No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Minimal Residual Disease Status as a Surrogate Endpoint for Progression-Free Survival in Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Studies: A Meta-analysis
Abstract
Background:
Therapeutic advances have greatly extended survival times in patients with multiple myeloma, necessitating increasingly lengthy trials when using survival outcomes as primary endpoints. A surrogate endpoint that can more rapidly predict survival could accelerate drug development. We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate minimal residual disease (MRD) status as a valid progression-free survival (PFS) surrogate in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM).
Materials and methods:
We searched abstracts in PubMed, The American Society of Hematology, and the European Hematology Association for "myeloma," "minimal residual disease," and "clinical trial." Because of the need to evaluate the treatment effect on MRD response, only randomized studies for subjects with NDMM were included. Details on the MRD-tested populations were required. The meta-analysis was performed by principles outlined at the 2013 United States Food and Drug Administration workshop on MRD in acute myeloid leukemia.42 For samples that were not measured for MRD and within the subset specified for MRD assessment, their MRD status was imputed from the samples that had known MRD status. Patients that were excluded from planned MRD assessment were considered MRD-positive.
Results:
Six randomized studies, representing 3283 patients and 2208 MRD samples, met analysis inclusion criteria. MRD negativity rates ranged from 0.06 to 0.70. The treatment effect on the odds ratio for MRD-negative response strongly correlated with the hazard ratio for PFS with a coefficient of determination for the weighted regression line of 0.97. Our meta-analysis suggested that MRD status met both the Prentice criteria for PFS surrogacy.
Conclusions:
These results support the claim that MRD status can be used as a surrogate for PFS in NDMM.
... With approximately 20 drug approvals in the past 20 years (1), clinical outcomes in patients with multiple myeloma have significantly improved, and it is not uncommon in practice to see patients living with the disease for more than 15 years after diagnosis (2). However, there is not yet an established cure for multiple myeloma, and the majority of patients achieve relatively long survival by transitioning from one therapy to the next when the disease progresses. ...
... In 2020, two meta-analyses were published that provided more support for the potential utility of MRD as a surrogate marker for PFS and OS (2,24). These analyses found a strong, positive association between MRD negativity and improved PFS across studies. ...
... These analyses found a strong, positive association between MRD negativity and improved PFS across studies. One analysis looked at trial-level association between MRD and PFS across six randomized trials (n = 3,283) and found an adjusted correlation coefficient of 0.97 (2). The other analysis included reconstructed patient-level data, which collectively demonstrated significant improvements in both PFS (44 studies; HR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.29-0.37; ...
Improvements in multiple myeloma treatments have extended patient survival to a decade or more. Treatment response rates >90% have introduced new challenges for drug development, including a need for early endpoints with greater sensitivity. The FDA, based on data from two independent academic research groups and industry, evaluated minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity as an intermediate endpoint for progression-free and overall survival, culminating in a unanimous vote by the Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee in April 2024 supporting MRD-negative complete response as an early endpoint reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit in multiple myeloma that may be used to support accelerated approval.
Significance
The acceptance of MRD-negative complete response as an endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit will allow for the design of streamlined clinical trials for accelerated approval, enabling significantly faster patient access to novel therapies. Cooperative efforts were required to obtain and analyze clinical trial data from multiple sponsors and to determine the best approach to analysis with a relatively limited number of available datasets. The process to evaluate MRD as an intermediate endpoint, undertaken jointly by myeloma researchers and industry, with feedback from the FDA, serves as a roadmap for other areas of oncology to develop intermediate endpoints.
... Measurable residual disease (MRD) assessment has emerged as a powerful strategy that has revolutionized the management of multiple myeloma. MRD is a sensitive prognostic assessment in multiple myeloma monitoring to determine depth of response, supported by many studies demonstrating that MRD negativity after treatment is associated with a better progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in multiple myeloma patients [6][7][8][9]. Moreover, MRD detection has been instrumental in evaluating the efficacy of novel therapeutic agents and in identifying patients who may benefit from early intervention or alternate treatment strategies. ...
... Specifically, individuals with undetectable MRD following treatment after diagnosis or relapse exhibit prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), signifying a significantly reduced risk of relapse and death from MM. Multiple myeloma monitoring through MRD assessment by next-generation flow cytometry has been found to be a surrogate endpoint in patients receiving first-line treatment [8], therefore, MRD may be used as an endpoint to accelerate drug development. ...
... Moreover, attainment of a negative MRD by flow cytometry after a relapse, also benefits patients by experiencing better outcomes. This also holds immense importance in clinical trials evaluating novel MM therapies, accelerating the development of novel therapies and the advancement of MM care [7][8][9]11,12]. ...
... The aim of MRD evaluation is to examine for the presence of at least 1 myeloma cell among 100 000 (sensitivity of 10 −5 ) or 1 000 000 (sensitivity of 10 −6 ) enucleated cells of the bone marrow with validated techniques including next generation flow cytometry or next generation sequencing [6]. MRD negativity has shown prognostic value in MM trials and previous meta-analyses [7][8][9][10][11][12]. Importantly, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee (ODAC) has recently voted in favor of using MRD negativity as an early endpoint in MM clinical trials aiming at accelerated drug approvals, based on consistent independent analyses by the collaborative research group International Independent Team for Endpoint Approval of Myeloma MRD (i2TEAMM), the EVIDENCE meta-analysis and the FDA [12,13]. ...
... Our updated meta-analysis adds to the body of evidence supporting MRD as a surrogate endpoint for PFS and OS in MM, and it aligns with previous meta-analyses in this field indicating strong associations between MRD negativity and PFS/OS both at trial-and individual patient-level [7][8][9][10][11][12][13]. Furthermore, it also encompasses data from recently published studies on quadruplet regimens in the upfront treatment, as well as anti-BCMA CAR T-cells and conjugated monoclonal antibodies in the relapsed/refractory setting. ...
This meta‐analysis examined the association between minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity and survival outcomes in 15 304 patients with multiple myeloma (MM) enrolled in randomized controlled trials published until June 2, 2024. Overall, there was a significant, negative and strong association between MRD negativity odds ratios and survival hazard ratios (β_PFS = ‐0.20, p < 0.001, β_OS = ‐0.12, p = 0.023). These associations remained significant for newly diagnosed patients (β_PFS = ‐0.35, p < 0.001), and they were consistent but not significant for relapsed/refractory patients (β_PFS = ‐0.06, p = 0.635). Sustained MRD negativity at 1 year was strongly correlated with prolonged PFS (β_PFS = ‐0.30, p < 0.001). In conclusion, this comprehensive meta‐analysis supports MRD as a surrogate for survival in MM.
... The depth of response including the assessment of MRD has emerged as one of the most relevant prognostic factors in patients with newly diagnosed MM (NDMM) as well as in relapsed/refractory (RR) disease. Indeed, reaching MRD negativity is associated with prolonged PFS and OS and may act as their surrogate according to the extensive number of clinical trials including meta-analyses in both NDMM and RRMM [5][6][7]. Importantly, in 2024, American Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved MRD negative complete remission (CR) as an early clinical endpoint for accelerated drug approval in MM which has been an unprecedented decision moving the whole field substantially forward. MRD seems to be an optimal guiding tool for management of the treatment in MM, for example, the fixed duration treatment with cessation of continuous therapy when MRD negativity achieved or vice versa, intensification, or change of therapy in the case of suboptimal response [8,9]. ...
... The depth of response including the assessment of MRD is a crucial prognostic factor in MM patients. Achieving MRD negativity is associated with improved PFS and OS which was demonstrated by many clinical trials including several metaanalyses [5][6][7]21]. In 2024, the US FDA approved MRD negative CR as an early clinical endpoint for accelerated drug approval in MM, marking a milestone that will lead to faster approval of new agents and increased importance of MRD testing in other diseases. ...
Minimal residual disease (MRD) is one of the most important prognostic factors in multiple myeloma (MM) and a valid surrogate for progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Recently, MRD negativity was approved as an early clinical endpoint for accelerated drug approval in MM. Nevertheless, there is limited evidence of MRD utility in real‐world setting. In this retrospective multicenter study, we report outcomes of 331 newly diagnosed MM patients with MRD evaluation at Day+100 after autologous stem cell transplantation using flow cytometry with a median limit of detection of 0.001%. MRD negativity was reached in 47% of patients and was associated with significantly prolonged median PFS (49.2 months vs. 18.4 months; hazard ratios (HR) = 0.37; p < 0.001) and OS (not reached vs. 74.9 months; HR = 0.50; p = 0.007). Achieving MRD negativity was associated with PFS improvements regardless of age, International Staging System (ISS) stage, lactate dedydrogenase (LDH) level, or cytogenetic risk. Importantly, MRD positive patients benefited from lenalidomide maintenance versus no maintenance (18‐months PFS: 81% vs. 46%; HR = 0.24; p = 0.002) while in MRD negative patients such benefit was not observed (p = 0.747). The outcomes of our real‐world study recapitulate results from clinical trials including meta‐analyses and support the idea that MRD positive patients profit more from lenalidomide maintenance than MRD negative ones.
... Importantly, in the MAN-HATTAN study, MRD negativity was seen in 71% of patients without ASCT as part of a prespecified analysis, using daratumumab-carfilzomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone as induction remission therapy, supporting the efficacy of the quadruplet alone [31]. MRD negativity represents an increasingly important goal of MM therapy [32] given the high rates now achievable and the strong prognostic value of MRD elimination for improved outcomes [11,13,14,33,34]. Of note, the proportion of patients achieving MRD-negative status was higher in the RVd + ASCT versus RVd-alone arm in both DETERMINATION (54% vs. 40% at the start of maintenance) [3] and the IFM 2009 trial (29.8% vs. 20.4%, ...
... The utility of MRD assessment for guiding treatment decision making is increasing given the high rates of MRD-negative responses being achieved with novel therapeutic approaches [3,[8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15]17]. MRD negativity is not only strongly associated with better longterm outcomes [33] but also a direct surrogate for PFS, independent of the treatment approach [34]. Preliminary data from DETERMINATION showed similar PFS from the start of lenalidomide maintenance among MRD-negative patients on the RVd + ASCT and RVd-alone arms [3]. ...
High-dose melphalan (HDM) plus autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) remains a standard-of-care treatment approach for eligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) based on demonstrated superiority in terms of progression-free survival (PFS) versus nontransplant approaches. Very high rates of minimal residual disease (MRD)-negative responses are also being seen with novel triplet and quadruplet induction regimens plus HDM-ASCT. However, recent clinical trials have shown no overall survival benefit with transplant versus nontransplant approaches. Furthermore, HDM is associated with several important downsides, including acute and long-term toxicities, transient decreases in quality of life, the need for hospitalization, an increased mutational burden at relapse, and an elevated risk of second primary malignancies. In this context, given the highly heterogeneous nature of MM in the NDMM patient population, as well as the continued emergence of novel agents and treatment approaches, there is an increasing rationale for considering deferred HDM-ASCT approaches in selected patients. Approaches under investigation include MRD-adapted therapy and the use of novel immune-based therapies as alternatives to HDM-ASCT. Ongoing developments in understanding the pathobiology and prognostic factors in NDMM, plus immune profiling and routine MRD evaluation, will result in novel, HDM-sparing treatment paradigms, enabling further improvement in patient outcomes.
... One prognostic marker that is already emerging as a potentially important way of guiding treatment escalation or de-escalation, including the use of deferred HDM-ASCT, is MRD status. Achieving MRD negativity has been demonstrated to be one of the key prognostic factors for long-term PFS and OS in patients with NDMM and a potential surrogate for outcomes [65][66][67][68][69]. Moreover, achieving sustained MRD negativity is highly correlated with prolonged PFS and OS [70][71][72][73][74] and is associated with better prognosis than simply achieving MRD-negative status; for example, an analysis of 23 patients with NDMM who were receiving lenalidomide maintenance following HDM-ASCT (n = 10) or induction therapy (n = 13) showed that patients who lost or were unable to obtain an MRD-negative status during the first year of maintenance were 14 times more likely to have disease progression than those with a sustained MRD-negative status for 1 year [70]. ...
... Importantly, the prognostic value of MRD-negative status is independent of treatment [65][66][67][68], with a similar PFS seen in MRD-negative patients receiving transplant or non-transplant approaches [24,28]. For example, in preliminary data from DETERMINA-TION, among the 39.8% and 54.4% of patients in the RVd-alone and RVd + ASCT arms who were evaluated for MRD status at the start of maintenance and were MRD-negative, the 5-year PFS rates were 59.2% and 53.5%, respectively [24]. ...
Simple Summary
Patients who are diagnosed with multiple myeloma are given an initial sequence of treatments that usually, for those who are young and fit enough, includes high-dose melphalan followed by autologous stem cell transplantation. This has contributed to the improvement in survival seen over the past 30 years. However, high-dose melphalan has significant limitations, including short-term side effects and longer-term issues such as an increased risk of developing secondary hematologic malignancies including leukemia. There are now numerous highly efficacious combination regimens for initial treatment that result in increasingly large proportions of patients achieving deep responses with no evidence of minimal residual disease. Moreover, large, randomized studies using these regimens have shown no benefit in overall survival after receiving high-dose melphalan with stem cell transplantation. There is thus a growing rationale for selected eligible patients to defer receiving high-dose melphalan and stem cell transplantation until potentially needed in a subsequent line of treatment.
Abstract
The standards of care for the initial treatment of patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) who are eligible for high-dose melphalan and autologous stem cell transplantation (HDM-ASCT) include highly active triplet and quadruplet regimens based on proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulatory drugs, and monoclonal antibodies. These regimens are resulting in improved outcomes and increasingly high rates of minimal residual disease (MRD)-negative responses without HDM-ASCT as part of the upfront therapy. Furthermore, recent randomized studies have shown that, while transplant-based approaches as a frontline therapy result in significantly longer progression-free survival compared to non-transplant approaches, this has not translated into an overall survival benefit. Given these developments, and in the context of the treatment burden of undergoing HDM-ASCT, in addition to the acute toxicities and long-term sequelae of HDM, which are associated with the genotoxicity of melphalan, there is an increasing rationale for considering deferring upfront HDM-ASCT in select transplant-eligible patients and saving it as a treatment option for later salvage therapy. Here, we review the latest clinical trial data on upfront or deferred HDM-ASCT and on the activity of quadruplet induction regimens, including rates of MRD-negative responses, and summarize emerging treatment approaches in the upfront setting such as the use of MRD-directed therapy and alternatives to HDM-ASCT.
... While achieving CR is important, MRD negativity provides a deeper measure of remission and is increasingly regarded as a more reliable prognostic indicator [25,26]. The IMWG recommends sustained MRD negativity for at least one year as the optimal outcome for multiple myeloma patients [16]. ...
Background
B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA)-directed chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy exhibits high response rates in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (r/r MM). However, the specific factors that influence the response duration remain poorly understood.
Methods
This single-centre, retrospective observational study included 56 patients with r/r MM who received BCMA CAR-T therapy (equecabtagene autoleucel) at Tongji Hospital, China. We analysed response rates and long-term clinical outcomes and identified key factors contributing to the long-term efficacy of BCMA CAR-T therapy.
Results
At a median follow-up of 39.6 months, the overall response rate (ORR) was 96.4%. Among the patients, 96.4% (54 of 56) achieved minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity, whereas 80.4% (45 of 56) achieved complete response (CR) or stringent complete response (sCR). Poorer outcomes were observed in patients with triple exposure, high cytogenetic risk, or failure to achieve CR. Better outcomes were associated with a CAR-T cell persistence of at least six months and sustained MRD negativity. Prolonged MRD negativity was strongly correlated with longer progression-free survival (PFS), with median PFS durations of 58 months, 64 months, and not reached (NR) for patients who maintained MRD negativity for 12, 24, and 36 months, respectively. Patients who remained MRD-negative and progression-free exhibited higher CAR-T cell expansion peaks. Additionally, CAR-T cell persistence was positively correlated with the duration of MRD negativity duration, PFS, and overall survival (OS).
Conclusions
BCMA CAR-T therapy provides durable responses in a subset of patients with r/r MM. Early intervention may improve patient prognosis by promoting sustained MRD negativity, thus improving overall treatment outcomes.
Trial registration
Trial registration Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR2000033946 (https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=53503), Registered June 18, 2020. Trial registration Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR1800018137 (https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=30653), Registered August 31, 2018.
... Minimal residual disease (MRD) assessment during and after treatment has become one of the most important prognostic factors in MM patients [12]. MRD status discriminates patient's outcome better than conventional response criteria to treatment and is often one of the primary endpoints in more recent clinical trials as a surrogate for progression free survival (PFS) [13]. ...
