-Rd (Figure). The median PFS for the Rd arm was 31.9 months and not reached for the D-Rd arm. Adding DARA to Rd resulted in deeper responses with a complete response (CR) or better rate of 47.6% in the D-Rd arm compared with 24.7% in the Rd arm (odds ratio [OR] 2.75, 95% CI, 2.01 to 3.76; P <0.0001). The very good partial response (VGPR) or better rate was 79.3% in the D-Rd arm compared with 53.1% in the Rd arm (OR 3.4, 95% CI, 2.45 to 4.72; P <0.0001). A total of 19% of patients have died and the HR for OS was 0.78 (95% CI, 0.56 to 1.1); follow-up is ongoing. Higher rates (5% or more difference) of grade 3/4 pneumonia, neutropenia, and leukopenia were observed in the D-Rd arm. The safety profile is consistent with previously reported DARA studies. The complete topline data set will be presented with additional efficacy endpoints, including MRD negativity rate. Conclusion The addition of DARA to Rd in patients with transplant-ineligible NDMM significantly reduced the risk of progression or death by 45%. There are no new safety signals using DARA plus Rd in NDMM. These data together with the phase 3 ALCYONE study (D-VMP vs VMP) support the addition of DARA to standard of care combinations in patients with NDMM ineligible for transplant. Disclosures Facon: Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kumar:KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Plesner:Celgene: Other: Independent Response Assessment Comittee; Janssen: Consultancy. Orlowski:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kite Pharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi-Aventis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BioTheryX: Research Funding; Spectrum Pharma: Research Funding. Moreau:Abbvie: 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; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Bahlis:Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Hulin:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding. Goldschmidt:Adaptive Biotechnology: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: 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; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Chugai: Honoraria, Research Funding; Mundipharma: Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; ArtTempi: Honoraria. O'Dwyer:Janssen: Consultancy. Perrot:Janssen: Consultancy, Equity Ownership, Honoraria. Venner:Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria. Weisel:Celgene: Consultancy; Angeb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Juno: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol Myers SquibbMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Ahmadi:Genmab: Employment, Equity Ownership. Chiu:Janssen Research & Development, LLC: Employment, Equity Ownership. Wang:Janssen Research & Development, LLC: Employment. Van Rampelbergh:Janssen: Employment. Uhlar:Janssen: Employment. Kobos:Janssen Research & Development: Employment. Qi:Janssen Research & Development, LLC: Employment. Usmani:Abbvie, Amgen, Celgene, Genmab, Merck, MundiPharma, Janssen, Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Merck, Pharmacyclics,Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, Takeda: Research Funding.

The NCCN Guidelines for Multiple Myeloma provide recommendations for diagnosis, workup, treatment, follow-up, and supportive care for patients with monoclonal gammopathy of renal significance, solitary plasmacytoma, smoldering myeloma, and multiple myeloma. These NCCN Guidelines Insights highlight some of the important updates and changes in the 1.2020 version of the NCCN Guidelines for Multiple Myeloma.

SummaryIbrutinib‐related data in Waldenström macroglobulinaemia (WM) remain sparse, particularly outside of trials. We report on 80 patients [previously treated, n = 67 (84%), treatment‐naïve, n = 13 (16%)] with WM, evaluated consecutively at Mayo Clinic, who received ibrutinib off‐study after its approval in 2015 for WM. Overall response rate (ORR) was 91%; major‐response rate (MRR) was 78%. The median time to first response and best response was 2·9 [95% confidence interval (CI): 2–4] and 5·7 (95% CI: 4–12) months, respectively. The median follow‐up was 19 (95% CI: 14–21) months; 18‐month progression‐free survival (PFS) was 82%. The median time on therapy was 12·5 (95% CI: 9·3–16·7) months, and the median duration‐of‐response was 32 (range: 23–32) months. Twenty‐five patients (31%) had discontinued therapy at last follow‐up (68% due to treatment‐related toxicities) and 18% of patients required dose reduction. Fatigue (12%) and atrial‐fibrillation (11%) were common non‐haematological toxicities. IgM rebound occurred in 36% of patients who abruptly discontinued ibrutinib. Following ibrutinib discontinuation, 84% of patients received subsequent treatment, achieving an ORR of 57% and MRR of 50%. The median PFS from commencement of subsequent salvage therapy was 18 months. Ibrutinib therapy, outside of clinical trials, is effective in WM, but is associated with toxicities and challenges, including IgM rebound and a high drug discontinuation rate for reasons other than disease progression.

