Citations

Introduction: Light chain multiple myeloma (LCMM) is a distinct subtype of multiple myeloma (MM) characterized by the exclusive production of immunoglobulin light chains, unlike the common form of MM that produces the complete immunoglobulin. There is a paucity of literature on the specific tumor cell alterations leading to light chain-only disease as opposed to the typical presentation in MM. Additionally, data on treatment response and outcomes in this subgroup of patients is sparse. This study explores the differences in baseline characteristics, including cytogenetic abnormalities and treatment response between LCMM and multiple myeloma with heavy chain involvement. Materials and Methods: We reviewed patient charts to obtain clinical and laboratory information for individuals diagnosed with LCMM and those with heavy chain MM (comparison cohort) from 2004 to 2022. Patients were matched for age, sex, and year of diagnosis. Data collected included treatment assessment, overall survival, and progression-free survival (PFS). Associations between outcomes and categorical variables were analyzed using the chi-square test, while the Mann-Whitney U test was employed to compare medians. Progression-free survival following initiation of initial therapy and overall survival were assessed using Kaplan-Meier analysis. The Mayo Clinic Institutional Review Board (IRB) approved the study. Results: We identified 848 patients, representing 17.1% of newly diagnosed MM cases. The median age of the LCMM cohort was 63 years (range 16-92), with a female-to-male ratio of 1:5. The LCMM cohort had higher levels of lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), beta-2 microglobulin (p<0.0001), higher baseline creatinine (p<0.0001) and calcium (p<0.0001). The two cohorts had no significant difference in the International Staging System (ISS) or revised ISS (R2-ISS). Additionally, hemoglobin (Hb) and white blood cell count at presentation were higher in the LCMM cohort. Chromosome 1 abnormalities were lower in the LCMM cohort: 1q gain (OR-0.7; 95% CI: 0.6-0.9) and 1p deletion (OR-0.7; 95% CI: 0.6-0.9, p=0.02). Likewise, the frequencies of trisomies and hyperdiploidy were lower in the LCMM cohort, with odds ratios of 0.32 (p=0.012) and 0.37 (p<0.001), respectively. The frequencies of translocations t(4;14) (OR-0.35, p<0.001) and t(14;16) (OR-0.6, p=0.03) were lower in LCMM compared to heavy chain MM. In contrast, the frequencies of t(11;14) (OR-3.4) and t(6;14) (OR-4.9) and deletion of 13q(OR-1.3) was higher in the LCMM cohort. There was no significant difference in the occurrence of del(17p)/TP53 abnormalities. The median PFS after the first regimen was shorter in the LCMM cohort (23 months vs. 27 months, p=0.03), and this difference remained significant after adjusting for baseline adverse prognostic indices and treatment regimen. Median PFS in LCMM patients with monoclonal antibody (Mab) as part of their treatment was 37 months vs. 23 months (Proteasome Inhibitor or immunomodulator-based regimen without Mab), though this difference is not statistically significant p=0.87. No significant difference was found in overall survival between the two groups. Conclusion: This study highlights unique features of light chain multiple myeloma, including increased frequencies of specific cytogenetic abnormalities. Further evaluation of observed differences in cytogenetic abnormalities may enhance our understanding of LCMM and potentially guide baseline treatment choices to improve outcome.