Information on the prognostic value of immunoparesis (IP) recovery in multiple myeloma (MM) patients has been only generated in some observational and retrospective studies. We have evaluated the prognostic impact of IP recovery and its association with minimal residual disease (MRD) in a series of 113 newly diagnosed transplant-ineligible (NDTI) patients, that received fix duration treatment (18 cycles of VMP/lenalidomide-dexamethasone) within the PETHEMA/GEM2010MAS65 trial and who achieved CR or VGPR. Immunoglobulin levels were measured at diagnosis, at the end of treatment (after cycle 18th) and during subsequent follow up whereas MRD was analyzed only at the end of the treatment (after cycle 18th). We found that patients who had IP at diagnosis and recovered it during or after treatment had longer progression free survival (PFS) [p < 0.001; HR 0.32 (0.19–0.52)] and longer overall survival (OS) [p = 0.007; HR 0.40 (0.20–0.80)] compared to those who failed to recover it. When we analyzed IP recovery in MRD negative patients, we found that those cases with IP recovery had longer PFS [p = 0.007; HR 0.31 (0.13–0.76)] and longer OS [p = 0.012; HR 0.21 (0.06–0.80)] as compared to MRD negative patients but without IP recovery. In conclusion, IP recovery confers better prognosis in NDTI-MM patients with fixed duration treatment who achieve CR or VGPR and the prognostic value of MRD can be complemented when combined with IP recovery.
... [22][23][24] There has been an increasing trend in the upfront use of daratumumabbased quadruplets [25][26][27][28][29] to achieve minimal residual disease (MRD) negative status, which is considered a surrogate marker for improved OS 30 and PFS. [30][31][32] Daratumumab is also used in light chain amyloidosis (AL) 33 and other plasma cell disorders. [34][35][36][37][38] Although around 45 -48% of patients experience infusion-related reactions, serious adverse events are uncommon. ...
Singapore leads Southeast Asia in the routine use of daratumumab for multiple myeloma and other plasma cell dyscrasias. This retrospective review analyzed 112 patients who received daratumumab between 2012 and 2020. Tolerability, and efficacy based on prior lines (PL) of therapy, cytogenetic risk group, and the presence of renal impairment were presented. Infusion-related reactions occurred in 26.8% of patients. Grades 1 and 2 hematological and non-hematological adverse events were observed in 14.3% and 33.9% of patients, respectively. After a median follow-up of 16.9 months, there was no significant difference in overall response rates (ORR) (86% versus 76.3%, p = 0.082) or depth of response (≥ complete response (CR), 35.1% versus 28.9%, p = 0.469) between myeloma patients with and without renal dysfunction. Newly diagnosed and relapsed/refractory patients had an ORR of 92% and 76.3%, and a ≥ VGPR (very good partial response) rate of 80% and 55.3%, respectively. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was better for patients with 0/1 PL compared to ≥ 2 PLs (19.8 versus 6.2 months, p < 0.001), with a deeper response (≥ CR, 38.5% versus 16.7%, p = 0.033). Forty-six and a half percentage of patients had high-risk FISH abnormalities, and those with 0/1 PL had a significantly better ORR than those with ≥ 2 PLs (83.3% vsersus 47.1%, p = 0.022), achieving an ORR similar to that of the general cohort (80.2%, p = 0.905). In conclusion, positioning daratumumab in earlier lines of therapy leads to better outcomes and may mitigate the impact of high-risk FISH abnormalities.
... [2][3][4] In this context, a large amount of data from clinical trials and meta-analyses has well demonstrated that undetectable MRD strongly correlates with favourable outcomes of MM patients, including both PFS and overall survival (OS). [6][7][8][9] Currently, over 50 ongoing phase III trials have included MRD as an endpoint to help estimate the depth of therapeutic response and clinical benefit of MRD-directed treatment assignment. 2 The MRD status, assessed by next-generation flow cytometry (NGF) or next-generation sequencing (NGS) with a minimum sensitivity of 10 -5 , has thus been incorporated into the revised International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) criteria for therapeutic response in MM, 5 as well as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) recommendations for clinical trials. 10 , 11 The prognostic value of MRD has been found to be independent of other adverse factors such as advanced disease stage (eg ISS or R-ISS III) and high-risk CA (HRCA). ...
Background
Minimal residual disease (MRD) testing is a promising approach to tailor the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM). However, several major concerns remain to be addressed before moving it into daily practice, most of which stem from the dynamic nature of the MRD status. Thus, it is crucial to understand the MRD dynamics and propose its clinical implications.
Methods
We retrospectively analysed the data of patients with newly diagnosed MM (NDMM) who had flow cytometry-based MRD tests at multiple time points after initiation of therapy. The impact of undetectable MRD (including attainment, duration and loss) on clinical outcomes was analysed.
Results
In a cohort of 220 patients with NDMM, attainment of MRD⁻ offered favourable outcomes (P < 0.0001 for both progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS)), regardless of baseline risk factors. Notably, MRD⁻ duration ≥12 months was associated with an 83 % (95 % confidence interval (CI), 0.09−0.34; P < 0.0001) or 69 % (95 % CI, 0.13−0.76; P = 0.0098) reduction in risk of progression/death or death, while the longer MRD⁻ was sustained, the better the outcome was. Loss of MRD⁻ led to poor PFS (hazard ratio (HR) 0.01, 95 % CI 0–0.06, P < 0.0001) and OS (HR 0.03, 95 % CI 0–0.24, P = 0.0008). Most patients (70 %) who lost MRD⁻ status carried high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities (HRCAs). While MRD⁻ was temporally inconsistent with conventional therapeutic responses (eg ≥ complete remission or very good partial response), it predicted disease progression or recurrence more robustly than the latter. Last, the predictive value of the MRD status was independent of baseline risk factors (eg high-risk cytogenetic abnormality, International Staging System (ISS) or Revised (R-)ISS staging).
Conclusions
Longitudinal assessment of MRD during the treatment course and follow-up is required for monitoring disease progression or relapse, to guide treatment decisions. Accordingly, a prospective study is currently ongoing to investigate the feasibility and benefit of the MRD-tailored therapy according to the longitudinal changes of the MRD status.
... Additional meta-and real-world analyses have supported these findings and also demonstrated the utility of MRD as a surrogate measure for PFS [20][21][22][23][24][25]. Indeed, MRD negativity is now one of the single most powerful prognostic features available to guide the management of MM patients (Table 1). ...
Simple Summary
Multiple myeloma (MM) is a blood cancer which classically has a prolonged course of remissions and relapses. Several new highly efficacious medications have been developed for MM in recent years, including some that utilize the body’s own immune cells to control the cancer. Alongside the development of these new medications has been the evolution of tests to track small amounts of (measurable) residual disease (MRD). Several MRD tests can now find and track as little as 1 residual cancer cell in 1 million in certain cases. Having no detectable MRD has been independently associated with improved cancer control and longer survival—here, we review how these tests might be used as a companion to new immune therapies for MM.
Abstract
Several novel T-cell-based therapies have recently become available for multiple myeloma (MM). These T-cell redirecting therapies (TRTs) include chimeric antigen receptor T-cells (CAR-T) and bispecific antibodies (BiAbs). In both clinical trial and real-world data, these therapies have demonstrated high rates of deep clinical response, and some are now approved for second-line treatment for relapsed MM. The deep and sustained clinical responses these therapies are capable of inducing will require sophisticated response monitoring to provide meaningful information for patient care. Obtaining measurable residual disease (MRD) negativity has been validated as an independent positive prognostic marker for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in both newly diagnosed and relapsed refractory patients with multiple myeloma. Assessment for MRD negativity was performed in all of the trials for FDA-approved TRT. Here, we summarize pertinent data for MRD assessment following TRT in MM and provide a rationale and structured framework for conducting MRD testing post TRT.
... As a new therapeutic endpoint, measurable residual disease (MRD) re ects the tumor burden of the disease, which can be timely and effectively treated to reduce the risk of disease progression. MRD is a prognostic factor independent of the clinical stages and genetic background of MM patients [3][4][5][6]. The immune system is also of great importance for understanding the control of MM. ...
Objective: Our study aimed to analyze the measurable residual disease (MRD), complete blood count (CBC), and immune cell profiles in multiple myeloma (MM) patients treated with bortezomib /adriamycin /dexamethasone (PAD) chemotherapy sequential autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) to determine their prognostic value and their interaction.
Methods: CBC data from 93 MM patients were collected at diagnosis, before ASCT, and 3 months after ASCT. Immune cell profiles were detected by flow cytometry in fresh peripheral blood (PB) samples from 33 out of the 93 enrolled patients before ASCT and 3 months after ASCT. We then studied the relationship between MRD status and prognosis, the predictive value of CBC, and the changes in immune cell profiles before and after ASCT in multiple myeloma patients and their association with prognosis.
Results: Early MRD-negative patients after ASCT had significantly longer progression-free survival (PFS) (median PFS was 36 months and 25 months, respectively, P < 0.05) and overall survival (OS) (median OS was 39 months and 33 months, respectively, P < 0.05) than MRD-positive patients. Three independent prognostic factors, neutrophil count (NEU), platelet count (PLT), and lymphocyte monocyte ratio (LMR) at diagnosis, were identified in our study group by LASSO regression. For the immune cell profiles, before ASCT, the negative immunomodulatory cell subsets (CD4/CD8 double-negative T cells (DNTs), regulatory T cells (Tregs), CD16⁺ CD56high NK cells), PD1⁺ CD4⁺ central memory T cells (PD1⁺T4CM), HLA-DR⁺ CD8⁺T cells were lower in MRD-negative or disease control patients than in MRD-positive or progressive disease patients (P < 0.05). Otherwise, naive CD8⁺ T Cells (T8N) and CD28⁺ CD27⁺ naive CD8⁺T Cells (CD28⁺ CD27+ T8N) were higher in MRD-negative or disease control patients than in MRD-positive or progressive disease patients (P < 0.05). After ASCT, the levels of lymphocytes, marginal zone B cells, γδ T cells, and the ratio of (naive T cells plus central memory T cells to effector memory T cells plus effector T cells) were higher in disease control patients than in patients with progressive disease (P < 0.05).
Conclusion: CBC, MRD, and immune cell profile detection before and after ASCT have significant prognostic value in MM patients. Lower levels of NEU or PLT, higher levels of LMR at diagnosis, and a higher number of negative immunomodulatory cell subsets and activated T lymphocytes before ASCT were associated with poor prognosis. On the other hand, lower levels of depleted T lymphocytes, and higher levels of functional T cells and marginal zone B cells after ASCT predicted a good prognosis.
... Minimal residual disease (MRD) assessment during and after treatment has become one of the most important prognostic factors in MM patients 12 . MRD status discriminates patient's outcome better than conventional response criteria to treatment and is often one of the primary endpoints in more recent clinical trials as a surrogate for progression free survival (PFS) 13 . ...
Information on the prognostic value of immunoparesis (IP) recovery in multiple myeloma (MM) patients has been only generated in some observational and retrospective studies. We have evaluated the prognostic impact of IP recovery and its association with minimal residual disease (MRD) in a series of 113 newly diagnosed transplant-ineligible (NDTI) patients, that received fix duration treatment (18 cycles of VMP/lenalidomide-dexamethasone) within the PETHEMA/GEM2010MAS65 trial and who achieved CR or VGPR. Immunoglobulin levels were measured at diagnosis, at the end of treatment (after cycle 18th ) and during subsequent follow up whereas MRD was analyzed only at the end of the treatment (after cycle 18th ). We found that patients who had IP at diagnosis and recovered it during or after treatment had longer progression free survival (PFS) [p < 0.001; HR 0.32 (0.19–0.52)] and longer overall survival (OS) [p = 0.007; HR 0.40 (0.20–0.80)] compared to those who failed to recover it. When we analyzed IP recovery in MRD negative patients, we found that those cases with IP recovery had longer PFS [p = 0.007; HR 0.31 (0.13–0.76)] and longer OS [p = 0.012; HR 0.21 (0.06–0.80)] as compared to MRD negative patients but without IP recovery. In conclusion, IP recovery confers better prognosis in NDTI-MM patients with fixed duration treatment who achieve CR or VGPR and the prognostic value of MRD can be complemented when combined with IP recovery.
... Because of these challenges, randomized controlled trials for MM rarely incorporate OS as their primary endpoint [8]. Time to progression (TTP), progression-free survival (PFS), and more recently, minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity are commonly used as surrogate endpoints and have been validated in numerous retrospective analyses [9][10][11][12][13]. Still, an overall survival advantage should remain the gold standard for response assessment if feasible. ...
Simple Summary
Induction regimens using 4-drugs for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma have shown impressive results in multiple trials. However, trials of 4-drug regimens typically use a 3-drug regimen as their comparator, which limits our ability to determine whether the benefit is from the specific combination of drugs or just the addition of more agents. We performed a meta-analysis to compare all trials that compared 4-drug to 3-drug regimens and found that the addition of an anti-CD38 antibody (daratumumab or isatuximab) resulted in improved responses, while 4-drug regimens without an anti-CD38 antibody performed similarly to 3-drug regimens. While the addition of an anti-CD38 antibody led to increased adverse effects, these were predominantly mild and easily managed. These data suggest that an anti-CD38 antibody should be part of all 4-drug induction regimens for newly diagnosed myeloma patients.
Abstract
The use of 4-drug induction regimens for treatment naïve newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) is associated with improved depth of response and progression-free survival (PFS). However, head-to-head trials of 4-drug combinations are lacking, and instead, these regimens are typically compared to 3-drug backbones; limiting the ability to discern whether any additional benefit (or toxicity) is simply additive or represents a synergy (or interaction). We conducted a meta-analysis of phase 2 and phase 3 clinical trials that randomized treatment naïve NDMM patients to either a 4-drug or 3-drug induction regimen. We included 11 trials which represented 6509 unique patients. PFS for all trials in the meta-analysis was 54 months with a 4-drug induction and 8.9 months with a 3-drug induction (HR: 0.49; 95% CI: 0.45; 0.54), but there was no benefit to using a 4-drug induction that did not include an anti-CD38 antibody (PFS 4-drug 8.1 months, PFS 3-drug 8.0 months; HR 0.95; 95% CI 0.86; 1.06). Adverse events were more frequent with the quadruplet regimens but were predominately mild. High-grade (≥3) adverse events (AEs) that were more common with 4-drug regimens were infections (RR: 1.34; 95% CI 1.17; 1.54) and thrombocytopenia (RR: 1.39; 95% CI 1.12; 1.74). This study suggests that 4-drug induction regimens which include an anti-CD38 antibody improve efficacy although with additional toxicity in NDMM patients.
... Consider the example of multiple myeloma, a more slow-growing cancer of plasma cells which primarily affects older patients and has a well-characterized pre-malignant phase. MRD has been shown to be an important prognostic factor in myeloma, with MRD negativity correlating with improvements in progression free and overall survival across several studies (Munshi et al. 2020;Avet-Loiseau et al. 2020;Cavo et al. 2022). These findings have led to use of MRD as a surrogate endpoint in clinical trials in order to expedite drug approval (FDA 2020). ...
Minimal residual disease (MRD), a measure of residual cancer cells, is a concept increasingly employed in precision oncology, touted as a key predictive biomarker to guide treatment decisions. This paper critically analyzes the expanding role of MRD as a predictive biomarker in hematologic cancers. I outline the argument for MRD as a predictive biomarker, articulating its premises and the empirical conditions that must hold for them to be true. I show how these conditions, while met in paradigmatic cases of MRD use in cancer, may not hold across other cancers where MRD is currently being applied, weakening the argument that MRD serves as an effective predictive biomarker across cancer medicine.
... In detail, 2-year disease-free survival was found to be 39.0% for patients given intensive chemotherapy with each drug, whereas it was 54.4% for patients given the standard drug treatments [25]. In addition, 2-year overall survival was relatively worse (58.4%) in patients treated with standard chemotherapy treatments compared to those with these two drugs (71.3%) [24,25,28]. ...
We have found little available information in the medical literature on the prevention and treatment of tertiary leukemia or patients' prognosis. We thus conducted a comprehensive literature review using the most recently updated American Society of Hematology guidelines, searching the MEDLINE and PubMed electronic databases by using the key term "progression-free survival (PFS) leukemia" and restricting results to the English language within the last decade. From the initially identified 1,083 papers, we extracted relevant data and treatment recommendations for leukemia patients. Standard treatments like Daunorubicin, Doxorubicin, and Asparaginase for children, adolescents, and young adults (18 to 24 years) have high relapse and complication rates within 5 years of treatment. Blinatumomab and Ibrutinib-Rituximab have higher success rates in PFS and a greater overall survival rate than other chemotherapy options have. Two-year disease-free survival was 39.0% with intensive chemotherapy, whereas it rose to 54.4% with anticancer drugs. Additionally, patients who underwent radiotherapy after relapse exhibited better long-term prevention of another relapse and a higher overall survival rate of 77.7% compared with 11.3% in patients not treated with radiotherapy. In the realm of pediatric leukemias, allogeneic stem cell treatments stand out as the most effective, boasting a superior remission rate. Notably, Tisagenlecleucel, a chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy, is approved for managing relapses of pediatric leukemias after initial or tertiary remission, with a promising 50% survival rate over 5 or 10 years. Further study on immunotherapies is warranted across diverse age groups from a tertiary prevention perspective.
