Popat, Rakesh

7508 Background: Data on response to BCMA-targeted therapies among BCMA-exposed pts with RRMM are limited. Outcomes after sequential/subsequent anti-BCMA bispecific T-cell engagers (Bs-TCE) are vital to evaluate. Etentamig is a next-generation differentiated BCMA x CD3 Bs-TCE composed of a bivalent BCMA-binding domain with a high-avidity, low-affinity CD3-binding domain potentially reducing cytokine release syndrome (CRS), and a silenced Fc tail for extended half-life and convenient monthly (Q4W) dosing. Phase 1 results of etentamig in RRMM showed robust efficacy and potential best-in-class safety. Methods: Arm B of the open-label, Phase 1b MOVISO study (NCT05650632) evaluated etentamig in pts with RRMM with ≥2 prior lines of therapy (PLT), including triple-class and prior BCMA exposure (antibody-drug conjugate [ADC] >30 days or CAR-T >6 months [mo] after last exposure). Primary safety endpoints were CRS and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS); efficacy endpoints included objective response rate (ORR; IMWG 2016), duration of response (DoR), and progression-free survival (PFS). Pts received etentamig (60 mg IV; no step-up dosing [SUD]) on Cycle 1 Day 1 and Q4W thereafter. Results: At cutoff (June 11, 2025), 41 prior BCMA-exposed pts (CAR-T, n=24; ADC, n=17) had been treated; 24 (57%) were male, 38 (93%) were White, median (mdn) (range) age was 68 (43–89) years, 37 (88%) had ECOG PS ≤1, and 34 (81%) were triple-class refractory. Mdn (range) PLT was 6 (3–15). For 21 (51%) pts, the last PLT was BCMA directed; 23 (56%) had previously responded to anti-BCMA therapy (17/24 [71%] for CAR-T and 6/17 [35%] for ADC). Mdn (range) time from last prior CAR-T or ADC to first dose of etentamig was 15 (1–30) and 4 (1–45) mo, respectively. Mdn (range) follow-up was 5.5 (0.2–17.1) mo. Despite no SUD, CRS and ICANS were reported in 24 (57%) and 3 (7%) pts, respectively; all G1/2 events, except 1 G3 ICANS. G3/4 neutropenia and infections were reported in 15 (36%) and 17 (41%) pts, respectively. Efficacy outcomes are detailed in the Table (NE, not estimable). For pts whose last PLT was BCMA directed, MRD negativity (clonoSEQ, 10 –5 ) was seen in 2/3 (67%) evaluable pts, along with robust peak activation and proliferation of CD8+ T cells. Conclusions: Pts treated with etentamig achieved durable responses; rates were higher in pts who received CAR-T as last line. No new safety signals were observed; only low-grade CRS was seen despite no SUD. Clinical trial information: NCT05650632 . All prior BCMA (N=41) Prior BCMA CAR-T (N=24) ORR, n/n (%) [95% CI] Overall 17/36 (47) [30–65] 11/22 (50) [28–72] BCMA-directed last PLT 11/19 (58) [34–80] 7/11 (64) [31–89] Mdn DoR, mo [95% CI], No. of pts Overall 13 [7–NE], N=17 13 [7–NE], N=11 BCMA-directed last PLT 13 [7–NE], N=11 13 [7–NE], N=7 Mdn PFS, mo [95% CI], No. of pts Overall 3.4 [3–11], N=41 8.3 [2–NE], N=24 BCMA-directed last PLT 9.4 [2–NE], N=21 9.4 [2–NE], N=12

ABSTRACT Talquetamab is a GPRC5D × CD3 bispecific antibody approved for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). This is the first real‐world study to comprehensively report muco‐cutaneous toxicities, infections, and efficacy of talquetamab in 151 patients across five countries with the longest follow‐up reported enabling better efficacy and toxicity estimates. The median age was 64 years; high‐risk cytogenetics were present in 42%; ECOG ≥ 2 in 22%; 12% had creatinine clearance < 30; and 55% would not have met MonumenTAL‐1 eligibility. Patients received a median of 6 prior lines of therapy, 53% were penta‐refractory, and 75% received prior BCMA therapy. Talquetamab was associated with skin toxicity in 39.7%, nail toxicity in 75.5%, dysgeusia in 60.4%, and oral toxicities in 62.9%, with grade ≥ 3 events uncommon (≤ 4%) and dose interruptions infrequent (9.6% for skin toxicity, 6.9% for dysgeusia, and 4.0% for oral toxicities). These findings underscore the need for improved supportive care for muco‐cutaneous toxicities. In multivariate analysis, only platelet count < 50 (HR 1.8, 95% CI 1.15–2.83) was associated with inferior PFS, while penta‐refractory status, absolute lymphocyte count < 0.4, and prior BCMA‐targeted therapy were not statistically significant. With a median follow‐up of 12.7 months, the overall response rate was 67.6%, median progression‐free survival was 7 months, and 12‐month overall survival was 65%. This study shows that talquetamab efficacy is maintained in a heavily pretreated real‐world population with high prior BCMA exposure and notable comorbidity burden.

