Back to Authors

Usmani, Saad

0000-0002-5484-8731

Mayo Clinic

Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.

Citations 40

Impact of second primary malignancy post–autologous transplantation on outcomes of multiple myeloma: a CIBMTR analysis

Blood Advances | February 24, 2023 | Volume: 7 | Issue: 12 | Pages: 2746-2757

10.1182/bloodadvances.2022009138 | PMID 36827681

Abstract The overall survival (OS) has improved significantly in multiple myeloma (MM) over the last decade with the use of proteasome inhibitor and immunomodulatory drug-based combinations, followed by high-dose melphalan and autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (auto-HSCT) and subsequent maintenance therapies in eligible newly diagnosed patients. However, clinical trials using auto-HSCT followed by lenalidomide maintenance have shown an increased risk of second primary malignancies (SPM), including second hematological malignancies (SHM). We evaluated the impact of SPM and SHM on progression-free survival (PFS) and OS in patients with MM after auto-HSCT using CIBMTR registry data. Adult patients with MM who underwent first auto-HSCT in the United States with melphalan conditioning regimen from 2011 to 2018 and received maintenance therapy were included (n = 3948). At a median follow-up of 37 months, 175 (4%) patients developed SPM, including 112 (64%) solid, 36 (20%) myeloid, 24 (14%) SHM, not otherwise specified, and 3 (2%) lymphoid malignancies. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that SPM and SHM were associated with an inferior PFS (hazard ratio [HR] 2.62, P < .001 and HR 5.01, P < .001, respectively) and OS (HR 3.85, P < .001 and HR 8.13, P < .001, respectively). In patients who developed SPM and SHM, MM remained the most frequent primary cause of death (42% vs 30% and 53% vs 18%, respectively). We conclude the development of SPM and SHM leads to a poor survival in patients with MM and is an important survivorship challenge. Given the median survival for MM continues to improve, continued vigilance is needed to assess the risks of SPM and SHM with maintenance therapy post–auto-HSCT.
Daratumumab Plus Lenalidomide and Dexamethasone (D-Rd) Versus Lenalidomide and Dexamethasone (Rd) in Transplant-Ineligible Patients (Pts) with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma (NDMM): Clinical Assessment of Key Subgroups of the Phase 3 Maia Study

Blood | November 28, 2022 | Volume: 140 | Issue: Supplement 1 | Pages: 7297-7300

10.1182/blood-2022-163494

Efficacy Outcomes and Characteristics of Patients with Multiple Myeloma (MM) Who Achieved Sustained Minimal Residual Disease Negativity after Treatment with Ciltacabtagene Autoleucel (cilta-cel) in CARTITUDE-1

Blood | November 28, 2022 | Volume: 140 | Issue: Supplement 1 | Pages: 4652-4654

10.1182/blood-2022-159141

Health-Related Quality of Life for Frail Transplant-Ineligible Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Treated with Daratumumab, Lenalidomide and Dexamethasone: Subgroup Analysis of MAIA Trial

Blood | November 28, 2022 | Volume: 140 | Issue: Supplement 1 | Pages: 1142-1145

10.1182/blood-2022-165524

Meta-analysis of ciltacabtagene autoleucel versus physician’s choice therapy for the treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma

Current Medical Research and Opinion | July 11, 2022 | Volume: 38 | Issue: 10 | Pages: 1759-1767

10.1080/03007995.2022.2100651 | PMID 35815818

Ciltacabtagene Autoleucel, an Anti–B-cell Maturation Antigen Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-Cell Therapy, for Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma: CARTITUDE-1 2-Year Follow-Up

Journal of Clinical Oncology | June 4, 2022 | Volume: 41 | Issue: 6 | Pages: 1265-1274

