disclosures the relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their...
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
![Page 2: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Disclosures
• The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page 5 of your syllabus
• The relevant financial relationships reported by the steering committee that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are provided on page 5 of your syllabus
• The relevant financial relationships reported by the non-faculty content contributors and/or reviewers that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page 5 of your syllabus
![Page 3: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Off-label Discussion Disclosure
This educational activity may contain discussion of published and/or investigational uses of agents that are not indicated by the Food and Drug Administration. PCME does not recommend the use of any agent outside of the labeled indications. Please refer to the official prescribing information for each product for discussion of approved indications, contraindications and warnings. The opinions expressed are those of the presenters and are not to be construed as those of the publisher or grantors.
![Page 4: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Pre-activity Survey
• Please take out the Pre-activity Survey from your packet• It is important that you fill out the demographic information
at the top of the form• Your answers are important to us and will be used to help
shape future CME activities
![Page 5: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Polling QuestionPre-activity Survey
Please rate your level of confidence in your ability to treat and manage patients with multiple myeloma (MM):
1 2 3 4 5
Not at all confident Expert
![Page 6: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Polling QuestionPre-activity Survey
A 55-year-old patient presents with a progressive mild decrease in hemoglobin, but is asymptomatic for MM. His workup revealed a hemoglobin of 11, calcium of 9.2, paraprotein peak of 2.6 with a beta-2 microglobulin of 3.7, and 30% plasma cells with diploid cytogenetics and no high-risk FISH. What further workup would you recommend at this time?
A. No further work-up recommended
B. MRI and/or PET/CT
C. Gene expression profiling
D. Immune spectrotyping
![Page 7: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Polling QuestionPre-activity Survey
Over a 4-month period, a patient receives 5 cycles of lenalidomide/dexamethasone and bortezomib and achieves a partial response. What is your treatment recommendation for this patient?
A. Continue on RVD
B. Change to other treatment
C. Proceed to stem-cell harvest and autograft consolidation
![Page 8: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Polling QuestionPre-activity Survey
A patient relapses after an 18-month complete response following consolidation with melphalan, autologous stem-cell rescue, and lenalidomide daily maintenance. She is treated with 6 cycles of bortezomib/dexamethasone; however, a month later, kappa-light chains and FDG avid bone lesions on PET/CT increase. Which treatment is most suitable for this patient?
A. Cyclophosphamide/bortezomib/dexamethasone
B. Salvage melphalan 200 mg/m2 with autologous stem-cell rescue
C. Bortezomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone
D. Carfilzomib-based combinations OR pomalidomide/low-dose dexamethasone
E. Lenalidomide/dexamethasone
![Page 9: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Polling QuestionPre-activity Survey
Which of the following factors would NOT impact treatment selection for relapsed/refractory MM:
A. Prior lines of therapy
B. Myeloma genomics
C. Comorbidities
D. Personal lifestyle
E. Clinical trial option
F. None of the above, since all these factors would impact treatment selection
![Page 10: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Educational Objectives
• Discuss the role of cytogenetic and molecular analyses in personalizing care in MM
• Review the treatment course for patients with smoldering MM
• Assess the optimal use of induction therapy and transplant to improve patient survival in MM
• Evaluate the use of high-dose chemotherapy vs novel agents for relapsed/refractory MM
![Page 11: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Smoldering Multiple Myeloma
![Page 12: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
• How do I treat a patient who presents with none of the common symptoms for myeloma (bone marrow clonal plasma cells just greater than 10, monoclonal peak barely at 3, mild anemia and no other symptoms related to the disease)?
• Do I really have to wait for a patient to have a calcium level of 11, creatinine level of 2, or less than 12 grams of hemoglobin or to get infected before I initiate treatment?
FAQs Regarding Smoldering Myeloma
![Page 13: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Case Presentation
54-year-old male2/11 progressive mild decrease in hemoglobin. No symptoms and normal exam. W/up reveals Hb 11; Ca 9.2; IgG 3786; albumin 4.2; mpeak 2.6; B2M 3.7 BMA 30% plasma cellsDiploid cytogenetic no high-risk FISH
![Page 14: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
What further work-up is recommended?
1. No further work-up recommended
2. MRI and PET CT
3. Gene expression profiling
4. Immune spectrotyping
Case Question
![Page 15: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
• Laboratory analysis – Complete blood count and complete metabolic panel
• β2M, LDH– M proteins
• Radiologic imaging – Skeletal survey, MRI/CT, PET
• Bone marrow biopsy• Specific tests to rule out other • Causes of anemia, renal insufficiency, • Hypercalcemia, etc.
Specific Diagnostic Tests
National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Guidelines for Diagnosis of Multiple Myeloma.
![Page 16: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
MGUS1-4
(Monoclonal Gammopathy of Undetermined Significance)
SmolderingMultiple
Myeloma1-5
MultipleMyeloma6-7
Symptoms Asymptomatic Asymptomatic Symptomatic (~89%)
Active treatment No No or clinical trial Yes
M-protein (per dL) <3 g >3 g M-spike orplasmacytoma
Clonal plasma cells in bone marrow <10% >10% >10%
End-organ damage None None 1 or more CRAB criteria
Likelihood of progression 1% per year
10% per year for first 5 years;
73% by 15 yearsNot Applicable
1. Kyle RA et al. N Engl J Med. 2007;356:2582-2590.2. International Myeloma Working Group. Br J Haematol. 2003;121:749-757.3. Jagannath S et al. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk. 2010;10:28-43.4. Kyle RA et al. Curr Hematol Malig Rep. 2010;5:62-69.
