Regimen For Multiple Myeloma Research Articles

Clinical Characteristics and Survival Outcomes of Patients With Primary and Secondary Plasma Cell Leukemia According to the 2021 Definition: A Single Center Retrospective Study

IntroductionPlasma cell leukemia (PCL) is a rare malignancy with poor overall survival (OS). Recently, its diagnostic criteria were revised by lowering the threshold of circulating plasma cells from ≥ 20% to ≥ 5%. MethodsBetween 2010 and 2024, patients with primary PCL (pPCL) and secondary PCL (sPCL) were identified at a tertiary center. We retrospectively analyzed baseline characteristics, treatment, and survival in months (m). ResultsWe identified 30 patients with pPCL and 29 patients with sPCL. The median time to sPCL in patients who received Daratumumab (Dara)-containing regimens for multiple myeloma was 46.8m compared with 12.3m in patients who did not (P=0.007). Of the whole cohort, 51.9% received an induction regimen with novel agents without chemotherapy. Of the evaluable patients with pPCL and sPCL, 82.1% (23/28) and 64.7% (11/17) achieved partial response or better respectively. Median progression free survival was significantly worse in patients with sPCL than pPCL (2.2 vs. 38.3 months; HR 0.16; 95% CI (0.07-0.35), P < .001). Median OS was also worse in patients with sPCL compared with pPCL (3.1 months vs. NR [not reached]; HR 0.09; 95%CI 0.04-0.23, P < .001). The median post-SCT survival for patients with pPCL was NR compared with 6.7m for patients with sPCL (HR 0.17; 95% CI (0.03-0.83), P = .03). Dara-refractory status was associated with worse OS (HR 5.63; 95% CI (2.75-11.51), P < .0001). ConclusionOutcomes of pPCL are improving but remain dismal for sPCL. We explored the role of novel agents, especially Dara, in the treatment of PCL. More prospective trials are needed to improve its outcomes.

Addition of Elotuzumab to Backbone Treatment Regimens for Multiple Myeloma: An Updated Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

BackgroundThe efficacy of elotuzumab, an anti-SLAMF7 monoclonal antibody, in treating relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) and newly-diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) has varied in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Moreover, there is limited data on its real-world application. Patients and MethodsWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs investigating the addition of elotuzumab to backbone antimyeloma regimens. The primary outcome of interest was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary efficacy outcomes included overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), and rates of very good partial response or better (VGPR). Key toxicities were also evaluated. ResultsThree RRMM trials (n = 915) and 5 NDMM trials (n = 1790) were included, with 50% of the 2705 patients receiving elotuzumab-containing triplets or quadruplets. In RRMM settings, elotuzumab use significantly improved PFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.60-0.82; P < .001; I² = 0%). This benefit was consistent among patients with high-risk cytogenetics (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.43-0.90; P = .01; I² = 0%) and was particularly evident in those previously treated with proteasome inhibitors (PIs) or immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs). The RRMM cohort also demonstrated better OS, ORR, and ≥VGPR rate. However, the NDMM cohort showed no significant improvements in any efficacy outcomes. Despite an increase in severe (grade ≥3) infections, elotuzumab use did not adversely affect rates of severe cytopenias, severe cardiac disorders, or second primary malignancies. ConclusionOur results suggest that elotuzumab-containing regimens represent valuable therapeutic options for PI/IMiD-exposed patients with RRMM. In contrast, elotuzumab's role in frontline settings remains limited.

Treatment Efficacy and Safety of Bortezomib Combined with Dexamethasone and Lenalidomide Chemotherapy Regimen for Multiple Myeloma

Objective: To analyze the effect of bortezomib combined with dexamethasone and lenalidomide in the treatment of multiple myeloma. Methods: 60 cases of multiple myeloma patients admitted to our hospital from January 2022 to December 2023 were selected randomly, with 30 cases in each group. Bortezomib combined with dexamethasone was administered in the control group, and bortezomib combined with dexamethasone and lenalidomide was given to the observation group, and the treatment effect was analyzed. Results: After treatment, CD3+ and CD4+ of the observation group were higher than that of the control group, CD8+ was lower than that of the control group, and the total treatment efficiency was higher, which was statistically significant (P &lt; 0.05), and there was no difference in the total incidence of adverse reactions between the two groups (P &gt; 0.05). Conclusion: Bortezomib combined with dexamethasone and lenalidomide is effective in the treatment of multiple myeloma as it regulates the immune function and is safe, thus it can be promoted in clinical practice.

Safety and feasibility analysis of rapid daratumumab infusion in Chinese patients with multiple myeloma.