... serve as the most appropriate endpoint for clinical (and possibly MRD-driven adaptive) trials. [33][34][35][36][37] MM is a patchy disease with various infected sites, that can be populated by genetically distinct (sub)clones. 18 would be interesting to study whether myeloma cell dissemination to the periphery serves as a tumor escape mechanism due to the pressure exerted by an inflamed microenvironment in the BM, which in turn, leads to the aforementioned modified gene-expression profiling, likely non driven by specific genetic abnormalities. ...
There is growing interest in multiple myeloma (MM) circulating tumor cells (CTCs), but their rareness in peripheral blood (PB) and inconsistency in cutoffs question their clinical utility. Herein, we applied next‐generation flow cytometry in 550 bone marrow (BM) and matched PB samples to define an optimal CTC cutoff for both transplant‐eligible and transplant‐ineligible newly diagnosed MM (NDMM) patients. Deep phenotyping was performed to investigate unique microenvironmental features associated with CTC dissemination. CTCs were detected in 90% of patients (median 0.01%; range: 0.0002%–12.6%) and increased levels associated with adverse features. Correlations were observed between high CTC percentages and a diffused MRI pattern, a distinct BM composition characterized by altered B‐cell differentiation together with an expansion of effector cells and tumor‐associated macrophages, as well as a greater phenotypic dissimilarity between BM and PB clonal cells. Progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) gradually worsened with each logarithmic increment of CTCs. Conversely, NDMM patients without CTCs showed unprecedented outcomes, with 5‐year PFS and OS rates of 83% and 97%, respectively. A cutoff of 0.02% CTCs was independent of the ISS, LDH, and cytogenetics in a multivariate analysis of risk factors for PFS. The 0.02% CTC cutoff synergized with the MGUS‐like phenotype and the R‐ISS for improving the risk stratification systems. MRD negativity was less frequent if CTCs were ≥0.02% at diagnosis, but whenever achieved, the poor prognosis of these patients was abrogated. This study shows the clinical utility of CTC assessment in MM and provides evidence toward a consensus cutoff for risk stratification.
... The panelists almost reached consensus regarding the importance of MRD and CR, which could be due to the current ac c eptability of these measures as end points in clinical trials [ 28 , 29 ] and , ther efor e, they ar e consider ed when det ermining a reg imen's effectiv eness. MRD and CR hav e been associated with longer PFS and OS [30][31][32], and the use of MRD negativity to aid in pa tien t prognosis and to inform trea tmen t decision is on the rise [31][32][33]. How ev er, a lack of standardization of MRD assessment techniques poses a problem in the in terpreta tion of data and comparison of clinical trials [ 34 ]; this is also reflected by the fact that the US FDA and the EM A hav e published guidelines on the use of MRD in clinical trials, but neither supports the use of MRD as a surrogate for efficacy [ 29 ]. ...
Aim: Obtain clinical consensus on factors impacting first-line prescribing for transplant-ineligible (TIE) patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). Materials & methods: A double-blinded, modified Delphi panel was employed. USA-based hematologists/oncologists who treat TIE patients with NDMM were selected as expert panelists. Results: Consensus was reached that patient frailty, performance status, comorbidities, treatment efficacy, and adverse event profile affect first-line prescribing. All panelists agreed it is important to use the most efficacious treatment first; 88% of panelists considered daratumumab-containing regimens the most efficacious. Panelists agreed treatment should be continued until progression while benefits outweigh risk. Conclusion: Findings reinforce the importance of using the most efficacious regimen upfront for TIE NDMM, and nearly all panelists considered daratumumab-containing regimens the most efficacious treatment.
... Thus, MRD negativity complemented with these new CTC-including improved prognostication models, could serve as the most appropriate endpoint for clinical (and possibly MRD-driven adaptive) trials. [32][33][34][35][36] MM is a patchy disease with various infected sites, that can be populated by genetically distinct (sub)clones. 17,37 Myeloma cells from distinct BM sites or even from extramedullary regions can be disseminated in the PB, thus offering the opportunity for a more representative illustrative status of the disease than a single BM aspiration obtained from one site. ...
Background
There is growing interest in multiple myeloma (MM) circulating tumor cells (CTCs), but its rareness in peripheral blood (PB) and inconsistency in cutoffs question their clinical utility. Herein, we aimed at defining the optimal CTC cutoff using a highly sensitive approach. Moreover, we analyzed matched bone marrow (BM) and PB samples in order to highlight inconsistencies between the two sites and identify microenvironmental profiles associating with enhanced CTC dissemination.
Methods
Next-generation flow cytometry was performed for the detection of myeloma cells in matched BM and PB samples from 550 newly-diagnosed MM patients. Various multivariable regression models were applied for the detection of the optimal CTC clinical cutoff (median follow-up: 41 months). BM microenvironment was characterized by deep phenotyping using both CyTOF and various multiparametric flow cytometry panels.
Results
CTCs were detected in 90% of patients (median 0.01%, range: 0.0002% − 12.6%) and increased levels associated with adverse features. Unexpected correlations were observed between high CTC percentages and a diffused MRI pattern, a distinct BM composition characterized by altered B-cell differentiation together with an expansion of effector cells and tumor-associated macrophages, as well as a greater phenotypic dissimilarity between BM and PB tumor cells. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) gradually worsened with each logarithmic increment of CTCs. Conversely, patients without CTCs showed unprecedented outcomes (5-year PFS and OS: 83% and 97%, respectively). A cutoff of 0.02% CTCs was independent of the ISS, LDH and cytogenetics in a multivariate analysis of risk factors for PFS and proved clinically relevant for both TE and TI patients. The 0.02% CTC cutoff synergized with the MGUS-like phenotype and the R-ISS for improved risk stratification. MRD-negativity was less frequent if CTCs were ≥ 0.02% at diagnosis, but whenever achieved, the poor prognosis of these patients was abrogated.
Conclusions
This study shows the clinical utility of CTC assessment in MM and provides evidence towards a consensus cutoff for risk stratification. The liquid biopsy is more informative of the entire tumor burden than a single-spot BM aspiration; hence, CTC analysis may serve as the new hallmark for the real-time evaluation of a patient’s disease status.
... (paragraph 6.14, brentuximab, PSD, July 2018 PBAC meeting) [not recommended] 'Not only does this implicitly assume that PFS is a valid surrogate for OS for patients with R/R PMBCL receiving immunotherapy, but it also assumes that the same relationship between PFS and OS holds for both immunotherapy and chemotherapy. There is increasing evidence to suggest that PFS is not a reliable surrogate for OS in many oncology settings, especially for immunotherapies7,8,9 . Therefore, the validity of the PFS data generated using this approach was highly uncertain.' ...
Funding decisions for cancer drugs are often based on limited evidence about their long-term effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. This 10-year review of funding decisions for cancer drugs submissions in Australia revealed that most decisions relied on data that was moderately predictive of survival.
... The posterior elements are rarely involved. In contrast, bone metastases of spinal are more likely to invade vertebral appendages (8,9). The imaging manifestation is multiple bone destruction, which can be osteolytic, osteogenic, and mixed. ...
Background
The clinical manifestations of multiple myeloma (MM) and bone metastatic tumor are both systemic bone pain, which is difficult to distinguish from imaging manifestations, leading to misdiagnosis and missed diagnosis.
Case summary
We reported a man with a unique case whose tumors were MM with bone metastatic tumor of clear cell renal cell carcinoma (CCRCC). Computed tomography (CT) showed multifocal osteolytic bone destruction, while magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) showed multifocal bone marrow infiltration with soft tissue mass. Pathology and immunohistochemistry established the diagnosis of the coexistence of myeloma with bone metastatic tumor of CCRCC in the spine. Immunotherapy and systemic chemotherapy were adopted in the clinic, and vertebral decompression was performed after anemia was corrected. This case with MM and bone metastatic tumor of CCRCC received radiotherapy and immunotherapy and acquired satisfying outcome after 1 year of follow-up.
Conclusion
It is difficult to differentiate MM and bone metastatic tumor on imaging, especially when there are bone lesions at the same time, which is an easily missed diagnosis and needs to be comprehensively evaluated in combination with functional procedures, clinical laboratory tests, and histopathology.
... Minimal residual disease (MRD) in MM patients is actually the most important prognostic factor during evolution of the disease and probably will be the main driver of clinical trials in the near future 17,18 . However not all MRD negative patients have the same prognosis, and therefore other evolutive prognostic factors are needed 19 . ...
Immunoparesis (IP) in multiple myeloma (MM) patients can be measured by classic assessment of immunoglobulin (Ig) levels or by analysis of the uninvolved heavy/light chain pair of the same immunoglobulin (uHLC) by the Hevylite® assay. In this study we evaluate the prognostic value of recovery from IP measured by classic total Ig and uHLC assessment in newly diagnosed MM transplant-eligible (NDMM-TE) patients with intensive treatment and its association with Minimal Residual Disease (MRD). Patients were enrolled and treated in the PETHEMA/GEM2012MENOS65 trial and continued in the PETHEMA/GEM2014MAIN trial. Total Ig (IgG, IgA and IgM) and uHLC were analyzed in a central laboratory at diagnosis, after consolidation treatment and after the first year of maintenance. MRD was analyzed by next generation flow cytometry after consolidation (sensitivity level 2x10-6). We found no differences in progression free survival (PFS) between patients who recovered and patients who didn’t recover from IP after consolidation when examining classic total Ig and uHLC. However, after the first year of maintenance, in contrast to patients with classic IP, patients with recovery from uHLC IP had longer PFS than patients without recovery, with hazard ratio of 0.42 (CI95% 0.21–0.81; p=0.008). Multivariate analysis with Cox proportional-hazards regression models confirmed recovery from uHLC IP after the first year of maintenance as an independent prognostic factor for PFS, with an increase in C-statistic of 0.05 (-0.04–0.14; p<0.001) when adding uHLC IP recovery. Moreover, we observed that MRD status and uHLC IP recovery affords complementary information for risk stratification. In conclusion, recovery from uHLC IP after one year of maintenance is an independent prognostic factor for PFS in NDMM-TE patients who receive intensive treatment. Immune reconstitution, measured as recovery from uHLC IP, provides complementary prognostic information to MRD assessment.
... In addition to the biological insights and potential for therapeutic targeting afforded by our approach, there is also an opportunity for improved patient monitoring. There has been increasing interest in designing assays for monitoring minimal/measurable residual disease (MRD) following treatment across hematologic malignancies 69,70 . In spite of this interest; however, it is unclear if suitable markers are available for all patients and some guidelines only specify molecular targets for select patients 71 . ...
Genomic profiling of hematologic malignancies has augmented our understanding of variants that contribute to disease pathogenesis and supported development of prognostic models that inform disease management in the clinic. Tumor only sequencing assays are limited in their ability to identify definitive somatic variants, which can lead to ambiguity in clinical reporting and patient management. Here, we describe the MSK-IMPACT Heme cohort, a comprehensive data set of somatic alterations from paired tumor and normal DNA using a hybridization capture-based next generation sequencing platform. We highlight patterns of mutations, copy number alterations, and mutation signatures in a broad set of myeloid and lymphoid neoplasms. We also demonstrate the power of appropriate matching to make definitive somatic calls, including in patients who have undergone allogeneic stem cell transplant. We expect that this resource will further spur research into the pathobiology and clinical utility of clinical sequencing for patients with hematologic neoplasms.
... In the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) criteria updated in 2016, the MRD-negative status was defined as the minimum sensitivity of 1 tumor cell per 1 × 10 5 normal cells (10 −5 sensitivity threshold) in the BM by either NGF or NGS [14]. Large-scale meta-analyses have demonstrated that MRD negativity is associated with significant improvements in both progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in the patients with MM [16][17][18][19]. MRD assessments using NGF and NGS allow for the high-sensitivity detection of MRD, but rely on single BM aspirates and might lead to falsenegative results due to the heterogeneous distribution of clonal plasma cells in the BM. ...
Positron emission tomography (PET) is an imaging modality used for the noninvasive assessment of tumor staging and response to therapy. PET with ¹⁸F labeled fluorodeoxyglucose (¹⁸F-FDG PET) is widely used to assess the active and inactive lesions in patients with multiple myeloma (MM). Despite the availability of ¹⁸F-FDG PET for the management of MM, PET imaging is less sensitive than next-generation flow cytometry and sequencing. Therefore, the novel PET radiotracers ⁶⁴Cu-LLP2A, ⁶⁸Ga-pentixafor, and ⁸⁹Zr-daratumumab have been developed to target the cell surface antigens of MM cells. Furthermore, recent studies attempted to visualize the tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes using PET imaging in patients with cancer to investigate their prognostic effect; however, these studies have not yet been performed in MM patients. This review summarizes the recent studies on PET with ¹⁸F-FDG and novel radiotracers for the detection of MM and the resulting preclinical research using MM mouse models and clinical studies. Novel PET technologies may be useful for developing therapeutic strategies for MM in the future.
Auf dem von der Universität Freiburg veranstalteten 15. Freiburg Myeloma Meeting diskutierten Ende 2024 Myelom-Experten aus den USA und Europa neue Trends in der Myelom-Forschung und -therapie. Prof. Paul Richardson, Boston, beleuchtete dabei die gegenwärtige Situation beim therapeutischen Management des multiplen Myeloms, alte und neue Herausforderungen und gab einen Überblick über die Forschungspipeline in der Therapie dieser Erkrankung.
Publication History
Article published online:
18 February 2025
© 2025. Thieme. All rights reserved.
Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Oswald-Hesse-Straße 50, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany
Background
Immunoglobulin (Ig) measurements in the clinical laboratory have been traditionally performed by nephelometry, turbidimetry, electrophoresis, and ELISA assays. Mass spectrometry (MS) measurements have the potential to provide deeper insights on the nature of these markers.
Content
Different approaches—top-down, middle-down, or bottom-up—have been described for measuring specific Igs for endogenous monoclonal immunoglobulins (M-proteins) and exogenous therapeutic monoclonal antibody therapies (t-mAbs). Challenges arise in distinguishing the Ig of interest from the polyclonal Ig background. MS is emerging as a practical method to provide quantitative analysis and information about structural and clonal features that are not easily determined by current clinical laboratory methods. This review discusses clinically implemented examples, including isotyping and quantification of M-proteins and quantitation of t-mAbs within the polyclonal Ig background, as examples of how MS can enhance our detection and characterization of Igs.
Summary
This review of current clinically available MS proteomic tests for Igs highlights both analytical and nonanalytical challenges for implementation. Given the new insight into Igs from these methods, it is hoped that vendors, laboratorians, healthcare providers, and payment systems can work to overcome these challenges and advance the care of patients.
The impact of measurable residual disease (MRD) in relapse/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) patients treated with T‐cell redirecting immunotherapy is uncertain. We analyzed MRD dynamics using next‐generation flow in 201 patients treated in clinical trials with chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells and T‐cell engagers (TCE). Achieving MRD negativity at 10⁻⁶ was associated with 89% reduction in the risk of progression and/or death. Survival outcomes were improved in patients with sustained versus transient MRD negativity and were dismal in those who remained MRD positive. The intent‐to‐treat MRD negative rates were higher in patients treated with CAR T cells versus TCE. However, among patients achieving MRD negativity, there were no differences in survival outcomes when stratified according to treatment with CAR T cells versus TCE. In multivariate analysis including the number of prior lines of treatment, International Staging System, cytogenetic risk, extramedullary disease and type of T‐cell redirecting immunotherapy, only the complete remission (CR) and MRD statuses showed independent prognostic value for progression‐free and overall survival. In conclusion, our study shows that deep and sustained MRD negative CR is the most relevant prognostic factor and should be considered as the treatment endpoint in RRMM patients treated with CAR T cells and TCE.
No randomized trial has directly compared daratumumab and lenalidomide (D-R) maintenance therapy versus standard-of-care lenalidomide (R) alone post-transplant. Here, we report the primary results of the phase 3 AURIGA study evaluating D-R versus R maintenance in NDMM patients who were in ≥very good partial response, minimal residual disease (MRD; threshold 10-5) positive, and anti-CD38 naïve post-transplant. Patients were randomized 1:1 to D-R or R maintenance for up to 36 cycles. Two hundred patients were randomized (D-R, n=99; R, n=101). The primary endpoint, MRD-negative (10-5) conversion rate by 12 months from start of maintenance, was significantly higher for D-R versus R (50.5% vs 18.8%; odds ratio [OR], 4.51; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.37-8.57; P<0.0001). MRD-negative (10-6) conversion rate was similarly higher with D-R (23.2% vs 5.0%; OR, 5.97; 95% CI, 2.15-16.58; P=0.0002). At 32.3 months' median follow-up, D-R achieved a higher overall MRD-negative (10-5) conversion rate (D-R, 60.6% vs R, 27.7%; OR, 4.12; 95% CI, 2.26-7.52; P<0.0001) and ≥complete response rate (75.8% vs 61.4%; OR, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.08-3.69; P=0.0255) versus R alone. Progression-free survival (PFS) favored D-R versus R (hazard ratio, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.29-0.97); estimated 30-month PFS rates were 82.7% for D-R and 66.4% for R. Incidences of grade 3/4 cytopenias (54.2% vs 46.9%) and infections (18.8% vs 13.3%) were slightly higher with D-R versus R. In conclusion, D-R maintenance achieved a higher MRD-negative conversion rate and improved PFS post-transplant versus R alone, with no new safety concerns. This trial was registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov: #NCT03901963.