5. Mateos M-V et al. Blood. 2009;114:Abstract 614. 6. Durie BG Salmon SE. Cancer. 1975;36:842-854. 7. Durie BG et al. Leukemia. 2006;20:1467-1473.
Plasma cell malignancy Premalignant condition
Differential Diagnosis
![Page 17: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
CRAB CRITERIA
HyperCalcemia
Renal dysfunction
Anemia
Bone lesions
Increased Infections
![Page 18: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Case Presentation
MRI no lesionsPET CT negativeMarrow 30% plasma cells diploid cytogeneticsDxd with asymptomatic myeloma
What is the risk of this patient to progress to symptomatic myeloma?
![Page 19: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Risk Factors For Progression
Reference Wisloff Dimop Witzig Facon Dipenz Rajkumar KastritisFactor% BM/PC >20 >20 >10% >60%Lytic Lesions +M peak
>3 gm >3gm>2gm (IgA) >3 gm
Preoteinuria >50 mg/24h
Circulating PC +
Hb <12FLC ratio >8 >100FISH Low riskInt riskHigh risk
NormalOthers
T4,14 orDel17
TTP 0 Risk 39 m 61 m 9 m >50 m > 60 m >60 m 73 mTTP All Risk 10m 10 m 30 m 6 m 24 m 24 m 8 m
![Page 20: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
• First year: screen every 3 to 6 months• After first year: screen at least
every 1 to 2 years• 3% of people older than 50 years• 5% of people older than 70 years
10% risk of progression per year*
• Screen every 4-6 weeks*For first 5 years, ~3% per year for next 5 years, ~1% per year thereafter
1% risk of progression per yearMGUS
Smoldering Multiple Myeloma
Disease Progression in SMM and MGUS Patients
Kyle RA et al. N Engl J Med. 2007;356:2582-2590.
Jagannath S et al. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk. 2010;10:28-43.
Kyle RA et al. Curr Hematol Malig Rep. 2010;5:62-69.
![Page 21: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
ARajkumar et al, 2014, Lancet Oncology, 15(12), e538-e548; Dispenzieri A et al. Blood. 2013;122:4172-4181.
Algorithm for Reclassifying SMM and Active MM
*Consider including patients with the following FISH: deletion 17p, t(4;14), and 1q21 gains as active MM; this population could account for as many as 30% of SMM patients. §Consider using more than 1 fluorodeox.
![Page 22: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Proposed Guidelines on Follow-up and Management of SMM Patients suspected to have MM should first be defined as having MGUS, SMM, or myeloma requiring therapy.
Ghobrial IM, Landgren O. Blood. 2014;124:3380-3388. © 2014 American Society of Hematology.
![Page 23: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Evidence for Early Treatment of High-risk SMM with Lenalidomide plus Dexamethasone Survival Outcomes in the Per-Protocol Population
• Major Pitfalls of Mateos Study– Control group DID NOT receive lenalidomide– Control group did not receive uniform
treatment (some actually may have received MP)
• Notwithstanding• Magnitude of benefit dramatic
Mateos et al. N Engl J Med. 2013;369:438-447.
A B
C
![Page 24: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Main Limitation of the Mateos Study
“…One limitation of the study was that patients received treatment off-protocol at the time of disease progression to symptomatic myeloma. It would have been informative to examine early treatment with lenalidomide and dexamethasone versus treatment with lenalidomide and dexamethasone that was deferred until the time of progression. However, the combination of lenalidomide and dexamethasone is not an approved first-line regimen for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, and most patients in this study (81%) were treated with either bortezomib-based regimens (53% of patients) or induction therapy followed by autologous stem-cell transplantation (28%) at the time of progression…”
![Page 25: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
• Asymptomatic myeloma is an entity that needs to be better defined– All patients with newly diagnosed asymptomatic myeloma
need to be followed closely for the first 2-3 years (every 6-12 week visits)
– All patients should be encouraged to participate in clinical trials
– Patients with high-risk disease should be treated as symptomatic myeloma
Summary
![Page 26: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Case Presentation
Over the next 6 months develops progressive anemia to a Hb of 10gm/dLBone marrow now shows 60% plasma cells15% show deletion 17 by FISHKaryotype normalNo lytic lesionsIs there an optimal induction regimen?
![Page 27: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
FAQs for Induction
• Have we fully defined the role of molecular and cytogenetic classifications in myeloma?
• What is the optimal induction regimen?• How much induction treatment should a transplant-eligible
patient receive?• Should I recommend SCT for a patient who has failed to
achieve a PR or CR after receiving 5 cycles of induction therapy?
• Is allogeneic transplant a reasonable option for a patient with standard-risk disease?
![Page 28: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Multiple Myeloma Treatment Linesa
Induction Consolidation
Front-line treatment
Maintenance
Maintenance
Rescue
Relapsed
IMiD: Thal-LenProteasome Inhibitor: Bor-Car
Steroids: Dex-PredAlkylator: Cyclo-Mel
Anthracycline: LipoDnr-Adr
SCT ObservationIMiD: Thal-Len
Proteasome Inh-BorSteroids: Dex-Pred
IMiD: Thal-Len-PomProteasome Inh: Bor-Car
Steroids: Dex-PredAlkylators: Mel-Cy-Benda
InvestigationalaTransplant-eligible patients.
Bor/Dex = bortezomib, dexamethasone; Bor/Dex/Dox = bortezomib, dexamethasone, doxorubicin; Bor/Thal/Dex = bortezomib, thalidomide, dexamethasone;
Len/Dex = lenalidomide, dexamethasone; SCT = stem-cell transplant; Thal/pred = thalidomide, prednisone;
Bor/Liposomal/Dox = bortezomib, liposomal doxorubicin.NCCN, 2009.