Background: Despite effective front-line therapies, DLBCL & MM have high relapse rates. Novel therapies like CAR-T & bispecific antibodies (BsAb) offer deep & durable remission compared to salvage therapies, but have a unique toxicity profile (TP) that requires monitoring. With no head-to-head trials, the rationale for therapy selection may vary. This study explores provider choices, sequencing preferences, & access barriers. Methods: Two anonymous surveys (MM and DLBCL) of US-based Hematologists were conducted from 2/2024 to 6/2024, on practice settings, CAR-T & BsAb availability, treatment preferences & barriers. Responses were analyzed to assess preferences across clinical scenarios. Results: Surveys were completed by 37 MM & 45 DLBCL providers. Most were at centers offering both CAR-T & BsAb. Most gave CAR-T inpatient, & BsAb outpatient. CAR-T was given by 73% MM providers & 66% DLBCL (92% used Cilta-cel, 96% used Ide-cel; 100% used Axi-cel, 90% used Liso-cel & 73% Tisa-cel). In MM, 78% used Teclistamab, 60% Talquetamab & 24% Elranatamab. In DLBCL, 62% used Epcoritamab & 40% Glofitamab. Providers preferred CAR-T over BsAb in MM after 4+ prior lines of therapy (LOT) (89%), & in DLBCL after 2+ prior LOT (93%). CAR-T was favored more among academic providers & those at CAR-T centers. Practice volume did not impact selection. Among providers at centers with BsAb-only, CAR-T was preferred by 60% (MM) and 50% (DLBCL). Providers at centers without both favored CAR-T (MM: 75%, DLBCL: 86%). CAR-T was chosen for better outcomes, short treatment, center choice, & prior experience. Other factors that influenced decisions were lower incidence of cytopenia/infection & “BsAb effective post-CAR-T, less so vice versa” (MM), & “curative potential of CAR-T” (DLBCL). Logistical barriers & institutional constraints influenced BsAb selection: CAR-T unavailability, access to specialized centers, referral complexity, insurance delay, manufacturing delay & hospitalization needs. In MM, 78% providers preferred Cilta-cel over Ide-cel, especially academic providers & those with CAR-T experience. CAR-T volume did not impact selection. Cilta-cel was preferred due to perceived better response rate (RR), more experience, “progression-free survival (PFS) benefit”, center choice, & logistical issues with Ide-cel. Ide-cel was selected due to center choice, favorable TP & insurance preference. Teclistamab was preferred by 78% due to more experience, better RR, TP & center choice, Elranatamab by 11% (better TP, RR, & “PFS”), & Talquetamab by 11% due to having a non-BCMA target. Academic providers preferred Teclistamab (89% vs 50%), & nonacademic providers preferred Talquetamab (38% vs 4%) and Elranatamab (13% vs 8%). In DLBCL after 2+ LOT, 69% favored Axi-cel due to prior experience, RR, center choice, & logistical issues with other products. Liso-cel & Tisa-cel were chosen by 27% & 2%, respectively, due to favorable TP. Axi-cel was also preferred 2nd line by 73% for similar reasons, while 24% favored Liso-cel for its favorable TP. Epcoritamab was preferred by 56% (subcutaneous injection, more experience & center choice) & Glofitamab by 42% (shorter treatment duration, easy administration, more experience, & center choice). Practice setting & volume did not impact selection between products in DLBCL. InBCMA-naïve MM pts, majority (97%) chose an anti-BCMA agent over GPRC5D due to better RR, TP, prior experience, & center choice. InBCMA-exposed pts, most (92%) favored an anti-GPRC5D agent. In contrast in DLBCL, 80% chose CD19 CAR-T after prior CD19-directed therapy, & 18% chose CD20 BsAb. Therefore, antigen escape was less of a concern in DLBCL vs MM. For relapse after 2nd line CAR-T in DLBCL, 78% preferred BsAb over other salvage options due to better RR, TP, & more experience. Providers prioritized RR, survival, & TP in decision making. Treatment logistics, duration, frequency, & cost were less crucial. MM providers also prioritized quality of life, which was less so in DLBCL. There were no differences in priority based on practice setting & experience with CAR-T. Conclusion: The study highlights factors influencing therapy choices in MM & DLBCL. Despite CAR-T's potential for better outcomes, significant access barriers exist. Efforts to streamline referral pathways, logistics, & expanding availability are crucial to improve outcomes. Understanding these preferences & barriers can guide future management strategies.

Introduction: Tissue biopsies are needed to establish a diagnosis of systemic AL amyloidosis. Biopsy can be obtained from an involved organ with suspected amyloid deposition (target biopsy) or from sites in which amyloid commonly deposits (surrogate biopsy). The choice of biopsy site depends on institutional and physician preference. Two commonly used sites for surrogate biopsies are abdominal fat pad and bone marrow. The present systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the diagnostic test accuracy of fat pad and bone marrow biopsies as surrogate biopsy sites in the diagnosis of AL amyloidosis. Methods: As part of the ASH AL Amyloidosis Diagnostic Guideline, we performed systematic reviews for seven prioritized PICO questions related to the screening, diagnosis and organ involvement evaluation of AL amyloidosis. We conducted electronic searches on PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception until January 2024. Two reviewers independently and in duplicate performed title and abstract screening and full text article screening on LASER AI, with conflicts resolved by a third reviewer. Studies were eligible if they included patients that had a fat pad sample or bone marrow biopsy and a target organ biopsy for suspicion of AL amyloidosis allowing for the calculation of diagnostic test accuracy measures. Diagnostic test accuracy measures of interest were sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value. Statistical analysis was performed on OpenMeta[Analyst]. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) was used to assess the certainty of evidence. Results: After deduplication, we retrieved 29,237 studies.. 20 studies with 2955 patients reporting on bone marrow biopsy, 25 with 4702 patients on fat pad sampling were included. The pooled sensitivity for bone marrow biopsy was 55.1% (95% CI 45.8-64.0, I2 = 94%) (Certainty of evidence: Low ⨁⨁◯◯), For fat pad sampling sensitivity was 76.6% (95% CI 72.1-80.8, I2 = 84.2%) (Certainty of evidence: Moderate ⨁⨁⨁◯). Among the included studies, 1 evaluated the sensitivity of fat pad sampling and bone marrow biopsy combined and found it to be 89%. No included studies evaluated specificity for bone marrow biopsy or fat pad sample. Conclusion: Combination of fat pad and bone marrow biopsy together significantly improve sensitivity for amyloid detection compared to either fat pad sampling or bone marrow biopsy alone.