Duration of overall survival in patients with cancer has lengthened due to earlier detection and improved treatments. However, these improvements have created challenges in assessing the impact of newer treatments, particularly those used early in the treatment pathway. As overall survival remains most decision-makers’ preferred primary endpoint, therapeutic innovations may take a long time to be introduced into clinical practice. Moreover, it is difficult to extrapolate findings to heterogeneous populations and address the concerns of patients wishing to evaluate everyday quality and extension of life. There is growing interest in the use of surrogate or interim endpoints to demonstrate robust treatment effects sooner than is possible with measurement of overall survival. It is hoped that they could speed up patients’ access to new drugs, combinations, and sequences, and inform treatment decision-making. However, while surrogate endpoints have been used by regulators for drug approvals, this has occurred on a case-by-case basis. Evidence standards are yet to be clearly defined for acceptability in health technology appraisals or to shape clinical practice. This article considers the relevance of the use of surrogate endpoints in cancer in the UK context, and explores whether collection and analysis of real-world UK data and evidence might contribute to validation.
CD38-targeting immunotherapy is approved in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) that are transplant ineligible (TI) and is considered the best standard of care (SOC). To improve current SOC, we evaluated the added value of weekly bortezomib (V) to isatuximab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone (IsaRd versus Isa-VRd). This Intergroupe Francophone of Myeloma phase 3 study randomized 270 patients with NDMM that were TI, aged 65–79 years, to IsaRd versus Isa-VRd arms. The primary endpoint was a minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity rate at 10⁻⁵ by next-generation sequencing at 18 months from randomization. Key secondary endpoints included response rates, MRD assessment rates, survival and safety. The 18-month MRD negativity rates at 10⁻⁵ were reported in 35 patients (26%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 19–34) in IsaRd versus 71 (53%, 95% CI 44–61) in Isa-VRd (odds ratio for MRD negativity 3.16, 95% CI 1.89–5.28, P < 0.0001). The MRD benefit was consistent across subgroups at 10⁻⁵ and 10⁻⁶, and was already observed at month 12. The proportion of patients with complete response or better at 18 months was higher with Isa-VRd (58% versus 33%; P < 0.0001), as was the proportion of MRD negativity and complete response or better (37% versus 17%; P = 0.0003). At a median follow-up of 23.5 months, no difference was observed for survival times (immature data). The addition of weekly bortezomib did not significantly affect the relative dose intensity of IsaRd. Isa-VRd significantly increased MRD endpoints, including the 18-month negativity rate at 10⁻⁵, the primary endpoint, compared with IsaRd. This study proposes Isa-VRd as a new SOC for patients with NDMM that are TI. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04751877.
Background: Multiple myeloma (MM) immunophenotyping (IPT) and measurable residual disease (MRD) monitoring by flow cytometry is a surrogate for progression-free survival and overall survival in clinical trials. However, plasma cell enumeration is challenging owing to morphological discrepancies and plasma cell (PC) loss during the sample processing.
Methods: In (n=87) newly diagnosed MM patients, we evaluated the immunophenotype of PCs at baseline, and for a subset of 35 patients MRD at post-induction was quantified and analyzed for association with outcomes and survival. The software Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS), version 16.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) was used for all the statistical analysis.
Results: Immunophenotyping showed strong positive expression of CD56 (83%), CD200 (94%), CD38 (92%), and CD117 (91%) and negative/weak expression of CD19 (83%), CD45 (89%), CD27 (74%), and CD81 (90%) respectively. Negative/weak expression of CD19 was significantly associated with age ≥56 years (p<0.048), with lower albumin (<3.4g/dL, p<0.001). Strong positive CD56 expression was significantly associated with the presence of M-protein (p<0.03). Strong positive CD117 expression was significantly associated with lower albumin (p<0.02). Strong positive CD200 expression was significantly associated with a good response (p<0.02). The median (IQR) value of bone marrow (BM)-MRD% was 0.005 (0.002-0.034). We found that there was no significant difference in the correlation, association, and survival outcomes with MRD%.
Conclusion: This study sheds light on the utility of IPT as an invaluable diagnostic tool in disease management. The findings of this study could be important when it comes to modifying the criteria for high-risk diseases and implementing a risk-adapted first therapy in clinical practice.
Estimating progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) superiority during clinical trials of multiple myeloma (MM) has become increasingly challenging as novel therapeutics have improved patient outcomes. Thus, it is imperative to identify earlier endpoint surrogates that are predictive of long-term clinical benefit to expedite development of more effective therapies. Minimal residual disease (MRD)-negativity is a common intermediate endpoint that has shown prognostic value for clinical benefit in trials of patients with multiple myeloma (MM). This meta-analysis was based on the FDA guidance for considerations for a meta-analysis of MRD as a clinical endpoint and evaluates MRD-negativity as an early endpoint reasonably likely to predict long-term clinical benefit. Eligible studies were phase 2 or 3 randomized controlled clinical trials measuring MRD negativity as an endpoint in patients with MM, with follow-up of ≥6 months following an a priori defined time point of 12±3 months post-randomization. Eight newly diagnosed MM-(NDMM)-studies evaluating 4,907 patients were included. Trial-level associations between MRD-negativity and PFS were R2WLSiv (95% CI) 0.67 (0.43-0.91) and R2copula 0.84 (0.64->0.99) at the 12-month timepoint. The individual-level association between 12-month MRD negativity and PFS resulted in a global odds ratio of 4.02 (95% CI: 2.57-5.46). For relapse/refractory MM-(RRMM), there were four studies included, and the individual-level association between 12-month MRD negativity and PFS resulted in a global odds ratio of 7.67 (4.24-11.10). A clinical trial demonstrating a treatment effect on MRD is reasonably likely to eventually demonstrate a treatment effect on PFS, suggesting that MRD may be an early clinical endpoint reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit in MM, that may be used to support accelerated approval and thereby expedite the availability of new drugs to patients with MM.
Use of surrogates as primary endpoints is commonplace in hematology/oncology clinical trials. As opposed to prognostic markers, surrogates are endpoints that can be measured early and yet can still capture the full effect of treatment, as it would be captured by the true outcome (e.g., overall survival). We discuss the level of evidence of the most commonly used endpoints in hematology and share recommendations on how to apply and evaluate surrogate endpoints in research and clinical practice. Based on the statistical literature, this clinician-friendly review intends to build a bridge between clinicians and surrogacy specialists. -
In Acute lymphoblastic Leukemia (ALL) assessment of molecular response to treatment, assessing minimal residual disease (MRD) is a major independent predictor of treatment outcome. Consequently, MRD is implemented in all ALL-treatment protocols to fill up or to redefine stratification of multifactorial risk with optional intensity of customized treatment. Aim: to specify the significance of MRD in the assessment of remission in children with ALL with results discordant between morphology and flow cytometry at the end of induction phase of therapy. Materials and Methods: A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted at Jin Oncology Center from March 2019 through November 2023. Data were taken out of the records of 58 patients who had ALL less than 16 years old. All patients were less than 16 years old and treated by ukall. They were diagnosed using peripheral blood morphology, bone marrow study and/or flow cytometry when lymphoblasts in peripheral blood or bone marrow aspirate are ≥20% and was confirmed by flow cytometry. On 29th day of induction therapy, bone marrow was examined for morphology and flow cytometry. The presence or absence of MRD was determined, and CD19, CD10 and tdt were tested. By morphologic assessment they were divided patients into: Category 1, C1 (<5% blasts), Category 2, C2 (5-20% blasts), and Category 3, C3 (>20% blasts). Statistical analysis was made using SPSS version 25. P value of less than 0.05 was considered significant. Results: The study involved 58 patients who had ALL. with a median age of 6.5 years, male to females ratio of 1.76:1, mean platelet count of 96.6 x 10⁹/L ,mean hemoglobin of 8.6 g/dL, mean leucocyte count of 74.3 x 10⁹/L), 48 cases (82.7%) of B-cell lineage and 10 cases (17.3%) of T-cell lineage, 94.6% of the B-cell cases were of the common B-ALL and the rest Pro-BALL type, 54.6% of the T-cell ALL was cortical T-ALL and 44.4% Early T-cell ALL. They were tested for MRD by morphology and flow cytometry on day 29. By morphology, 46 patients had remission but by flow only 24 cases. Seventeen cases had residual blasts >5%. In 19 cases there was a discrepancy between the results of morphology and flow. Twenty-five cases (52.08% of B-cell cases) were positive for MRD by flow results. Eight of the ten cases of T-ALL (80%), were positive for MRD by flow cytometry. Among 48 cases of B-ALL, 36 were in C1 category (morphologically in remission), 11 cases were in C2 category and one case in the C3 category. Of cases in C1 category, 17 were MRD +ve and 19 were MRD –ve by flow cytometry. In the C2 category, only 2 out of the 11 cases (18.18%) had discordant results between morphology and flow results. The correlation between morphology and flow results was 100% in the C3 category. Conclusion: MRD should not be the surrogate of morphology but to be used in conjunction in order to give us a more accurate representation of status of remission.
Nearly all patients with multiple myeloma eventually relapse or become refractory to treatment. Lenalidomide is increasingly administered in the frontline until disease progression or intolerance to therapy, resulting in the need for highly effective, lenalidomide-sparing options. In this study, carfilzomib plus daratumumab and dexamethasone were evaluated against lenalidomide-sparing, pomalidomide-containing triplets using matching-adjusted indirect comparison in the absence of head-to-head data. The analyses utilized long-term follow-up data from the CANDOR study (NCT03158688). Treatment with carfilzomib, daratumumab, and dexamethasone resulted in significantly longer progression-free survival (hazard ratio 0.60 [95% confidence interval: 0.37, 0.88])vs. pomalidomide plus bortezomib and dexamethasone, and numerically longer progression-free survival (hazard ratio 0.77 [95% confidence interval: 0.50, 1.08]) vs. daratumumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma and previous lenalidomide exposure, the majority of whom were lenalidomide refractory. Carfilzomib plus daratumumab and dexamethasone offers a highly effective, lenalidomide-sparing treatment option for this population.
Purpose
We investigated both the clinical utilities and the prognostic impacts of the clonotypic peptide mass spectrometry (MS)-EasyM, a blood-based minimal residual disease (MRD) monitoring protocol in multiple myeloma.
Experimental Design
A total of 447 sequential serum samples from 56 patients with multiple myeloma were analyzed using EasyM. Patient-specific M-protein peptides were sequenced from diagnostic samples; sequential samples were quantified by EasyM to monitor the M-protein. The performance of EasyM was compared with serum immunofixation electrophoresis (IFE), bone marrow multiparameter flow cytometry (MFC), and next-generation flow cytometry (NGF) detection. The optimal balance of EasyM sensitivity/specificity versus NGF (10−5 sensitivity) was determined and the prognostic impact of MS-MRD status was investigated.
Results
Of the 447 serum samples detected and measured by EasyM, 397, 126, and 92 had time-matching results for comparison with serum IFE, MFC-MRD, and NGF-MRD, respectively. Using a dotp >0.9 as the MS-MRD positive, sensitivity was 99.6% versus IFE and 100.0% versus MFC and NGF. Using an MS negative cutoff informed by ROC analysis (<1.86% of that at diagnosis), EasyM sensitivity remained high versus IFE (88.3%), MFC (85.1%), and NGF (93.2%), whereas specificity increased to 90.4%, 55.8%, and 93.2%, respectively. In the multivariate analysis, older diagnostic age was an independent predictor for progression-free survival [PFS; high risk (HR), 3.15; 1.26–7.86], the best MS-MRD status (MS-MRD negative) was independent predictor for both PFS (HR, 0.25; 0.12–0.52) and overall survival (HR, 0.16; 0.06–0.40).
Conclusions
EasyM is a highly sensitive and minimal invasive method of MRD monitoring in multiple myeloma; MS-MRD had significant predictive ability for survival outcomes.
The role of measurable residual disease (MRD) negativity as a biomarker to stop treatment is being investigated in transplant-eligible multiple myeloma (MM). Thus, it is important to identify risk factors of MRD resurgence and/or progressive disease (PD) among patients achieving undetectable MRD in order to avoid undertreating them. Here, we studied 267 newly-diagnosed transplant-eligible MM patients enrolled in the GEM2012MENOS65 and GEM2014MAIN clinical trials who achieved MRD negativity by next-generation flow cytometry. After a median follow-up of 73 months since the first MRD negative assessment, 111 of the 267 (42%) patients showed MRD resurgence and/or PD. The only prognostic factors at diagnosis that predicted MRD resurgence and/or PD were an International staging system (ISS) 3 and the presence of ≥0.01% circulating tumor cells (CTCs). Failure to achieve MRD negativity after induction also predicted higher risk of MRD resurgence and/or PD. Patients having none versus one versus two or more risk factors (ISS 3, ≥0.01% CTCs and late MRD negativity) showed 5-year rates of MRD resurgence and/or PD of 16%, 33% and 57%, respectively (P<.001). Thus, these easily measurable risk factors could help refining the selection of patients for whom treatment cessation after MRD negativity is being investigated in clinical trials. Registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov with respective identifiers NCT01916252 and NCT02406144.
Purpose:
The GMMG-CONCEPT trial investigated isatuximab, carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (Isa-KRd) in transplant-eligible (TE) and transplant-noneligible (TNE) patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) with exclusively high-risk disease for whom prospective trials are limited, aiming to induce minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity.
Methods:
This academic, investigator-initiated, multicenter, phase II trial enrolled patients with high-risk NDMM (HRNDMM) defined by mandatory International Staging System stage II/III combined with del17p, t(4;14), t(14;16), or more than three 1q21 copies as high-risk cytogenetic aberrations (HRCAs). Patients received Isa-KRd induction/consolidation and Isa-KR maintenance. TE patients received high-dose melphalan. TNE patients received two additional Isa-KRd cycles postinduction. This prespecified interim analysis (IA) reports the primary end point, MRD negativity (<10-5, next-generation flow), at the end of consolidation. The secondary end point was progression-free survival (PFS).
Results:
Among 125 patients with HRNDMM (TE-intention-to-treat [ITT]-IA, 99; TNE-ITT, 26) of the IA population for the primary end point, the median age was 58 (TE-ITT-IA) and 74 (TNE-ITT) years. Del17p was the most common HRCA (TE, 44.4%; TNE, 42.3%); about one third of evaluable TE/TNE patients presented two or more HRCAs, respectively. The trial met its primary end point with MRD negativity rates after consolidation of 67.7% (TE) and 54.2% (TNE) of patients. Eighty-one of 99 TE-ITT-IA patients reached MRD negativity at any time point (81.8%). MRD negativity was sustained for ≥1 year in 62.6% of patients. With a median follow-up of 44 (TE) and 33 (TNE) months, median PFS was not reached in either arm.
Conclusion:
Isa-KRd effectively induces high rates of sustainable MRD negativity in the difficult-to-treat HRNDMM population, regardless of transplant status, translating into a median PFS that was not yet reached after 44/33 months.
Background
The combination of bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone is a standard treatment for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who are ineligible for autologous stem-cell transplantation. Daratumumab has shown efficacy in combination with standard-of-care regimens in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma.
Methods
In this phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned 706 patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were ineligible for stem-cell transplantation to receive nine cycles of bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone either alone (control group) or with daratumumab (daratumumab group) until disease progression. The primary end point was progression-free survival.
Results
At a median follow-up of 16.5 months in a prespecified interim analysis, the 18-month progression-free survival rate was 71.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 65.5 to 76.8) in the daratumumab group and 50.2% (95% CI, 43.2 to 56.7) in the control group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.65; P<0.001). The overall response rate was 90.9% in the daratumumab group, as compared with 73.9% in the control group (P<0.001), and the rate of complete response or better (including stringent complete response) was 42.6%, versus 24.4% (P<0.001). In the daratumumab group, 22.3% of the patients were negative for minimal residual disease (at a threshold of 1 tumor cell per 10⁵ white cells), as compared with 6.2% of those in the control group (P<0.001). The most common adverse events of grade 3 or 4 were hematologic: neutropenia (in 39.9% of the patients in the daratumumab group and in 38.7% of those in the control group), thrombocytopenia (in 34.4% and 37.6%, respectively), and anemia (in 15.9% and 19.8%, respectively). The rate of grade 3 or 4 infections was 23.1% in the daratumumab group and 14.7% in the control group; the rate of treatment discontinuation due to infections was 0.9% and 1.4%, respectively. Daratumumab-associated infusion-related reactions occurred in 27.7% of the patients.