![Page 29: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Impact of Chromosomal Abnormalities on Survival Outcomes in MM (cont.)
ISS = International Staging SystemAvet-Loisseau H et al. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:4585-4590.
IMWG AnalysisGenetic Abnormalities
4-year Estimated OSMinus vs Plus Abnormality
Log Rank P Value
Any 73% vs 57% <0.0001
t(4;14)ISSIISS2ISS3
64% vs 36%81% vs 52%63% vs 30%44% vs 22%
<0.0001<0.0001<0.0001<0.007
Del(17)ISSIISS2ISS3
68% vs 44%81% vs 64%68% vs 42%48% vs 28%
<0.0001<0.020
<0.0001<0.020
a. ISSI or ISS2, normal FISH 193/610 deaths (76%)a vs b <0.0001a vs c <0.0001b vs c <0.0001
b. ISSI + abnormal FISH/ISS3 + normal FISH
140/252 deaths (52%)
c. ISS2 or ISS3 + abnormal FISH 146/196 deaths (32%)
![Page 30: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Goals of TherapyLongest life with best quality of life with
minimal burden of treatment
![Page 31: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
A Meta-analysis of Phase III Studies Comparing Bortezomib-based vs Non-bortezomib-based Induction Treatment Before ASCT
100
80
0
Prog
ress
ion-
Free
Sur
vival
(%)
20
60
No. at riskNon-bortezomib basedBortezomib based
Time (months)12 24 36 42 48 54 60
Bortezomib basedNon-bortezomib based
P=0.0001
A
40
6 18 30
785787
604675
429491
178212
98101
5458
2531
1010
671722
527609
306360
100
80
0
Ove
rall S
urviv
al (%
)20
60
No. at riskNon-bortezomib basedBortezomib based
Time (months)12 24 36 42 48 54 60
Bortezomib basedNon-bortezomib based
P=0.0402
B
40
6 18 30
785787
694722
614641
309338
174191
100117
5260
1820
727746
662698
486515
Michele Cavo, MD. Presented at: ASH2013, Abstract #767. Sonneveld P. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31:3279-3287.
Non-bortezomib based
Bortezomib based
Non-bortezomib based
Bortezomib based
![Page 32: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Case Presentation
Over the next 3 months receives 4 cycles of lenalidomide / dexamethasone and bortezomib and achieves a PRStem cells are collected
![Page 33: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Case Question
What would you recommend for this patient?
• Continue on RVD?• Change to other treatment?• Proceed to autograft consolidation?
![Page 34: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Autologous Bone Marrow Transplant – Long-term Results
Barlogie B et al. Bone Marrow Transplant. 1998;21:1101-1107.
![Page 35: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
Role of High-dose Melphalan in Myeloma in
the Era of IMiDs and Proteasome Inhibitors
![Page 36: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
Figure 2
Koreth J et al. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2007;13:183-196. (DOI:10.1016/j.bbmt.2006.09.010).Copyright © 2007 American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation. Terms and Conditions.
Benefit of Autografting for Myeloma
![Page 37: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
VRD x 5
CY (3g/m2)MOBILIZATIONGoal: 5 x106 cells/kg
Lenalidomide 12 mos
VRD x 2
Melphalan 200mg/m2* + ASCT
CY (3g/m2) MOBILIZATIONGoal: 5 x106 cells/kg
IFM/DFCI 2009 StudyNewly Diagnosed MM Patients (SCT Candidates)
VRD x 3
Lenalidomide 12 mos
Induction
Consolidation
Maintenance
VRD x 3
Randomize, stratification ISS & FISH
Collection
SCT at relapse MEL 200 mg/m2 if <65 yrs,
≥65 yrs 140mg/m2
http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01208662?term=nct01208662&rank=1.
![Page 38: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
Mel200-ASCT vs CC+R: PFS1Median Follow-up from Randomization: 4 Years
Gay et al, Blood, 2014 124(21). Abstract 198.
![Page 39: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
Mel200-ASCT vs CC+R: Second-line Therapy
Gay et al, Blood, 2014 124(21). Abstract 198.
![Page 40: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
Mel200-ASCT vs CC+R: OSMedian Follow-up from Randomization: 4 Years
Gay et al, Blood, 2014 124(21). Abstract 198.
![Page 41: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
Mel200-ASCT vs CC+R
Age <60
Age ≥60
KPS 60-70%
KPS 80-100%
ISS I/II
ISS III
No del17, t(4;14), t(14;16)
Del17, t(4;14), t(14,16)
LDH < ULN
LDH ≥ ULN
HR (95% CI) P value
0.67 (0.41-1.11) 0.117
0.44 (0.23-0.86) 0.015
0.76 (0.33-1.72) 0.506
0.54 (0.34-0.85) 0.008
0.55 (0.34-0.89) 0.016
0.75 (0.38-1.45) 0.376
0.57 (0.34-0.94) 0.029
0.60 (0.31-1.14) 0.118
0.62 (0.41-0.95) 0.027
0.23 (0.03-1.92) 0.177
Favors CC+RFavors Mel200-ASCT
Mel200-ASCT vs CC+ROS Subgroup analysis
OS, overall survival; KPS, Karnofsky Performance Status; ISS, International Staging System; LDH, lactate dehydrogenase; ULN, upper limit of normal; Mel200-ASCT, melphalan 200 mg/m2 followed by autologous stem cell transplantation; CC+R, conventional chemotherapy + lenalidomideGay et al, Blood, 2014 124(21). Abstract 198.