With the increasing use of daratumumab (DARA)-containing regimens for multiple myeloma (MM) patients in China, the standard infusion time of DARA is long, with the potential for infusion-related reactions (IRRs) and increased hospitalization and use of resources. Shortening the duration of DARA infusion helps to optimize the hospital stay and enhance the patient treatment experience. The current, commonly used 90-min rapid DARA infusion regimen may not be applicable to Chinese MM patients, and therefore, we explored a new 110-min rapid DARA infusion regimen aimed at reducing the treatment burden on patients to guarantee therapeutic safety. MM inpatients treated with the DARA regimen were divided into two groups according to the number of times the DARA regimen was used: a standard infusion regimen for patients treated with the first two doses of DARA and a 110-min rapid infusion regimen for patients treated with more than two doses of DARA. Anti-allergy medications were routinely administered prior to the start of DARA infusion, patient consent, and authorization was obtained for all treatments, and statistical evaluation of the results was conducted via descriptive analyses, one-way ANOVA and chi-square tests. A total of 129 patients were included in this study: 68 in the standard infusion group, with 121 DARA infusions, and 129 in the rapid infusion group (patients who participated in the standard infusion subsequently participated in the rapid infusion), with 738 DARA infusions. The incidence of IRRs was 27.27% (36/121) in the standard infusion group and 1.35% (10/738) in the rapid infusion group, which were significantly different (p < 0.001). The incidence of IRRs after rapid infusion in other studies was <6%. The incidence of grade 1 IRRs in the rapid infusion group was 0.81% (6/738), the incidence of grade 2 IRRs was 0.54% (4/738), and there were no IRRs above grade 3; age, sex, and underlying disease had no effect on the choice of infusion method (p > 0.05). The mean infusion time after the occurrence of IRRs was also shorter in the rapid infusion group than in the standard infusion group (F = 24.781, p < 0.001). The 110-min rapid infusion DARA regimen is feasible and safe for use in Chinese MM patients.

Patient-reported treatment-related symptoms and use of the PRO-CTCAE for multiple myeloma clinical trials: A qualitative interview study.

e19516 Background: Therapeutic regimens for multiple myeloma (MM) involve multiple pharmacological agents, including steroids. Many cause treatment-related symptoms that add to patient burden or may trigger treatment cessation. This study gathered qualitative data about the patient experience with MM treatments, including regimens with steroids. Findings were summarized and compared to the Patient Reported Outcome version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE), to assess its comprehensiveness and relevance in MM clinical trials. Methods: Individual, semi-structured interviews were conducted virtually with a diverse sample of 16 US-based, English-speaking adults (38% male, 25% Black, 13% Hispanic) to explore their experiences with MM and treatments, including perspectives on steroids and potential benefits of steroid-sparing regimens. Content analysis was used to summarize and compare terminology participants used to describe their experiences with treatments. Results: Participants reported a diverse set of treatment-related symptoms impacting their overall experience, indicating the importance of assessing regimen tolerability in clinical trials. Steroids were linked to increased energy that interfered with sleep or functioning, irritability, taste changes, weight gain, increased appetite, and cognitive symptoms like brain fog. Participants reported that most symptoms were tolerable, but they would prefer to avoid steroids if treatment benefits did not diminish. Many reported symptoms were included in the PRO-CTCAE items (see Table), but several symptoms related to regimens with steroids are not covered: excess energy, bitter/metallic taste, taste sensitivity, brittle nails, irritability, hunger/increased appetite, and muscle weakness. Conclusions: MM patients experience a range of treatment-related symptoms, many of which impact their quality of life. If given the option, patients would prefer a steroid-free regimen if there was proven clinical benefit. While the PRO-CTCAE covers most of the treatment-related symptoms, proving to be an option for multiple myeloma clinical trials, additional PRO instruments may be needed to cover specific gaps in the PRO-CTCAE item library content coverage. [Table: see text]

Incidence of thromboses and secondary cancers in patients with multiple myeloma after lenalidomide-based induction followed by maintenance as first-line therapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

e19510 Background: Lenalidomide, an immunomodulatory drug (IMiD) is one of the backbones of standard first-line induction regimen for multiple myeloma (MM). Lenalidomide maintenance is associated with improved progression-free survival, especially after bone marrow transplantation. The optimal duration of maintenance therapy is unknown. In our study, we evaluated the incidence of any thrombosis, venous thrombosis (VTh) and arterial thrombosis (ATh) as well as any secondary cancers, secondary solid and hematologic cancers in patients with MM who received lenalidomide-based first-line induction followed by lenalidomide maintenance for at least 6 months. Methods: This systematic review identified pertinent clinical trials from MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL databases from inception to December 31, 2023. After two rounds of review by 4 authors independently, 25 clinical trials in patients with MM met the above eligibility criteria. The number of cases with any thrombosis, VTh, ATh, any secondary cancers, secondary solid and hematologic cancers along with the total number of patients in the arms with lenalidomide-based therapy were extracted from each trial. The incidence meta-analysis was performed using the “meta” package version 6.2-0 of R version 4.2.2 via a random-effects model. Pooled incidence and its associated 95% confidence interval (CI) were reported for each outcome. I² statistic was used to determine the heterogeneity of the studies. Results: 10743 patients were reviewed from 25 clinical trials. The pooled incidence rate of any thrombosis was 4% (0.04; 95% CI: 0.03 to 0.06, I2=91%). The pooled incidence rate of arterial thrombosis and venous thrombosis was 1% (0.01; 95% CI: 0.00 to 0.02, I2=77%) and 4% (0.04; 95% CI: 0.02-0.09, I2=94%) respectively. The pooled incidence rate of any secondary cancer was 5% (0.05; 95% CI, 0.04 to 0.07, I2=93%). The pooled incidence rate of secondary hematological malignancies was 2% (0.02; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.03, I2=90%) and secondary solid cancers was 4% (0.04; 95% CI, 0.03 to 0.06, I2=76%). Conclusions: IMiDs are one of the backbones of the MM regimen. Our meta-analysis showed lenalidomide-based regimen increased the risk for thromboses – higher for VTh (4%) and slightly higher for ATh (1%). It also showed a higher rate of secondary cancers – both solid (4%) and hematologic cancers (2%). However, our study showed considerable heterogeneity. These events become clinically important as patients with MM live longer. MM patients on lenalidomide maintenance could benefit from an active surveillance, monitoring and early treatment program for these long-term adverse effects. VTh prophylaxis based on the type of regimen is already standard. Secondary cancer surveillance may need to be individualized for MM patients in remission.