Summary In 2014, the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) updated the criteria for diagnosing myeloma and added three additional criteria to the traditional Calcium elevation, Renal impairment, Anemia, Bone disease (CRAB) criteria, called the Sixty % marrow plama cells, Light chain ratio >60, Mri demonstates lytic lesions (SLiM) criteria (clonal bone marrow plasma cells ≥60%, involved to uninvolved free light chain ratio (FLCr) ≥100 and >1 focal lesion on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)). We report on the outcomes of 30 patients who underwent autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) where therapy was initiated solely based on SLiM criteria and compared them to a matched cohort of 60 patients whose myeloma‐defining event was CRAB. The SLiM cohort had a shorter median time to neutrophil (15 vs. 16 days, p = 0.049) and platelet (15 vs. 17 days, p = 0.0004) engraftment. The 36‐month overall survival (OS) was 100% in the SLiM group and 93.27% in the control group (95% CI 83.06%–97.42%), with a trend towards longer OS in the SLiM cohort ( p = 0.065). The 36‐month progression‐free survival (PFS) was 91.61% in the SLiM (95% CI 69.93%–97.87%) and 65.95% in the control group (95% CI 52.31%–76.53%). There was no difference in the PFS between the cohorts ( p = 0.414). ASCT is efficacious and safe in MM patients transplanted only due to SLIM criteria. Early intervention in this asymptomatic cohort did not appear to result in deeper responses or better PFS compared to outcomes in symptomatic patients.

Abstract As patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) continue to live longer, they might get exposed to most available drugs and drug classes during the disease course. For such late line RRMM or among patients without access to novel therapies, retreatment with a drug that the disease had previously been refractory to might be one option. In this retrospective study, we describe 315 patients with RRMM at our institution who were retreated with a drug that the disease had been previously refractory to. We found an overall response rate of 56.2% and a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 11 months with retreatment. Patients with a longer time on initial therapy with the index drug (>28.4 months) had a superior PFS with retreatment (median PFS, 16.9 vs 8.1 months; P < .001). Similarly, patients with a longer time gap between the initial line of therapy with index drug and retreatment with index drug (>46.1 months) had better PFS with retreatment (28.2 vs 8.9 months; P = .016). In conclusion, retreatment with a previously refractory drug is a viable therapeutic option for RRMM, with the most significant benefit derived in disease demonstrating sensitivity to initial drug exposure and among those with a longer gap between initial drug exposure and retreatment.

AbstractRenal AL amyloidosis can be complicated by end‐stage renal disease (ESRD) requiring renal replacement therapy (RRT). In this study, we describe the long‐term outcomes of renal AL amyloidosis patients undergoing autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) and assess the utility of the renal staging system. Retrospective study of renal AL patients (n = 697; Mayo Clinic, Boston University) who underwent ASCT between 2003 and 2020. Renal stage was assigned based on 24‐h proteinuria and estimated glomerular filtration rate measurements. Renal survival was defined as the time from ASCT until initiation of RRT, while patients who were not placed on RRT were censored at their last follow‐up. With a median follow‐up of 10.4 years, RRT was required in 149 patients (21%). The median time from ASCT to ESRD was 3.4 years, with late events of progression to ESRD seen >10 years from ASCT. Pre‐ASCT renal stage was significantly associated with the cumulative incidence of RRT: 3‐year RRT rate was 3%, 10%, and 37% for renal stages I, II, and III, respectively. However, in the 2012–2020 period subset, a significant decrease in ESRD risk was noted across all renal stages (3‐year RRT 0%, 5%, and 24%, respectively). In multivariate analysis, renal survival was independently associated with the pre‐ASCT renal stage, lambda isotype, bone marrow plasmacytosis ≥20%, post‐ASCT hematologic response, and year of ASCT. Long‐term outcomes of renal AL amyloidosis treated with ASCT are presented. Renal stage reliably predicts renal outcomes in patients with AL undergoing ASCT, despite a reduction in the proportion of patients progressing to RRT in recent years.