Conclusions
Among patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were ineligible for stem-cell transplantation, daratumumab combined with bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone resulted in a lower risk of disease progression or death than the same regimen without daratumumab. The daratumumab-containing regimen was associated with more grade 3 or 4 infections. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; ALCYONE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02195479.)
Flow cytometry has become a highly valuable method to monitor minimal residual disease (MRD) and evaluate the depth of complete response (CR) in bone marrow (BM) of multiple myeloma (MM) after therapy. However, current flow-MRD has lower sensitivity than molecular methods and lacks standardization. Here we report on a novel next generation flow (NGF) approach for highly-sensitive and standardized MRD detection in MM. An optimized 2-tube 8-color antibody panel was constructed in five cycles of design-evaluation-redesign. Additionally, a bulk-lysis procedure was established for acquisition of ⩾10(7) cells/sample, and novel software tools were constructed for automatic plasma cell gating. Multicenter evaluation of 110 follow-up BM from MM patients in very good partial response or CR showed a higher sensitivity for NGF-MRD vs conventional 8-color flow-MRD -MRD-positive rate of 47 vs 34% (P=0.003)-. Thus, 25% of patients classified as MRD-negative by conventional 8-color flow were MRD-positive by NGF, translating into a significantly longer progression-free survival for MRD-negative vs MRD-positive CR patients by NGF (75% PFS not reached vs 7 months; P=0.02). This study establishes EuroFlow-based NGF as a highly-sensitive, fully-standardized approach for MRD detection in MM which overcomes the major limitations of conventional flow-MRD methods and is ready for implementation in routine diagnostics.Leukemia accepted article preview online, 20 January 2017. doi:10.1038/leu.2017.29.
Importance:
Numerous studies have evaluated the prognostic value of minimal residual disease (MRD) in patients with multiple myeloma (MM). Most studies were small and varied in terms of patient population, treatment, and MRD assessment methods.
Objective:
To evaluate the utility of MRD detection in patients with newly diagnosed MM.
Data sources:
A Medline search was conducted for articles published in English between January 1990 and January 2016.
Study selection:
Eligible studies reported MRD status and progression-free survival (PFS) or overall survival (OS) in 20 or more patients following treatment. Among 405 articles identified, 21 met the initial eligibility criteria and were included in the analysis.
Data extraction and synthesis:
Information on patient characteristics, treatment, MRD assessment, and outcomes were extracted using a standard form.
Main outcomes and measures:
The impact of MRD status on PFS and OS was assessed by pooling data from relevant trials. Data were adjusted to allow for different proportions of patients with MRD in different studies, and analyzed using the Peto method. Forest plots were created based on Cox model analysis. Other prespecified research questions were addressed qualitatively.
Results:
Fourteen studies (n = 1273) provided data on the impact of MRD on PFS, and 12 studies (n = 1100) on OS. Results were reported specifically in patients who had achieved conventional complete response (CR) in 5 studies for PFS (n = 574) and 6 studies for OS (n = 616). An MRD-negative status was associated with significantly better PFS overall (hazard ratio [HR], 0.41; 95% CI, 0.36-0.48; P < .001) and in studies specifically looking at CR patients (HR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.34-0.56; P < .001). Overall survival was also favorable in MRD-negative patients overall (HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.46-0.71; P < .001) and in CR patients (HR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.33-0.67; P < .001). Tests of heterogeneity found no significant differences among the studies for PFS and OS.
Conclusions and relevance:
Minimal residual disease-negative status after treatment for newly diagnosed MM is associated with long-term survival. These findings provide quantitative evidence to support the integration of MRD assessment as an end point in clinical trials of MM.
Bone Marrow Transplantation is a high quality, peer-reviewed journal covering all aspects of clinical and basic haemopoietic stem cell transplantation.
Acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL) is a molecularly well-defined disease, characterized by a specific chromosomal translocation; the improvement in biologic and clinical
knowledge and subsequent introduction of molecularly targeted therapies have transformed the management of APL, with survival rates now exceeding 80%. Minimal residual disease (MRD) assessment in APL is the most important tool for its treatment; the prognostic role of the molecular detection of promyelocytic leukemia retinoic acid receptor α (PML-RARα) transcript after consolidation therapy in the early identification of the following hematologic relapse is now well established and guides preemptive therapy. First experiences performed with a qualitative polymerase chain reaction (PCR) approach were replaced with more accurate real-time quantitative PCR (RQ-PCR), which guarantees a numeric quantification of MRD. The identification of arsenic trioxide (ATO) as a valid therapy not only in relapsed patients but also as an alternative to standard therapy alone or in association with all-trans-retinoic acid enlarges the setting of validation of MRD evaluation in APL patients, considering a possible different clearance of PML-RARα with innovative therapy different from the standard ones. MRD monitoring demonstrated its validity also in the setting of relapsed patients with interesting results in the autologous and allogeneic stem cell transplantation setting or with the use of other biological agents. The aim of this review is to report and discuss the actual state of the art of MRD in APL.
Carfilzomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone therapy yields deep responses in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). It is important to gain an understanding of this combination's tolerability and impact on minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity because this end point has been associated with improved survival.
To assess the safety and efficacy of carfilzomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone therapy in NDMM and high-risk smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM).
Clinical and correlative pilot study at the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center. Patients with NDMM or high-risk SMM were enrolled between July 11, 2011, and October 9, 2013. Median follow-up was 17.3 (NDMM) and 15.9 months (SMM).
Eight 28-day cycles were composed of carfilzomib 20/36 mg/m2 on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16; lenalidomide 25 mg on days 1 through 21; and dexamethasone 20/10 mg (cycles 1-4/5-8) on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16, 22, and 23. Patients who achieved at least stable disease subsequently received 24 cycles of lenalidomide extended dosing.
Primary end points were neuropathy of grade 3 or greater (NDMM) and at least very good partial response rates (SMM). Minimal residual disease was also assessed.
Of 45 patients with NDMM, none had neuropathy of grade 3 or greater. Of 12 patients with high-risk SMM, the most common of any-grade adverse events were lymphopenia (12 [100%]) and gastrointestinal disorders (11 [92%]). All patients with SMM achieved at least a very good partial response during the study period. Among the 28 patients with NDMM and the 12 with SMM achieving at least a near-complete response, MRD negativity was found in 28 of 28 (100% [95% CI, 88%-100%]), 11 of 12 (92% [95% CI, 62%-100%]) (multiparametric flow cytometry), 14 of 21 (67% [95% CI, 43%-85%]), and 9 of 12 (75% [95% CI, 43%-94%]) (next-generation sequencing), respectively. In patients with NDMM, 12-month progression-free survival for MRD-negative vs MRD-positive status by flow cytometry and next-generation sequencing was 100% vs 79% (95% CI, 47%-94%; P < .001) and 100% vs 95% (95% CI, 75%-99%; P = .02), respectively.
Carfilzomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone therapy is tolerable and demonstrates high rates of MRD negativity in NDMM, translating into longer progression-free survival in patients achieving MRD negativity. Carfilzomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone therapy also demonstrates efficacy in high-risk SMM.
Monitoring of minimal residual disease (MRD) has become routine clinical practice in frontline treatment of virtually all childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) and in many adult ALL patients. MRD diagnostics has proven to be the strongest prognostic factor, allowing for risk group assignment into different treatment arms, ranging from significant treatment reduction to mild or strong intensification. Also in relapsed ALL patients and patients undergoing stem cell transplantation, MRD diagnostics is guiding treatment decisions. This is why also the efficacy of innovative drugs, such as antibodies and small molecules, are currently being evaluated with MRD diagnostics within clinical trials. In fact, MRD measurements might well be used as surrogate endpoint, thereby shortening the follow-up significantly. The MRD techniques need to be sensitive (≤10(-4)), broadly applicable, accurate, reliable, fast, and affordable. So far, flowcytometry and PCR analysis of rearranged immunoglobulin and T-cell receptor genes (ASO-PCR) are claimed to meet these criteria, but classical flowcytometry does not reach a solid 10(-4), whereas classical ASO-PCR is time-consuming and labor intensive. Therefore two high throughput technologies are being explored, i.e. high throughput sequencing and next generation (multidimensional) flowcytometry, both evaluating millions of sequences or cells, respectively. Each of them has specific advantages and disadvantages.
Copyright © 2015 American Society of Hematology.
This follow-up extension of a randomised phase II study assessed differences in long-term outcomes between bortezomib-thalidomide-dexamethasone (VTD) and VTD-cyclophosphamide (VTDC) induction therapy in multiple myeloma. Newly diagnosed patients (n = 98) were randomised 1:1 to intravenous bortezomib (1·3 mg/m(2) ; days 1, 4, 8, 11), thalidomide (100 mg; days 1-21), and dexamethasone (40 mg; days 1-4, 9-12), with/without cyclophosphamide (400 mg/m(2) ; days 1, 8), for four 21-day cycles before stem-cell mobilisation/transplantation. After a median follow-up of 64·8 months, median time-to-next therapy was 51·8 and 47·9 months with VTD and VTDC, respectively. Type of subsequent therapy was similar in both arms. After adjusting for asymmetric censoring, median time to progression was not significantly different between VTD and VTDC [35·7 vs. 34·5 months; Hazard ratio (HR) 1·26, 95% confidence interval: 0·76-2·09; P = 0·370]. Five-year survival was 69·1% and 65·3% with VTD and VTDC, respectively. When analysed by minimal residual disease (MRD) status, overall survival was longer in MRD-negative versus MRD-positive patients with bone marrow-confirmed complete response (HR 3·66, P = 0·0318). VTD induction followed by transplantation provides long-term disease control and, consistent with the primary analysis, there is no additional benefit from adding cyclophosphamide. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00531453).
© 2015 The Authors. British Journal of Haematology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
The FDA has co-sponsored three workshops to address minimal residual disease (MRD) detection in acute lymphocytic leukemia (ALL), chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), and acute myeloid leukemia (AML) as well as an FDA-NCI roundtable symposium on MRD detection and its use as a response biomarker in Multiple Myeloma (MM). As clinical outcomes in MM continue to improve with the introduction of new therapeutics, consideration of biomarkers and their development as validated surrogate endpoints that can be used in the place of traditional clinical trial endpoints of progression-free survival (PFS) will be fundamental to expeditious drug development. This article will describe the FDA drug approval process, the regulatory framework through which a biomarker can be used as a surrogate endpoint for drug approval, and how MRD detection in MM fits within this context. In parallel, this article will also describe the FDA current device clearance process with emphasis on the analytical development as it might apply to an in vitro diagnostic assay for the detection of MRD in MM. It is anticipated that this Special Issue may possibly represent how MRD might serve as a drug development tool in hematological malignancies. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
© 2015 International Clinical Cytometry Society.
Background:
Elotuzumab, an immunostimulatory monoclonal antibody targeting signaling lymphocytic activation molecule F7 (SLAMF7), showed activity in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone in a phase 1b-2 study in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma.
Methods:
In this phase 3 study, we randomly assigned patients to receive either elotuzumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone (elotuzumab group) or lenalidomide and dexamethasone alone (control group). Coprimary end points were progression-free survival and the overall response rate. Final results for the coprimary end points are reported on the basis of a planned interim analysis of progression-free survival.
Results:
Overall, 321 patients were assigned to the elotuzumab group and 325 to the control group. After a median follow-up of 24.5 months, the rate of progression-free survival at 1 year in the elotuzumab group was 68%, as compared with 57% in the control group; at 2 years, the rates were 41% and 27%, respectively. Median progression-free survival in the elotuzumab group was 19.4 months, versus 14.9 months in the control group (hazard ratio for progression or death in the elotuzumab group, 0.70; 95% confidence interval, 0.57 to 0.85; P<0.001). The overall response rate in the elotuzumab group was 79%, versus 66% in the control group (P<0.001). Common grade 3 or 4 adverse events in the two groups were lymphocytopenia, neutropenia, fatigue, and pneumonia. Infusion reactions occurred in 33 patients (10%) in the elotuzumab group and were grade 1 or 2 in 29 patients.
Conclusions:
Patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma who received a combination of elotuzumab, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone had a significant relative reduction of 30% in the risk of disease progression or death. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb and AbbVie Biotherapeutics; ELOQUENT-2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01239797.).
Background:
Lenalidomide plus dexamethasone is a reference treatment for relapsed multiple myeloma. The combination of the proteasome inhibitor carfilzomib with lenalidomide and dexamethasone has shown efficacy in a phase 1 and 2 study in relapsed multiple myeloma.
Methods:
We randomly assigned 792 patients with relapsed multiple myeloma to carfilzomib with lenalidomide and dexamethasone (carfilzomib group) or lenalidomide and dexamethasone alone (control group). The primary end point was progression-free survival.
Results:
Progression-free survival was significantly improved with carfilzomib (median, 26.3 months, vs. 17.6 months in the control group; hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.57 to 0.83; P=0.0001). The median overall survival was not reached in either group at the interim analysis. The Kaplan-Meier 24-month overall survival rates were 73.3% and 65.0% in the carfilzomib and control groups, respectively (hazard ratio for death, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.63 to 0.99; P=0.04). The rates of overall response (partial response or better) were 87.1% and 66.7% in the carfilzomib and control groups, respectively (P<0.001; 31.8% and 9.3% of patients in the respective groups had a complete response or better; 14.1% and 4.3% had a stringent complete response). Adverse events of grade 3 or higher were reported in 83.7% and 80.7% of patients in the carfilzomib and control groups, respectively; 15.3% and 17.7% of patients discontinued treatment owing to adverse events. Patients in the carfilzomib group reported superior health-related quality of life.
Conclusions:
In patients with relapsed multiple myeloma, the addition of carfilzomib to lenalidomide and dexamethasone resulted in significantly improved progression-free survival at the interim analysis and had a favorable risk-benefit profile. (Funded by Onyx Pharmaceuticals; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01080391.).
Background:
The combination melphalan-prednisone-thalidomide (MPT) is considered a standard therapy for patients with myeloma who are ineligible for stem-cell transplantation. However, emerging data on the use of lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone warrant a prospective comparison of the two approaches.
Methods:
We randomly assigned 1623 patients to lenalidomide and dexamethasone in 28-day cycles until disease progression (535 patients), to the same combination for 72 weeks (18 cycles; 541 patients), or to MPT for 72 weeks (547 patients). The primary end point was progression-free survival with continuous lenalidomide-dexamethasone versus MPT.
Results:
The median progression-free survival was 25.5 months with continuous lenalidomide-dexamethasone, 20.7 months with 18 cycles of lenalidomide-dexamethasone, and 21.2 months with MPT (hazard ratio for the risk of progression or death, 0.72 for continuous lenalidomide-dexamethasone vs. MPT and 0.70 for continuous lenalidomide-dexamethasone vs. 18 cycles of lenalidomide-dexamethasone; P<0.001 for both comparisons). Continuous lenalidomide-dexamethasone was superior to MPT for all secondary efficacy end points, including overall survival (at the interim analysis). Overall survival at 4 years was 59% with continuous lenalidomide-dexamethasone, 56% with 18 cycles of lenalidomide-dexamethasone, and 51% with MPT. Grade 3 or 4 adverse events were somewhat less frequent with continuous lenalidomide-dexamethasone than with MPT (70% vs. 78%). As compared with MPT, continuous lenalidomide-dexamethasone was associated with fewer hematologic and neurologic toxic events, a moderate increase in infections, and fewer second primary hematologic cancers.
Conclusions:
As compared with MPT, continuous lenalidomide-dexamethasone given until disease progression was associated with a significant improvement in progression-free survival, with an overall survival benefit at the interim analysis, among patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were ineligible for stem-cell transplantation. (Funded by Intergroupe, Francophone du Myélome and Celgene; FIRST ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00689936; European Union Drug Regulating Authorities Clinical Trials number, 2007-004823-39.).
Key Points
Melphalan, in combination with bortezomib, should be maintained as one of the standards of care for the treatment of elderly MM patients. Complete response and particularly flow complete response should be an important goal in the treatment of elderly myeloma patients.
Purpose:
The three-drug combination of lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (RVD) has shown significant efficacy in multiple myeloma (MM). The Intergroupe Francophone du Myélome (IFM) decided to evaluate RVD induction and consolidation therapies in a sequential intensive strategy for previously untreated transplantation-eligible patients with MM.
Patients and methods:
In this phase II study, 31 symptomatic patients age < 65 years were enrolled to receive three RVD induction cycles followed by cyclophosphamide harvest and transplantation. Patients subsequently received two RVD consolidation cycles and 1-year lenalidomide maintenance.