![Page 42: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
1st Autologous Transplant
n=710
No Sibling DonorAuto-Auto
n=484
Sibling DonorAuto-Allo
n=226
High Riskn=48
Standard Risk
n=189
Standard Risk
n=436
High Riskn=37
Main groups compared
![Page 43: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
Progression-free Survival Overall Survival
Survival Outcomes after the First Transplant Auto-Auto vs Auto-Allo: Intent-to-treat analysis
Prob
abilit
y, %
100
0
20
40
60
80
90
10
30
50
70
Auto/Allo, 43% @ 3yr
Auto/Auto, 46% @ 3yr
P-value = 0.67 P-value = 0.19
Auto/Allo, 77% @ 3yr
Auto/Auto, 80% @ 3yr 100
0
20
40
60
80
90
10
30
50
70
0 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48
436 424 406 395 370 348 305 107 79189 183 167 160 156 143 124 43 27
Months 0 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48# at risk:Auto/Auto 436 395 348 292 242 213 178 54 42Auto/Allo 189 165 138 117 105 89 71 23 16
![Page 44: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
D-S Stage 1-3, ≤70 years≥2 cycles of induction Attained SD or better≤1 yr from start of therapy≥2 x 106 CD34 cells/kg
Placebo
Lenalidomide*10 mg/d with ↑↓
(5–15 mg)
Lenalidomide*10 mg/d with ↑↓
(5–15 mg)
RestagingDays 90–100
Registration
CALGB 100104 Schema
CRPRSD
Stratification based on registration -2M level and prior thalidomide and lenalidomide use during Induction. Primary Endpoint: powered to determine a prolongation of TTP from 24 months to 33.6 months (9.6 months)
Mel 200
ASCT
* provided by Celgene Corp, Summit, NJ
Randomization
![Page 45: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
CALGB 100104; N Engl J Med. 2012.
Time to Progression
![Page 46: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
Multivariate Analysis of Prognostic Factors for PFS
Variable PFS
HR 95% CI P
< CR at induction 1.80 1.29-2.51 0.001
Del(17p) and/or t(4;14) 1.56 1.18-2.05 0.002
ISS > 2 1.57 1.14-2.17 0.006
Plts <150 (109/L) 1.48 1.05-2.08 0.025
Hb <10.5 (g/dL) 1.32 1.03-1.70 0.028
Del(13q) 1.20 0.94-1.54 0.145
IgA isotype 1.13 0.85-1.50 0.393
Creat >1.2 (mg/dL) 0.87 0.64-1.19 0.391
Michele Cavo, MD. Presented at: ASH2013, Abstract #767.
1 2Hazard Ratio
![Page 47: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
PFS According to Preplanned ASCT(s) for Patients with del(17p) and/or t(4;14) and Who Failed CR after B-based Induction Regimens
Michele Cavo, MD. Presented at: ASH2013, Abstract #767.
ScorePrognostic factors
N° of pts (%)ISS Cytogenetic abnormalities Response at induction2 141 (23.27%)
1-2 Del(17p) ± t(4;14) < CR 70 (11.55%)3 Del(17p) – t(4;14)- < CR 65 (10.73%)3 Del(17p) ± t(4;14) CR 6 (0.99%)
Kaplan-Meier survival estimates
Log rank test: HR 0.41 (0.22 - 0.77)P=0.004 P=0.006
Months
1.00
0.75
0.00
0.25
0.50
0 12 24 36 48
42 mo2 ASCT
21 mo
1 ASCT
![Page 48: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/48.jpg)
OS According to Preplanned ASCT(s) for Pts With del(17p) and/or t(4;14) and Who Failed CR After B-based Induction Regimens
Log rank test: HR 0.22 (0.10 - 0.50)P=0.0001 P<0.001
Months
1.00
0.75
0.00
0.25
0.50
0 12 24 36 48
76%2 ASCT
33%1 ASCT
Kaplan-Meier survival estimates
ScorePrognostic factors
N° of pts (%)ISS Cytogenetic abnormalities Response at induction2 141 (23.27%)
1-2 Del(17p) ± t(4;14) < CR 70 (11.55%)3 Del(17p) – t(4;14)- < CR 65 (10.73%)3 Del(17p) ± t(4;14) CR 6 (0.99%)
Michele Cavo, MD. Presented at: ASH2013, Abstract #767.
![Page 49: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/49.jpg)
Lenalidomide Maintenance**
Lenalidomide Maintenance**
MEL 200mg/m2 VRD x 4*
Lenalidomide Maintenance
MEL 200mg/m2
**Lenalidomide 15 mg daily x 3years
* Bortezomib 1.3mg /m2 days 1, 4, 8,11 Lenalidomide 15mg days 1-15 Dexamethasone 40mg days 1, 8, 15
*
BMT CTN 0702: SCHEMA
Register and Randomize
![Page 50: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/50.jpg)
Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma
![Page 51: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/51.jpg)
FAQs Regarding Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma
• Is there a role for high-dose chemotherapy consolidation in the era of novel, more effective agents and strategies? Do we know the optimal timing for HD chemotherapy?
• What are the pros and cons of emerging therapies and novel treatment strategies based on recent clinical data?
![Page 52: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/52.jpg)
• 54-year-old male with progressive anemia to Hb of 10gm/dL; Ca 9.2; IgG 6800; albumin 4.2; mpeak 4.5; B2M 5.5. No lytic lesions, but bone marrow 60% plasma cells, normal karyotype with 15% deletion 17 by FISH
• Receives 4 cycles of lenalidomide/dexamethasone and bortezomib and achieves a PR, followed by consolidation with melphalan 200 mg/m2 with autologous stem cell rescue and len 10 mg po daily maintenance (along with monthly zoledronic acid) with a CR for 1.5 years and then relapses by free light chains with a kappa of 150 mg/L and KLR of 162
Case Presentation
![Page 53: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/53.jpg)
• Treated with bortezomib/dexamethasone for 6 cycles with a PR and then was off therapy for a preplanned trip. The kappa light chains increased again 35 days later to 205 and a KLR of 232 along with asymptomatic but new FDG avid bone lesions on PET-CT.
Case Presentation
![Page 54: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/54.jpg)
Case Question
Which treatment would you choose for this patient at this time?
1. Cyclophosphamide/bortezomib/dexamethasone
2. Salvage melphalan 200 mg/m2 with autologous stem cell rescue
3. Bortezomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone
4. Carfilzomib-based combinations
5. Pomalidomide/low-dose dexamethasone
6. Lenalidomide/dexamethasone
7. Unsure
![Page 55: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/55.jpg)
• CRAB symptoms, disease burden, and rate of progression• Prior therapies
– Depth and duration of prior response– Side effects– Time since therapy
• Myeloma genomics• General health – diabetes, CBC, cardiac/hepatic/renal function,
neuropathy, VTE• Personal lifestyle and preferences• Option for clinical trial
Factors to Consider in Treatment Selection
![Page 56: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/56.jpg)
MM-003 Final Analysis: Pomalidomide/LoDex vs HiDex in Relapsed/Refractory MM: Efficacy Data
• ORR (overall): 31% (26% PR) Pom/LoDex vs 10% (9% PR) HiDex
San Miguel J et al. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14:1055-1066. Dimopoulos MA et al. Presented at: ASH 2013, Abstract #408. Reproduced with permission.
Median PFS, Mos
Pom + LoDex (n = 302) 4.0
HiDex† (n = 153) 1.9
PFS* OS1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
00 4 8 12 16 20 24
PFS (Mos)
Prop
ortio
n of
Pat
ient
s
HR: 0.50P <0.001
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
00 4 8 12 16 20 24 28
OS (Mos)Pr
opor
tion
of P
atie
nts
HR: 0.72P =0.009
Median OS, Mos
Pom + LoDex (n = 302) 13.1
HiDex† (n = 153) 8.1
*Primary endpoint.†85 pts (56%) on the HiDex arm received subsequent Pom.
![Page 57: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/57.jpg)
Pomalidomide/LoDex vs HiDex: Safety
• AEs generally similar between arms and across subgroups– Most common grade 3/4 AEs: neutropenia, anemia, thrombocytopenia– ≥ grade 3 PN in 15% with Pom plus LoDex vs 11% with HiDex
San Miguel J et al. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14:1055-1066.
AE, %Pom + LoDex
(n = 300)HiDex
(n = 150)
Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5
Infections and infestations 24 6 4 19 5 9
Anemia 31 2 -- 32 5 --
Neutropenia 26 22 -- 9 7 --
Fatigue 5 -- -- 6 -- --
Thrombocytopenia 9 13 -- 9 17 --
Pyrexia 3 < 1 -- 3 1 --
Diarrhea 1 -- -- 1 -- --
Constipation 2 -- -- -- -- --
Cough < 1 < 1 -- < 1 -- --
Back pain 4 1 -- 3 < 1 --
Dyspnea 4 1 -- 5 -- --
Febrile neutropenia 8 2 -- -- -- --
![Page 58: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/58.jpg)
Carfilzomib, an Irreversible Proteasome Inhibitor, in Relapsed/Refractory MM
• Carfilzomib FDA approved in 2012 for treatment of MM after ≥2 previous therapies, including bortezomib and an IMiD, and with progression on or within 60 days of treatment– Approval based on
single-arm phase II PX-171-003 study (n = 266): ORR of 23.7% and median DOR of 7.8 mos[1]
1. Siegel DS et al. Blood. 2012;120:2817-2825.2. NCCN. Clinical practice guidelines in oncology: multiple myeloma. v.1.2014.
PFS
0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 12.5 15.0 17.5
100
75
50
25
0
Median PFS: 3.7 mos (95% Cl: 2.8-4.6)
Mos From Start of Treatment
Pts
Aliv
e an
d W
ithou
t Pro
gres
sion
(%)
Censored observationsConfidence band
![Page 59: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/59.jpg)
Integrated Safety Profile of Single-agent Carfilzomib: Experience from 526 Patients
• 4 phase II studies (PX-171-003-A0, PX-171-003-A1, PX-171-004, and PX-171-005)
Siegel D et al. Hematologica. 2013;98:1753-1761.
Select AEs, % All Grades Related Grade 3/4 Serious AEFatigue 55.5 41.4 7.6 0Anemia 46.8 26.8 22.4 1.3Nausea 44.9 35.2 1.3 0Any cardiac event
Cardiac failure 22.17.2
NR 9.55.7
7.84.9
Any respiratory event Dyspnea
69.042.2
NR 10.34.9
6.52.1
Any renal impairment Serum creatinine Acute renal failure
33.124.15.3
NR 7.22.74.4
6.11.34.2
Peripheral neuropathy 13.9 NR 1.3 NR
• Tolerable safety profile allows for administration of full-dose carfilzomib with low discontinuation rates
![Page 60: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/60.jpg)
Single Agent and Doublet Efficacy
Trial Phase n IMiD exposed
PI exposed ORR PFS
(months)OS
(months)
Thalidomide 2 169 0% 0% 30% 2y : 20% 2y : 48%
BTZ vs DEX 3 669 49% 0% 38% 6.22 30
BTZ + doxil vs BTZ 3 646 41% 0% 43% 9 33
Len Dex MM009 3 177 41% 10% 61% 11.1 29.6
Len Dex MM010 3 349 30% 4.5% 60% 11.3 38
CFZ (+dex 8) 2 266 100% 99% 23.7% 3.7 15.6
Pom D vs Dex 3 302 100% 95% 31% 4.2 13.1
Barlogie B. Blood. 2001;98:492-494.Richardson P. N Engl J Med. 2005;352:2487-2498. Orlowski RZ. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:3892-3901.Weber D. N Engl J Med. 2007;357:2133-2142.