Abstract Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) conducted among populations of European ancestry (EA) have identified 23 common single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with multiple myeloma (MM) risk. We hypothesize that the combination of these SNPs in a polygenic risk score (PRS) is likely to be a strong risk factor for MM. However, it is unclear whether the genetic variation associated with MM susceptibility also predisposes to monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS). Thus, we calculated a PRS and evaluated the association with risk of MM and its precursor, MGUS. We pooled genotype data for 2434 MM and 3446 controls from ten MM GWAS of individuals of EA within the Interlymph Consortium, for 23 MM risk SNPs identified by prior GWAS. An additional 754 MGUS cases were ascertained from Mayo Clinic and MD Anderson clinical practices. To calculate the PRS, we used the risk estimates corresponding to the 23 SNP associations from the largest published MM GWAS. The log of the odds ratio (OR) for each SNP was multiplied by the respective number of risk alleles and summed to generate a PRS for each individual. The PRS was examined continuously, per one standard deviation (SD), and as quintiles, based on the PRS distribution in the controls. Associations of PRS with MM and MGUS risk were examined separately, using multivariable logistic regression assuming an additive model to assess ORs and 95% confidence intervals adjusted for age, sex, and site. We also evaluated age and sex stratified models. The distribution of sex within MM cases, MGUS cases and controls were each ~60% male and ~40% female. The median age was 61, 66, and 66 years for MM cases, MGUS cases and controls, respectively. PRS ranged from 1.52-4.91, with a median PRS of 3.21 for MM cases, 3.19 for MGUS cases, and 3.05 for controls. PRS was significantly associated with MM risk when assessed continuously (OR=1.19 per SD, p=2.2x10-16) and categorically; compared with the middle quintile (Q3), individuals in the highest quintile (Q5) had a 66% increased MM risk (OR=1.66, p=2.3x10-9) and those in the lowest quintile (Q1) had a 38% decreased MM risk (OR=0.62, p=1.3x10-6). PRS was also significantly associated with MGUS risk (OR=1.19 per SD, p=1.7x10-11); individuals with the highest PRS (Q5) had a 77% increased risk (OR=1.77, p=4.0x10-4) and those with lowest PRS (Q1) had 30% decreased risk (OR=0.70, p=0.04), compared with Q3. When stratified by age and sex, similar associations and trends were found. Using an independent sample of MM / MGUS cases and controls, we showed that a PRS constructed from 23 common genetic variants for MM risk is associated with risk of both MM and MGUS, regardless of age or sex. A future direction of this work is testing associations with PRS and clinical characteristics of the MM cases, as well as differences between MGUS cases that progress and those that do not. Our results suggest that common genetic variation may predispose to MGUS as the precursor to MM. Citation Format: Alyssa I. Clay-Gilmour, Michelle A. Hildebrandt, Nicola J. Camp, Elad Ziv, Elizabeth E. Brown, Jonathan N. Hofmann, John J. Spinelli, Graham G. Giles, Parveen Bhatti, Wendy Cozen, Xifeng Wu, Dennis P. Robinson, Aaron D. Norman, Jason P. Sinnwell, Shaji K. Kumar, S Vincent Rajkumar, Susan L. Slager, Celine M. Vachon. Associations between a polygenic risk score and risk of multiple myeloma and its precursor [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2019; 2019 Mar 29-Apr 3; Atlanta, GA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(13 Suppl):Abstract nr 2686.

Summary Improvement in survival in Light chain (AL) amyloidosis has been seen over recent decades, enabling more patients to achieve long‐term survival. Patients with AL amyloidosis who survived ≥10 years from time of diagnosis ( n = 186) were the subject of this study. Ten‐year survivors represented 22% of the total population. These patients were characterized by favourable patient, organ and plasma cell features. Of note, trisomies were less common among 10‐year survivors compared to those who did not survive to 10 years. All‐time best haematological response was complete response in 67%, very good partial response in 30%, partial response in 2% and no response in 1%, with 11% having received a consolidative strategy for inadequate response to first line therapy. The overall organ response rate to first‐line therapy was 76%, which increased to 86% when considering subsequent line(s) of therapy. Forty‐seven percent of the 10‐year survivors did not require a second‐line therapy. The median treatment‐free survival (TFS) among the 10‐year survivors was 10·5 years (interquartile range 7·4‐12·2). On multivariate analysis independent predictors for TFS were the achievement of complete haematological response and lack of cardiac involvement. Long‐term survivors are increasingly seen in AL amyloidosis and present distinct patient, organ and clonal disease features.

AbstractThe role of consolidation post autologous stem cell transplant in light chain amyloidosis is not well defined. We retrospectively identified patients who had light chain amyloidosis and underwent autologous stem cell transplant at the Mayo Clinic. Consolidation was defined as any treatment given after the day 100 evaluation post‐transplant to maintain or deepen the response. We identified 471 patients, of whom 72 (15%) received consolidation. Patients receiving consolidation had more advanced disease (Mayo 2012 stage ≥II in 67% vs 52%, P = .02), and had lower day 100 response rates (very good partial response or better: 35% vs 84%, P < .001). After consolidation, rates of very good partial response improved from 24% to 28%, and rates of complete response improved from 11% to 40%. Patients with less than very good partial response who received consolidation, had better progression‐free survival (median of 22.4 vs 8.8 months, P < .001), and the benefit was greater in those who deepened their response (median of 41 vs 8.8 months, P < .001). In patients with less than very good partial response, there was a trend for better overall survival in patients who responded to consolidation (median of 125.8 vs 74.4 months, P = .07). In patients who achieved very good partial response, or better, at day 100 post autologous stem cell transplant, consolidation did not improve progression‐free or overall survival. Consolidation after autologous stem cell transplant for light chain amyloidosis improves progression‐free survival for patients who achieve less than very good partial response.