Abstract Recent therapeutic advances, including bispecific antibodies (bsAbs), have improved outcomes for patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). However, early mortality (EM) remains a significant challenge, even in the era of novel immunotherapies. We conducted a multicenter, retrospective analysis of real-world patients with RRMM treated with commercial bsAbs to evaluate the incidence and causes of EM. Between May 2022 and June 2025, a total of 441 patients were treated across 7 countries. EM, defined as death within 12 months of therapy initiation, occurred in 148 patients (34%), with a median time from bsAb initiation to death of 2.87 months (interquartile range, 1.38-6.85). The leading cause of EM was progressive disease (72%), followed by infection (13%); regardless of the cause of death, 82% had active disease at the time of death. Our findings highlight that despite encouraging efficacy, EM remains high among real-world bsAb recipients, emphasizing the need for improved disease control strategies and supportive care interventions.

PURPOSE Venetoclax, an oral BCL-2 inhibitor, has efficacy in t(11;14)-positive relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM), which is enhanced by dexamethasone, which promotes BCL-2 dependency. METHODS The randomized, open-label, phase III CANOVA study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03539744 ) enrolled adults with t(11;14)-positive RRMM who had received ≥2 previous lines of therapy. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to venetoclax-dexamethasone or pomalidomide-dexamethasone until progression or intolerable toxicity. The primary end point was independent review committee assessed–progression-free survival (PFS) in the intention-to-treat population analyzed by stratified log-rank test (two-sided type I error rate, α = .05), with hazard ratio (HR) and 95% CI estimated by stratified Cox proportional hazard model. Secondary end points included response rates, overall survival (OS), minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity rate (<10 –5 ), and safety. RESULTS Overall, 263 patients were randomly assigned (venetoclax-dexamethasone, n = 133; pomalidomide-dexamethasone, n = 130). Median PFS was 9.9 months (95% CI, 6.9 to 12.6) with venetoclax-dexamethasone versus 5.8 months (95% CI, 3.8 to 9.2) with pomalidomide-dexamethasone (HR, 0.823 [95% CI, 0.596 to 1.136]; P = .24). Overall response and very good partial response or better rates were 62% and 39%, respectively, with venetoclax-dexamethasone versus 35% and 14% with pomalidomide-dexamethasone. MRD negativity rate was 8% with venetoclax-dexamethasone and 0% with pomalidomide-dexamethasone. Median OS was 32.4 months (95% CI, 26.4 to 40.7) with venetoclax-dexamethasone and 26.9 months (95% CI, 20.4 to 38.9) with pomalidomide-dexamethasone (HR, 0.856 [95% CI, 0.612 to 1.197]). Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse event rates were 67% with venetoclax-dexamethasone versus 83% with pomalidomide-dexamethasone. There were 16 (12%) treatment-emergent deaths with venetoclax-dexamethasone versus 8 (6%) with pomalidomide-dexamethasone. CONCLUSION The primary end point of PFS was not met. PFS and OS were numerically longer with venetoclax-dexamethasone versus pomalidomide-dexamethasone in t(11;14)-positive RRMM. Consistent with previous studies, infections were associated with venetoclax-dexamethasone; no new safety signals were observed.