Results:
Very good partial response rate or better at the completion of induction, transplantation, and consolidation therapy was 58%, 70%, and 87%, respectively. Maintenance upgraded responses in 27% of patients. Overall, 58% of patients achieved complete response, and 68% were minimal residual disease (MRD) negative by flow cytometry. The most common toxicities with RVD were neurologic and hematologic, including grade 1 to 2 sensory neuropathy (55%), grade 3 to 4 neutropenia (35%), and thrombocytopenia (13%). Two basal cell carcinomas in the same patient and one case of breast cancer were observed. There was no treatment-related mortality. With a median follow-up of 39 months, estimated 3-year progression-free and overall survival were 77% and 100%, respectively. None of the patients who achieved MRD negativity relapsed.
Conclusion:
The transplantation program with RVD induction and consolidation followed by lenalidomide maintenance produced high-quality responses and showed favorable tolerability in patients with newly diagnosed MM. Overall, 68% of patients achieved MRD negativity; none of these patients relapsed. This program is being evaluated in the ongoing IFM/Dana-Farber Cancer Institute 2009 phase III study.
We assessed the prognostic value of minimal residual disease (MRD) detection in multiple myeloma (MM) patients using a sequencing-based platform in bone marrow samples from 133 MM patients in at least very good partial response (VGPR) after front-line therapy. Deep sequencing was carried out in patients in whom a high-frequency myeloma clone was identified and MRD was assessed using the IGH-VDJH, IGH-DJH, and IGK assays. The results were contrasted with those of multiparametric flow cytometry (MFC) and allele-specific oligonucleotide polymerase chain reaction (ASO-PCR). The applicability of deep sequencing was 91%. Concordance between sequencing and MFC and ASO-PCR was 83% and 85%, respectively. Patients who were MRD(-) by sequencing had a significantly longer time to tumor progression (TTP) (median 80 vs 31 months; P < .0001) and overall survival (median not reached vs 81 months; P = .02), compared with patients who were MRD(+). When stratifying patients by different levels of MRD, the respective TTP medians were: MRD ≥10(-3) 27 months, MRD 10(-3) to 10(-5) 48 months, and MRD <10(-5) 80 months (P = .003 to .0001). Ninety-two percent of VGPR patients were MRD(+). In complete response patients, the TTP remained significantly longer for MRD(-) compared with MRD(+) patients (131 vs 35 months; P = .0009).
Since the introduction of the proteasome inhibitor bortezomib and the immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs) thalidomide and lenalidomide, more patients with multiple myeloma are achieving deep,durable responses and disease control, and are living longer. These improvements have afforded more robust analyses of the relationship between response and survival. Generally, these studies have demonstrated that improvements in the quality of response across all stages of treatment are associated with better disease control and longer survival. Thus, achievement of maximal response should be strongly considered, particularly in the frontline setting, but must also be balanced with tolerability, quality of life, and patient preferences. In select patients, achievement of a lesser response may be adequate to prolong survival, and attempts to treat these patients to a deeper response may place them at unnecessary risk without significant benefit. Maintenance therapy has been shown to improve the quality of response and disease control and, in some studies, survival. Studies support maintenance therapy for high-risk patients as a standard of care, and there are emerging data supporting maintenance therapy in standard-risk patients to improve progression-free and possibly overall survival. Multidrug regimens combining a proteasome inhibitor and an IMiD have shown exceptional response outcomes with acceptable increases in toxicity in both the frontline and salvage settings, and are becoming a standard treatment approach. Moving forward, the use of immunophenotypic and molecular response criteria will be essential in better understanding the impact of highly-active and continuous treatment regimens across myeloma patient populations. Future translational studies will help to develop antimyeloma agents to their fullest potential. The introduction of novel targeted therapies, including the IMiD pomalidomide and the proteasome inhibitors carfilzomib and ixazomib (MLN9708), will provide greater options to individualize treatment and help patients achieve a clinically meaningful response.Leukemia accepted article preview online, 19 July 2013. doi:10.1038/leu.2013.220.
PURPOSETo investigate the prognostic value of minimal residual disease (MRD) assessment in patients with multiple myeloma treated in the MRC (Medical Research Council) Myeloma IX trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS
Multiparameter flow cytometry (MFC) was used to assess MRD after induction therapy (n = 378) and at day 100 after autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT; n = 397) in intensive-pathway patients and at the end of induction therapy in non-intensive-pathway patients (n = 245).ResultsIn intensive-pathway patients, absence of MRD at day 100 after ASCT was highly predictive of a favorable outcome (PFS, P < .001; OS, P = .0183). This outcome advantage was demonstrable in patients with favorable and adverse cytogenetics (PFS, P = .014 and P < .001, respectively) and in patients achieving immunofixation-negative complete response (CR; PFS, P = .0068). The effect of maintenance thalidomide was assessed, with the shortest PFS demonstrable in those MRD-positive patients who did not receive maintenance and longest in those who were MRD negative and did receive thalidomide (P < .001). Further analysis demonstrated that 28% of MRD-positive patients who received maintenance thalidomide became MRD negative. MRD assessment after induction therapy in the non-intensive-pathway patients did not seem to be predictive of outcome (PFS, P = .1). CONCLUSIONMRD assessment by MFC was predictive of overall outcome in patients with myeloma undergoing ASCT. This predictive value was seen in patients achieving conventional CR as well as patients with favorable and adverse cytogenetics. The effects of maintenance strategies can also be evaluated, and our data suggest that maintenance thalidomide can eradicate MRD in some patients.
High-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem-cell transplantation is a standard treatment for young patients with multiple myeloma. Residual disease is almost always present after transplantation and is responsible for relapse. This phase 3, placebo-controlled trial investigated the efficacy of lenalidomide maintenance therapy after transplantation.
We randomly assigned 614 patients younger than 65 years of age who had nonprogressive disease after first-line transplantation to maintenance treatment with either lenalidomide (10 mg per day for the first 3 months, increased to 15 mg if tolerated) or placebo until relapse. The primary end point was progression-free survival.
Lenalidomide maintenance therapy improved median progression-free survival (41 months, vs. 23 months with placebo; hazard ratio, 0.50; P<0.001). This benefit was observed across all patient subgroups, including those based on the β(2)-microglobulin level, cytogenetic profile, and response after transplantation. With a median follow-up period of 45 months, more than 70% of patients in both groups were alive at 4 years. The rates of grade 3 or 4 peripheral neuropathy were similar in the two groups. The incidence of second primary cancers was 3.1 per 100 patient-years in the lenalidomide group versus 1.2 per 100 patient-years in the placebo group (P=0.002). Median event-free survival (with events that included second primary cancers) was significantly improved with lenalidomide (40 months, vs. 23 months with placebo; P<0.001).
Lenalidomide maintenance after transplantation significantly prolonged progression-free and event-free survival among patients with multiple myeloma. Four years after randomization, overall survival was similar in the two study groups. (Funded by the Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00430365.).
The achievement of complete response (CR) after high-dose therapy/autologous stem cell transplantation (HDT/ASCT) is a surrogate for prolonged survival in multiple myeloma; however, patients who lose their CR status within 1 year of HDT/ASCT (unsustained CR) have poor prognosis. Thus, the identification of these patients is highly relevant. Here, we investigate which prognostic markers can predict unsustained CR in a series of 241 patients in CR at day +100 after HDT/ASCT who were enrolled in the Spanish GEM2000 (n = 140) and GEM2005 < 65y (n = 101) trials. Twenty-nine (12%) of the 241 patients showed unsustained CR and a dismal outcome (median overall survival 39 months). The presence of baseline high-risk cytogenetics by FISH (hazard ratio 17.3; P = .002) and persistent minimal residual disease by multiparameter flow cytometry at day +100 after HDT/ASCT (hazard ratio 8.0; P = .005) were the only independent factors that predicted unsustained CR. Thus, these 2 parameters may help to identify patients in CR at risk of early progression after HDT/ASCT in whom novel treatments should be investigated.
The phase 3 Velcade as Initial Standard Therapy in Multiple Myeloma: Assessment with Melphalan and Prednisone study in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients ineligible for high-dose therapy demonstrated that bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone (VMP) was superior to melphalan-prednisone across all efficacy end points. We assessed the prognostic impact of response on time-to-event parameters in the intent-to-treat population. Patients received nine 6-week cycles of treatment. Time to progression, time to next therapy, and treatment-free interval were associated with quality of response. When European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation criteria were used, complete response (CR) was associated with significantly longer time to progression (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.45, P = .004), time to next therapy (HR = 0.46, P = .0004), and treatment-free interval (HR = 0.38, P < .0001) versus partial response, but there was no significant difference in overall survival (HR = 0.87, P = .54); similar differences were seen with CR versus very good partial response by uniform criteria. Quality of response improved with prolonged VMP treatment, with 28% of CRs achieved during cycles 5-9. CR duration appeared similar among patients with "early" (cycles 1-4) and "late" CRs (cycles 5-9) and among patients receiving 9 versus < 9 cycles of bortezomib within VMP. These results highlight that CR is an important treatment goal and support prolonged VMP therapy to achieve maximal response. This study is registered at http://www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT00111319.
Minimal residual disease (MRD) assessment is standard in many hematologic malignancies but is considered investigational in multiple myeloma (MM). We report a prospective analysis of the prognostic importance of MRD detection by multiparameter flow cytometry (MFC) in 295 newly diagnosed MM patients uniformly treated in the GEM2000 protocol VBMCP/VBAD induction plus autologous stem cell transplantation [ASCT]). MRD status by MFC was determined at day 100 after ASCT. Progression-free survival (PFS; median 71 vs 37 months, P < .001) and overall survival (OS; median not reached vs 89 months, P = .002) were longer in patients who were MRD negative versus MRD positive at day 100 after ASCT. Similar prognostic differentiation was seen in 147 patients who achieved immunofixation-negative complete response after ASCT. Moreover, MRD(-) immunofixation-negative (IFx(-)) patients and MRD(-) IFx(+) patients had significantly longer PFS than MRD(+) IFx(-) patients. Multivariate analysis identified MRD status by MFC at day 100 after ASCT as the most important independent prognostic factor for PFS (HR = 3.64, P = .002) and OS (HR = 2.02, P = .02). Our findings demonstrate the clinical importance of MRD evaluation by MFC, and illustrate the need for further refinement of MM re-sponse criteria. This trial is registered at http://clinicaltrials.gov under identifier NCT00560053.
Minimal residual disease (MRD) assessment is standard in many hematologic malignancies but is considered investigational in multiple myeloma (MM). We report a prospective analysis of the prognostic importance of MRD detection by multiparameter flow cytometry (MFC) in 295 newly diagnosed MM patients uniformly treated in the GEM2000 protocol (VBMCP/VBAD induction plus autologous stem cell transplant [ASCT]). MRD status by MFC was determined at day 100 post-ASCT. Persistent myelomatous plasma cells (MM-PCs) were detected by MFC in 170 patients (58%), who were considered MRD-positive. Progression-free survival (PFS; median 71 vs 37 months, P < .0001) and overall survival (OS; median not reached vs 89 months, P = .002) were longer in patients who were MRD-negative versus MRD-positive at day 100 post-ASCT, with a 5-year PFS rate of 60% and 22% (P < .0001), respectively. Similar prognostic differentiation was seen in 147 patients who achieved immunofixation (IFx) negative complete response post-ASCT. The 5-year PFS rate was 62% in MRD-negative patients (n=94) versus 30% in MRD-positive patients (n=53; P < .0001), and the respective 5-year OS rates were 87% versus 59% (P = .009). Moreover, MRD− IFx− and MRD− IFx+ patients had significantly longer PFS than MRD+ IFx− patients (median 71, 65, and 37 months, respectively, P = .0002). By multivariate analysis, only MRD status by MFC at day 100 post-ASCT and FISH cytogenetics were identified as independent prognostic factors for PFS, and only MRD status by MFC and age were identified for OS. The relative risks of progression and death among MRD-positive versus MRD-negative patients were 3.64 (P = .002) and 2.02 (P = .02), respectively. Finally, a subgroup of 157 patients in which MRD information was available both pre- and post-ASCT were analyzed. Patients who were MRD-positive both pre- and post-transplant (n=93) had the worst prognosis; patients who were MRD-positive pre-ASCT but improved to MRD-negative post-ASCT (n=48) had an intermediate prognosis, and patients who were MRD-negative both pre- and post-transplant (n=16) had the best prognosis. The 5-year PFS and OS rates in these three prognostic subgroups were 25%, 57%, and 80%, respectively (P = .0001), and 59%, 78%, and 100%, respectively (P = .06). In summary, our results show that MRD evaluation by MFC is a very useful technique to identify patients at different risk of progression. This type of analysis, particularly when performed post-ASCT, may contribute to the design of patient-specific maintenance treatment approaches, as well as the evaluation of the potential benefits of consolidation therapies.
Background
Ixazomib is the first orally administered PI studied in the clinic. The feasibility of combining ixazomib weekly and lenalidomide-dexamethasone (Rd) in the first all-oral PI- and immunomodulatory drug-containing triplet regimen was evaluated in a phase 1/2 trial of 65 pts with newly diagnosed MM. Results indicated a 90% ORR (62% ≥VGPR) using ixazomib 4 mg (recommended phase 2/3 dose), with a manageable safety profile, including 14% gr ≥3 skin/subcutaneous tissue disorders and limited (4% gr 3) peripheral neuropathy (PN) (Kumar et al, Lancet Oncol 2014). These data provided the rationale for phase 3 investigation of IRd vs placebo-Rd in pts with RRMM in this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, international, multicenter study.
Methods
Adults with RRMM after 1-3 prior lines of therapy who were not refractory to prior lenalidomide or PI-based therapy were randomized 1:1 to receive ixazomib 4 mg or matching placebo weekly on d 1, 8, and 15, plus lenalidomide 25 mg PO on d 1-21 (dose reduced for renal impairment per local label/practice) and dexamethasone 40 mg PO on d 1, 8, 15, and 22, in 28-d cycles. Randomization was stratified by number of prior therapies (1 vs 2/3), PI exposure (naïve vs exposed), and ISS disease stage (I/II vs III). Cycles were repeated until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary endpoint was PFS as assessed by an independent review committee blinded to treatment, per IMWG criteria. Key secondary endpoints were OS and OS in high-risk pts with del(17). Sample size was determined to provide 80% power for the OS endpoint and adequate power to test PFS. Three interim analyses (IAs) and a final analysis were planned to test PFS and OS; here, we report data from the first IA, the final analysis for PFS.
Results
722 pts were randomized (360 IRd; 362 Rd). Baseline characteristics were balanced between groups; overall median age was 66 yrs (30-91), 70% were PI-exposed, 88% were ISS stage I/II, 59% had received 1 prior therapy, and 77%/11%/11% were relapsed/refractory/relapsed and refractory, with 6% primary refractory. Based primarily (97%) on central laboratory evaluation, 19% had high-risk cytogenetics by FISH (del(17), t(4;14), or t(14;16)), including 10% del(17). Prior therapies included 69% bortezomib, 45% thalidomide, and 12% lenalidomide. The study met the primary endpoint at the first IA (median follow-up 14.8 vs 14.6 mos with IRd vs Rd), demonstrating a 35% improvement in PFS with IRd vs Rd (HR 0.742; p=0.012; Table). In pts with high-risk cytogenetics, the PFS HR was 0.543 with IRd vs Rd (HR 0.596 in pts with del(17)), with a median PFS similar to the overall IRd group, indicating ixazomib may overcome the negative impact of cytogenetic alterations. OS data were not yet mature. Key response data are shown in the Table. Pts received a median of 13 (1-26) vs 12 (1-25) cycles of IRd vs Rd; 55% and 52% of pts remained on treatment. With IRd vs Rd, 68% vs 61% of pts had gr ≥3 AEs (driven by thrombocytopenia), 40% vs 44% had serious AEs, 13% vs 11% discontinued all study drugs due to AEs, and 3% vs 5% died on treatment. AEs observed with IRd were consistent with reported safety profiles for the individual agents. Common gr ≥3 AEs were neutropenia (19% vs 16%), anemia (9% vs 13%), thrombocytopenia (13% vs 5%), and pneumonia (6% vs 8%). Gastrointestinal events included 42% vs 36% diarrhea (6% vs 2% gr 3), 26% vs 21% nausea (2% vs 0% gr 3), and 22% vs 11% vomiting (1% vs <1% gr 3). PN rates were 28% vs 21% (2% vs 2% gr 3), 35% vs 21% had rash events (4% vs 1% gr 3), 4% vs 6% had renal failure (2% vs 3% gr ≥3), and 4% vs 3% had heart failure (2% vs 2% gr ≥3).
Conclusion
At this first prespecified IA, addition of ixazomib to Rd in pts with RRMM increased median PFS to 20.6 from 14.7 mos without a substantial increase in overall toxicity, including cardiac and PN toxicity. Benefit with IRd was also noted in pts with high-risk cytogenetics, including those with del(17), in whom median PFS was similar to all IRd-treated pts indicating that ixazomib may have a favorable impact on the adverse prognosis associated with genetic mutations. If approved, this all-oral combination of IRd may become a new standard of care in this setting.
