Citations

AbstractIn this phase 1/2 study, carfilzomib was added to high‐dose melphalan conditioning prior to autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in patients with multiple myeloma that had been treated with ≤2 prior lines of therapy. Carfilzomib was escalated at doses of 27, 36, 45, and 56 mg/m2 on days −6, −5, −2, and −1 before ASCT in the phase 1 component of the study. In addition, all the patients received melphalan 100 mg/m2 on days −4 and −3. The primary endpoint of the phase 1 component was to identify the maximum tolerated dose, and the primary endpoint of the phase 2 component was the rates of complete response (≥CR) at 1 year after ASCT. The phase 1 dose escalation cohort included 14 patients, and 35 patients were included in the phase 2 cohort. The maximum tested dose was 56 mg/m2 (MTD). The median time from diagnosis to study enrollment was 5.8 (range 3.4–88.4) months, and 16% of patients had obtained a ≥CR prior to ASCT. The best response within 1 year after ASCT was a ≥ CR rate in 22% for the entire cohort, and 22% for patients treated at the MTD. The ≥VGPR rates improved from 41% before ASCT to 77% by 1 year after ASCT. One patient had a grade 3 renal adverse event, and renal function returned to baseline with supportive care. The rate of grade 3–4 cardiovascular toxicity was 16%. The addition of carfilzomib to melphalan conditioning was safe and resulted in deep responses after ASCT.

Introduction: The Safety and efficacy of DOACs is unknown in patients with left ventricular thrombus as these patients were excluded from DOAC trials. Hypothesis: The safety and efficacy of DOACs is comparable to vitamin K antagonists Methods: Databases including Medline, Scopus and Cochrane Central Registration of Controlled Trials were queried from inception to March 30 th 2022. Studies reporting efficacy and safety outcomes were selected for the analysis. Results: We included 11 studies comprising 1920 patients with left ventricular thrombus. The mean age in the DOAC group was 57.5 years (SD 12.8) and 58.6 years (SD 13.0) in the VKA group; 26.8% were females. Pooled results showed no difference in mortality (RR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.16-2.52]) embolic events (RR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.59-1.50]) or major bleeding (RR, 0.95[95% CI, 0.66-1.36]) in the DOACs compared to VKA groups. Event rate for DOAC group compared to VKA group was 12.7 vs 17.5 per 100 patient-years (mean follow up of 4.0 months) for mortality, 19.5 vs 26.5 per 100 patient-years (mean follow up of 8.9 months) for embolic events and 8.0 vs 10.0 per 100 patient-years (mean follow up of 9.5 months) for major bleeding. Conclusions: These data, from observational and randomized studies, demonstrate promising safety and efficacy of DOACs for treatment of left ventricular thrombus. Elevated embolic and mortality rates regardless of anticoagulant choice emphasize the need for further research to improve outcomes for patients with this complication.

Riluzole is a sodium-glutamate antagonist that attenuates neurodegeneration in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). It has shown favorable results in promoting recovery in pre-clinical models of traumatic spinal cord injury (tSCI) and in early phase clinical trials. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of riluzole in acute cervical tSCI. An international, multi-center, prospective, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, adaptive, Phase III trial (NCT01597518) was undertaken. Patients with American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale (AIS) A-C, cervical (C4-C8) tSCI, and <12 h from injury were randomized to receive either riluzole, at an oral dose of 100 mg twice per day (BID) for the first 24 h followed by 50 mg BID for the following 13 days, or placebo. The primary efficacy end-point was change in Upper Extremity Motor (UEM) scores at 180 days. The primary efficacy analyses were conducted on an intention to treat (ITT) and completed cases (CC) basis. The study was powered at a planned enrolment of 351 patients. The trial began in October 2013 and was halted by the sponsor on May 2020 (and terminated in April 2021) in the face of the global COVID-19 pandemic. One hundred ninety-three patients (54.9% of the pre-planned enrolment) were randomized with a follow-up rate of 82.7% at 180 days. At 180 days, in the CC population the riluzole-treated patients compared with placebo had a mean gain of 1.76 UEM scores (95% confidence interval: -2.54-6.06) and 2.86 total motor scores (CI: -6.79-12.52). No drug-related serious adverse events were associated with the use of riluzole. Additional pre-planned sensitivity analyses revealed that in the AIS C population, riluzole was associated with significant improvement in total motor scores (estimate: standard error [SE] 8.0; CI 1.5-14.4) and upper extremity motor scores (SE 13.8; CI 3.1-24.5) at 6 months. AIS B patients had higher reported independence, measured by the Spinal Cord Independence Measure score (45.3 vs. 27.3; d: 18.0 CI: -1.7-38.0) and change in mental health scores, measured by the Short Form 36 mental health domain (2.01 vs. -11.58; d: 13.2 CI: 1.2-24.8) at 180 days. AIS A patients who received riluzole had a higher average gain in neurological levels at 6 months compared with placebo (mean 0.50 levels gained vs. 0.12 in placebo; d: 0.38, CI: -0.2-0.9). The primary analysis did not achieve the predetermined end-point of efficacy for riluzole, likely related to insufficient power. However, on pre-planned secondary analyses, all subgroups of cervical SCI subjects (AIS grades A, B and C) treated with riluzole showed significant gains in functional recovery. The results of this trial may warrant further investigation to extend these findings. Moreover, guideline development groups may wish to assess the possible clinical relevance of the secondary outcome analyses, in light of the fact that SCI is an uncommon orphan disorder without an accepted neuroprotective treatment.