Dimopoulos M. N Engl J Med. 2007;357:2123-2132.Siegel DS. Blood. 2012;120:2817-2825.San Miguel J. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14:1055-1066.
![Page 61: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/61.jpg)
RdLenalidomide 25 mg Days 1–21
Dexamethasone 40 mg Days 1, 8, 15, 22
CarRdCarfilzomib 27 mg/m2 IV (10 min)
Days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16 (20 mg/m2 days 1, 2, cycle 1 only) Lenalidomide 25 mg Days 1–21
Dexamethasone 40 mg Days 1, 8, 15, 22
Phase III CarRd vs Rd (ASPIRE) Study Design
Key inclusion criteria:
• 1–3 prior treatments
• Relapsed or PD
• ≥PR to at least 1 prior regimen
Key exclusion criteria:
• CrCl <50 mL/min
• PD on BTZ
• PD on Rd
• Len or dex intolerance
After C12, carfilzomib given D 1, 2, 15, 16
After C18, carfilzomib discontinued
28-day cycles
Randomization n=792
![Page 62: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/62.jpg)
Primary Endpoint: Progression-free SurvivalITT Population (n=792)
![Page 63: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/63.jpg)
Primary Endpoint: Progression-free Survival by Subgroup
23.1 vs 13.9 mos (P 0.083)29.6 vs 19.5 mos (P 0.004)
![Page 64: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/64.jpg)
• Unadjusted P value from the stratified log-rank test comparing the overall survival curves up to 24 months was 0.0046
Kaplan-Meier 24-Month Overall Survival Rates
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
73.3%65.0%
CarRd
Rd
Perc
enta
ge o
f Pat
ient
s
![Page 65: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/65.jpg)
Adverse Events in the Safety Population
Stewart AK et al. N Engl J Med. 2014. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1411321.
![Page 66: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/66.jpg)
PI + IMiD + Dex (Triplet) Efficacy
Trial Phase n IMiD exposed
IMiD refractory
PI exposed
PI refractory
ORR PFS(mos)
OS(mos)
Bort Thal Dex 1-2 85 74% most 0% 0% 65% 6 22
Bort Len Dex 2 64 73%T
6% L 3% 53% 8% 64% 9.5 30
Bort Pom Dex 1 28 100% 100% 100% NA 71% NA NA
Car-Len-Dex 2 52 73% 44% 80% 25% 77% 15.4 NA
Car-Pom-Dex 1/2 79 100% 100% 89% 91% in
ph 1 70% 9.7 NR
Wang M et al. Blood. 2013;122:3122-3128. Shah JJ et al. Presented at: ASH 2013. Abstract 690.
Pineda-Roman M. Leukemia. 2008;22:1419-1427.Richardson PG et al. Blood. 2014;123:1461-1469. Richardson PG et al. Presented at: ASCO 2014.
![Page 67: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/67.jpg)
PANORAMA 1: Phase III Study of Panobinostat + Bortezomib + Dexamethasone in Relapsed or Relapsed and Refractory MM Panobinostat significantly extended progression-free survival
San-Miguel JF et al. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15:1195-1206.
• Median PFS was significantly longer in the panobinostat group• There is also a trend toward better OS in the panobinostat group• ORRs were similar for the two groups; however, the CR/nCR rate was significantly higher for
panobinostat• Common grade 3-4 laboratory abnormalities and adverse events included thrombocytopenia (67% vs
31%), lymphopenia (53% vs 40%), diarrhea (26% vs 8%), asthenia or fatigue (24% vs 12%), and peripheral neuropathy (18% vs 15%)
PBDn = 387
Pbo-BDn = 381 P
Median PFS, mo 11.99 8.08 <0.0001
Median OS, mo 33.64 30.39 0.26
ORR, % 60.7 54.6 0.09
CR/nCR, % 27.6 15.7 0.00006
Median DOR, mo (range)
13.14 (11.76-14.92)
10.87 (9.23-11.76)
Median TTR, mo (range)
1.51 (1.41-1.64)
2.00 (1.61-2.79)Time (months)
Prog
ress
ion-
free
surv
ival
(%)
Panobinostat, bortezomib, and dexamethasonePlacebo, bortezomib, and dexamethasone
HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.52-0.76; P<0.0001
![Page 68: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/68.jpg)
Overall (n=768)Cytogenetic risk group- Normal risk (n=167)- Poor risk (n=37)
0.25 0.5 0.75 1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2 2.25
PAN-BTZ-Dex Pbo-BTZ-Dex
Hazard Ratio (95% CI)
0.63 (0.52-0.76)
0.88 (0.60-1.29)0.47 (0.18-1.25)
Pan + Btz + Dex Relapsed or Refractory MM Efficacy in Patients with High-risk Cytogenetics
San-Miguel JF et al. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15:1195-1206.