Abstract Introduction: Elranatamab (Elra) is a bispecific antibody (BsAb) targeting BCMA that is approved for patients with triple class exposed relapsed refractory myeloma (RRMM) on the basis of the MagnetisMM-3 phase 2 trial. For BCMA naïve patients, an overall response rate (ORR) of 61.0% and median progression free survival (PFS) of 17.2m was observed with a median overall survival (OS) of 24.6m. However, efficacy and safety information in the real world is lacking. Methods: This was an international retrospective study of patients with RRMM treated with Elra monotherapy outside of clinical trials. Data was collected through the International Myeloma Foundation Immunotherapy Database from 7 countries (UK, USA, Canada, Greece, Spain, Czech Republic and Singapore). High-risk cytogenetic abnormalities (HRCA) were defined as 1q+, t(4;14), t(14;16), t(14;20), and/or del(17p). Response was assessed using IMWG consensus criteria. Patient characteristics were summarized by frequency (percentage) or median (range). PFS, OS were evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method and reported with 95% confidence intervals. Results: 79 patients were included. Median age was 67 years (range: 41-95y) with 20% ≥75 years. Racial distribution was: 75% White, 16% Black/African American, 8% Asian/Pacific. 55% were ECOG performance status (PS) 1-2. Patients received a median of 5 prior lines (range 1-11), and 35% were BCMA exposed (9% CAR-T, 5% ADC, 7% BsAb, 8% BsAb plus CAR-T, 4% ADC plus BsAb). Of those with available data, 45% had HRCA,13% had extramedullary disease (EMD) and 32% had penta-drug refractory RRMM. Overall, 48% would not have been eligible for the MagnetisMM-3 trial. Median follow-up was 6.3m (range 0.5-35.0). ORR was 53% (PR 11%, VGPR 33%, CR 8%, sCR 1%) and 67% for BCMA naïve patients. Responses were significantly lower for BCMA exposed patients (ORR 31%) but did not differ by age (51% &lt;75yrs vs 60% ≥75yrs). On univariate analysis, prior BCMA exposure, platelets &lt;50, presence of HRCA and penta-refractoriness were significantly associated with a lower response rate. PFS for the whole cohort at 6 and 12m was 64% (95%CI, 54-77%) and 52% (40-67%); for BCMA naïve patients, it was 77% (65-90%) and 67% (54-84%), respectively. Within the whole cohort, PFS was shorter for: BCMA exposed (median 4.0m vs not reached (NR)), platelets &lt;50 (2.0 vs 21.7m), HRCA (7.2m vs NR), penta-refractory (4.3m vs NR). PFS did not differ significantly by EMD, PS, age, or creatinine clearance. OS for the whole cohort at 6 and12m was 74% (64-85%) and 58% (45-74%); for BCMA-naïve patients, it was 80% (43-85%) and 70% (57-87%), respectively. Within the whole cohort, OS was shorter for: BCMA exposed (median 10.3m vs NR), platelets &lt;50 (4.3m vs NR), HRCA (10.7m vs NR) and penta-refractory (10.3m vs NR). Univariate regression analysis demonstrated that prior BCMA exposure, platelets &lt;50 and penta-refractoriness were significantly associated with a worse PFS and OS, and HRCA predicted poorer survival CRS was observed in 41% of patients (grade(G)1: 35%, G2: 5%, ≥G3: 0%) with most occurring with the first step up dose (SUD): SUD1: 29%, SUD2: 15%, full dose: 4%. Tocilizumab was used in 20% and steroids in 3%. ICANS was observed in 4 cases (5%): G1: 2, G2: 1, G4: 1. Treatment was with steroids (n=3) and tocilizumab (n=2). G3-4 thrombocytopenia was observed in 19% and 14% required platelet transfusions. G3-4 neutropenia occurred in 25% with overall 31% requiring GCSF. Infections were reported in 33 (42%) patients with median time to infection of 41 days. A total of 94 infection episodes were observed over 581 personal months. There were 2 infection-related deaths reported (1 had IVIG, 1 did not). 64% had hypogammaglobulinemia (IgG &lt; 400mg/dl) and IVIG was given in 65% of patients. Conclusions: In this first international real world analysis, Elranatamab achieved a response rate of 67% and a 12m PFS of 67% in BCMA naïve patients, similar to the MagnetisMM-3 trial despite almost half not meeting trial eligibility. However, prior BCMA exposure, platelets &lt;50, high risk cytogenetics and penta refractory status were predictors of poorer outcomes. Acknowledgements: The International Myeloma Foundation, International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG)

