International Myeloma Working Group risk stratification model for smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM)

Smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM) is an asymptomatic precursor state of multiple myeloma (MM). Recently, MM was redefined to include biomarkers predicting a high risk of progression from SMM, thus necessitating a redefinition of SMM and its risk stratification. We assembled a large cohort of SMM patients meeting the revised IMWG criteria to develop a new risk stratification system. We included 1996 patients, and using stepwise selection and multivariable analysis, we identified three independent factors predicting progression risk at 2 years: serum M-protein >2 g/dL (HR: 2.1), involved to uninvolved free light-chain ratio >20 (HR: 2.7), and marrow plasma cell infiltration >20% (HR: 2.4). This translates into 3 categories with increasing 2-year progression risk: 6% for low risk (38%; no risk factors, HR: 1); 18% for intermediate risk (33%; 1 factor; HR: 3.0), and 44% for high risk (29%; 2–3 factors). Addition of cytogenetic abnormalities (t(4;14), t(14;16), +1q, and/or del13q) allowed separation into 4 groups (low risk with 0, low intermediate risk with 1, intermediate risk with 2, and high risk with ≥3 risk factors) with 6, 23, 46, and 63% risk of progression in 2 years, respectively. The 2/20/20 risk stratification model can be easily implemented to identify high-risk SMM for clinical research and routine practice and will be widely applicable

Prevention and management of adverse events of novel agents in multiple myeloma: a consensus of the European Myeloma Network

During the last few years, several new drugs have been introduced for treatment of patients with multiple myeloma, which have significantly improved the treatment outcome. All of these novel substances differ at least in part in their mode of action from similar drugs of the same drug class, or are representatives of new drug classes, and as such present with very specific side effect profiles. In this review, we summarize these adverse events, provide information on their prevention, and give practical guidance for monitoring of patients and for management of adverse events

Prevention and management of adverse events of novel agents in multiple myeloma: A consensus of the European Myeloma Network

During the last few years, several new drugs have been introduced for treatment of patients with multiple myeloma, which have significantly improved the treatment outcome. All of these novel substances differ at least in part in their mode of action from similar drugs of the same drug class, or are representatives of new drug classes, and as such present with very specific side effect profiles. In this review, we summarize these adverse events, provide information on their prevention, and give practical guidance for monitoring of patients and for management of adverse events

Randomized phase 2 study: Elotuzumab plus bortezomib/dexamethasone vs bortezomib/dexamethasone for relapsed/refractory MM

In this proof-of-concept, open-label, phase 2 study, patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) received elotuzumab with bortezomib and dexamethasone (EBd) or bortezomib and dexamethasone (Bd) until disease progression/unacceptable toxicity. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary/exploratory endpoints included overall response rate (ORR) and overall survival (OS). Two-sided 0.30 significance level was specified (80% power, 103 events) to detect hazard ratio (HR) of 0.69. Efficacy and safety analyses were performed on all randomized patients and all treated patients, respectively. Of 152 randomized patients (77 EBd, 75 Bd), 150 were treated (75 EBd, 75 Bd). PFS was greater with EBd vs Bd (HR, 0.72; 70% confidence interval [CI], 0.59-0.88; stratified log-rank P 5 .09); median PFS was longer with EBd (9.7 months) vs Bd (6.9 months). In an updated analysis, EBd-treated patients homozygous for the high-affinity FcγRIIIa allele had median PFS of 22.3 months vs 9.8 months in EBd-treated patients homozygous for the low-affinity allele. ORR was 66% (EBd) vs 63% (Bd). Very good partial response or better occurred in 36% of patients (EBd) vs 27% (Bd). Early OS results, based on 40 deaths, revealed an HR of 0.61 (70% CI, 0.43-0.85). To date, 60 deaths have occurred (28 EBd, 32 Bd). No additional clinically significant adverse events occurred with EBd vs Bd. Grade 1/2 infusion reaction rate was low (5% EBd) and mitigated with premedication. In patients with RRMM, elotuzumab, an immunostimulatory antibody, appears to provide clinical benefit without added clinically significant toxicity when combined with Bd vs Bd alone. Registered to ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT01478048

Outcomes of Haploidentical Transplantation in Patients with Relapsed Multiple Myeloma:An EBMT/CIBMTR Report

Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) using siblings and matched donors has the potential for long-term disease control in a subset of high-risk patients with multiple myeloma (MM); however, the data on using haploidentical donors in this disease are limited. We conducted a retrospective analysis to examine the outcomes of patients with MM who underwent haploidentical allo-HCT within European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation/Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research centers. A total of 96 patients underwent haploidentical allo-HCT between 2008 and 2016. With a median follow-up of 24.0 months (range, 13.2 to 24.9 months), 97% (95% confidence interval [CI], 93% to 100%) of patients had neutrophil engraftment by day 28, and 75% (95% CI, 66% to 84%) achieved platelet recovery by day 60. Two-year progression-free survival (PFS) was 17% (95% CI, 8% to 26%), and overall survival (OS) was 48% (95% CI, 36% to 59%). At 2 years, the cumulative risk of relapse/progression was 56% (95% CI, 45% to 67%), and 1-year nonrelapse mortality (NRM) was 21% (95% CI, 13% to 29%). The incidences of acute graft-versus-host-disease (GVHD) grades II-IV by 100 days and chronic GVHD at 2 years were 39% (95% CI, 28% to 49%) and 46% (95% CI, 34% to 59%), respectively. On univariate analysis, use of post-transplantation cyclophosphamide (PT-Cy) (54% [95% CI, 41% to 68%] versus 25% [95% CI, 1% to 48%]; P =.009) and use of bone marrow as source of stem cells (72% [95% CI, 55% to 89%] versus 31% [95% CI, 17% to 46%]; P = .001) were associated with improved OS at 2 years. Disease status, patient sex, intensity of conditioning regimen, recipient/donor sex mismatch, and cytomegalovirus serostatus had no impact on OS, PFS, or NRM. Haploidentical transplantation is feasible for patients with multiply relapsed or high-risk MM, with an encouraging 2-year OS of 48% and an NRM of 21% at 1 year, supporting further investigation of haploidentical allo-HCT in suitable candidates with MM