Abstract Patients with multiple myeloma (MM) who do not respond to initial therapy have worse outcomes than primary responders, and effective treatments are lacking in this population. However, the outcomes of primary refractory disease in the modern treatment era have not yet been studied. We reviewed patients with MM treated with triplet/quadruplet therapy at our institution to assess the incidence of primary refractory disease and the impact of salvage therapies in this population. We identified 1127 patients, of whom 1086 were evaluated for hematologic responses after 4 to 6 cycles. Of these, 93.3% (1013) had evidence of response, whereas 6.7% (73) had primary refractory disease. With a median overall survival (OS) of 51.3 months, patients with primary refractory disease had an increased risk of shorter survival in univariable and multivariable analyses (hazard ratio [HR], 3.5 [95% confidence interval (CI), 2.5-4.9]; HR, 4.3 [95% CI, 2.6-6.9], respectively). In the subgroup analysis of patients with primary refractory disease, those who received second-line autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) had increased second progression-free survival (20.9 vs 8.1 months; P &lt; .01) and second OS (74.7 vs 31.3 months; P = .02) compared with patients who did not. We conclude that early progression remains a significant factor for shorter OS in the current era, and salvage ASCT could be the most beneficial option for this population.

e20032 Background: The introduction of anti-CD38 antibodies (daratumumab) in the treatment landscape of multiple myeloma (MM) has increased the progression-free survival (PFS) in recent years. Still, the ideal combination (Dara-IMiD vs. Dara-PI) of these drugs in patients with relapsed MM is unclear. Methods: We reviewed MM patients treated with daratumumab as second-line therapy at our institution from 2016 to 2022 to assess the outcomes with the different combination therapies. We used the Kaplan-Meier method to estimate PFS from the first relapse. Results: We identified 329 patients with a median age of 63.6 years (range: 27.1 – 90.4). Most of the patients received triplet induction therapy (95%) and upfront transplant (67%) as primary therapy. At the time of Dara initiation, 41% were refractory to IMiDs, 22% to PIs, 18% to both, and 18% to neither drug. Patients treated with Dara-IMiD had significantly better PFS than Dara-PI (28.7 months vs. 18.5 months, p < 0.01, respectively). In a subgroup analysis based on the FISH results, high-risk patients had similar PFS outcomes (24.3 vs. 10.2 months, p = NS, respectively), while standard-risk patients benefited significantly from the Dara-IMiD regimen (48.3 vs. 19.2 months, p < 0.01, respectively). Among patients treated with Dara-IMiD, those already refractory to IMiDs from the first line had significantly shorter PFS than those without IMiD resistance (14.9 vs. 43.3 months, p < 0.01, respectively). In addition, the lenalidomide-based combination resulted in significantly better PFS compared to pomalidomide in our cohort (40.5 vs. 19.2 months, p < 0.01, respectively). However, no difference was found in the IMiD refractory population (12.3 vs. 15.1 months, respectively). Finally, no significant differences were seen between Dara-IMiD and Dara-PI in patients only refractory to IMiDs (16.1 vs. 12.8 months, p = NS, respectively). Conclusions: While further studies are required to adjudicate the best combination, we conclude that Dara-IMiD might be more effective in patients with relapsed MM, especially for patients not refractory to IMiD at first line. [Table: see text]

