B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA) in multiple myeloma: rationale for targeting and current therapeutic approaches.

Despite considerable advances in the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) in the last decade, a substantial proportion of patients do not respond to current therapies or have a short duration of response. Furthermore, these treatments can have notable morbidity and are not uniformly tolerated in all patients. As there is no cure for MM, patients eventually become resistant to therapies, leading to development of relapsed/refractory MM. Therefore, an unmet need exists for MM treatments with novel mechanisms of action that can provide durable responses, evade resistance to prior therapies, and/or are better tolerated. B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA) is preferentially expressed by mature B lymphocytes, and its overexpression and activation are associated with MM in preclinical models and humans, supporting its potential utility as a therapeutic target for MM. Moreover, the use of BCMA as a biomarker for MM is supported by its prognostic value, correlation with clinical status, and its ability to be used in traditionally difficult-to-monitor patient populations. Here, we review three common treatment modalities used to target BCMA in the treatment of MM: bispecific antibody constructs, antibody-drug conjugates, and chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-modified T-cell therapy. We provide an overview of preliminary clinical data from trials using these therapies, including the BiTE® (bispecific T-cell engager) immuno-oncology therapy AMG 420, the antibody-drug conjugate GSK2857916, and several CAR T-cell therapeutic agents including bb2121, NIH CAR-BCMA, and LCAR-B38M. Notable antimyeloma activity and high minimal residual disease negativity rates have been observed with several of these treatments. These clinical data outline the potential for BCMA-targeted therapies to improve the treatment landscape for MM. Importantly, clinical results to date suggest that these therapies may hold promise for deep and durable responses and support further investigation in earlier lines of treatment, including newly diagnosed MM

B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA) in multiple myeloma: rationale for targeting and current therapeutic approaches.

Despite considerable advances in the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) in the last decade, a substantial proportion of patients do not respond to current therapies or have a short duration of response. Furthermore, these treatments can have notable morbidity and are not uniformly tolerated in all patients. As there is no cure for MM, patients eventually become resistant to therapies, leading to development of relapsed/refractory MM. Therefore, an unmet need exists for MM treatments with novel mechanisms of action that can provide durable responses, evade resistance to prior therapies, and/or are better tolerated. B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA) is preferentially expressed by mature B lymphocytes, and its overexpression and activation are associated with MM in preclinical models and humans, supporting its potential utility as a therapeutic target for MM. Moreover, the use of BCMA as a biomarker for MM is supported by its prognostic value, correlation with clinical status, and its ability to be used in traditionally difficult-to-monitor patient populations. Here, we review three common treatment modalities used to target BCMA in the treatment of MM: bispecific antibody constructs, antibody-drug conjugates, and chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-modified T-cell therapy. We provide an overview of preliminary clinical data from trials using these therapies, including the BiTE® (bispecific T-cell engager) immuno-oncology therapy AMG 420, the antibody-drug conjugate GSK2857916, and several CAR T-cell therapeutic agents including bb2121, NIH CAR-BCMA, and LCAR-B38M. Notable antimyeloma activity and high minimal residual disease negativity rates have been observed with several of these treatments. These clinical data outline the potential for BCMA-targeted therapies to improve the treatment landscape for MM. Importantly, clinical results to date suggest that these therapies may hold promise for deep and durable responses and support further investigation in earlier lines of treatment, including newly diagnosed MM

Treatment Sequencing Patterns in Medicare-Enrolled Patients with Multiple Myeloma

Abstract Introduction: Over the last decade, several novel therapies have been approved for multiple myeloma (MM) leading to significant improvement in the prognosis of MM patients. MM patients are often treated with multiple lines of therapy as relapse occurs. With the numerous options of therapeutic agents and novel combinations of regimens, the treatment for MM has become more complicated. However, little is known regarding the treatment sequencing patterns for Medicare patients with MM. In this study, we described the use of drug regimens by lines of therapy and characterized treatment sequences in Medicare patients with MM. Methods: Using a validated algorithm (Princic et al. Blood 2015;126:4521), we identified adult MM patients (≥ 18 years old) in 2008-2011 from the Centers for Medicare &amp; Medicaid Services 100% Hematologic Cancer file (2007-2012) who began first-line (1L) treatment. Patients who advanced to second-line (2L), third-line (3L), and fourth-line (4L) were identified if a 90 day gap in all treatments was observed or when a drug was added to a regimen &gt;90 days after the line index date. Drug regimens were based on National Comprehensive Cancer Network MM treatment guidelines and were identified using National Drug Code and Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System codes. Patients were included in the study if they received monotherapy, doublets, or triplets at 1L. The study period was from the 1L initiation date to the earliest of death, disenrollment from Medicare Parts A, B, and D coverage, receipt of treatments other than the above-mentioned drug regimens, or December, 31, 2012. We described the distribution of type of drug regimens by lines of therapy, overall and by age defined at MM index date, and characterized treatment sequencing patterns for patients who advanced to 2L, 3L, and 4L by type of drug regimens in the prior line of therapy, respectively. Results: In total, 12563 MM patients initiated 1L therapy. Of these, 9% were aged 18-64 years (enrolled in Medicare due to disabilities), 42% aged 65-74 years, and 49% aged ≥ 75 years. Most patients were white (78%) and more than half were female (53%). We identified 5647 (45%), 2243 (18%), and 773 (6%) patients who advanced to 2L, 3L, and 4L, respectively. Overall, doublets were the most common 1L regimen (62%), followed by monotherapy (21%) and triplets (17%). Most common treatments for monotherapy in 1L were dexamethasone (52%), lenalidomide (21%), and bortezomib (17%). The pattern was similar among patients who advanced to a 2L, 3L, or 4L, respectively, though more triplets were used at advanced lines. For 1L therapy, only 12% of patients aged ≥ 75 years received triplets, in contrast to &gt;20% of triplet use in 3L and 4L respectively (Table). Of patients who received monotherapy in 1L and advanced to 2L, 37% continued monotherapy and 63% switched to more dense regimens (doublets, 53%; triplets 10%). Of patients who received doublets in 1L and advanced to 2L, 58% continued doublets, 22% switched to triplets, and 20% to monotherapy. Of patients who received triplets in 1L and advanced to 2L, 26% continued triplets and 74% switched to less dense regimens (doublets, 47%; monotherapy, 27%). Treatment sequencing patterns were similar for patients who advanced to 3L and 4L with monotherapy or doublets in prior lines, while the proportion of patients who repeated triplets increased to about 32% in 3L and 37% in 4L (Figure). Conclusions: Among Medicare patients with MM, doublets were the most frequently used regimens across all lines of therapy, while triplets were used in more advanced lines. Patients on monotherapy or doublets were more likely to retain their treatment pattern when they advance to the next line of therapy, while those on triplet regimen were more likely to switch to a less dense regimen when they advance to their next line of therapy. Fewer patients of older age (75+ years) were prescribed triplet therapies, however triplet use in this patient group increases in more advanced lines. These results provide a baseline description of treatment patterns from which we will be able to benchmark the impact of the recent introduction of novel agents and their use in elderly MM patients. Further studies assessing the comparative effectiveness and benefit-risk of treatment sequences are warranted. Figure Figure. Disclosures Yusuf: Amgen Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Vidito:Amgen Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Mezzi:Amgen Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Werther:Amgen Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. </jats:sec

How to Train Your T Cells: Overcoming Immune Dysfunction in Multiple Myeloma

Abstract The progression of multiple myeloma, a hematologic malignancy characterized by unregulated plasma cell growth, is associated with increasing innate and adaptive immune system dysfunction, notably in the T-cell repertoire. Although treatment advances in multiple myeloma have led to deeper and more durable clinical responses, the disease remains incurable for most patients. Therapeutic strategies aimed at overcoming the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment and activating the host immune system have recently shown promise in multiple myeloma, particularly in the relapsed and/or refractory disease setting. As the efficacy of T-cell–dependent immuno-oncology therapy is likely affected by the health of the endogenous T-cell repertoire, these therapies may also provide benefit in alternate treatment settings (e.g., precursor disease; after stem cell transplantation). This review describes T-cell–associated changes during the evolution of multiple myeloma and provides an overview of T-cell–dependent immuno-oncology approaches under investigation. Vaccine and checkpoint inhibitor interventions are being explored across the multiple myeloma disease continuum; treatment modalities that redirect patient T cells to elicit an anti–multiple myeloma response, namely, chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells and bispecific antibodies [including BiTE (bispecific T-cell engager) molecules], have been primarily evaluated to date in the relapsed and/or refractory disease setting. CAR T cells and bispecific antibodies/antibody constructs directed against B-cell maturation antigen have generated excitement, with clinical data demonstrating deep responses. An increased understanding of the complex interplay between the immune system and multiple myeloma throughout the disease course will aid in maximizing the potential for T-cell–dependent immuno-oncology strategies in multiple myeloma. </jats:sec

Carfilzomib with immunomodulatory drugs for the treatment of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma

International audienceCarfilzomib, a selective proteasome inhibitor (PI), is approved for the treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (MM). Combination regimens incorporating a PI and immunomodulatory drug (IMiD) have been associated with deep responses and extended survival in patients with newly diagnosed MM (NDMM). Carfilzomib-based combinations with immunomodulators are being extensively studied in the frontline setting. The objective of this review was to describe efficacy and safety data for carfilzomib-based, PI/immunomodulatory combinations in NDMM. Information sources were articles indexed in PubMed and abstracts from key hematology/oncology congresses published between January 2012 and December 2018. PubMed and congresses were searched for prospective clinical studies assessing the combination of carfilzomib with an IMiD for NDMM treatment. Retrospective and preclinical reports, case reports/series, reviews, and clinical studies not evaluating carfilzomib–immunomodulator combinations in NDMM were excluded based on review of titles and abstracts. A total of nine articles and 72 abstracts were deemed relevant and included in the review. A total of six distinct carfilzomib-based, PI/immunomodulator combination regimens have been evaluated in 12 clinical trials. Overall, treatment with these regimens has resulted in deep responses, including high rates of negativity for minimal residual disease. These deep responses have translated to long progression-free survival and overall survival rates. Efficacy results for these regimens have generally been consistent across subgroups defined by age, transplant eligibility, and cytogenetic risk. The safety profile of carfilzomib in NDMM is consistent with that observed in the relapsed-refractory MM setting. Clinical studies have found that carfilzomib-based combinations with immunomodulators are highly active with a favorable safety profile in NDMM. The carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (KRd) drug backbone is a promising foundation for treatment strategies aimed at achieving long-term, deep responses (functional cures) in the frontline setting. Several ongoing studies are evaluating KRd, with or without anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies

A map of copy number variations in the Tunisian population: a valuable tool for medical genomics in North Africa

Abstract Copy number variation (CNV) is considered as the most frequent type of structural variation in the human genome. Some CNVs can act on human phenotype diversity, encompassing rare Mendelian diseases and genomic disorders. The North African populations remain underrepresented in public genetic databases in terms of single-nucleotide variants as well as for larger genomic mutations. In this study, we present the first CNV map for a North African population using the Affymetrix Genome-Wide SNP (single-nucleotide polymorphism) array 6.0 array genotyping intensity data to call CNVs in 102 Tunisian healthy individuals. Two softwares, PennCNV and Birdsuite, were used to call CNVs in order to provide reliable data. Subsequent bioinformatic analyses were performed to explore their features and patterns. The CNV map of the Tunisian population includes 1083 CNVs spanning 61.443 Mb of the genome. The CNV length ranged from 1.017 kb to 2.074 Mb with an average of 56.734 kb. Deletions represent 57.43% of the identified CNVs, while duplications and the mixed loci are less represented. One hundred and three genes disrupted by CNVs are reported to cause 155 Mendelian diseases/phenotypes. Drug response genes were also reported to be affected by CNVs. Data on genes overlapped by deletions and duplications segments and the sequence properties in and around them also provided insights into the functional and health impacts of CNVs. These findings represent valuable clues to genetic diversity and personalized medicine in the Tunisian population as well as in the ethnically similar populations from North Africa

Cardiac Events in Real-World Multiple Myeloma Patients Treated with Carfilzomib: A Retrospective Claims Database Analysis

Abstract Introduction: Multiple myeloma (MM) is a hematologic cancer that mostly affects elderly patients who are at increased risk for development of cardiac-related comorbidities due to age-, disease-, and treatment-related factors. In real world data, approximately 25-30% of MM patients are hospitalized for a cardiac event after MM diagnosis (Kistler et al. American Society Hematology 2012 Annual Meeting, poster 2916). The proteasome inhibitor, carfilzomib, is approved for treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory MM. In carfilzomib clinical trials, grade 3 or higher cardiac failure was reported for ~4% of patients (Stewart et al. NEJM 2015;372:142-52, Dimopoulos et al. Lancet Oncol 2016;17:27-38). In this retrospective analysis, we sought to evaluate the incidence rate (IR) of cardiac events in MM patients treated with carfilzomib in a real-world setting in the US and to describe differences in baseline characteristics between carfilzomib-treated MM patients who do and do not have cardiac events. Methods: Newly-diagnosed MM patients with symptomatic disease were identified in the Truven MarketScan claims database from 1/1/05 to 6/30/15 using an algorithm validated for ascertainment of MM patients in claims data (Princic et al. Blood 2015;126:4521). All carfilzomib-treated patients were included in the analysis. The first dose of carfilzomib was the index date. The baseline period was 12 months prior to the MM diagnosis date to the index date. Cardiac events (hypertension, heart failure, ischemic heart disease, arrhythmias and conduction disorders, and cardiomyopathy) were identified during baseline by inpatient (IP) or outpatient (OP) claims and after index date by primary diagnosis on IP claims (hospitalized events). Logistic regression was used to estimate baseline covariates associated with any cardiac event. Due to sample size constraints, multivariate regression was not performed. The incidence rate (IR) per 1000 patient-years (PYRs) and associated 95% confidence interval (CI) of hospitalized cardiac events during carfilzomib treatment which included 30 days after the last carfilzomib dose were calculated among patients without a history of the corresponding hospitalized event during the baseline period. Results: The cohort included 498 MM patients treated with carfilzomib; 108 (22%) patients had ≥1 cardiac event identified by both IP and OP claims and 24 (5%) had ≥1 hospitalized cardiac event. Of the 24 hospitalized patients, 14 were hospitalized during carfilzomib treatment (median days to onset = 104) and 8 were hospitalized after carfilzomib treatment (&gt;30 days post dosing; median days to onset = 284). The median age (range) of the 24 patients with hospitalized cardiac events and those with no hospitalized cardiac claims (n=474) was 62 (37, 79) and 61 (36, 96) years, respectively (Table). Baseline medical history of any cardiac event was evident for 92% of hospitalized patients and 84% of non-hospitalized patients. Among hospitalized patients, 25% were over 75 years as compared with 13% of non-hospitalized patients. In univariate analysis, patients with baseline amyloidosis, hypertensive chronic kidney disease, and chronic kidney disease had higher odds of having a hospitalized cardiac event. No significant differences were seen in the proportion of patients with or without a hospitalized cardiac event when evaluated by line of therapy or by carfilzomib treatment regimen (monotherapy or combination). Among patients aged 75+ years, 8.7% were hospitalized, while 2.5% and 4.9% of 65-74 and 18-64 year old patients were hospitalized, respectively (Table). IR per 1000 PYRs [95% CI] among the 14 carfilzomib-treated MM patients hospitalized for any cardiac event during the carfilzomib treatment period was 89.7 (49.0; 150.5) - see Figure for IRs of specific cardiac events. Conclusions: Among carfilzomib-treated patients in a US claims database, hospitalization for a cardiac event was uncommon (~5%) and does not exceed what has been observed in MM patients. Patients at highest risk for cardiac hospitalizations had a history of amyloidosis or chronic renal failure. Additional analyses in much larger populations are needed to better understand risk factors for these events. Disclosures Chari: Array Biopharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Aggarwal:Amgen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Mezzi:Amgen Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Wang:Amgen Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kim:Amgen Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Zhu:Amgen Inc.: Consultancy. Braunlin:Amgen Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Werther:Amgen Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Mikhael:Abbvie: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding. </jats:sec

Carfilzomib-Lenalidomide-Dexamethasone Versus Bortezomib-Lenalidomide-Dexamethasone in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: Results from the Prospective, Longitudinal, Observational Commpass Study

Abstract Introduction: Triplet regimens incorporating a proteasome inhibitor and immunomodulatory drug are standards of care for the treatment of patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). The combinations of carfilzomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (KRd) and bortezomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (VRd) are recommended regimens for the treatment of NDMM by the National Comprehensive Care Network. However, there are limited data directly comparing the relative effectiveness and tolerability of these two regimens in patients with NDMM. Here, we report prospective evaluation of efficacy and preliminary tolerability data for patients who received KRd or VRd as frontline therapy in the Multiple Myeloma Research Foundation (MMRF) Clinical Outcomes in MM to Personal Assessment of Genetic Profile (CoMMpass, NCT01454297) study. Methods: CoMMpass is a prospective observational study conducted since 2011 by the MMRF that has enrolled over 1100 patients from Multiple Myeloma Research Consortium sites. Eligible adults with NDMM and symptomatic disease were enrolled within 30 days of initiating frontline therapy. Frontline therapy was chosen at the discretion of the investigator but must have included a proteasome inhibitor and/or immunomodulatory drug. In the current analysis, we evaluated the effectiveness and reasons for treatment discontinuation among enrolled patients who received KRd or VRd as first-line therapy. KRd patients were matched to VRd patients based on propensity score matching including age, gender, ISS and renal insufficiency as covariates. Treatment response was assessed by investigators and defined by International Myeloma Working Group Uniform Response Criteria. Event-free survival (EFS) was the pre-specified primary endpoint and defined as the time from the start of treatment until disease progression, death, or the initiation of new therapy. EFS was compared between treatment groups using a Cox proportional hazards model. Results: A total of 609 evaluable patients received first-line KRd (n=149) or VRd (n=460). Of these, 149 KRd patients and 149 VRd patients were matched according to baseline co-variates. Patient demographics and disease characteristics were balanced between treatment arms for the matched set of patients (KRd vs VRd) including by median age (years, 58 vs 59), gender (male, 63% vs 62%), and ISS (stage I, 46% vs 53%; stage II, 41% vs 40%; stage III, 13% vs 7%). With median follow up of 11.5 months for KRd and 41.9 months for VRd, 12-month EFS rates (95% CI) were 95% (90-99%) for KRd vs 84% (78-90%) for VRd (12-month HR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.10-0.75; p=0.0043; Figure 1). By 12 months, 87% (95% CI, 81-93%) of KRd patients vs 68% (95% CI, 60-76%) of VRd patients had a partial response or better (p=0.0029) and 35% (95% CI, 25-45%) of KRd patients vs 14% (95% CI, 8-20%) of VRd patients achieved a complete response or better (p=0.0054; Figure 2). The treatment discontinuation rate due to adverse events was 3.4% for each arm. Conclusions: In the CoMMpass study, KRd demonstrated significant improvements in 12-month EFS compared with VRd in patients with NDMM (HR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.10-0.75; p=0.0043). By 12 months, patients treated with KRd also achieved significantly higher response rates and complete response rates or better compared with VRd treated patients. Discontinuation rates due to AEs were similar between KRd and VRd. With limitations of non-randomized evaluation and relatively short median follow-up in the KRd arm, these results are consistent with previous single arm studies that KRd is not only effective but potentially a superior treatment option compared with VRd for patients with NDMM. Updated results with extended follow-up will be presented. Disclosures Landgren: Karyopharm: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Siegel:Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Chari:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Array Biopharma: Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; The Binding Site: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy. Boedigheimer:Amgen Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Welliver:Amgen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Mezzi:Amgen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Iskander:Amgen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Jakubowiak:Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; SkylineDx: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. </jats:sec