Prognostic impact of early‐versus‐late responses to different induction regimens in patients with myeloma undergoing autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation: Results from the CALM study by the CMWP of the EBMT

In autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT)-eligible myeloma patients, prolonged induction does not necessarily improve the depth of response. We analyzed 1222 ASCT patients who were classified based on (a) the interval between induction and stem cell collection, (b) the type of induction regimen: BID (Bortezomib, IMiDs, and Dexamethasone), Bortezomib-based, or CTD (Cyclophosphamide, Thalidomide, and Dexamethasone), and (c) the time to best response (Early ie, best response within 4 or 5 months, depending on the regimen vs Late; Good ie, VGPR or better vs Poor). The length of induction treatment required to achieve a Good response did not affect PFS (P = .65) or OS (P = .61) post-ASCT. The three types of regimen resulted in similar outcomes: median PFS 31, 27.7 and 30.8 months (P = .31), and median OS 81.7, 92.7, and 77.4 months, respectively (P = .83). On multivariate analysis, neither the type nor the duration of the induction regimen affected OS and PFS, except for Early Good Responders who had a better PFS compared to Early Poor Responders (HR = 1.21, P-value = .02). However, achieving a Good response at induction was associated with a better response (≥VGPR) post-transplant. The kinetics of response did not affect outcomes

Prognostic impact of early-versus-late responses to different induction regimens in patients with myeloma undergoing autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation: Results from the CALM study by the CMWP of the EBMT.

In autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT)-eligible myeloma patients, prolonged induction does not necessarily improve the depth of response. We analyzed 1222 ASCT patients who were classified based on (a) the interval between induction and stem cell collection, (b) the type of induction regimen: BID (Bortezomib, IMiDs, and Dexamethasone), Bortezomib-based, or CTD (Cyclophosphamide, Thalidomide, and Dexamethasone), and (c) the time to best response (Early ie, best response within 4 or 5 months, depending on the regimen vs Late; Good ie, VGPR or better vs Poor). The length of induction treatment required to achieve a Good response did not affect PFS (P = .65) or OS (P = .61) post-ASCT. The three types of regimen resulted in similar outcomes: median PFS 31, 27.7 and 30.8 months (P = .31), and median OS 81.7, 92.7, and 77.4 months, respectively (P = .83). On multivariate analysis, neither the type nor the duration of the induction regimen affected OS and PFS, except for Early Good Responders who had a better PFS compared to Early Poor Responders (HR = 1.21, P-value = .02). However, achieving a Good response at induction was associated with a better response (≥VGPR) post-transplant. The kinetics of response did not affect outcomes

IgD Subtype But Not IgM or Non-Secretory Is a Prognostic Marker for Poor Survival Following Autologous Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation in Multiple Myeloma. Results From the EBMT CALM (Collaboration to Collect Autologous Transplant Outcomes in Lymphomas and Myeloma) Study

The rare myelomas, immunoglobulin (Ig)D, IgM, and non-secretory, have been associated with poorer outcomes following treatment than the common myelomas (IgG, IgA, and light-chain only). We show that even with novel therapies, augmented with autologous transplantation, this remains true for IgD myeloma. In contrast, IgM and non-secretory myelomas have a prognosis similar to the usual myelomas. Background: The Collaboration to Collect Autologous Transplant Outcomes in Lymphoma and Myeloma (CALM) study has provided an opportunity to evaluate the real-world outcomes of patients with myeloma. The aim of this study was to compare the outcome according to the different subtypes of myeloma using CALM data. Patients: This study compared overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and complete remission (CR) and the impact of novel versus non-novel drug containing induction regimens prior to autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) of 2802 patients with usual and rare myelomas. Results: Our data suggest that IgM and non-secretory myeloma have superior PFS and OS compared with IgD myeloma and outcomes comparable to those for usual myeloma. Patients who received novel agent induction had higher rates of CR prior to transplant. Non-novel induction regimens were associated with inferior PFS but no difference in OS. Although not the primary focus of this study, we show that poor mobilization status is associated with reduced PFS and OS, but these differences disappear in multivariate analysis suggesting that poor mobilization status is a surrogate for other indicators of poor prognosis. Conclusion: We confirm that IgD myeloma is associated with the worst prognosis and inferior outcomes compared with the other isotypes. (C) 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved