Panobinostat represents a potent oral nonselective pan-histone deacetylase inhibitor (HDAC) with activity in myeloma patients. It has been approved by the FDA and EMA in combination with bortezomib and dexamethasone for the treatment of multiple myeloma, in patients who have received at least two prior regimens, including bortezomib and an immunomodulatory agent. In order to further explore its clinical potential, it is evaluated in different combinations in relapsed/refractory and newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. This review focuses on available data about panobinostat’s pharmacology and its role in clinical practice. This review will reveal panobinostat’s efficacy as antimyeloma treatment, describing drug evolution from preclinical experimental administration to administration in phase III trials, which established its role in current clinical practice. Based on the latest data, we will present its mechanism of action, its efficacy, and most important issues regarding its toxicity profile. We will further try to shed light on its role in current and future therapeutic landscape of myeloma patients. Panobinostat retains its role in therapy of multiple myeloma because of its manageable toxicity profile and its efficacy, mainly in heavily pretreated multiple myeloma patients. These characteristics make it valuable also for novel regimens in combination with second-generation proteasome inhibitors, IMiDs, and monoclonal antibodies. Results of ongoing trials are expected to shed light on drug introduction in different therapeutic combinations or even at an earlier level of disease course.

Bortezomib and dexamethasone with cyclophosphamide (CyBorD) or melphalan (BMDex) are commonly used primary treatments for light-chain (AL) amyloidosis, but limited data exist on bortezomib with immunomodulatory drug combinations. We report our experience with primary therapy with a bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRD) “light” regimen in 34 consecutive patients with AL amyloidosis. The majority (79%) had cardiac involvement, 15% and 23% were Mayo stage 3A and 3B, respectively, and 54% had renal involvement. After the first VRD cycle, 71% of patients achieved a hematologic response (44% at least very good partial response [VGPR]). On intent to treat, 11 (32%) achieved a complete response (of whom 5 of 11 were minimal residual disease [MRD] negative at 10⁻⁵), 17 (50%) a VGPR, and 2 (7%) a partial response. The 12-month survival was 73%. Starting lenalidomide dose was 5 mg in 86% of patients. Hematologic toxicity was mild; nonhematologic toxicities included rash (grade 3/4 [16%]), infections (grade ≥3 [12%]), constipation (grade ≥3 [9%]), and peripheral neuropathy (grade 2 [20%]); 37.5% of patients required lenalidomide dose reduction, 27% discontinued lenalidomide, 38% required bortezomib dose reduction, and 12% discontinued bortezomib. We compared VRD to CyBorD in 68 patients matched for Mayo stage and baseline difference between involved minus uninvolved serum free light chain levels, and observed a trend for deeper response at 3 and 6 months with VRD. In conclusion, VRD can be an active regimen for newly diagnosed patients with AL amyloidosis able to induce very deep hematologic responses at the expense of increased toxicity.

Discontinuation of lenalidomide maintenance after autologous stem cell transplantation is a burning question within the multiple myeloma (MM) community, especially after the inclusion of minimal residual disease (MRD) in the disease response criteria. In this prospective study, we evaluated the conversion to MRD positivity, the treatment-free survival (TFS), and the progression-free survival (PFS) in 52 patients with MM who discontinued lenalidomide maintenance after achieving sustained bone marrow and imaging MRD negativity for 3 years. Patients who developed MRD positivity after lenalidomide discontinuation restarted lenalidomide maintenance at the same dose. The median follow-up from lenalidomide discontinuation was 3 years. Overall, 12 (23%) patients obtained MRD positivity and restarted lenalidomide maintenance. Only 4 (7.6%) patients progressed; 3 had a biochemical progression and 1 had a clinical progression. The overall median PFS was not reached, whereas the 7-year PFS from diagnosis was 90.2%. The 1-, 2-, and 3-year TFS rates were 93.9%, 91.6%, and 75.8%, respectively, whereas the 1-, 2-, and 3-year landmark PFS rates from maintenance discontinuation (study entrance) were 96.0%, 96.0%, and 92.9%, respectively. There were no statistically significant associations among age, sex, Second Revision International Staging System, type of induction therapy, and use of consolidation therapy and the effect outcomes of PFS and TFS. We conclude that maintenance discontinuation after 3 years of sustained marrow and imaging MRD negativity is associated with low rates of MRD conversion and progressive disease. Thus, in the era of modern antimyeloma treatments, a subgroup of patients may remain treatment free while in complete remission without jeopardizing disease response.

COVID-19 vaccination leads to a less intense humoral response in patients with multiple myeloma (MM) compared with healthy individuals, whereas the SARS-CoV-2-specific immunity fades over time. The purpose of this study was to explore the kinetics of SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) in patients with MM after vaccination with the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine, focusing on their response before (B4D) and at 1 month after the fourth vaccination (M1P4D). Overall, 201 patients with a median age of 67 years were included, whereas 114 (56.7%) were men. The median NAbs levels B4D were 80.0% (±3.5%) and at M1P4D they increased to a median value of 96.1% (±3.7%). The NAb values at M1P4D were similar to those at 1 month post the third dose and superior to all previous timepoints. At M1P4D, the NAbs levels of all the treatment groups increased, apart from the anti-BCMA group. A significant increase in median NAbs values was observed for those receiving CD38-based treatment (n = 43, from 71.0% B4D to 96.0% at M1P4D) and those who did not receive CD38- or BCMA-targeted therapy (n = 137, from 89.6% B4D to 96.3% at M1P4D). Regarding the patients under BCMA-based therapy (n = 21), there was no remarkable increase in NAbs values following the second booster shot (from 3.0% B4D to 4.0% at M1P4D). In conclusion, booster vaccination with the BNT162b2 results in a substantially improved humoral response against SARS-CoV-2 in patients with MM. Anti-BCMA treatment remains an adverse predictive factor for NAbs response; thus, tailored prevention measures should be considered for this patient subgroup.

Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) remains a standard therapy for multiple myeloma (MM) patients. Our study aimed to assess the impact of daratumumab-containing induction on stem cell (SC) mobilization, apheresis and hospitalization. We evaluated 200 newly diagnosed MM patients that were mobilized for SC collection and which received induction with (N = 40) or without daratumumab (N = 160). Dara group patients required more frequent use of plerixafor, larger collection volumes, and had lower SC yield. 87.5% (35/40) of dara group patients achieved the planned yield of ≥ 5 × 10^6 CD34+/kg for at least one transplant compared to 96.2% (154/160) of patients in the non-dara group. Dara group patients had delayed hematopoietic recovery (11 vs 10 days for PMN > 0.5 × 10E9/l), required more transfusions (4 vs 2 plts), prolonged hospitalization (20 vs 18 days), more febrile episodes and prolonged antibiotic administration. Despite daratumumab effect patients finally achieved a successful stem cell collection and proceeded to transplant.