Once-weekly versus twice-weekly bortezomib in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: a real-world analysis

Induction regimens for multiple myeloma (MM) commonly include bortezomib, which has typically been administered twice weekly despite studies demonstrating comparable efficacy and less peripheral neuropathy (PN) with once-weekly bortezomib. We aimed to analyze the real-world prevalence and efficacy of once-weekly versus twice-weekly bortezomib regimens in newly diagnosed MM. We analyzed 2497 US patients aged 18–70 years treated with commercial first-line bortezomib using nationwide Flatiron Health electronic health record-derived data, including 910 (36.4%) patients who received twice-weekly and 1522 (63.2%) who received once-weekly bortezomib. Once-weekly bortezomib use increased over time, from 57.7% in 2017 to 73.1% in 2022. Multivariate analysis identified worsened performance status and more recent year of diagnosis with higher odds of receiving once-weekly bortezomib. Real-world progression-free survival (median 37.2 months with once-weekly versus 39.6 months with twice-weekly, p = 0.906) and overall survival (medians not reached in either cohort, p = 0.800) were comparable. PN rates were higher in patients receiving twice-weekly bortezomib (34.7% versus 18.5%, p < 0.001). In conclusion, once-weekly bortezomib is clearly associated with similar efficacy and fewer toxicities compared to twice-weekly bortezomib. Our findings support once-weekly bortezomib as a standard-of-care regimen for newly diagnosed patients with MM.

Pharmacoeconomic study of the effectiveness of cytogenetic studies in patients with MM before prescribing first-line therapy

Purpose of the study. Conducting an assessment of the economic consequences (clinical and economic analysis) when conducting cytogenetic studies before prescribing various first-line treatment regimens for multiple myeloma (MM). Materialsand methods. The pharmacoeconomic study was carried out using the method of cost analysis, “cost-effectiveness” within the framework of the State Guarantee Program (SGP). Results. A review of the literature demonstrated that a limited number of data are currently available on the clinical effectiveness of the analyzed regimens in the first line, both in patients with normal and high cytogenetic risk. The cost-effectiveness analysis showed that among the three studied 1st-line treatment regimens (VMP, Rd, VRd), in terms of PFS (progression-free survival), the coefficient was minimal for the VMP regimen in patients with high cytogenetic risk. Conclusion. The study showed that the choice and prescription of first-line therapy, depending on the results of a cytogenetic study, is a clinically effective and cost-effective approach to organizing medical care for adult patients with multiple myeloma in the Russian Federation. This could be used in the future to formulate.

Efficacy of Combined Drug Pre-transplant Conditioning Regimens in Multiple Myeloma Patients with Single Autologous Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation

Aim. To conduct an interim outcome analysis of conditioning regimens with carfilzomib or thiotepa compared to standard melphalan 200 mg/m2 regimen in multiple myeloma (MM) patients with single autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (auto-HSCT).&#x0D; Materials &amp; Methods. The retrospective analysis focused on outcomes of 67 single auto-HSCTs performed from 2017 to 2021. Responses as well as progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) rates were compared in MM patients per IWMG criteria in pre- and post-transplant periods. Three conditioning regimens were assigned: melphalan 200 mg/m2 (Mel200), melphalan/carfilzomib combination (Mel/Karfil), and melphalan/thiotepa combination (Mel/Thio). In an additional cohort of 12 MM patients, next-generation sequencing assay was used to detect inherited and somatic mutations associated with proteasome inhibitor efficacy. For this purpose, DNA of peripheral blood lymphocytes and bone marrow plasma cells were examined.&#x0D; Results. PFS medians were comparable in MM patients treated with Mel200 (n = 40) and Mel/Karfil (n = 10) conditioning regimens, they were 32 and 23 months, respectively (p = 0.241). In these cohorts, OS median was not reached, and the curves showed no significant differences (p = 0.050). Out of 10 MM patients treated with Mel/Karfil, six received melphalan 140 mg/m2, the remaining 4 patients received 200 mg/m2. Complete response (CR) rate in the Mel200 and Mel/Karfil groups increased two-fold after auto-HSCT: from 35.5 % to 74.2 % and from 25.0 % to 50.0 %, respectively. The worst PFS and OS medians were in the Mel/Thio group, i.e., 12 and 17 months, respectively, and CR rate after auto-HSCT remained unchanged. The best PFS was associated with CR rather than very good partial or partial response after auto-HSCT, they were 48, 21, and 23 months, respectively (p = 0.001). Exome sequencing of DNA of peripheral blood lymphocytes and bone marrow plasma cells revealed polymorphic variants in the genes associated with chemotherapy response.&#x0D; Conclusion. The outcomes of Mel/Karfil, the regimen containing the reduced dose of melphalan 140 mg/m2, and the statistical comparability with the Mel200 regimen suggest that this combination can be effective in the treatment of MM patients with impaired renal function, which still needs to be further confirmed. No advantage of the combined conditioning regimen over the standard one can be accounted for by the loss of plasma cell sensitivity to proteasome inhibitors. The obtained data provide ground for modifying the study protocol with a particular focus on evaluating the efficacy and safety of conditioning regimen Mel/Karfil with melphalan 200 mg/m2 depending on biologic phenotype of plasma cell.