Abstract Background: BCMA- and GPRC5D-targeting immunotherapies including CART cell therapy and Bispecific antibodies are currently approved for the treatment of multiple myeloma. However, clinical outcomes after dual antigenic exposure remain undefined. Herein we report the first report of BCMA-GPRC5D dual targeted multiple myeloma (DEMM). Methods: We conducted a retrospective multi-center study of RRMM patients treated with both BCMA- and GPRC5D-targeted treatments (TT) (CAR T, bispecific antibodies, ADCs) between November 1, 2022, and July 1, 2025. Outcomes included PFS1 (post-dual exposure), and overall survival (OS). Kaplan-Meier estimates and event-free probabilities were calculated. Results: One hundred and fifty patients who underwent TCE treatments were included and 49 patients met the criteria for inclusion. Median age was 65 years, 22.4% had creatinine clearance &lt;=30 and ECOG 2 or greater was present in 22.2%; 57% had high-risk cytogenetics (IMWG 2016), and 60.5% were penta-refractory. Patients received a median of 6 prior lines of therapy (LOT) before 1st TCE and 9 prior LOT before DEMM. 65.3% received 1 TCE, 30.6% received 2 TCE and 4.1% received 3 TCE before DEMM. Similarly, 67.3% received 1 BCMA, 24.5% received 2 BCMA TT and 4.1% received 3 BCMA TT before DEMM. Prior TT included- BCMA CART (57.1%), BCMA Bispecific (57.1%), BCMA ADC (18.4%), other TCE (10.2%). The last dual exposure was GPRC5D Bispecific in 91.8%, BCMA Bispecific in 6.1% and BCMA CART in 2%. The median followup post relapse was 3.4 months (range 0.0-16 mos). The median PFS during the last dual exposure TT was 3.98 months (95% CI: 2.96–6.70). 32.7% did not receive any subsequent LOT and died due to progressive disease. 67.3% of patients had progressive MM and received next LOT. Median PFS1 was 1.77 months (95% CI: 1.28–6.21) with 3-, 6-, and 12-month event-free probabilities of 44%%, 19% and 0% respectively. Median OS was 5.7 months (95% CI: 2.53-12.16) for DEMM from the time of refractoriness to dual antigenic targets. Conclusions: Patients dual-exposed to BCMA- and GPRC5D-directed therapies have a poor prognosis, 32.7% had not received further treatment and in those who received treatment the PFS1 was less than 2 months and an OS of 5.7 months from progression. This reflects an area of high unmet need for the patients that are dual-exposed to BCMA- and GPRC5D-directed therapies. Further data on the cohort will be updated at the meeting. Acknowledgements include, the International Myeloma Foundation, IMWG.

PURPOSE Initial reports indicate that access to contemporary therapies currently used in North America for the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) varies internationally. No studies have quantitatively reported the extent of disparities in the access to MM therapies worldwide, with a goal to investigate access to MM therapies and barriers globally. METHODS From June 18 to July 15, 2023, an electronic survey was distributed to 176 oncologists treating MM outside the United States. MM drugs were categorized by accessibility, with the cutoff for adequate access set at 60% of respondents affirming easy/moderate access. RESULTS Ninety-five (54%) respondents from 33 countries completed the survey. Fifty-one percent of the respondents were from university-based academic programs, and 17% of the responders treated only plasma cell disorders. Most respondents had adequate access to noncellular MM therapies, except for isatuximab, ixazomib, selinexor, and elotuzumab. Among the cellular therapies, 17% had access to Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-cell therapy, whereas 23% had access to approved T-cell engagers (TCEs). Financial stress on patients and health care systems has emerged as a primary barrier to global inaccessibility of treatment drugs. CONCLUSION Global access to novel MM therapies remains challenging, and we have identified barriers and suggested strategies to bridge this gap.