Table. Key efficacy data IRd Rd HR / OR Median PFS, mos 20.6 14.7 HR 0.742; 95% CI: 0.587-0.939; p=0.012 Confirmed ORR, % 78.3 71.5 OR 1.44; p=0.035 CR 11.7 6.6 OR 1.87; p=0.019 ≥VGPR 48.1 39.0 OR 1.45; p=0.014 Median time to first response (ITT analysis), mos 1.1 1.9 Median duration of response (≥PR), mos 20.5 15.0
Disclosures
Moreau: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Off Label Use: Investigational proteasome inhibitor ixazomib in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone for patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. Masszi:Janssen-Cilag: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Bahlis:Johnson & Johnson: Speakers Bureau; Johnson & Johnson: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Johnson & Johnson: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Sandhu:Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria. Ganly:Novartis: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Medipics: Equity Ownership. Baker:Janssen-Cilag New Zealand: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Stoppa:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Simpson:Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria. Gimsing:Amgen: Honoraria. Palumbo:Celgene, Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Genmab, Janssen-Cilag, Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis, Sanofi Aventis: Honoraria. Garderet:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy. Cavo:Janssen-Cilag, Celgene, Amgen, BMS: Honoraria. Kumar:AbbVie: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding; Celgene, Millenium, Sanofi, Skyline, BMS, Onyx, Noxxon,: Other: Consultant, no compensation,; Skyline, Noxxon: Honoraria; Millenium/Takeda: Research Funding. Touzeau:AbbVie: Research Funding. Laubach:Novartis: Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding. Lin:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Berg:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. DiBacco:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Hui:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA, a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited: Employment. Richardson:Gentium S.p.A.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.
8011
Background: MRD detection is a sensitive tool to measure response in MM. We assessed MRD by MFC in newly diagnosed MM patients (pts) enrolled in the EMN02/HO95 phase 3 trial. Methods: Pts were ≤65 years old and received Bortezomib-Cyclophosphamide-Dexamethasone (VCD) induction, intensification with Bortezomib-Melphalan-Prednisone (VMP) vs High-Dose-Melphalan (HDM) followed by stem cell transplant, consolidation with Bortezomib-Lenalidomide-Dexamethasone (VRD) vs no consolidation, and Lenalidomide maintenance. MRD analysis was performed in pts achieving at least a very good partial response (VGPR) before starting maintenance (after HDM, VMP or VRD) and during maintenance every 6-12 months; samples were centralized to 3 European labs. MFC was performed on bone marrow according to Euroflow-based methods (8 colors, 2 tubes) with a sensitivity of 10 ⁻⁵ . Quality checks were performed to compare sensitivity and to show correlation between protocols (Hofste op Bruinink D ASH 2016 abstract 2072). Results: 316 pts were evaluable before maintenance: median age was 57 years, 18% (57/316) pts had ISS III and 22% (70/316) had high risk cytogenetic (HR-C) defined as having at least one among del17, t(4;14) or t(14;16); 63% (199/316) had received HDM and 37% (117/316) VMP; thereafter 51% (160/316) had received VRD. 76% (239/316) were MRD negative (MRD-) of whom 64% (153/239) received HDM vs 36% (86/239) VMP, with a median follow-up time of 30 months from MRD enrolment. 3-year PFS was 50% in MRD positive (MRD+) vs 77% in MRD- pts (HR: 2.87, p < 0.001). Subgroup analyses were performed to evaluate the risk factors for MRD+ according to baseline characteristics and therapies: HR-C was the most important risk factor (HR 9.87, interaction-p = 0.001). Finally, 48% of MRD+ pts at pre-maintenance who had a second MRD evaluation after at least 1 year of lenalidomide became MRD-. Conclusions: MRD by MFC is a strong prognostic factor in MM pts receiving intensification with novel agents or transplant; lenalidomide maintenance further improved depth of response; HR-C is the most important prognostic factor in MRD+ pts. Clinical trial information: NCT01208766.
The treatment landscape for multiple myeloma has been transformed by the introduction of novel agents, including immunomodulatory drugs, proteasome inhibitors, and monoclonal antibodies. These have been shown to be more effective and generally better tolerated than conventional chemotherapy, with their introduction into clinical practice leading to improved survival. Furthermore, a better understanding of disease biology, improved diagnostic criteria, as well as the development of sensitive and specific tools for disease prognostication have contributed to better outcome. Treatment in the younger patient can now be individualized based on host and disease features with enhanced monitoring of response and use of high-sensitivity techniques for evaluating residual disease. The current standard of care has been significantly enhanced by novel agents with a paradigm shift towards optional or delayed autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) as a reasonable choice in selected patients. Conversely, extended treatment with induction of remission followed by maintenance strategies is now a standard of care, conferring prolonged disease control with more manageable toxicities in both the short and long term, as well as improved quality of life.
Key Points
Genetically accurate xenografts of CMML are achievable with near 100% frequency in NSGS mice. Robust human engraftment and overt phenotypes of CMML and JMML xenografts here facilitate preclinical therapeutic evaluation in vivo.
Purpose
To perform a critical analysis on the impact of depth of response in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM).
Patients and Methods
Data were analyzed from 609 patients who were enrolled in the GEM (Grupo Español de Mieloma) 2000 and GEM2005MENOS65 studies for transplant-eligible MM and the GEM2010MAS65 clinical trial for elderly patients with MM who had minimal residual disease (MRD) assessments 9 months after study enrollment. Median follow-up of the series was 71 months.
Results
Achievement of complete remission (CR) in the absence of MRD negativity was not associated with prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) compared with near-CR or partial response (median PFS, 27, 27, and 29 months, respectively; median OS, 59, 64, and 65 months, respectively). MRD-negative status was strongly associated with prolonged PFS (median, 63 months; P < .001) and OS (median not reached; P < .001) overall and in subgroups defined by prior transplantation, disease stage, and cytogenetics, with prognostic superiority of MRD negativity versus CR particularly evident in patients with high-risk cytogenetics. Accordingly, Harrell C statistics showed higher discrimination for both PFS and OS in Cox models that included MRD (as opposed to CR) for response assessment. Superior MRD-negative rates after different induction regimens anticipated prolonged PFS. Among 34 MRD-negative patients with MM and a phenotypic pattern of bone marrow involvement similar to monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance at diagnosis, the probability of “operational cure” was high; median PFS was 12 years, and the 10-year OS rate was 94%.
Conclusion
Our results demonstrate that MRD-negative status surpasses the prognostic value of CR achievement for PFS and OS across the disease spectrum, regardless of the type of treatment or patient risk group. MRD negativity should be considered as one of the most relevant end points for transplant-eligible and elderly fit patients with MM.
The therapeutic landscape of multiple myeloma (MM) has evolved spectacularly over the past decade with the discovery and validation of proteasome inhibitors and immunomodulatory agents as highly active agents, both in front-line therapy as well as in the relapse and maintenance settings. While previous attempts to apply available monoclonal antibodies (Mabs) to the treatment of patients with MM has until recently been disappointing, novel targets specifically explored in the context of MM have recently lead to the first approvals of Mabs for the treatment of patients with MM. We have performed a literature search to identify preclinical targeting of MM, including in vitro and in vivo models using monoclonal antibodies, as well as clinical trials of monoclonal antibodies in patients with MM. Sources used were peer-reviewed publications, congress abstracts and on-line clinical trials data (such as clinicaltrials.gov). Several targets have been evaluated in preclinical models and a growing number of agents are being evaluated in clinical trials, as single agents or in combination and under various antibody formats. Two agents, targeting for the first time CD38 and SLAMF7 respectively, have recently been approved for the treatment of patients with MM. The recent approval of these two antibodies is expected to have a strong impact on treatment modalities and outcome in patients with MM, including both transplant-eligible and elderly patients.
Purpose
Follicular lymphoma (FL) is an indolent cancer, with effective but rarely curative treatment options. As a standard study end point for first-line FL therapy, progression-free survival (PFS) requires extended follow-up (median PFS, > 7 years). To provide patients with earlier access to newer therapies, an earlier end point to expedite clinical trials is needed. Our objective was to formally assess the complete response rate at 30 months (CR30) after initiation of induction therapy as a potential surrogate end point for PFS in first-line FL therapy.
Patients and Methods
We analyzed individual patient data from 13 randomized multicenter trials of induction and maintenance regimens in first-line FL therapy published after 1990 and with sufficient data to evaluate whether CR30 could predict treatment effects on PFS. Correlation of the CR30 odds ratio with the PFS hazard ratio was evaluated by both linear regression (R ² WLS ) and bivariate copula (R ² Copula ) models. Prespecified criteria for surrogacy required either R ² WLS or R ² Copula ≥ 0.80, with a lower-bound 95% CI > 0.60.
Results
Data from eight induction and five maintenance randomized trials in 3,837 evaluable patients were analyzed. The prespecified surrogacy threshold was met, with an R ² WLS of 0.88 (95% CI, 0.77 to 0.96) and an R ² Copula of 0.86 (95% CI, 0.72 to 1.00). Multiple sensitivity and supplemental analyses supported the robustness of the findings. A minimum 11% absolute improvement in CR30 from a 50% control rate predicted a significant treatment effect on PFS (hazard ratio, 0.69).
Conclusion
This large, prospective, pooled analysis of randomized chemotherapy, immunotherapy, and chemoimmunotherapy trials demonstrates that CR30 is a surrogate end point for PFS in first-line FL treatment trials. Use of this end point may expedite therapeutic development with the intent of bringing novel therapies to this patient population years before PFS results are mature.
Background
Lenalidomide plus dexamethasone is a reference treatment for patients with newly diagnosed myeloma. The combination of the proteasome inhibitor bortezomib with lenalidomide and dexamethasone has shown significant efficacy in the setting of newly diagnosed myeloma. We aimed to study whether the addition of bortezomib to lenalidomide and dexamethasone would improve progression-free survival and provide better response rates in patients with previously untreated multiple myeloma who were not planned for immediate autologous stem-cell transplant.
Methods
In this randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial, we recruited patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma aged 18 years and older from participating Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG) and National Clinical Trial Network (NCTN) institutions (both inpatient and outpatient settings). Key inclusion criteria were presence of CRAB (C=calcium elevation; R=renal impairment; A=anaemia; B=bone involvement) criteria with measurable disease (measured by assessment of free light chains), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0–3, haemoglobin concentration 9 g/dL or higher, absolute neutrophil count 1 × 10³ cells per mm³ or higher, and a platelet count of 80 000/mm³ or higher. We randomly assigned (1:1) patients to receive either an initial treatment of bortezomib with lenalidomide and dexamethasone (VRd group) or lenalidomide and dexamethasone alone (Rd group). Randomisation was stratified based on International Staging System stage (I, II, or III) and intent to transplant (yes vs no). The VRd regimen was given as eight 21-day cycles. Bortezomib was given at 1·3 mg/m² intravenously on days 1, 4, 8, and 11, combined with oral lenalidomide 25 mg daily on days 1–14 plus oral dexamethasone 20 mg daily on days 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, and 12. The Rd regimen was given as six 28-day cycles. The standard Rd regimen consisted of 25 mg oral lenalidomide once a day for days 1–21 plus 40 mg oral dexamethasone once a day on days 1, 8, 15, and 22. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival using a prespecified one-sided stratified log rank test at a significance level of 0·02. Analyses were intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00644228.
Findings
Between April, 2008, and February, 2012, we randomly assigned 525 patients at 139 participating institutions (264 to VRd and 261 to Rd). In the randomly assigned patients, 21 patients in the VRd group and 31 in the Rd group were deemed ineligible based mainly on missing, insufficient, or early or late baseline laboratory data. Median progression-free survival was significantly improved in the VRd group (43 months vs 30 months in the Rd group; stratified hazard ratio [HR] 0·712, 96% CI 0·56–0·906; one-sided p value 0·0018). The median overall survival was also significantly improved in the VRd group (75 months vs 64 months in the Rd group, HR 0·709, 95% CI 0·524–0·959; two-sided p value 0·025). The rates of overall response (partial response or better) were 82% (176/216) in the VRd group and 72% (153/214) in the Rd group, and 16% (34/216) and 8% (18/214) of patients who were assessable for response in these respective groups had a complete response or better. Adverse events of grade 3 or higher were reported in 198 (82%) of 241 patients in the VRd group and 169 (75%) of 226 patients in the Rd group; 55 (23%) and 22 (10%) patients discontinued induction treatment because of adverse events, respectively. There were no treatment-related deaths in the Rd group, and two in the VRd group.
Interpretation
In patients with newly diagnosed myeloma, the addition of bortezomib to lenalidomide and dexamethasone resulted in significantly improved progression-free and overall survival and had an acceptable risk-benefit profile.
Funding
NIH, NCI, NCTN, Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Takeda Oncology Company, and Celgene Corporation.
Driven by access to better drugs, on average, newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients have over 10 years overall survival. Using modern combination therapies-with or without the addition of high-dose melphalan and autologous stem cell transplantation-up to 80% of patients reach a complete response. As a logical and necessary step forward, clinical studies have explored strategies to detect minimal residual disease (MRD) and its correlation with clinical outcomes. In this context, MRD has been proposed as a regulatory end point for drug approval in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. To better define the role of MRD negativity in relation to clinical outcomes, we undertook a meta-analysis including published clinical trials of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients. We applied a random effects model which weighted studies using the inverse-variance method. Studies were combined on the scale of the logarithm of the hazard ratio (HR) and the corresponding s.d. We found that MRD negativity (versus positivity) was associated with better PFS (HR=0.35; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.27-0.46; P<0.001) and overall survival (HR=0.48; 95% CI 0.33-0.70; P<0.001). Our results show that MRD negativity is a strong predictor of clinical outcomes, supportive of MRD becoming a regulatory end point for drug approval in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.Bone Marrow Transplantation advance online publication, 5 September 2016; doi:10.1038/bmt.2016.222.
Multiple myeloma; flow cytometry; minimal residual disease
Background
Daratumumab, a human IgGκ monoclonal antibody that targets CD38, induces direct and indirect antimyeloma activity and has shown substantial efficacy as monotherapy in heavily pretreated patients with multiple myeloma, as well as in combination with bortezomib in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.
Methods
In this phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned 498 patients with relapsed or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma to receive bortezomib (1.3 mg per square meter of body-surface area) and dexamethasone (20 mg) alone (control group) or in combination with daratumumab (16 mg per kilogram of body weight) (daratumumab group). The primary end point was progression-free survival.
Results
A prespecified interim analysis showed that the rate of progression-free survival was significantly higher in the daratumumab group than in the control group; the 12-month rate of progression-free survival was 60.7% in the daratumumab group versus 26.9% in the control group. After a median follow-up period of 7.4 months, the median progression-free survival was not reached in the daratumumab group and was 7.2 months in the control group (hazard ratio for progression or death with daratumumab vs. control, 0.39; 95% confidence interval, 0.28 to 0.53; P<0.001). The rate of overall response was higher in the daratumumab group than in the control group (82.9% vs. 63.2%, P<0.001), as were the rates of very good partial response or better (59.2% vs. 29.1%, P<0.001) and complete response or better (19.2% vs. 9.0%, P=0.001). Three of the most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events reported in the daratumumab group and the control group were thrombocytopenia (45.3% and 32.9%, respectively), anemia (14.4% and 16.0%, respectively), and neutropenia (12.8% and 4.2%, respectively). Infusion-related reactions that were associated with daratumumab treatment were reported in 45.3% of the patients in the daratumumab group; these reactions were mostly grade 1 or 2 (grade 3 in 8.6% of the patients), and in 98.2% of these patients, they occurred during the first infusion.
Conclusions
Among patients with relapsed or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma, daratumumab in combination with bortezomib and dexamethasone resulted in significantly longer progression-free survival than bortezomib and dexamethasone alone and was associated with infusion-related reactions and higher rates of thrombocytopenia and neutropenia than bortezomib and dexamethasone alone. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02136134.)
Treatment of multiple myeloma has substantially changed over the past decade with the introduction of several classes of new effective drugs that have greatly improved the rates and depth of response. Response criteria in multiple myeloma were developed to use serum and urine assessment of monoclonal proteins and bone marrow assessment (which is relatively insensitive). Given the high rates of complete response seen in patients with multiple myeloma with new treatment approaches, new response categories need to be defined that can identify responses that are deeper than those conventionally defined as complete response. Recent attempts have focused on the identification of residual tumour cells in the bone marrow using flow cytometry or gene sequencing. Furthermore, sensitive imaging techniques can be used to detect the presence of residual disease outside of the bone marrow. Combining these new methods, the International Myeloma Working Group has defined new response categories of minimal residual disease negativity, with or without imaging-based absence of extramedullary disease, to allow uniform reporting within and outside clinical trials. In this Review, we clarify several aspects of disease response assessment, along with endpoints for clinical trials, and highlight future directions for disease response assessments.