e20011 Background: Drug refractoriness is an important factor determining choice of next therapy and prognosis in multiple myeloma (MM). It is debatable whether refractoriness to a drug varies among patients (pts) with MM progressing on different administration schedules of the drug. Outcomes of MM pts refractory to different doses of lenalidomide have been previously described, but similar data about proteasome inhibitors (PIs) are limited. In this study, we assessed the impact of refractoriness to different schedules of bortezomib (V) on outcomes with subsequent therapies in MM pts. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed MM pts at our center diagnosed between January 2004 and December 2018, who progressed on/ after receiving first line therapy with V containing regimens. At first relapse, we divided pts into 3 groups- MM progressing on or within 60 days of receiving (1) 1-1.3 mg/m2 V once weekly or more frequently (Standard Dose Refractory), (2) 1-1.3 mg/m2 V once every 2 weeks or less frequently (Low Dose Refractory), and (3) MM progressing at least 60 days after stopping V (Not Refractory). In addition to V, we classified pts as being refractory to cyclophosphamide and immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs) at first relapse. We classified salvage regimens into daratumumab (Dara), PI, IMiD, PI+IMiD, and VDTPACE like regimens. We then assessed progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for next line therapy, and for next V containing therapy using Kaplan Meier and Cox models. Results: A total of 302 pts were included. Median age at diagnosis was 62 years and 60% pts were male. Overall, 23%, 31%, and 27% were International Staging System (ISS) stage I, II, and III respectively; 40% had high risk FISH as per mSMART. Of the 302 pts, 134 (44%) pts received another V containing regimen after the first line therapy at any time during the disease course. Using a multivariable Cox model to adjust for ISS, high risk FISH, refractoriness to other drugs, duration of first line therapy, and treatment received at relapse, the Not Refractory Group had a better PFS for both 2nd line therapy and the next V containing line of therapy, while no significant differences were seen between the Standard Dose Refractory and Low Dose Refractory groups. OS differences followed the same trend but were not statistically significant (Table). Conclusions: On multivariable analysis, the PFS did not differ among standard dose vs low dose refractory pts, and both were significantly inferior to pts not refractory to V. These data suggest that refractoriness to V might not be a dose dependent phenomenon. [Table: see text]

8051 Background: Patients with multiple myeloma (MM) that do not respond to initial therapy have worse outcomes compared to primary responders, and effective treatments are lacking in this population. However, the outcomes of primary refractory disease in the modern treatment era have not been studied. Methods: From 2007-2019, we reviewed MM patients treated with triplet/quadruplet therapy in our institution to assess the incidence of primary refractory disease and the impact of salvage therapies in this population. Primary refractory disease was defined as either progressive disease or stable disease at 4-6 cycles. The Kaplan-Meier estimates were used for survival probabilities. PFS and OS were calculated from MM diagnosis to progression, escalation/change of treatment, or death, respectively. For the primary refractory group, the second PFS and second OS were measured from the start of second-line therapy. The Cox regression model was used for multivariable analysis with the following variables (age, ISS, induction therapy, FISH, and bone marrow plasma cells at diagnosis). Results: We identified 1127 patients, of which 1086 were evaluated for hematologic response after 4-6 cycles. Of these, 93.3% (1013) had evidence of response, while 6.7% (73) had primary refractory disease. With a median OS of 50.7 months, patients with primary refractory disease had an increased risk for shorter survival in univariable and multivariable analysis (HR: 3.6, 95% CI = 2.61 – 4.96, HR = 3.89, 95% CI = 2.68 – 5.65, respectively). In subgroup analysis of primary refractory patients, the median second PFS and second OS from the first relapse were 11.9 months (95% CI: 8.7 – 17.3 months) and 43.4 (95% CI: 31.4– 75.9 months), respectively. Patients that received 2nd line ASCT had increased second PFS (20.9 vs. 8.1 months, respectively, p < 0.01) and second OS (74.7 vs. 31.3 months, respectively, p = 0.02) compared to patients that did not. Patients that took daratumumab as the second line did not have any significant survival differences compared to those who did not, p = NS. Conclusions: We conclude that early progression remains a significant factor for shorter OS in the current era, and salvage ASCT could be the most beneficial option for this population. [Table: see text]