![Page 69: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/69.jpg)
Summary of Combo Therapy with HDACIs
Regimen Phase (N) Outcomes
Panobinostat or placebo + VD III(768)
ORR: 60.7% vs 54.6%PFS: 12.0 vs 8.1 mos (P <0.0001) (9.9 vs 7.7)OS: 33.6 vs 30.4 mos
Panobinostat + VD II (55 BTZ ref) ORR 34.5%, CBR 52.7%
Panobinostat + RD II(19)
ORR of 31%, CBR of 52 %n=14 Len Ref: ORR 21%, CBR 42%
Panobinostat + Carfilzomib I/II(26)
ORR of 46%, CBR of 52 %n=16 Btz Ref: ORR 44%
Vorinostat or placebo + V (no dex)
III(637)
ORR: 54% vs 41% (P <0.0001)PFS: 7.6 vs 6.8 mos (P <0.01); OS no diff
Ricolinostat ± VD I (20) ORR: 25% (heavily pretreated); CBR: 60%
Ricolinostat + RD I (22) ORR: 64%, CBR: 100%
San-Miguel JF et al. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15:1195-1206. Richardson PG et al. Blood. 2013;122:2331-2337.Chari A. Presented at: ASH 2014. Kaufman. Presented at: ASH Abstract #32.
Dimopoulos M et al. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14:1129-1140.Raje N et al. Presented at: ASH 2013. Abstract #759.Raje N et al. Presented at: EHA 2014. Abstract #P358.
![Page 70: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/70.jpg)
CD38 Monoclonal Antibodies
• CD38 - transmembrane glycoprotein & ectoenzyme with high-receptor density on MM cells1 (80%-100%) vs NHL2,3 (30%-80%) vs AML4 58% vs B-CLL5 20%-25%
• Also expressed on precursor B-cells• Daratumumab and SAR650984 : humanized IgG1 monoclonal antibodies
1. Lin et al. Am J Clin Pathol. 2004;121:482-488. 2. Angelopoulou et al. Eur J Haematol. 2002;68:12-21. 3. Schwonzen et al. Brit J Haematol. 1993;83:232-239.4. Keyhani et al. Leukemia Res. 1999;24:153-159.
5. Domingo-Domènech et al. Haematologica. 2002;87:1021-1027.
![Page 71: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/71.jpg)
Daratumumab
• Part 1 (n=32): phase I, first in human– Main toxicity grade 1 or 2 infusional toxicity– 5 of 12 (42%) of patients dosed at 4-24 mg/mg achieved
PR as best response
• Part 2 (n= 50): expansion cohort
![Page 72: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/72.jpg)
Patient Characteristics
![Page 73: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/73.jpg)
All AEs Grade 3/4 and SAEs per Dose Group
![Page 74: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/74.jpg)
Infusion Related Reactions (IRR)
![Page 75: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/75.jpg)
Response
![Page 76: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/76.jpg)
Daratumumab Status
• Breakthrough designation by FDA: May 2013 for >3 lines of therapy or PI and IMiD refractory
• Newly Diagnosed
– Phase III (SCT eligible): DVTD vs VTD
– Phase III (non-SCT eligible): DRd vs Rd
– Phase III (non-SCT eligible): DVMP vs VMP
• Relapse (1+ lines of therapy)
– Phase III: DRd vs Rd
– Phase III: DVD vs VD
• Relapsed/Refractory
– Phase II: Dara
– Phase II: Dara + [VD, VMP, VTD, PomD]
![Page 77: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/77.jpg)
Indatuximab Ravtansine (BT062): Antibody-drug Conjugate vs CD138
Jagannath et al. Abstract #305.
• An anti-CD138 chimerized monoclonal IgG4, covalently linked to thecytotoxic agent maytansinoid (DM4)
• CD138 is highly expressed on MM cells but not other hematopoietic and marrow stromal cell• To a lesser extent CD138 can also be found on epithelial cells • BT062 is stable and non-toxic in circulation
1. Binding to CD138
2. Receptor (CD138)-mediated internalization
3. Lysosomal processing of SPDB linker leads to lipophilic DM4 metabolites(DM4 + S-methyl-DM4)
4. Inhibition of tubulin polymerization
5. Cell cycle arrest and apoptosis
6. Bystander killing of neighboring cells
![Page 78: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/78.jpg)
Best Response in Study 969
*Stabilized for at least 11 weeks (C4D15)Number of patients Total Percentage
Objective Response
Rate
Clinical Benefit
Response
Stable Disease or better
treated with BT062 32
evaluable for response 28 100%
- PD 14 50%
- SD 11 39%50%
- Minor response 2 7%11%
- Partial response 1 4% 4%
• Median # cycles for patients with ≥SD: 5 (105 days), range 4-25• Patient with MR ongoing, progression free >18 months• Related SAEs and DLTs in highest dose levels and CD138+ tissues; resolved after 10-52 days - DLTs: elevated ggt, mucositis, HFS- SAE: as above + GIB, blurred vision/dry eyes/photophobia due to corneal epithelial damage,
acneiform rash
Jagannath et al. Abstract #305.