BACKGROUND ELRA is a humanized, BCMA/CD3 bispecific antibody. In the phase 2 registrational MagnetisMM-3 (MM-3) trial, SC ELRA given as 2 step-up priming doses (12 mg on day 1 and 32 mg on day 4 of cycle 1) followed by 76 mg QW in patients (pts) with RRMM naive to BCMA-directed therapy resulted in an ORR of 61.0%. With a median follow-up of 28.4 mos, the median DOR, PFS, and OS were not reached (NR; 2-year rate, 66.9%), 17.2, and 24.6 mos, respectively. Overall, 56.3% of pts had CRS (grade 2, 14.3%; no grade ≥3). Most events occurred after doses 1 (44.5%), 2 (20.2%), and 3 (5.9%); 0.8% (1 pt) had CRS with doses ≥4. Recurrent CRS occurred in 15.1% of pts. The phase 1/2 MagnetisMM-9 (MM-9; NCT05014412) study is examining an alternative priming regimen and longer dosing intervals of ELRA. Here, we present updated MM-9 results. METHODS In MM-9, pts with RRMM and disease refractory to ≥1 IMiD drug, ≥1 PI, and ≥1 anti-CD38 antibody were given SC ELRA as step-up priming doses of 4 and 20 mg on Day 1 and Day 4 of Cycle 1, respectively. After the priming doses, ELRA 76 mg was given QW for the next 6 cycles (Part 1) or for 1 cycle followed by 116 (dose level 1 [DL1]) or 152 (dose level 2 [DL2]) mg Q2W for the next 5 cycles (Part 2A). After 6 cycles, the dosing frequency was decreased from QW to Q2W (Part 1) or from Q2W to Q4W (Part 2) in pts who achieved ≥PR lasting ≥2 months. The recommended phase 2 dose from Part 2A (152 mg, DL2) was evaluated in Part 2B (dose expansion). The primary endpoint for both parts is grade ≥2 CRS rate per ASTCT criteria during Cycle 1. Secondary endpoints include evaluation of efficacy and adverse events. Data cutoff: February 13, 2024. RESULTS Overall, 85 pts (median age, 64.0 y) were treated with ELRA. The majority (72.9%) of pts had R-ISS stage I/II disease (23.5% with R-ISS stage III); 31.8% had high-risk cytogenetics. Median number of prior lines of therapy was 5.0 (range, 1-12). The median treatment duration was 8.6, 2.9, 1.4, and 3.3 mos, in Part 1, Part 2A DL1, Part 2A DL2, and Part 2B, respectively. Median follow-up for pts overall (n=85), in Part 1 (n=33), Part 2A DL1 (n=12), Part 2A DL2 (n=11), and Part 2B (n=29) was 10.4, 23.3, 16.5, 15.2, and 9.3 mos, respectively. Overall, the ORR was 58.8%. For pts in Part 1, Part 2A DL1, Part 2A DL2, or Part 2B, ORR was 66.7%, 58.3%, 36.4%, and 58.6%, respectively; median DOR was NR (9-mo rate: 86.4%), 10.8 mos (9-mo rate: 80.0%), NR (9-mo rate: 100.0%), and NR (9-mo rate: 84.8%); median PFS was 17.1 (9-mo rate: 62.8%), 11.6 (9-mo rate: 50.9%), 1.6 mos (9-mo rate: 40.0%), and NR (9-mo rate: 57.1%); median OS was NR (9-mo rate: 75.8%), 17.4 mos (9-mo rate: 66.7%), NR (9-mo rate: 60.0%), and NR (9-mo rate: 72.4%), respectively. For pts in Part 1, Part 2A DL1, Part 2A DL2, and Part 2B, grade ≥2 CRS rates during Cycle 1 were 15.2%, 16.7%, 27.3%, and 6.9%, respectively. For pts in Part 1, Part 2A DL1, Part 2A DL2, and Part 2B, CRS rates were 30.3%, 33.3%, 36.4%, and 24.1% after dose 1, 27.3%, 25.0%, 36.4%, and 24.1% after dose 2, 15.2%, 33.3%, 27.3%, and 20.7% after dose 3, 6.1%, 8.3%, 0%, and 3.4% after dose 4, and 6.1%, 16.7%, 9.1%, and 0% after doses ≥5. Recurrent CRS occurred in 18.2%, 33.3%, 18.2%, and 17.2% of pts in Part 1, Part 2A DL1, Part 2A DL2, and Part 2B. The most common (&gt;60%) TEAEs (any grade/grade ≥3) were hematologic TEAEs (Part 1, 75.8%/75.8%; Part 2A DL1, 83.3%/83.3%; Part 2A DL2, 81.8%/81.8%; Part 2B, 79.3%/69.0%), infections (Part 1, 78.8%/48.5%; Part 2A DL1, 83.3%/66.7%; Part 2A DL2, 72.7%/63.6%; Part 2B, 62.1%/37.9%), and CRS (Part 1, 60.6%/0%; Part 2A DL1, 83.3%/0%; Part 2A DL2, 90.9%/9.1%; Part 2B, 48.3%/0%). Grade 5 TEAEs not including PD were infection (n=4), fall (n=1), subdural hematoma (n=1), and food poisoning (n=1). CONCLUSIONS The 4/20 mg step-up priming regimen and alternative dosing schedules in MM-9 resulted in similar efficacy vs the step-up regimen used in the registrational MM-3 study (12/32 mg). Responses were durable with encouraging PFS and OS with the alternative step up and longer dosing schedule. While the overall safety signals with the alternative step up regimen are similar to those seen with MM-3, the CRS profile differed with more CRS events after each subsequent dose and a higher prevalence of recurrent CRS. Thus, the optimal ELRA step-up regimen remains 12/32 mg from the original regimen in the MM-3 study. In addition, these early results suggest that reducing the dose frequency of ELRA may not compromise efficacy.