Statin-induced Mitochondrial Priming Sensitizes Multiple Myeloma Cells to BCL2 and MCL-1 Inhibitors.

BH3 mimetics including venetoclax hold promise for treatment of multiple myeloma but rational combinations are needed to broaden efficacy. This study presents mechanistic and clinical data to support addition of pitavastatin to venetoclax regimens in myeloma. The results open a new avenue for repurposing statins in blood cancer.

Comparison of Various Stem Cell Mobilization Regimens for Multiple Myeloma - a 15-Year Retrospective Institutional Analysis from India

Introduction For multiple myeloma (MM), Cyclophosphamide (Cy) based chemo-mobilization offers advantage in term of higher stem cell yield and can overcome adverse impact of prior lenalidomide therapy on stem cell harvest. However, considering need for hospital stay and risk of febrile neutropenia, steady state mobilization with G-CSF and pre-emptive plerixafor (PEF) is becoming increasingly popular. Until few years back, cost of PEF was prohibitive thereby limiting its use and prompting a search for alternative cheaper drugs. Mouse models have shown that Proteasome Inhibitors aid in hematopoietic stem-cell (HSC) mobilization by down-regulating very-late antigen-4 (VLA-4) on bone marrow stromal cells which interacts with vascular cell adhesion molecule (VCAM-1) on HSC. We previously reported that bortezomib (Bort) in combination with Cy-G-CSF showed a trend towards higher CD34 yield and reduced need for apheresis sessions, without additional toxicity. There is limited data comparing mobilization regimens, especially from low-middle income countries where HSC collection may not be done after 4-6 cycles of first-line therapy. We hereby report our 15-year experience of various mobilization regimens for MM. Methods All patients with MM who underwent HSC mobilization from September 2007 - December 2022 were included in this analysis. Various mobilization regimens [Group 1 - G-CSF + Bort (August 2018 - December 2022); Group 2 - G-CSF + plerixafor (August 2018 - December 2022); Group 3 - Bort-Cy-GCSF (April 2016 - July 2018); Group 4 - Cy + G-CSF (September 2007 - March 2016)] were used as per respective time-periods (Table 1). Our aim was to collect CD34 cell dose of 5million/kg to suffice for 2 transplants. G-CSF (5 mcg/kg subcutaneously BD) was given on days 1-5 (Groups 1 and 2). Bort (1.3mg/m 2 iv / sc) (Group 1) or PEF (Group 2) were given on day 4 twelve hours prior to planned apheresis on day 5. Apheresis was done on day 5, and additionally on day 6, if first harvest was inadequate for 2 transplants. In group 3, Bort (1.3mg/m 2 iv) was given on days-1,4,8,11, with Cy (1gm/m 2 iv) on days 8 and 9, followed by G-CSF from day 11 onwards. Cy (1gm/m 2 iv) was given on day 1 and 2 (Group 4), followed by G-CSF from day 4 onwards. Stem cell harvest was done in groups 3 and 4 once peripheral blood CD34 (PB CD34) was &amp;gt;20/µL. In groups 3 and 4, if PB CD34 was &amp;lt;20/µL for 2 subsequent days, PEF was used according to physician's discretion, if available. Similarly in Group 1, if PB CD34 was between 10-20/µl on day 4, PEF was used according to physician's discretion. PEF was used in any group after the first harvest if the cell dose was deemed inadequate, at physician's discretion. Primary objective was to determine proportion of patients with CD34 + dose ≥5x10 6/kg in first apheresis in various groups. Secondary objectives were to determine total median CD34 + dose (x10 6/kg) collected, median CD34 + (x10 6/kg) in first apheresis, and frequency of mobilization failure. Mobilization failure was defined as total collected CD34 + dose of &amp;lt;2x10 6/kg or abandoned harvest attempt anticipating a poor collection.Analysis was done as per planned regimen (intention to treat analysis). Results Total 205 patients were analyzed. Median age was 48 years (27-65 years) and 143 (70%) were males (Table 1). Median day of first collection in groups 3 and 4 was day10 from the first dose of cyclophosphamide. Percentage of patients who collected ≥5x10 6 CD34 + cells/kg in first apheresis were 26%, 53%, 69% and 63%, respectively in Groups 1-4 (p=0.0001) (Table 1). CD34+ cell-dose in first apheresis and total dose collected are shown in Table 1. In comparison to groups 1 and 2, both chemo-mobilization groups (group 3 and 4) had a significantly higher total cell dose (Figure 1). In comparison to group 1, both Cy chemo-mobilization groups had a significantly higher cell dose in first harvest, but there was no significant difference between group 2 and group 4 (p=0.23) (Figure 1). PEF was required additionally in 47%, 22%, and 7% of patients in groups 1, 3 and 4 respectively (P&amp;lt;0.00001). Amongst transplanted patients, there was no difference in neutrophil or platelet engraftment and the frequency of engraftment syndrome in various groups. Conclusion Cy-based chemo-mobilization regimens have advantage of higher total stem cell yield, while they are equivalent to G-CSF + Plerixafor for harvest in single apheresis. Addition of Bortezomib to Cyclophosphamide may help to increase stem cell yield.