10.1200/jco.22.00842 | PMID 35658469

PURPOSE CARTITUDE-1, a phase Ib/II study evaluating the safety and efficacy of ciltacabtagene autoleucel (cilta-cel) in heavily pretreated patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma, yielded early, deep, and durable responses at 12 months. Here, we present updated results 2 years after last patient in (median follow-up [MFU] approximately 28 months), including analyses of high-risk patient subgroups. METHODS Eligible patients had relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma, had received ≥ 3 prior lines of therapy or were double refractory to a proteasome inhibitor and immunomodulatory drug and had received prior proteasome inhibitor, immunomodulatory drug, and anti-CD38 therapy. Patients received a single cilta-cel infusion 5-7 days after lymphodepletion. Responses were assessed by an independent review committee. RESULTS At a MFU of 27.7 months (N = 97), the overall response rate was 97.9% (95% CI, 92.7 to 99.7); 82.5% (95% CI, 73.4 to 89.4) of patients achieved a stringent complete response. Median duration of response was not estimable. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were not reached; 27-month PFS and OS rates were 54.9% (95% CI, 44.0 to 64.6) and 70.4% (95% CI, 60.1 to 78.6), respectively. Overall response rates were high across all subgroups (95.1%-100%). Duration of response, PFS, and/or OS were shorter in patients with high-risk cytogenetics, International Staging System stage III, high tumor burden, or plasmacytomas. The safety profile was manageable with no new cilta-cel–related cytokine release syndrome and one new case of parkinsonism (day 914 after cilta-cel) since the last report. CONCLUSION At approximately 28 months MFU, patients treated with cilta-cel maintained deep and durable responses, observed in both standard and high-risk subgroups. The risk/benefit profile of cilta-cel remained favorable with longer follow-up.
Perspectives on the Risk-Stratified Treatment of Multiple Myeloma

Blood Cancer Discovery | June 2, 2022 | Volume: 3 | Issue: 4 | Pages: 273-284

10.1158/2643-3230.bcd-21-0205 | PMID 35653112

Summary: The multiple myeloma treatment landscape has changed dramatically. This change, paralleled by an increase in scientific knowledge, has resulted in significant improvement in survival. However, heterogeneity remains in clinical outcomes, with a proportion of patients not benefiting from current approaches and continuing to have a poor prognosis. A significant proportion of the variability in outcome can be predicted on the basis of clinical and biochemical parameters and tumor-acquired genetic variants, allowing for risk stratification and a more personalized approach to therapy. This article discusses the principles that can enable the rational and effective development of therapeutic approaches for high-risk multiple myeloma.
Daratumumab Improves Depth of Response and Progression-free Survival in Transplant-ineligible, High-risk, Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma

The Oncologist | March 25, 2022 | Volume: 27 | Issue: 7 | Pages: e589-e596

10.1093/oncolo/oyac067 | PMID 35462406

Abstract Background Patients with high-risk, newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (HR-NDMM) who are ineligible for autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) have limited first-line treatment options. Recent meta-analyses evaluating the impact of incorporating daratumumab in the backbone regimen on progression-free survival (PFS) have found mixed results in these patients. Materials and Methods A pooled analysis of patient-level data for ASCT-ineligible patients with HR-NDMM [ie, del(17p), t(4;14), t(14;16)] from the MAIA and ALCYONE trials; stratified by study identifier and adjusting for cytogenetic abnormality subtype, baseline performance status, International Staging System stage, myeloma type, and renal impairment; was conducted. Impact of daratumumab on PFS and rates of complete response or better (≥CR), minimal residual disease (MRD)-negative CR, very good partial response or better (≥VGPR), and overall response (ORR) was compared to control. Results Among 101 patients in the daratumumab and 89 patients in the control cohort, median follow-up was 43.7 months. Daratumumab reduced the risk of progression or death by 41% (adjusted hazard ratio for PFS [95% confidence interval (CI)] = 0.59 [0.41-0.85]) versus control. At 36 months, the estimated proportion of patients who did not progress and were still alive was 41.3% in the daratumumab and 19.9% in the control cohort. Rates of ≥CR (41.6% vs. 22.5%), MRD-negative CR (24.8% vs. 5.6%), ≥VGPR (75.2% vs. 46.1%), and ORR (92.1% vs. 74.2%) were higher for daratumumab versus control. Conclusion These findings demonstrate that incorporation of daratumumab in frontline treatment regimens reduced the risk of progression or death and improved response rates among ASCT-ineligible HR-NDMM patients.
Current approaches to management of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma

American Journal of Hematology | March 2, 2022 | Volume: 97 | Issue: S1 | Pages: No page available