Introduction: Given the major treatment advancements in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) such as bispecific antibodies (BsAbs), understanding patient and healthcare provider (HCP) decision-making perspectives is crucial. This study investigated barriers to adopting resource-intensive novel therapies, unmet needs in access to care, and treatment decision priorities in one of the largest surveys of RRMM patients and HCPs. Methods: This prospective study was conducted from March to June 2024 using 30-minute web-based quantitative surveys fielded in 2269 participants (1301 RRMM patients and 968 HCPs) across 7 countries (US, UK, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Japan). The survey collected data on pre-defined patient subgroups (line of treatment, ages &lt;45, 46-65, 65+]) and in HCP subgroups (care settings: academic, community [non-Center of Excellence [COE]). Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and chi-square tests. Results: Two themes that emerged from the findings were: 1) discrepancies in treatment considerations between patients and HCPs, and 2) Familiarity with and considerations around BsAbs among patients Discrepancies in HCP and Patient considerations HCPs and patients prioritized different considerations during treatment decision-making, particularly related to the importance of treatment related adverse events (TRAEs). 3L+ patients equally prioritized disease control and minimizing TRAEs (49% and 49%); HCPs prioritized disease control more often than minimizing TRAEs (59% and 40% for 3L+ patients). Patients considered many TRAEs extremely challenging to manage, whereas HCPs were less likely to do so (patients vs HCPs: bone-related AEs: 64% vs 39%, p&lt;0.001; hypertension: 54% vs 28%, p&lt;0.001; cholesterol: 53% vs 21%, p&lt;0.001; skin-related AEs: 49% vs 30%, p&lt;0.001). Limiting TRAEs was a concern particularly among patients over 65 (52%, p&lt;0.001) and those with comorbidities (52%, p&lt;0.001). Limiting costs and financial challenges (3L+ patients: 33% vs HCPs: 13%, p&lt;0.001) and avoiding compromising the potential to receive treatment options in later lines (3L+ patients: 25% vs HCPs:14%, p&lt;0.001) were other considerations patients prioritized more than HCPs. HCPs prioritized limiting side effects 9% more in 3L settings compared to 2L. Discrepancies in decision-making in 2L setting included a desire to limit treatment-related logistical burden (patients: 35% vs HCP: 17%, p&lt;0.001), limit challenges for care partners (25% vs 13%, p&lt;0.001), and ensure treatment without referral (24% vs 16%, p=0.001). Compared to their older counterparts, younger patients (&lt;45 y v ≥45y) prioritized convenient treatment administration (39% vs 29%, p=0.024) and avoiding referrals to other institutions (32% vs 22%, p&lt;0.001). Perspectives on treatment considerations specific to BsAbs Among 3L+ patients, most have not heard of BsAbs, or have heard but were unfamiliar with the option. A small proportion of 3L+ patients recalled their HCPs suggesting BsAbs as a treatment option (14%) although most patients decided to receive BsAbs treatment when it was offered (71%). Among patients on BsAb treatment, patients most often cited clinical reasons for going on BsAbs (i.e., remission, symptom relief, and likelihood of greater longevity). Among non-clinical reasons, lower time commitment and lower likelihood of negative financial impact compared with other treatments were also common. Notably, 36% of HCPs reported low confidence in identifying RRMM patients eligible for BsAbs. Compared with academic HCPs (32%), more community/non-COE HCPs (42% p=0.018) reported low confidence. Conclusions: HCPs and patients have different priorities during treatment decision-making, particularly regarding the importance of minimizing TRAE and in prioritizing efficacy and managing logistical burdens in later treatment lines. Among novel treatments, BsAbs are not frequently recalled by patients as a treatment option provided by HCPs. HCPs, especially in community settings, are often uncertain about identifying eligible patients for BsAbs, indicating a need for greater educational resources for HCPs. Increasing patient awareness of available treatments, HCP understanding of novel treatments, and fostering dialogue on patient priorities can increase the likelihood of informed, personalized shared decision-making, and optimize evidence-based patient outcomes.