Multiple Myeloma in 2023 Ways: From Trials to Real Life.

Multiple myeloma is a chronic hematologic malignancy that obstinately tends to relapse. Basic research has made giant strides in better characterizing the molecular mechanisms of the disease. The results have led to the manufacturing of new, revolutionary drugs which have been widely tested in clinical trials. These drugs have been approved and are now part of the therapeutic armamentarium. As a consequence, it is essential to combine what we know from clinical trials with real-world data in order to improve therapeutic strategies. Starting with this premise, our review aims to describe the currently employed regimens in multiple myeloma and compare clinical trials with real-life experiences. We also intend to put a spotlight on promising therapies such as T-cell engagers and chimeric antigen receptor T-cells (CAR-T) which are proving to be effective in changing the course of advanced-stage disease.

Retrospective Observational Study on Real-World Bortezomib Prescribing Patterns and Outcomes in Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma

Introduction: Most induction regimens for multiple myeloma (MM) contain bortezomib. In most clinical trials, bortezomib has been prescribed either intravenously or subcutaneously twice per week in 21-day or 28-day cycles. However, several retrospective single-center studies have shown that once-weekly bortezomib has comparable efficacy and less peripheral neuropathy compared to twice-weekly bortezomib ( Sidana et al, PLoS One 2017; Cook et al, AJH 2021). These findings have also been confirmed by a secondary analysis of data from three prospective Phase 3 randomized studies ( Mateos et al, Haematologica 2014). As such, many clinicians have adopted once-weekly bortezomib regimens in routine care in the past decade. However, the real-world (RW) prevalence and efficacy of once-weekly vs twice-weekly bortezomib regimens in a larger population have not yet been characterized. Methods: This study used US nationwide longitudinal Flatiron Health electronic health record-derived de-identified data. We included patients aged 18-70 years with newly diagnosed MM between 2017-2022 with ≥ 6 months of follow-up and ≥ 2 clinical visits who were treated with a first-line (1L) bortezomib-containing regimen. Patients aged &amp;gt;70 were excluded a priori given the likelihood of altered practice patterns and more frequent comorbidities. Twice-weekly bortezomib was defined as patients for whom the most frequent interval between two doses of 1L bortezomib within a cycle was 3.0-4.9 days, while once-weekly bortezomib was defined as a corresponding interval of 5.0-9.9 days. We used multivariable logistic regression to assess demographic and clinical factors associated with once-weekly vs twice-weekly (reference) bortezomib. RW progression free survival (rwPFS) and RW overall survival (rwOS) from 1L treatment initiation were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Outcomes were compared using Cox proportional hazards model including transplant as a time-varying covariate and adjustment for other demographic and clinical factors. Results: Of 2,522 patients included, 927 (36.8%) received twice-weekly while 1,522 (63.2%) received once-weekly bortezomib. Approximately half of patients (50.3%) were non-Latinx White, 21.7% non-Latinx Black, and 8.0% Latinx. Most patients were treated in the community setting (78.8%). Rates of once-weekly bortezomib administration were 66.2% and 62.1% among patients treated at academic and community practices, respectively. The frequency of weekly bortezomib use increased over time, from 58.0% between 2017-2019 to 68.8% between 2020-2022. In multivariate analysis, ECOG PS ≥ 2 (odds ratio [OR] 1.50; [95% CI 1.14 to 1.99] vs ECOG PS 0), and more recent year of diagnosis (OR 1.14; [95% CI 1.08 to 1.20] per year) were associated with higher odds of receiving once-weekly bortezomib. Conversely, Latinx patients vs non-Latinx White (OR 0.60 [95% CI 0.44 to 0.82]) and patients with ≥ 2 high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities (HRCA) vs 0 HRCA (OR 0.66 [95% CI 0.48 to 0.91]) had lower odds of receiving once-weekly bortezomib administration. No significant associations were found between gender, ISS stage, practice setting, insurance category, or baseline creatinine. There was no statistically significant difference in rwPFS among patients receiving once-weekly (median 37.3 months, 95% CI 33.8 to 42.5) vs twice-weekly bortezomib (median 39.2 months, 95% CI 32.9 to 42.8) (HR 0.87 [95% CI 0.77 to 1.00]) (Figure 1A). Similarly, there was no statistically significant difference in rwOS with median 25.5 months follow-up (Figure 1B). Median rwOS was not reached in either group (hazard ratio 0.89 [95% CI 0.75 to 1.07]). Discussion: We evaluated US bortezomib prescribing patterns for the first time in the modern era using a large nationwide RW-study. Whereas prescribing patterns have shifted towards once-weekly bortezomib over time, over 30% of patients diagnosed in the last three years received twice-weekly bortezomib. Importantly, once-weekly and twice-weekly bortezomib performed comparably with regard to rwPFS and rwOS. While our study did not analyze neuropathy or patient quality of life, once-weekly bortezomib is known to be associated with less neuropathy and less time in clinic. These data further support the conclusion that once-weekly bortezomib should be considered the standard of care for newly diagnosed patients with MM.