8043 Background: Extramedullary Multiple Myeloma (EMM) has an aggressive clinical course and can present at diagnosis [primary EMM, (pEMM)] or relapse [secondary EMM, (sEMM)]. Here, we report clinical characteristics and outcomes of EMM, and predictive factors for the development of sEMM. Methods: We identified 299 patients with biopsy-proven EMM between 01/01/2000 and 12/31/2021. Patients with solitary plasmacytomas, paraskeletal MM and primary plasma cell leukemia were excluded. A 1:1 matched pair analysis (matched for year of diagnosis of MM for comparable follow-up and treatment eras) was performed to compare clinical characteristics and outcomes for patients with and without sEMM. Results: The median follow-up from the diagnosis of MM was 11.5 years (95%CI: 9.3-14.8). Of 299 patients, 204 (68%) patients had sEMM and 95 (32%) had pEMM, with largely comparable baseline characteristics (Table). The median overall survival (OS) from the diagnosis of sEMM was 0.7 (95% CI: 0.6-0.9) years compared to 3.6 (95%CI: 2.4-5.6) years for pEMM (p<0.0001). For sEMM, mutlvariable analysis (MVA) for OS identified visceral organ involvement (eg. liver, lung/pleura, brain, pancreas, etc.) to be associated with inferior OS [HR 1.6 (95% CI: 1.1-2.4), p=0.01]; high-risk cytogenetics (HR-CTG), ISS-3 stage, and age did not impact OS from sEMM. For pEMM, HR-CTG [HR 2.3 (95% CI 1.1 -4.8), p=0.03] and ISS-3 stage [HR 3.1 (95% CI 1.5-6.7), p=0.003] were associated with inferior OS on MVA whereas visceral EMM or age did not impact OS from pEMM. On univariate analysis, patients with sEMM were younger (median age 58.7 vs 61 years, p=0.006), had a higher proportion of 1q duplication (32% vs 17%, p=0.001), t(4;14) [16% vs 9%, p=0.047] and elevated LDH (30% vs 19%, p=0.04), compared to the matched cohort of patients without sEMM. On MVA, younger age at diagnosis, t(4;14) and 1q duplication at diagnosis of MM were independent predictors of development of sEMM. The median OS from diagnosis of MM was 5.4 years (95%CI: 4.1-6.2) for patients with sEMM versus 7.5 years (95% CI: 6.4-10.1; p <0.001) for the matched cohort. Secondary EMM was an independent poor prognostic marker for OS from the diagnosis of MM [HR 1.6 (95%CI: 1.2-2.1); p=0.004] in addition to age, ISS3 disease and HR-CTG. Conclusions: Outcomes of patients with EMM, especially sEMM, remain dismal. Patients with sEMM have higher rates of 1q duplication and t(4;14) at diagnosis of MM and carried an independent adverse prognosis in a matched cohort. [Table: see text]

8022 Background: Extramedullary Multiple Myeloma (EMM) is an aggressive entity with a dismal prognosis. Immune effector therapies (IETs), including chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapies and bispecific T-cell engaging antibodies (BsAb), have demonstrated excellent efficacy in relapsed/refractory MM with limited data for efficacy in EMM. Here, we report the treatment outcomes for patients with EMM. Methods: We identified 299 patients with EMM diagnosed between 01/01/2000 and 12/31/2021 after excluding solitary plasmacytomas, paraskeletal MM and primary plasma cell leukemia. The IMWG criteria were used for response definition. Results: Of the 299 patients, 204 (68%) patients had secondary EMM (sEMM) and 95 (32%) patients had primary EMM (pEMM). For sEMM (n=204), the median progression free survival (PFS) with initial therapy was 2.9 (95% CI: 2.4-3.2) months. Initial treatment strategies for sEMM were heterogenous and demonstrated in the table; 44% patients achieved ≥partial response (PR) with initial treatment for sEMM. The median PFS in patients with ≥PR was 5.8 (95%CI: 4.5-6.9) months vs 1.8 (95%CI: 1.4-2; p <0.0001) months for <PR. For patients with pEMM (n=95), the median PFS was 12.9 (95% CI: 6.7-18) months; the median PFS was 17.4 (95%CI: 12.9-25.4) months for patients with ≥PR versus 1 month (95%CI: 0.8-2) in patients with <PR. Thirty patients (all sEMM and triple class refractory) were treated with IET after development of EMM: 18 with BCMA-directed CAR-T, 10 with BsAbs, and 2 with both CAR-T and BsAbs. In patients receiving CAR-T therapy, 75% (15/20) achieved ≥PR with 40% (n=8) achieving MRD negative (by flowcytometry) complete response. Fifteen (75%) patients receiving CAR-T had progressive disease (PD); 7 with systemic and EMM PD and 4 patients each with isolated EMM or systemic PD. The median PFS for patients treated with CAR-T was 4.9 months [3.1- not reached (NR)]. Among patients achieving a ≥PR with CAR-T, the median PFS was 5.8 (95%CI: 4.7-NR) months vs 1.4 months [(95%CI: 0.8-NR), p<0.001] for <PR. Among patients treated with BsAbs (10-BCMA, 1 each against FcRH5 and GPRC5D), 33% (4/12) achieved a ≥PR. Ten (83%) patients had PD on BsAb; 8 with both EMM and systemic PD and 1 patient each with isolated EMM or PD. The median PFS with BsAb was 2.9 months (95%CI: 2.2-NR). Conclusions: Patients with EMM continue to have dismal outcomes with conventional therapies. High response rates were noted with CAR-T therapy, but these tend to be short-lived. [Table: see text]