Lymphoid follicle colonization by Bcl-2bright+CD10+ B-cells (“follicular lymphoma in situ”) at nodal and extranodal sites can be a manifestation of follicular homing of lymphoma

Follicular lymphoma (FL) in situ (FLIS) was first described and proposed as a distinct entity associated with an indolent clinical course in 2002. To gain further insight into the biology of this enigmatic lymphoproliferation, we analyzed morphologic, phenotypic, cytogenetic and molecular features of tissue specimens manifesting a pattern of follicular colonization by Bcl-2bright+CD10+ B-cells and associated lymphomas from 13 adults and evaluated their clinical outcomes. We observed this immunoarchitectural pattern in lymph nodes (n = 8), at extranodal sites (n = 4), or at both locations (n = 1) at diagnosis. All except 3 cases showed concomitant bright CD10 expression. Six (46%) patients had synchronous and 2 (15%) developed metachronous B-cell lymphomas, with 5 representing high-grade lymphomas. The Bcl-2bright+CD10+ B-cells colonizing reactive follicles and synchronous lymphomas were clonally related in 4/5 (80%) cases analyzed and 5/6 (83%) displayed BCL2 translocations. Two cases exhibited complex karyotypes in both components; a genetic “triple hit” was detected in one instance and 2 copies of t(14,18) were observed in a lymph node biopsy lacking evidence of lymphoma from an individual with stage 4 disease, suspected on imaging, who subsequently displayed a mantle zone/perifollicular infiltrate of Bcl-2bright+CD10+ B-cells in the adenoids. Our findings suggest that bright Bcl-2, and often bright CD10 expression, by B-cells colonizing reactive follicles might represent a phenomenon related to follicular homing of lymphoma, rather than being an attribute of preneoplastic FL precursors. Furthermore, due to the relatively high frequency of overt lymphomas observed, complete staging workup is recommended for patients exhibiting a Bcl-2bright+CD10+ B-cell follicular colonization pattern on biopsy

Progression-free survival as a surrogate endpoint for overall survival in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma

Objectives: The goal of the research was to assess the quantitative relationship between median progression-free survival (PFS) and median overall survival (OS) specifically among patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) based on published randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Methods: Two bibliographic databases (PubMed and Embase, 1970–2017) were systematically searched for RCTs in RRMM that reported OS and PFS, followed by an updated search of studies published between 2010 and 2022 in 3 databases (Embase, MEDLINE, and EBM Reviews, 2010–2022). The association between median PFS and median OS was assessed using the nonparametric Spearman rank and parametric Pearson correlation coefficients. Subsequently, the quantitative relationship between PFS and OS was assessed using weighted least-squares regression adjusted for covariates including age, sex, and publication year. Study arms were weighted by the number of patients in each arm. Results: A total of 31 RCTs (56 treatment arms, 10,450 patients with RRMM) were included in the analysis. The average median PFS and median OS were 7.1 months (SD 5.5) and 28.1 months (SD 11.8), respectively. The Spearman and Pearson correlation coefficients between median PFS and median OS were 0.80 (P &lt; 0.0001) and 0.79 (P &lt; 0.0001), respectively. In individual treatment arms of RRMM trials, each 1-month increase in median PFS was associated with a 1.72-month (95% CI 1.26–2.17) increase in median OS. Conclusion: Analysis of the relationship between PFS and OS incorporating more recent studies in RRMM further substantiates the use of PFS to predict OS in RRMM.</p

Daratumumab With Cetrelimab, an Anti-PD-1 Monoclonal Antibody, in Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma

Patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma have an immunosuppressive state with upregulation of programmed death receptor-1 on immune effector cells. Treatment with daratumumab plus cetrelimab, which targets the programmed death receptor-1, was evaluated in 9 patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. No new safety concerns were identified for the combination. The potential clinical benefit of daratumumab plus cetrelimab remains uncertain. Background: Daratumumab is approved for relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) as monotherapy or in combination regimens. We evaluated daratumumab plus cetrelimab, a programmed death receptor-1 inhibitor, in RRMM. Patients and Methods: This open-label, multiphase study enrolled adults with RRMM with >= 3 prior lines of therapy. Part 1 was a safety run-in phase examining dose-limiting toxicities of daratumumab (16 mg/kg intravenously weekly for cycles 1-2, biweekly for cycles 3-6, and monthly thereafter) plus cetrelimab (240 mg intravenously biweekly, all cycles). In Parts 2 and 3, patients were to be randomized to daratumumab with or without cetrelimab (same schedule as Part 1). Endpoints included safety, overall response rate, pharmacokinetics, and biomarker analyses. Results: Nine patients received daratumumab plus cetrelimab in the safety run-in, and 1 received daratumumab in Part 2 before administrative study termination following a data monitoring committee's global recommendation to stop any trial including daratumumab combined with inhibitors of programmed death receptor-1 or its ligand (programmed death-ligand 1). The median follow-up times were 6.7 months (safety run-in) and 0.3 months (Part 2). No dose-limiting toxicities occurred. All 10 patients had >= 1 treatment-emergent adverse event; 7 patients had grade 3 to 4 treatment-emergent adverse events, and none led to treatment discontinuation or death. In the safety run-in, 7 (77.7%) patients had > 1 infusion-related reaction (most grade 1-2), and 1 had a grade 2 immune-mediated reaction. Among safety run-in patients, the overall response rate was 44.4%. Conclusions: No new safety concerns were identified for daratumumab plus cetrelimab in RRMM. The short study duration and small population limit complete analysis of this combination. (C) 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc

Adjusted Comparison of Outcomes between Patients from CARTITUDE-1 versus Multiple Myeloma Patients with Prior Exposure to PI, Imid and Anti-CD-38 from a German Registry

Ciltacabtagene autoleucel (cilta-cel) is a Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy with the potential for long-term disease control in heavily pre-treated patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). As cilta-cel was assessed in the single-arm CARTITUDE-1 clinical trial, we used an external cohort of patients from the Therapie Monitor registry fulfilling the CARTITUDE-1 inclusion criteria to evaluate the effectiveness of cilta-cel for overall survival (OS) and time to next treatment (TTNT) vs. real-world clinical practice. Individual patient data allowed us to adjust the comparisons between both cohorts, using the inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPW; average treatment effect in the treated population (ATT) and overlap population (ATO) weights) and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression. Outcomes were compared in intention-to-treat (HR, IPW-ATT: TTNT: 0.13 (95% CI: 0.07, 0.24); OS: 0.14 (95% CI: 0.07, 0.25); IPW-ATO: TTNT: 0.24 (95% CI: 0.12, 0.49); OS: 0.26 (95% CI: 0.13, 0.54)) and modified intention-to-treat (HR, IPW-ATT: TTNT: 0.24 (95% CI: 0.09, 0.67); OS: 0.26 (95% CI: 0.08, 0.84); IPW-ATO: TTNT: 0.26 (95% CI: 0.11, 0.59); OS: 0.31 (95% CI: 0.12, 0.79)) populations. All the comparisons were statistically significant in favor of cilta-cel. These results highlight cilta-cel’s potential as a novel, effective treatment to address unmet needs in patients with RRMM

Daratumumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone versus pomalidomide and dexamethasone alone in previously treated multiple myeloma (APOLLO): an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial

Background: In a phase 1b study, intravenous daratumumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone induced a very good partial response or better rate of 42% and was well tolerated in patients with heavily pretreated multiple myeloma. We aimed to evaluate whether daratumumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone would improve progression-free survival versus pomalidomide and dexamethasone alone in patients with previously treated multiple myeloma. Methods: In this ongoing, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial (APOLLO) done at 48 academic centres and hospitals across 12 European countries, eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma with measurable disease, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–2, had at least one previous line of therapy, including lenalidomide and a proteasome inhibitor, had a partial response or better to one or more previous lines of antimyeloma therapy, and were refractory to lenalidomide if only one previous line of therapy was received. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by an interactive web-response system in a random block size of two or four to receive pomalidomide and dexamethasone alone or daratumumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone. Randomisation was stratified by number of previous lines of therapy and International Staging System disease stage. All patients received oral pomalidomide (4 mg, once daily on days 1–21) and oral dexamethasone (40 mg once daily on days 1, 8, 15, and 22; 20 mg for those aged 75 years or older) at each 28-day cycle. The daratumumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone group received daratumumab (1800 mg subcutaneously or 16 mg/kg intravenously) weekly during cycles 1 and 2, every 2 weeks during cycles 3–6, and every 4 weeks thereafter until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of study medication. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03180736. Findings: Between June 22, 2017, and June 13, 2019, 304 patients (median age 67 years [IQR 60–72]; 161 [53%] men and 143 [47%] women) were randomly assigned to the daratumumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone group (n=151) or the pomalidomide and dexamethasone group (n=153). At a median follow-up of 16·9 months (IQR 14·4–20·6), the daratumumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone group showed improved progression-free survival compared with the pomalidomide and dexamethasone group (median 12·4 months [95% CI 8·3–19·3] vs 6·9 months [5·5–9·3]; hazard ratio 0·63 [95% CI 0·47–0·85], two-sided p=0·0018). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were neutropenia (101 [68%] of 149 patients in the daratumumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone group vs 76 [51%] of 150 patients in the pomalidomide and dexamethasone group), anaemia (25 [17%] vs 32 [21%]), and thrombocytopenia (26 [17%] vs 27 [18%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 75 (50%) of 149 patients in the daratumumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone group versus 59 (39%) of 150 patients in the pomalidomide and dexamethasone group; pneumonia (23 [15%] vs 12 [8%] patients) and lower respiratory tract infection (18 [12%] vs 14 [9%]) were most common. Treatment-emergent deaths were reported in 11 (7%) patients in the daratumumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone group versus 11 (7%) patients in the pomalidomide and dexamethasone group. Interpretation: Among patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma, daratumumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone reduced the risk of disease progression or death versus pomalidomide and dexamethasone alone and could be considered a new treatment option in this setting. Funding: European Myeloma Network and Janssen Research and Development.European Myeloma Network and Janssen Research and Development

Daratumumab, Bortezomib, and Dexamethasone Versus Bortezomib and Dexamethasone in Patients With Previously Treated Multiple Myeloma: Three-year Follow-up of CASTOR

Background: In the phase III CASTOR study in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma, daratumumab, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (D-Vd) demonstrated significant clinical benefit versus Vd alone. Outcomes after 40.0 months of median follow-up are discussed. Patients and Methods: Eligible patients had received ≥ 1 line of treatment and were administered bortezomib (1.3 mg/m2) and dexamethasone (20 mg) for 8 cycles with or without daratumumab (16 mg/kg) until disease progression. Results: Of 498 patients in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population (D-Vd, n = 251; Vd, n = 247), 47% had 1 prior line of treatment (1PL; D-Vd, n = 122; Vd, n = 113). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was significantly prolonged with D-Vd versus Vd in the ITT population (16.7 vs. 7.1 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.31; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.25-0.40; P < .0001) and the 1PL subgroup (27.0 vs. 7.9 months; HR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.15-0.32; P < .0001). In lenalidomide-refractory patients, the median PFS was 7.8 versus 4.9 months (HR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.28-0.68; P = .0002) for D-Vd (n = 60) versus Vd (n = 81). Minimal residual disease (MRD)–negativity rates (10−5) were greater with D-Vd versus Vd (ITT: 14% vs. 2%; 1PL: 20% vs. 3%; both P < .0001). PFS2 was significantly prolonged with D-Vd versus Vd (ITT: HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.38-0.61; 1PL: HR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.24-0.51; P < .0001). No new safety concerns were observed. Conclusion: After 3 years, D-Vd maintained significant benefits in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma with a consistent safety profile. D-Vd provided the greatest benefit at first relapse and increased MRD-negativity rates.CASTOR showed the significant clinical benefit of daratumumab plus bortezomib and dexamethasone for patients with previously treated multiple myeloma. With ∼3 years median follow-up, this regimen continues to demonstrate significantly improved progression-free survival with higher minimal residual dis