Evaluation of MRD in multiple myeloma (MM) is becoming an important trial endpoint, especially in young patients. With current intensive approaches, the complete remission (CR) rates are up to 70%, making conventional evaluations of response quite useless. More sensitive tools are mandatory. Two techniques may help investigators to reach this goal, flow cytometry (FCM) and NGS. We applied both techniques to the IFM part of the IFM/DFCI 2009 trial. Briefly, this trial enrolled 700 patients under 66 years of age who were randomized to receive either 8 cycles of VRD (Velcade®-Revlimid®-Dexamethasone) (arm A), or 3 VRD cycles, high-dose melphalan, followed by two consolidation VRD cycles (arm B). All patients received a lenalidomide maintenance for 12 months. A bone marrow MRD evaluation was planned before and after maintenance for all patients achieving at least very good partial response (VGPR). A one-mL bone marrow aspirate was sent overnight to one of the central labs. The primary purpose was to assess MRD by FCM. When extra cells were available, they were frozen as a dry pellet for NGS analyses, using the LymphoSight® platform (Sequenta/Adaptive Inc.). A total of 246 patients have been evaluated by NGS before maintenance and 178 after maintenance. Patients were classified in 3 categories: negative (< 10-6), low-positive (between 10-4 and 10-6), and positive (> 10-4). At pre-maintenance, 87 patients were negative, 80 were low-positive, and 79 were positive. At post-maintenance, these numbers were respectively 86, 52, and 40. Using a cutoff at 10-6, patients below 10-6 at pre-maintenance presented a 3-year PFS at 83%, vs 53% for patients > 10-6. At post-maintenance, these % were 90% and 59% respectively. When restricted to patients in CR, the 3-year PFS was 87% and 63% at pre-maintenance, and 92% and 64% at post-maintenance (Figure). Finally, we compared the two MRD techniques. Using a 7-color FCM strategy, the sensitivity level was 10-4. Amongst the 163 patients negative with the FCM approach, 84 (51 %) patients were positive using NGS and among 72 patients positive with FCM, 67 (93%) were also positive using NGS. In the subgroup of patients with negative MRD using FCM, the 3 year PFS was 86% for NGS negative patients vs 66 % for NGS positive at pre-maintenance and 91% vs 65% at post maintenance. Looking at high-risk patients, 26 patients with t(4;14), and 16 with del(17p) were evaluated. Half of the t(4;14) patients achieved MRD negativity, versus only 1/16 patients with del(17p). Interestingly, 9/13 patients with t(4;14) who achieved MRD negativity, and 0/1 patients with del(17p) did not relapse, showing the importance of achieving deep response in these high-risk patients. In conclusion, this study clearly demonstrates that a sensitive technique like NGS is able to predict PFS in patients treated with modern approaches.
Figure 1. Figure 1.
Disclosures
Avet-Loiseau: Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding. Hulin:celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; jansen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Arnulf:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Garderet:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy. Karlin:Sandoz: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. MACRO:millenium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; jansen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Richardson:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gentium S.p.A.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Faham:Adaptive Biotechnologies: Employment, Equity Ownership. Facon:Onyx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: 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; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pierre Fabre: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Moreau:Novartis: Honoraria, Other: Adboard; Takeda: Other: Adboard; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Adboard; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Adboard; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Adboard; Amgen: Other: Adboard; Amgen: Other: Adboard; Novartis: Other: Adboard. Attal:celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; jansen: Honoraria.
Allografting is potentially curative for myeloma (MM).¹ Molecular remissions (MR) were reported after myeloablative and reduced-intensity conditionings.2, 3 Before the ‘new drugs’ era, a tandem approach with an autograft after high-dose melphalan (200 mg/m²) followed by a non-myeloablative 200 cGy total body irradiation-based allograft was designed in Seattle.⁴ At a median follow-up of 12.1 years, we report long-term clinical outcomes of minimal residual disease (MRD) kinetics by qualitative PCR (nested-PCR) and real-time quantitative PCR (qPCR) on a cohort of newly diagnosed patients treated with the Seattle approach.
Background:
Multiple myeloma cells uniformly overexpress CD38. We studied daratumumab, a CD38-targeting, human IgG1κ monoclonal antibody, in a phase 1-2 trial involving patients with relapsed myeloma or relapsed myeloma that was refractory to two or more prior lines of therapy.
Methods:
In part 1, the dose-escalation phase, we administered daratumumab at doses of 0.005 to 24 mg per kilogram of body weight. In part 2, the dose-expansion phase, 30 patients received 8 mg per kilogram of daratumumab and 42 received 16 mg per kilogram, administered once weekly (8 doses), twice monthly (8 doses), and monthly for up to 24 months. End points included safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetics.
Results:
No maximum tolerated dose was identified in part 1. In part 2, the median time since diagnosis was 5.7 years. Patients had received a median of four prior treatments; 79% of the patients had disease that was refractory to the last therapy received (64% had disease refractory to proteasome inhibitors and immunomodulatory drugs and 64% had disease refractory to bortezomib and lenalidomide), and 76% had received autologous stem-cell transplants. Infusion-related reactions in part 2 were mild (71% of patients had an event of any grade, and 1% had an event of grade 3), with no dose-dependent adverse events. The most common adverse events of grade 3 or 4 (in ≥ 5% of patients) were pneumonia and thrombocytopenia. The overall response rate was 36% in the cohort that received 16 mg per kilogram (15 patients had a partial response or better, including 2 with a complete response and 2 with a very good partial response) and 10% in the cohort that received 8 mg per kilogram (3 had a partial response). In the cohort that received 16 mg per kilogram, the median progression-free survival was 5.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.2 to 8.1), and 65% (95% CI, 28 to 86) of the patients who had a response did not have progression at 12 months.
Conclusions:
Daratumumab monotherapy had a favorable safety profile and encouraging efficacy in patients with heavily pretreated and refractory myeloma. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development and Genmab; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00574288.).
In 2015, there is a large body of evidence demonstrating that minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity after therapy is a powerful predictor of progression-free survival and overall survival in multiple myeloma. Based on available data, we believe MRD provides a meaningful endpoint for regulatory purposes, academic studies, and a valuable prognostic evaluation of individual patients in the clinical setting. Similar to what has been shown in acute and chronic lymphocytic leukemia, based on emerging data, the prognostic impact of MRD in multiple myeloma appears to be independent of induction therapy received. This fact raises fundamental questions regarding best possible treatment strategies (e.g., fixed number of cycles versus response adapted number of cycles) as well as optimal treatment modalities (e.g., newer effective but less intense combination therapies versus high dose melphalan followed by autologous stem cell transplantation), in particular for patients newly diagnosed with multiple myeloma. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
© 2015 International Clinical Cytometry Society.
Outcomes for patients with multiple myeloma (MM) have improved substantially in the past decade, with improvements in both progression-free survival and overall survival. Many patients are now achieving a complete response to treatment, and consequently highly sensitive assays are needed for detection of minimal residual disease (MRD) in patients with MM. Results of multicolour flow cytometry and deep-sequencing studies suggest that among patients achieving a complete response, MRD-negative status is associated with significant improvements in progression-free survival and overall survival. Despite the increasing need for MRD testing in patients with MM, considerable heterogeneity in techniques for MRD detection hinders the clinical interpretation of their results. The criteria used to define MRD, strengths and weaknesses of the major types of tests (flow cytometry versus molecular testing), and the optimal sample type (bone marrow aspirate versus peripheral blood) are all unresolved dilemmas in MRD testing. This Review presents an overview of the various techniques for MRD detection in patients with MM. In addition, this article discusses challenges and opportunities for the routine use of MRD testing, possible future directions for clinical trials and implications for drug approval processes.
The introduction of BCR-ABL1 tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in 2001 for treatment of chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) marked a paradigm shift in management of the disease. With that advance, CML has been largely managed as a chronic condition, with daily medication and frequent monitoring. Optimizing monitoring methods and identifying factors associated with response and long-term outcomes has thus been a major clinical research focus. Given the improved understanding of surveillance techniques in CML and the advent of several recently approved second- and third-generation TKIs, there have been recent updates to clinical practice guidelines. The dramatic change in survival for patients with CML treated with TKIs compared with previous therapies and the subsequent incremental therapeutic improvements have led to uniquely well-supported approaches and surveillance of patients on TKI therapy. Measurement of RNA for BCR-ABL1 via quantitative PCR (qPCR) is the cornerstone of disease management. Efforts to maximize utility and scheduling of molecular monitoring and the care plans based on results of that monitoring are at the heart of current investigations. Study designs of major clinical studies in CML will incorporate new goals of therapy and molecular monitoring methods.
Few effective treatments exist for patients with refractory or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma not responding to treatment with bortezomib and lenalidomide. Pomalidomide alone has shown limited efficacy in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma, but synergistic effects have been noted when combined with dexamethasone. We compared the efficacy and safety of pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone with high-dose dexamethasone alone in these patients.
This multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 3 trial was undertaken in Australia, Canada, Europe, Russia, and the USA. Patients were eligible if they had been diagnosed with refractory or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma, and had failed at least two previous treatments of bortezomib and lenalidomide. They were assigned in a 2:1 ratio with a validated interactive voice and internet response system to either 28 day cycles of pomalidomide (4 mg/day on days 1-21, orally) plus low-dose dexamethasone (40 mg/day on days 1, 8, 15, and 22, orally) or high-dose dexamethasone (40 mg/day on days 1-4, 9-12, and 17-20, orally) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Stratification factors were age (≤75 years vs >75 years), disease population (refractory vs relapsed and refractory vs bortezomib intolerant), and number of previous treatments (two vs more than two). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01311687, and with EudraCT, number 2010-019820-30.
The accrual for the study has been completed and the analyses are presented. 302 patients were randomly assigned to receive pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone and 153 high-dose dexamethasone. After a median follow-up of 10·0 months (IQR 7·2-13·2), median PFS with pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone was 4·0 months (95% CI 3·6-4·7) versus 1·9 months (1·9-2·2) with high-dose dexamethasone (hazard ratio 0·48 [95% CI 0·39-0·60]; p<0·0001). The most common grade 3-4 haematological adverse events in the pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone and high-dose dexamethasone groups were neutropenia (143 [48%] of 300 vs 24 [16%] of 150, respectively), anaemia (99 [33%] vs 55 [37%], respectively), and thrombocytopenia (67 [22%] vs 39 [26%], respectively). Grade 3-4 non-haematological adverse events in the pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone and high-dose dexamethasone groups included pneumonia (38 [13%] vs 12 [8%], respectively), bone pain (21 [7%] vs seven [5%], respectively), and fatigue (16 [5%] vs nine [6%], respectively). There were 11 (4%) treatment-related adverse events leading to death in the pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone group and seven (5%) in the high-dose dexamethasone group.
Pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone, an oral regimen, could be considered a new treatment option in patients with refractory or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma.
Celgene Corporation.
To the editor:
As more effective therapies become routinely used to treat multiple myeloma,[1][1] standardized methods (such as flow cytometry) to determine the presence/absence of minimal residual disease (MRD) will likely play an increasingly important role in the clinical, research, and
PURPOSEBortezomib-thalidomide-dexamethasone (VTD) is an effective induction therapy in multiple myeloma (MM). This phase II, noncomparative study sought to determine whether addition of cyclophosphamide to this regimen (VTDC) could further increase efficacy without compromising safety. PATIENTS AND METHODS
Patients age 18 to 70 years with previously untreated, measurable MM, who were eligible for high-dose chemotherapy-autologous stem-cell transplantation (HDCT-ASCT), were randomly assigned to bortezomib 1.3 mg/m(2), thalidomide 100 mg, and dexamethasone 40 mg, with (n = 49) or without (n = 49) cyclophosphamide 400 mg/m(2) for four 21-day cycles, followed by HDCT-ASCT. The primary end point was postinduction combined rate of near-complete response (nCR) or better (including complete response [CR] with normalized serum κ:λ free light chain ratio, CR, and nCR).ResultsPostinduction, 51% (VTD) and 44% (VTDC) of patients achieved combined CR/nCR, with bone marrow-confirmed CR in 29% and 31%, overall response rates of 100% and 96%, respectively, and very good partial response or better rates of 69% per arm. Post-HDCT-ASCT, combined CR/nCR rates were 85% (VTD) and 77% (VTDC). In all, 35% (VTD) and 27% (VTDC) of patients were negative for minimal residual disease (MRD) during induction and postinduction. Three-year overall survival was 80% (both arms). Grade 3 to 4 adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs were observed in 47% and 22% (VTD) and 57% and 41% (VTDC) of patients, respectively. The primary health-related quality of life end point (European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 [EORTC QLQ-C30] Global Health score) steadily increased with VTD during induction and reached a clinically relevant difference post-transplantation versus baseline. CONCLUSION
Both VTD and VTDC are highly active induction regimens producing high combined CR/nCR and MRD-negative rates; however, VTDC was associated with increased toxicity and suggestion of transient decreases in Global Health score, without an increase in activity.
Data are lacking on whether lenalidomide maintenance therapy prolongs the time to disease progression after autologous hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation in patients with multiple myeloma.
Between April 2005 and July 2009, we randomly assigned 460 patients who were younger than 71 years of age and had stable disease or a marginal, partial, or complete response 100 days after undergoing stem-cell transplantation to lenalidomide or placebo, which was administered until disease progression. The starting dose of lenalidomide was 10 mg per day (range, 5 to 15).
The study-drug assignments were unblinded in 2009, when a planned interim analysis showed a significantly longer time to disease progression in the lenalidomide group. At unblinding, 20% of patients who received lenalidomide and 44% of patients who received placebo had progressive disease or had died (P<0.001); of the remaining 128 patients who received placebo and who did not have progressive disease, 86 crossed over to lenalidomide. At a median follow-up of 34 months, 86 of 231 patients who received lenalidomide (37%) and 132 of 229 patients who received placebo (58%) had disease progression or had died. The median time to progression was 46 months in the lenalidomide group and 27 months in the placebo group (P<0.001). A total of 35 patients who received lenalidomide (15%) and 53 patients who received placebo (23%) died (P=0.03). More grade 3 or 4 hematologic adverse events and grade 3 nonhematologic adverse events occurred in patients who received lenalidomide (P<0.001 for both comparisons). Second primary cancers occurred in 18 patients who received lenalidomide (8%) and 6 patients who received placebo (3%).
Lenalidomide maintenance therapy, initiated at day 100 after hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation, was associated with more toxicity and second cancers but a significantly longer time to disease progression and significantly improved overall survival among patients with myeloma. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00114101.).
Emerging evidence indicates that tumors can follow several evolutionary paths over a patient's disease course. With the use of serial genomic analysis of samples collected at different points during the disease course of 28 patients with multiple myeloma, we found that the genomes of standard-risk patients show few changes over time, whereas those of cytogenetically high-risk patients show significantly more changes over time. The results indicate the existence of 3 temporal tumor types, which can either be genetically stable, linearly evolving, or heterogeneous clonal mixtures with shifting predominant clones. A detailed analysis of one high-risk patient sampled at 7 time points over the entire disease course identified 2 competing subclones that alternate in a back and forth manner for dominance with therapy until one clone underwent a dramatic linear evolution. With the use of the Vk*MYC genetically engineered mouse model of myeloma we modeled this competition between subclones for predominance occurring spontaneously and with therapeutic selection.
The ACCENT group previously established disease-free survival (DFS) with 2 or 3 years median follow-up to predict 5 year overall survival (5 year OS) in stage II and III colon cancer. ACCENT further proposed (1) a stronger association between DFS and OS in stage III than II, and (2) 6 or 7 years necessary to demonstrate DFS/OS surrogacy in recent trials. The relationship between end-points in trials with oral fluoropyrimidines, oxaliplatin and irinotecan is unknown.
Associations between the treatment effect hazard ratios (HRs) on 2 and 3 years DFS, and 5 and 6 years OS were examined in 6 phase III trials not included in prior analyses from 1997 to 2002. Individual data for 12,676 patients were analysed; two trials each tested oxaliplatin, irinotecan and oral treatment versus 5-FU/LV.
Overall association between 2/3 year DFS and 5/6 year OS HRs was modest to poor (simple R² measures: 0.58-0.76, model-based R²: 0.17-0.49). In stage III patients, the association increased (model-based R² ≥ 0.79). Observed treatment effects on 2 year DFS accurately 5/6 year OS effects overall and in stage III patients.
In recent trials of cytotoxic chemotherapy, 2 or 3 years DFS HRs are highly predictive of 5 and 6 years OS HRs in stage III but not stage II patients. In all patients the DFS/OS association is stronger for 6 year OS, thus at least 6 year follow-up is recommended to assess OS benefit. These data support DFS as the primary end-point for stage III colon cancer trials testing cytotoxic agents.