10.1002/ajh.26512 | PMID 35234302

AbstractMajor developments in the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) over the past decade have led to a continued improvement in survival. Significant progress has been made with deeper and longer remissions seen with newer treatment approaches—both for induction as well as maintenance therapy. The treatment approach to MM is guided by several factors including patient age, frailty, comorbidities, eligibility for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT), and risk stratification into standard‐risk or high‐risk MM. High‐risk MM is defined by the presence of t(4;14), t(14;16), t(14;20), del (17p), TP53 mutation, or gain (1q). Transplant eligible patients should receive 4–6 cycles of induction followed by stem cell collection. Patients can then undergo ASCT, or continue induction therapy and shift to maintenance, delaying ASCT till first relapse. Transplant ineligible patients should receive induction therapy followed by maintenance. For induction therapy prior to ASCT, a proteasome inhibitor‐IMiD combination remains standard with monoclonal antibody‐based quadruplets preferred in high‐risk patients. Among transplant ineligible patients, those with standard‐risk MM should receive DRd continued until disease progression, while bortezomib containing regimens (VRd or VRd lite) can be considered for high‐risk patients. Finally, standard‐risk patients should receive lenalidomide maintenance after induction/ASCT, while proteasome inhibitor‐IMiD combinations should be used for high‐risk patients.
Updated Results from CARTITUDE-1: Phase 1b/2Study of Ciltacabtagene Autoleucel, a B-Cell Maturation Antigen-Directed Chimeric Antigen Receptor T Cell Therapy, in Patients With Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma

Blood | November 23, 2021 | Volume: 138 | Issue: Supplement 1 | Pages: 549-549

10.1182/blood-2021-146060

Abstract Introduction: Ciltacabtagene autoleucel (cilta-cel), a chimeric antigen receptor T (CAR-T) cell therapy with 2 B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA) targeting single-domain antibodies, demonstrated early, deep, and durable responses in the phase 1b/2 CARTITUDE-1 study in patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) who had been heavily pretreated (Berdeja, Lancet, 2021). After a median follow-up of 12.4 months, the overall response rate (ORR; as assessed by independent review committee) was 97%, with 67% of pts achieving stringent complete response (sCR). The 12-month progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) rates were 77% and 89%, respectively. Here, we report updated results from CARTITUDE-1 with longer duration of follow-up (median 18 months). Methods: Eligible pts had MM and received ≥3 prior therapies or were refractory to a proteasome inhibitor (PI) and an immunomodulatory drug (IMiD), and had received a PI, IMiD, and an anti-CD38 antibody. After apheresis, bridging therapy was permitted. Pts received a single cilta-cel infusion (target dose 0.75×10 6 CAR+ viable T cells/kg; range 0.5-1.0×10 6) 5-7 days (d) after lymphodepletion (300 mg/m 2 cyclophosphamide, 30 mg/m 2 fludarabine daily for 3 d). Primary objectives were to characterize cilta-cel safety, confirm the recommended phase 2 dose (phase 1b), and evaluate cilta-cel efficacy (phase 2). Response was assessed per IMWG criteria by an independent review committee and minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity at 10 -5 by next-generation sequencing. In this combined phase 1b and phase 2 analysis, cytokine release syndrome (CRS; per Lee et al Blood 2014 grading criteria) and neurotoxicity (by CTCAE v5.0) were mapped to the ASTCT criteria for CRS and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity (ICANS), respectively. Results: As of Feb 11, 2021, 97 pts (58.8% male; median age 61.0 years [range 43-78]) received cilta-cel. Pts had received a median of 6 (range 3-18) prior lines of therapy; 83.5% were penta-drug exposed, 87.6% were triple-class refractory, 42.3% were penta-drug refractory, and 99.0% were refractory to last line of therapy. ORR was 97.9% (95% CI: 92.7-99.7); 80.4% of pts achieved sCR, and 94.8% achieved very good partial response or better (Figure). The median time to first response was 1 month (range 0.9-10.7), median time to best response was 2.6 months (range 0.9-15.2), and median time to complete response or better was 2.6 months (range 0.9-15.2). The median duration of response was 21.8 months (95% CI: 21.8-not estimable). Of 61 pts evaluable for MRD, 91.8% were MRD negative at the 10 -5 threshold; MRD 10 -5 negativity was sustained for ≥6 months in 44.3% (27/61) of pts and ≥12 months in 18% (11/61) of pts. The 18-month PFS and OS rates were 66.0% (95% CI: 54.9-75.0) and 80.9% (95% CI: 71.4-87.6), respectively. 18-month PFS rates in pts who achieved sustained MRD for ≥6 months and ≥12 months were 96.3% (95% CI: 76.5-99.5) and 100%, respectively. The most common grade 3/4 hematologic AEs in ≥25% of pts were neutropenia (94.8%), anemia (68.0%), leukopenia (60.8%), thrombocytopenia (59.8%), and lymphopenia (49.5%). There were no fatalities related to cytopenias, and no new safety signals with longer follow-up. CRS occurred in 94.8% of pts (mostly grade 1/2); median time to onset was 7 d (range 1-12), and CRS resolved within 14 d in 98.9% of pts. There was no new CAR T-cell neurotoxicity since the previous report. Post cilta-cel infusion, 21 deaths occurred during the study: 0 within first 30 d, 2 within 100 d, and 19 more than 100 d post infusion. Ten deaths were due to disease progression, 6 were treatment-related (as assessed by the investigator), and 5 were due to AEs unrelated to treatment. One patient was retreated with cilta-cel (for progressive disease) and had stable disease (per computerized algorithm) post-retreatment with no incidence of CAR T-cell neurotoxicity. Conclusions: At a longer median follow-up of 18 months, a single cilta-cel infusion led to early, deep, and durable responses in heavily pre-treated pts with MM. Follow-up is ongoing and updated data will be presented. Cilta-cel demonstrated a manageable safety profile with no new safety signals observed with longer follow-up. Further investigations of cilta-cel are ongoing in earlier lines of therapy (CARTITUDE-2 [NCT04133636], CARTITUDE-4 [NCT04181827], and CARTITUDE-5 [NCT04923893]) and in outpatient settings. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Martin: GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy; Janssen: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding. Usmani: Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; SkylineDX: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen Oncology: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; EdoPharma: Consultancy; Array BioPharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene/BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; GSK: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Consultancy. Berdeja: Lilly, Novartis: Research Funding; Poseida, Sanofi, Teva: Research Funding; GSK, Ichnos Sciences, Incyte: Research Funding; Bluebird bio, BMS, Celgene, CRISPR Therapeutics, Janssen, Kite Pharma, Legend Biotech, SecuraBio, Takeda: Consultancy; Celularity, CRISPR Therapeutics: Research Funding; Abbvie, Acetylon, Amgen: Research Funding; EMD Sorono, Genentech: Research Funding. Jakubowiak: Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GSK: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gracell: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Cohen: Novartis: Research Funding; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Genentech/Roche: Consultancy; Oncopeptides: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Research Funding. Hari: Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Sanofi: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Oncopeptides: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Millenium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; GSK: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Adaptive Biotech: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene-BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Avigan: Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Juno: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Partner Tx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Aviv MedTech Ltd: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Legend Biotech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Chugai: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy; Parexcel: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy. Deol: Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy. Lesokhin: bristol myers squibb: Research Funding; Iteos: Consultancy; pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Behringer Ingelheim: Honoraria; Trillium Therapeutics: Consultancy; Serametrix, Inc: Patents & Royalties; Genetech: Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding. Munshi: Adaptive Biotechnology: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Oncopep: Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Other: scientific founder, Patents & Royalties; Legend: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy. O'Donnell: Onocopeptide: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Bristol Myer Squibb: Consultancy; Adaptive: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy. Stewart: Oncopeptides: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; GSK: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Skyline diagnostics: Consultancy; Genomcs England: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Tempus Inc.: Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; PikSci Inc.: Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company, Patents & Royalties; Sanofi Aventis: Honoraria. Schecter: Janssen: Current Employment, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company. Goldberg: Janssen: Current Employment, Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company. Jackson: Janssen: Current Employment; Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center: Consultancy. Yeh: Janssen: Current Employment. Banerjee: Janssen: Current Employment, Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company. Allred: Janssen: Current Employment, Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company. Zudaire: Janssen: Current Employment. Deraedt: Janssen: Current Employment. Olyslager: Janssen: Current Employment. Pacaud: Legend Biotech: Current Employment. Lin: Juno: Consultancy; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Takeda: Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; Vineti: Consultancy; Gamida Cell: Consultancy; Sorrento: Consultancy; Legend: Consultancy; Merck: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Jagannath: Legend Biotech: Consultancy; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy. OffLabel Disclosure: At the time of abstract submission, cilta-cel is being investigated for the treatment of multiple myeloma but is not yet approved.