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

[Objective]: In the absence of head-to-head trials, indirect treatment comparisons (ITCs) between ciltacabtagene autoleucel (cilta-cel; in CARTITUDE-1) and treatments used in real-world clinical practice (physician’s choice of treatment [PCT]), were previously conducted. We conducted multiple meta-analyses using available ITC data to consolidate the effectiveness of cilta-cel versus PCT for patients with triple-class exposed relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). [Methods]: Five ITCs were assessed for similarity to ensure robust comparisons using meta-analysis. Effectiveness outcomes were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), time to next treatment (TTNT), and overall response rate (ORR). A robust variance estimator was used to account for the use of CARTITUDE-1 in each pairwise ITC. Analyses were conducted in both treated and enrolled populations of CARTITUDE-1. [Results]: Four ITCs were combined for evaluation of OS. Results were statistically significantly in favor of cilta-cel versus PCT in treated patients (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.24, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.22–0.26). Three ITCs were combined for evaluation of PFS and TTNT. Cilta-cel reduced the risk of progression and receiving a subsequent treatment by 80% (HR: 0.20 [95% CI: 0.06, 0.70]) and 83% (HR: 0.17 [95% CI: 0.12, 0.26]), respectively. Three ITCs were combined for evaluation of ORR. Cilta-cel increased the odds of achieving an overall response by 86-times versus PCT in treated patients. Findings were consistent in the enrolled populations and across sensitivity analyses. [Conclusions]: Evaluating multiple indirect comparisons, cilta-cel demonstrated a significantly superior advantage over PCT, highlighting its effectiveness as a therapy in patients with triple-class exposed RRMM.The CARTITUDE-1 study and these analyses were funded by Janssen Research & Development, LLC, and Legend Biotech, Inc. Medical writing support was provided by EVERSANA and funded by Janssen Global Services, LLC

LocoMMotion:a prospective, non-interventional, multinational study of real-life current standards of care in patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma

Despite treatment advances, patients with multiple myeloma (MM) often progress through standard drug classes including proteasome inhibitors (PIs), immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs), and anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies (mAbs). LocoMMotion (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04035226) is the first prospective study of real-life standard of care (SOC) in triple-class exposed (received at least a PI, IMiD, and anti-CD38 mAb) patients with relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM). Patients (N = 248; ECOG performance status of 0–1, ≥3 prior lines of therapy or double refractory to a PI and IMiD) were treated with median 4.0 (range, 1–20) cycles of SOC therapy. Overall response rate was 29.8% (95% CI: 24.2–36.0). Median progression-free survival (PFS) and median overall survival (OS) were 4.6 (95% CI: 3.9–5.6) and 12.4 months (95% CI: 10.3–NE). Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported in 83.5% of patients (52.8% grade 3/4). Altogether, 107 deaths occurred, due to progressive disease (n = 74), TEAEs (n = 19), and other reasons (n = 14). The 92 varied regimens utilized demonstrate a lack of clear SOC for heavily pretreated, triple-class exposed patients with RRMM in real-world practice and result in poor outcomes. This supports a need for new treatments with novel mechanisms of action

Pharmacokinetics and Exposure–Response Analyses of Daratumumab in Combination Therapy Regimens for Patients with Multiple Myeloma

Introduction: Daratumumab, a human IgG monoclonal antibody targeting CD38, has demonstrated activity as monotherapy and in combination with standard-of-care regimens in multiple myeloma. Population pharmacokinetic analyses were conducted to determine the pharmacokinetics of intravenous daratumumab in combination therapy versus monotherapy, evaluate the effect of patient- and disease-related covariates on drug disposition, and examine the relationships between daratumumab exposure and efficacy/safety outcomes. Methods: Four clinical studies of daratumumab in combination with lenalidomide/dexamethasone (POLLUX and GEN503); bortezomib/dexamethasone (CASTOR); pomalidomide/dexamethasone, bortezomib/thalidomide/dexamethasone, and bortezomib/melphalan/prednisone (EQUULEUS) were included in the analysis. Using various dosing schedules, the majority of patients (684/694) received daratumumab at a dose of 16 mg/kg. In GEN503, daratumumab was administered at a dose of 2 mg/kg (n = 3), 4 mg/kg (n = 3), 8 mg/kg (n = 4), and 16 mg/kg (n = 34). A total of 650 patients in EQUULEUS (n = 128), POLLUX (n = 282), and CASTOR (n = 240) received daratumumab 16 mg/kg. The exposure–efficacy and exposure–safety relationships examined progression-free survival (PFS) and selected adverse events (infusion-related reactions; thrombocytopenia, anemia, neutropenia, lymphopenia, and infections), respectively. Results: Pharmacokinetic profiles of daratumumab were similar between monotherapy and combination therapy. Covariate analysis identified no clinically important effects on daratumumab exposure, and no dose adjustments were recommended on the basis of these factors. Maximal clinical benefit on PFS was achieved for the majority of patients (approximately 75%) at the 16 mg/kg dose. No apparent relationship was observed between daratumumab exposure and selected adverse events. Conclusion: These data support the recommended 16 mg/kg dose of daratumumab and the respective dosing schedules in the POLLUX and CASTOR pivotal studies. Funding: Janssen Research & Development