Impact of integrating standardized venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis orders for patients with multiple myeloma into an electronic health record (EHR).

469 Background: VTE is a serious complication in multiple myeloma patients, who have a 9-fold increased risk compared to the general population. Prophylaxis for VTE is recommended by international guidelines in multiple myeloma patients based on VTE risk assessment, but published studies have demonstrated prescribing may be suboptimal. Our aim was to evaluate the impact of integrating standardized VTE prophylaxis orders for multiple myeloma patients on active treatment into our EHR, which services over 2300 providers within 500 community cancer treatment locations across the United States. Methods: National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guideline-recommended VTE prophylaxis agents were integrated as optional orders into multiple myeloma EHR regimen templates from June to July 2022. Optional informational orders were also included: a “VTE Prophylaxis Reminder” order served as a trigger for the care team if prophylaxis was not prescribed and a “VTE Prophylaxis Exception” order served as documentation if the patient did not qualify for anticoagulation. An educational guide about VTE risk stratification and prophylaxis in multiple myeloma was developed and embedded in regimen templates. To evaluate the impact of this intervention, a structured EHR data export was used to identify multiple myeloma patients with regimen templates ordered during the prespecified time frames. A retrospective chart review was conducted to identify documentation of anticoagulation or reason for exception on or prior to cycle 1 day 1 of the multiple myeloma regimen. Data were compared using the Fisher’s exact test. We also evaluated ordering of VTE prophylaxis and use of informational orders from regimens during the post-implementation phase. Results: A total of 297 patients were identified, with 128 during the pre-implementation phase (May 2022) and 169 during the post-implementation phase (September 2022). Documentation of anticoagulation or reason for exception on or prior to cycle 1 day 1 of the multiple myeloma regimen increased from 70% (89/128) during the pre-implementation phase to 81% (137/169) during the post-implementation phase (two-sided p=0.0276). Aspirin was the most common agent prescribed in 73% and 64% of patients, respectively. During the post-implementation phase, VTE prophylaxis was prescribed directly from the regimen in 16% of patients. The “VTE Prophylaxis Reminder” order was utilized for 89% of patients and the “VTE Prophylaxis Exception” order was utilized for 1 patient. Conclusions: Integration of standardized orders into EHR regimen templates may facilitate prescribing and serve as reminders for the care team. We saw an 11% increase in documentation of VTE prophylaxis, which may potentially reduce risk of VTE in this patient population. Efforts are ongoing to highlight the need for anticoagulation and importance of documentation.

Risk of thromboembolic events associated with different multiple myeloma regimens in Taiwan: a nested case-control study.

Although novel agents for multiple myeloma (MM) have a better response rate and survival in both newly diagnosed and relapsed/refractory MM patients, concerns regarding the association between MM treatments and thromboembolic events have been raised. The aim of this population-based study was to examine the association between different combinations of MM treatments and the risk of thromboembolic events. We conducted a nested case-control study using the Taiwan Cancer Registry (TCR) and National Health Insurance Research Database (NHIRD). Adult patients newly diagnosed with MM and treated with at least one of the immunomodulatory agents between 2008 and 2016 were identified. Among them, we further identified patients who developed thromboembolic events as cases and selected controls matched by age, sex and duration of MM diagnosis at a ratio of 1:5. The index date was defined as the day one year before the diagnosis date of thromboembolic events in the case group and the corresponding date in the control group. Conditional logistic regression was used to examine the association between different MM treatment regimens and the risk of thromboembolic events. A total of 4,180 newly diagnosed MM patients treated with at least one of the immunomodulatory agents were identified (mean age: 67.2 years; male: 55.7%). In this MM cohort, we further identified 388 cases and 1,940 matched controls (mean age: 71 years; male: 64.2%). The use of a thalidomide/bortezomib/steroid combination (odds ratio (OR) 2.95 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.47-5.95]), thalidomide monotherapy (OR 3.33; 95% CI, 1.59-6.94), and a thalidomide/steroid combination (OR 4.24; 95% CI, 2.00-8.98) were associated with an increased risk of thromboembolic events. Other risk factors, particularly a history of thromboembolic events, including ischemic heart disease and pulmonary embolism, were significantly associated with increased risk of thromboembolic events. We found that the use of thalidomide alone and in specific combinations was associated with an increased risk of thromboembolic events.