ImportanceKidney light chain (AL) amyloidosis is associated with a risk of progression to kidney replacement therapy (KRT) and death. Several studies have shown that a greater reduction in proteinuria following successful anticlonal therapy is associated with improved outcomes.ObjectiveTo validate graded kidney response criteria and their association with kidney and overall survival (OS).Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis retrospective, multicenter cohort was conducted at 10 referral centers for amyloidosis from 2010 to 2015 and included patients with kidney AL amyloidosis that was evaluable for kidney response and who achieved at least hematologic partial response within 12 months of diagnosis. The median follow-up was 69 (54-88) months. Data analysis was conducted in 2023.ExposureFour kidney response categories based on the reduction in pretreatment 24-hour urine protein (24-hour UP) levels: complete response (kidCR, 24-hour UP ≤200 mg), very good partial response (kidVGPR, >60% reduction in 24-hour UP), partial response (kidPR, 31%-60% reduction), and no response (kidNR, ≤30% reduction). Kidney response was assessed at landmark points (6, 12, and 24 months) and best kidney response.Main Outcomes and MeasuresCumulative incidence of progression to KRT and OS.ResultsSeven-hundred and thirty-two patients (335 women [45.8%]) were included, with a median (IQR) age of 63 (55-69) years. The median (IQR) baseline 24-hour proteinuria and estimated glomerular filtration rate was 5.3 (2.8-8.5) g per 24 hours and 72 (48-92) mL/min/1.73m2, respectively. In a competing-risk analysis, the 5-year cumulative incidence rates of progression to KRT decreased with deeper kidney responses as early as 6 months from therapy initiation (11%, 12%, 2.1%, and 0% for kidNR, kidPR, kidVGPR, and kidCR, respectively; P = .002) and were maintained at 12 months and 24 months and best kidney response. Patients able to achieve kidCR/kidVGPR by 24 months and at best response had significantly better OS compared with kidPR/kidNR. Kidney progression, defined as a 25% or greater decrease in estimated glomerular filtration rate, was associated with cumulative incidence of progression to KRT and OS.Conclusions and RelevanceThe results of this cohort study suggest that graded kidney response criteria offers clinically and prognostically meaningful information for treating patients with kidney AL amyloidosis. The response criteria potentially inform kidney survival based on the depth of reduction in 24-hour proteinuria levels and demonstrate an OS advantage for those able to achieve kidCR/kidVGPR compared with kidPR/kidNR. Taken together, achievement of at least kidVGPR by 12 months is needed to ultimately improve kidney and patient survival.

7558 Background: Survival in patients with multiple myeloma (MM) continues to improve with the newer therapies, but there is no clear evidence of a cure and patients continue to relapse. However, most patients have the most extended period without progression with their first-line therapy, and subsequent therapies often provide a shorter duration of response due to the use of drugs with overlapping mechanisms of action and, more importantly, a shorter first remission, pointing toward more aggressive disease biology. With newer immunotherapies being used at 1st relapse, this may change. We designed this study to explore the natural history of MM after the 1st relapse and define the predictors of outcome after the initial relapse. Methods: We identified all patients in the Mayo Clinic database diagnosed between Jan 2004-June 2019 who had had initial disease progression. The study cohort included 2005 patients. We explored the overall survival (OS) from the time of documented disease progression or the start of second-line treatment in patients who had not met IMWG criteria before second-line therapy. Front-line therapy was grouped into those with either an IMiD or PI, both IMiD and PI, daratumumab with IMiD and PI, and none of these agents. The IMiD and PI were always used with dexamethasone with or without an alkylator. Results: The median age was 63 (range 24-95) years and 60% were male. The median estimated follow-up from diagnosis for all patients was 86 mos. (95% CI; 82, 88) and the median time to progression from the start of therapy was 25 mos. (95% CI; 24, 26). The median OS from the first progression was 45 mos. (95% CI; 42, 50), 36 mos. for those diagnosed before 2009, and 52-53 mos. for those diagnosed later. On univariate analysis, age <70 at 1st relapse, RISS I, novel agents in initial therapy, CR in the first line, diagnosis after 2009, initial remission >18 mos, and initiation of therapy before IMWG progression were all associated with improved OS after 1st relapse (Table). On multivariate analysis, age <70, RISS I, initial remission >18 mos, and initiation of therapy before IMWG progression were all associated with improved OS after 1st relapse. Conclusions: The study provides an estimate of the outcomes and significant predictors of outcomes after 1st relapse in patients with MM. These factors should be taken into consideration when designing clinical trials in this patient population. In particular, these factors identify a high-risk group of patients not always identified by baseline characteristics and should be the focus of future trials. [Table: see text]