![Page 79: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/79.jpg)
Summary of Efficacy of Monoclonal Antibodies (@ R2P2/Ph3 Doses)
Treatment n Eligibility (% Refractory)
Response Rate
PFS DOR (mos)
OS (mos)
Elotuzumab Rd 36 NA -R sens 92% 33 mos 17.8 NRDaratumumab 20 50/75/38
(% Ref: B/L/BL35% (n=20) NR NR NR
Sar650984 13 69% C&P exposed 30.8% NA 5+ NADara RD 30 6.7% L ref 87% NA NA NSSar RD 24 80%L/20%P
~60 B/~50%Car63%
(48% L ref, n25)5.8 mos NA NA
BT062 RD 21 100%Bort, 87%L 73%(75% L ref, n8)
NA NA NA
1. Lonial S et al. ASCO 2013. Abstract 8542. 2. Lokhorst HM et al. ASCO 2014. Abstract 8513. 3. Martin T et al. ASCO 2014. Abstract 8532. 4. Plesner T et al. ASH 2014. Abstract 84. 5. Martin T et al. ASH 2014. Abstract 83. 6. Kelly K et al. ASH 2013. Abstract 758.
Dara Breakthrough designation May 2013 for >3 lines of therapy or PI and IMiD refractoryElo Breakthrough designation by FDA: May 19 2014 for >1 line of therapy given with Rd
![Page 80: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/80.jpg)
Kinesin Spindle Protein – A New Drug Target in Multiple Myeloma (MM)
• Kinesin Spindle Protein (KSP, eg5) is a microtubule motor protein required for mitosis and separation of spindle pole– KSP inhibition prevents formation of
bipolar spindle, leading to cell death
• Rapid onset of apoptosis occurs in Mcl-1 Dependent MM
• Expected Differentiated AE profile– No expected neuropathy– Minimal non-hematological toxicity
Tunquist BJ et al. Mol Cancer Ther. 2010;9:2046-2056.
![Page 81: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/81.jpg)
Hematologic ToxicityWorst Grade On-Study
Febrile Neutropenia
Bleeding
Hemoglobin
Platelets
Neutrophils
0 25 50 75 100 0 25 50 75 100
N=32 N=55
Filanesib Single-agent Filanesib + Dex
Grade 3Grade 4
Hematological toxicity predicted based on mechanism of action• Managed with supportive care• Low incidence of febrile neutropenia or bleeding events
![Page 82: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/82.jpg)
Filanesib Activity
Filanesib granted orphan drug approval by FDA in May 2014.
![Page 83: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/83.jpg)
Treatment n Eligibility ORR PFS DOR (mos)
OS (mos)
ixazomib + dex 33 88% Lexp; B sens 34% 12.4 96% @ 6 mo
filanesib in low AAG
32 21
75% IMiD Ref53% PI ref
16% 24%
3.75.3
8.68.6
19 23.3
filanesib + dex in low AAG
55 36
100% IMiD Ref98% PI ref
15% 19%
3.45.1
5.15.1
10.510.8
afuresertib 34 97% I; 88% PI 8.8%selinexor + dex 8 Ref to all classes 50% NR NR NRLGH 447 59 NR 10.5% NR 5.8 NR
Filanesib granted orphan drug approval by FDA in May 2014.
Kumar S et al. ASH 2013. Lonial S. ASH 2013.Voorhees et al. ASH 2013.
Summary of Novel Agents with Single-agent Activity
Chen C et al. EHA 2014. Spencer A et al. Blood. 2014.Raab et al. ASH 2014. Abstract 301.
![Page 84: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/84.jpg)
Participant CME Evaluation
• Please take out the Participant CME Post-survey and Evaluation Form from the back of your packet.
• If you are not seeking credit, we ask that you fill out the information pertaining to your degree and specialty, as well as the few post-activity survey questions measuring the knowledge and competence you have garnered from this program. The post-survey begins on page 1 of the evaluation form.
• Your participation will help shape future CME activities.
![Page 85: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/85.jpg)
Polling QuestionPost-activity Survey
A 55-year-old patient presents with a progressive mild decrease in hemoglobin, but is asymptomatic for MM. His workup revealed a hemoglobin of 11, calcium of 9.2, paraprotein peak of 2.6 with a beta-2 microglobulin of 3.7, and 30% plasma cells with diploid cytogenetics and no high-risk FISH. What further workup would you recommend at this time?
A. No further work-up recommended
B. MRI and/or PET/CT
C. Gene expression profiling
D. Immune spectrotyping
![Page 86: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/86.jpg)
Polling QuestionPost-activity Survey
Over a 4-month period, a patient receives 5 cycles of lenalidomide/dexamethasone and bortezomib and achieves a partial response. What is your treatment recommendation for this patient?
A. Continue on RVD
B. Change to other treatment
C. Proceed to stem-cell harvest and autograft consolidation
![Page 87: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/87.jpg)
Polling QuestionPost-activity Survey
A patient relapses after an 18-month complete response following consolidation with melphalan, autologous stem-cell rescue, and lenalidomide daily maintenance. She is treated with 6 cycles of bortezomib/dexamethasone; however, a month later, kappa-light chains and FDG avid bone lesions on PET/CT increase. Which treatment is most suitable for this patient?
A. Cyclophosphamide/bortezomib/dexamethasone
B. Salvage melphalan 200 mg/m2 with autologous stem-cell rescue
C. Bortezomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone
D. Carfilzomib-based combinations OR pomalidomide/low-dose dexamethasone
E. Lenalidomide/dexamethasone
![Page 88: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/88.jpg)
Polling QuestionPost-activity Survey
Which of the following factors would NOT impact treatment selection for relapsed/refractory MM:
A. Prior lines of therapy
B. Myeloma genomics
C. Comorbidities
D. Personal lifestyle
E. Clinical trial option
F. None of the above, since all these factors would impact treatment selection
![Page 89: Disclosures The relevant financial relationships reported by faculty that they or their spouse/partner have with commercial interests are located on page](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062516/56649e185503460f94b045f3/html5/thumbnails/89.jpg)
Thank you for joining us today!