Baseline inflammation indexes and neutrophil-to-LDH ratio for prediction of the first mobilization failure without plerixafor-based regimens in multiple myeloma and lymphoma patients: A single-center retrospective study.

Many factors were identified for mobilization failure (MF) in autologous hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation. To our knowledge, this is the first study to investigate the efficacy of baseline inflammation indexes and neutrophil-to-lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) ratio to predict MF in multiple myeloma (MM) and lymphoma. A total of 240 patients with lymphoma or MM hospitalized between January 2014 and June 2022 for the first stem cell mobilization were included in this retrospective single-center study. We evaluated the impact of baseline demographic, clinical, and laboratory data (before granulocyte colony-stimulating factor and chemotherapy implementation), including neutrophil, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio, monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio, systemic immune-inflammation index (SII), systemic inflammatory response index (SIRI), neutrophil-to-C-reactive protein, and neutrophil-to-LDH ratios on MF. A total of 240 patients were divided into successful (214 patients, 89.16%) and poor mobilizers (26 patients, 10.84%). Poor mobilizers had lower neutrophil, NLR, SII, and neutrophil-to-LDH ratios (P values were .001, .022, .001, and .001, respectively). Among these markers, only the neutrophil-to-LDH ratio was statistically low in both poor mobilizer MM and lymphoma patients. Receiving operator characteristic curve analysis was performed to evaluate neutrophil, SII, and neutrophil-to-LDH ratios for MF. Neutrophil-to-LDH ratio had the highest specificity (93.93%, for ≤9.904 cut-off) compared to the other two variables. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that neutrophil-to-LDH ratio ≤ 9.904 (cut-off) (odds ratio: 7.116, P = .001), neutrophil counts ≤3300/mm3 (cut-off) (odds ratio: 3.248, P = .021), and lymphoma diagnosis (odds ratio: 2.674, P = .039) were independent risks for MF. The neutrophil-to-LDH ratio could be a novel marker in lymphoma and MM patients to predict the first MF. New studies should be conducted for the optimization of this index.

The quantification of circular RNA 0007841 during induction therapy helps estimate the response and survival benefits to bortezomib-based regimen in multiple myeloma.

Circular RNA_0007841 (Circ_0007841) facilitates multiple myeloma (MM) progression and resistance of the bortezomib by experimental studies, while its clinical implication in MM patients is still unclear. This study intended to evaluate the longitudinal change and prognostic role of circ_0007841 expression in MM patients receiving bortezomib-based induction therapy. In this prospective study, bone marrow plasma cell (BMPC) samples were gained from 97 MM patients at diagnosis and after bortezomib-based induction therapy, and from 30 healthy controls (HCs) proposing BM donation. Then, circ_0007841 expression in BMPC samples was measured by reverse transcription-quantitative polymerase chain reaction. Additionally, MM patients were followed up for a median of 29.4months. Circ_0007841 expression was increased in MM patients compared to HCs (P < 0.001), but it was decreased after bortezomib-based induction therapy in MM patients (P < 0.001). Moreover, circ_0007841 expression at diagnosis was associated with the presence of t (4; 14) (P = 0.034), while its expression after bortezomib-based induction therapy was linked with higher revised international staging system stage (P = 0.025) in MM patients. Interestingly, circ_0007841 expression after bortezomib-based induction therapy was lower in MM patients who achieved complete remissions (P = 0.001) and overall responses (P = 0.002) compared to those who did not. Prognostically, circ_0007841 expression after bortezomib-based induction therapy (over the median vs. below the median) independently predicted shorter progression-free survival (hazard ratio (HR): 2.497, P = 0.002) and overall survival (HR: 3.107, P = 0.008) in MM patients. Circ_0007841 quantification during induction therapy may reflect the response and survival benefits to bortezomib-based regimen in MM patients.

The Determination Trial Impact on Upfront (vs Delayed) Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation for Transplant-Eligible Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma

Background: Following the completion of induction therapy for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients who are transplant-eligible, autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) consolidation with high-dose melphalan followed by lenalidomide maintenance therapy is considered standard of care. However, accumulated evidence of significant benefit and deep responses to newer induction therapies that contain combinations of immunomodulatory drugs and proteasome inhibitors have raised questions about the role as well as timing (upfront vs delayed) of ASCT consolidation in the initial treatment of ASCT-eligible NDMM. DETERMINATION is a phase III clinical trial (NCT01208662) that randomly assigned transplant-eligible NDMM patient to treatment with lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone with and without an ASCT consolidation, followed by lenalidomide maintenance until progression. The present study surveyed oncologists and hematologists to evaluate their perceptions of the DETERMINATION trial and the benefits and barriers of integrating ASCT into 1L therapy for transplant-eligible NDMM. Methods: In July 2022, U.S.-based oncologists were invited to attend a live meeting to discuss abstracts presented at ASCO 2022. Demographics data were collected in a premeeting survey. The perceptions and reactions of these providers to abstract data, including an abstract detailing the findings from the DETERMINATION trial, were captured via audience response system (ARS) technology. Not all participants answered every question. Responses were aggregated and analyzed using descriptive statistics. Results: Among the 52 participants who attended the live meeting, 79% (n=41) identified as community providers; these providers reported that they see an average of 20 patients on clinic days. Ninety percent (n=45) of the participants who were responders to the DETERMINATION trial data (n=50) indicated that they treat NDMM. After reviewing the trial data, slightly less than half of providers (42%) reported that the data were compelling enough to increase the use of ASCT in the 1L for patients with transplant-eligible NDMM. Of those respondents who treat NDMM, three-quarters were likely to give lenalidomide maintenance therapy until disease progression as opposed to a fixed duration of maintenance therapy. We also found that a lack of overall survival (OS) benefit was a major drawback in DETERMINATION results for most respondents; specifically, when queried on the top limitation of the trial, 73% of respondents (n=33) chose lack of significant OS data. Finally, when making decisions on triplet regimens in multiple myeloma, OS and progression-free survival (PFS) benefits were reported as treatment decision drivers by 44% and 23% of respondents who treat NDMM, respectively. Conclusions: Overall, our data show that OS (which was not a primary endpoint in DETERMINATION) is viewed as the most significant factor when considering 1L treatment decisions in NDMM, and less than half respondents indicated that PFS (a primary endpoint in DETERMINATION) persuaded them to increase their use of upfront, vs delayed, ASCT in their patients with transplant-eligible NDMM. Future research by the Cardinal Health Specialty Solutions will aim to clarify various aspect of novel therapies for NDMM including quadruplet 1L therapy, other anti-CD38 antibody upfront usage, minimal residual disease, and their respective impacts on the choice of upfront (vs delayed) ASCT consolidation in the 1L setting.

Single-Nucleotide Variants and Epimutations Induce Proteasome Inhibitor Resistance in Multiple Myeloma.

Proteasome inhibitors (PI) are the backbone of various treatment regimens in multiple myeloma. We recently described the first in-patient point mutations affecting the 20S subunit PSMB5 underlying PI resistance. Notably, in vivo, the incidence of mutations in PSMB5 and other proteasome encoding genes is too low to explain the development of resistance in most of the affected patients. Thus, additional genetic and epigenetic alterations need to be explored. We performed DNA methylation profiling by Deep Bisulfite Sequencing in PSMB5, PSMC2, PSMC5, PSMC6, PSMD1, and PSMD5, a subset of proteasome subunits that have hitherto been associated with PI resistance, recruited from our own previous research, the literature, or a meta-analysis on the frequency of somatic mutations. Methylation was followed up on gene expression level and by dual-luciferase reporter assay. The KMS11 cell line served as a model to functionally test the impact of demethylating agents. We identified PSMD5 promoter hypermethylation and subsequent epigenetic gene silencing in 24% of PI refractory patients. Hypermethylation correlated with decreased expression and the regulatory impact of this region was functionally confirmed. In contrast, patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, along with peripheral blood mononuclear cells and CD138+ plasma cells from healthy donors, generally show unmethylated profiles. Under the selective pressure of PI treatment, multiple myeloma cells acquire methylation of the PSMD5 promoter silencing the PSMD5 gene expression. PSMD5 acts as a key orchestrator of proteasome assembly and its downregulation was described to increase the cell's proteolytic capacity. PSMD5 hypermethylation, therefore, represents a novel mechanism of PI tolerance in multiple myeloma.

Efficacy of maintenance treatment in patients with multiple myeloma: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

ABSTRACT Background Despite conspicuous advances in innovating novel drugs and combination regimens in multiple myeloma (MM) in recent decades, the most appropriate maintenance regimens after inductive therapy are still controversial and opaque. Objective We aimed to identify the most effective maintenance treatment for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients via network meta-analysis. Method We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Google Scholars from inception to April, 2022. Odds ratios (ORs) were generated for dichotomous variants. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Results Eventually a total of 19 trials, including 11 treatments and 8337 patients, were included in this analysis. For OS, lenalidomide (OR ranged from 1.61 to 1.99) and daratumumab (OR ranged from 1.83 to 2.41) showed significant efficacy over placebo. Maintenance therapy comprising lenalidomide-carfilzomib (OR ranged from 3.19 to 6.95), lenalidomide-prednisone (OR ranged from 2.62 to 4.44), bortezomib-thalidomide (OR ranged from 2.48 to 3.64), daratumumab (OR ranged from 2.0 to 2.98), lenalidomide (OR ranged from 1.4 to 3.19), ixazomib (OR ranged from 1.36 to 2.05), thalidomide (OR ranged from 1.5 to 1.86) demonstrated significant effects in prolonging PFS compared with placebo; Among the efficient therapies, lenalidomide-carfilzomib was significantly superior to lenalidomide (OR ranged from 2.18 to 2.20), daratumumab (OR ranged from 1.49 to 2.66) and ixazomib (OR ranged from 2.75 to 3.57). Conclusion Considering OS and PFS, lenalidomide-carfilzomib should be recommended as the best therapy. In clinical practice, this must be weighed against the increased risk of adverse events and financial burden. However, more head-to-head studies are needed to confirm these findings.