Introduction: Teclistamab (Tec) is the first approved BCMA x CD3 bispecific antibody for the treatment of triple-class-exposed patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) based on the pivotal MajesTEC-1 study. Tec was associated with high overall response rate (ORR) of 63% in heavily pretreated patients. After a longer follow-up of 30.4 months, CR rate was 46.1%, median duration of response (DOR) was 24 months (95% CI, 17.0 - not estimable), and median progression-free survival (PFS) was 11.4 months (95% CI, 8.8 - 16.4). Herein, we present updated analysis of real-world outcomes and safety with tec in RRMM with extended follow-up of more than 12 months. Methods: This is an international multicenter retrospective study of patients with RRMM treated with tec on-label at 9 academic centers from 5 countries (United States, United Kingdom, Greece, Spain, and Canada) through the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) Immunotherapy Committee. Patients with RRMM treated with commercial tec at the respective institutions between May 24, 2022 to January 4, 2024 were included. Median follow-up was 14 months with data collected until July 15, 2024. High-risk cytogenetic abnormalities (HRCA) was defined as 1q+, t(4;14), t(14;16), t(14;20), and/or del(17p). Response was assessed using the IMWG consensus criteria. Patient characteristics were summarized by frequency (percentage) or median (interquartile range [IQR] or range). PFS, overall survival (OS), DOR were evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: There were 223 patients included in this analysis with the following characteristics: median age of 67 (range 33-91) with 24% ≥75 years; 45% female; 74% White, 10% Black, 9% Asian, and 7% other/unknown; 86 of 176 (49%) with high risk cytogenetics, including del(17p), t(4;14), t(14;16), t(14;20), and gain/amp 1q; 29.4% (37/126) with known extramedullary disease; 14% with creatinine clearance ≤30 ml/min. Patients received a median of 6 (IQR, 4-8) prior lines of therapy with 52% (107/206) being penta-drug refractory. Among 212 patients with available data, 161 (75.9%) patients would have been ineligible for MajesTEC-1. There were 94 (42%) patients who received prior BCMA-directed therapy (29.8% antibody-drug conjugate [ADC] alone; 45.7% CART alone; 6.3% bispecific antibody alone; 17.0% ADC and CART). Median time from diagnosis to tec initiation was 6.1 (range 0.6-29.2) years. For the 206 response-evaluable patients, ORR was 66%, including 25.2% ≥CR, 33.5% VGPR, and 7.3% PR. ORR for the 90 response-evaluable patients with prior BCMA-directed therapy was 54.5% (21.1% ≥CR, 26.7% VGPR, 6.7% PR). After a median follow-up of 14 (95%CI, 13-14) months, median PFS and OS were 8.8 (95% CI, 5.5-14) and 20 (95% CI, 18-not reached [NR]) months, respectively. 12-month PFS estimate was 46% (95% CI, 40%-54%), and 12-month OS rate was 65% (95% CI, 59%-72%). Median DOR was 17 (95% CI, 17-NR) months with 12-month estimate of 68% (95% CI, 60%-77%). Tec step-up dosing occurred in the outpatient setting for 57 (25.6%) patients. CRS occurred in 119 out of 222 (53.6%) patients with almost all being grade 1-2, except for 1 grade 4 event. ICANS occurred in 18 out of 216 (8.3%) patients (grade 1-2: 5.1%; grade 3-4: 2.8%). Any grade infection occurred in 130 (58.3%) patients; 25.1% of patients had grade ≥3 infection, including 10 patients with grade 5 infection. While receiving teclistamab, 79 (35.4%) patients had ≥2 infections. IVIG was given in 114 out of 164 (69.5%) patients. Conclusion: In this multicenter international real-world analysis of outcomes and safety associated with tec, ORR was high at 66% with 25.2% of patients achieving ≥CR. CR rates may be underestimated due to infrequent bone marrow confirmation in the real-world datasets. Encouragingly, ORR was 54.5% in BCMA exposed RRMM patients, including 21.1% with ≥CR. After a median follow-up of 14 months, heavily pretreated patients including patients with prior BCMA therapy had durable responses with median PFS of 8.8 months and median DOR of 17 months. There were no new safety signals noted in this real-world study. This is the largest real-world study to date of teclistamab with long-term follow-up of more than 12 months. Additional data including more patients, longer follow-up and results from difficult to treat subgroups will be presented at the meeting.