Prolonging overall survival (OS) remains an unmet need in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). In ELOQUENT-2 (NCT01239797), elotuzumab plus lenalidomide/dexamethasone (ERd) significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) versus lenalidomide/dexamethasone (Rd) in patients with RRMM and 1–3 prior lines of therapy (LoTs). We report results from the pre-planned final OS analysis after a minimum follow-up of 70.6 months, the longest reported for an antibody-based triplet in RRMM. Overall, 646 patients with RRMM and 1–3 prior LoTs were randomized 1:1 to ERd or Rd. PFS and overall response rate were co-primary endpoints. OS was a key secondary endpoint, with the final analysis planned after 427 deaths. ERd demonstrated a statistically significant 8.7-month improvement in OS versus Rd (median, 48.3 vs 39.6 months; hazard ratio, 0.82 [95.4% Cl, 0.68–1.00]; P = 0.0408 [less than allotted α of 0.046]), which was consistently observed across key predefined subgroups. No additional safety signals with ERd at extended follow-up were reported. ERd is the first antibody-based triplet regimen shown to significantly prolong OS in patients with RRMM and 1–3 prior LoTs. The magnitude of OS benefit was greatest among patients with adverse prognostic factors, including older age, ISS stage III, IMWG high-risk disease, and 2–3 prior LoTs.

Summary: Daratumumab is a CD38‐targeting monoclonal antibody approved for intravenous (IV) infusion for multiple myeloma (MM). We describe the Phase II PLEIADES study of a subcutaneous formulation of daratumumab (DARA SC) in combination with standard‐of‐care regimens: DARA SC plus bortezomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone (D‐VRd) for transplant‐eligible newly diagnosed MM (NDMM); DARA SC plus bortezomib/melphalan/prednisone (D‐VMP) for transplant‐ineligible NDMM; and DARA SC plus lenalidomide/dexamethasone (D‐Rd) for relapsed/refractory MM. In total, 199 patients were treated (D‐VRd, n = 67; D‐VMP, n = 67; D‐Rd, n = 65). The primary endpoints were met for all cohorts: the ≥very good partial response (VGPR) rate after four 21‐day induction cycles for D‐VRd was 71·6% [90% confidence interval (CI) 61·2–80·6%], and the overall response rates (ORRs) for D‐VMP and D‐Rd were 88·1% (90% CI 79·5–93·9%) and 90·8% (90% CI 82·6–95·9%). With longer median follow‐up for D‐VMP and D‐Rd (14·3 and 14·7 months respectively), responses deepened (ORR: 89·6%, 93·8%; ≥VGPR: 77·6%, 78·5%), and minimal residual disease–negativity (10^‒5) rates were 16·4% and 15·4%. Infusion‐related reactions across all cohorts were infrequent (≤9·0%) and mild. The median DARA SC administration time was 5 min. DARA SC with standard‐of‐care regimens demonstrated comparable clinical activity to DARA IV–containing regimens, with low infusion‐related reaction rates and reduced administration time.

Summary: Belantamab mafodotin, an immuno‐conjugate targeting B‐cell maturation antigen, showed single‐agent activity in phase 1 and 2 studies, and was recently approved for heavily pretreated relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) patients. Real‐world data and long‐term follow‐up are scarce. We conducted a multisite retrospective study aimed to assess safety and efficacy of belantamab mafodotin monotherapy administered via the GSK expanded access compassionate care programme. One‐hundred and six RRMM patients were treated with belantamab mafodotin between July 2019 and March 2021. The median age was 69.4 years. Patients were heavily pretreated with a median of six (range 2–11) prior therapy lines. Major adverse effects included ocular toxicity (keratopathy 68.4%, grade ≥3: 40.5%; blurred vision 36.8%, grade ≥3: 6.3%), thrombocytopenia (27.4%, grade ≥3: 17.9%) and infections (11.3%, grade ≥3: 7.5%). Median follow‐up time was 11.9 [95% confidence interval (CI) 10.0–13.8] months. Overall response rate was 45.5%. Median progression‐free survival was 4.7 (95% CI 3.5–5.9) months in the entire cohort and 8.8 (95% CI 6.6–10.9) months among responders. Median overall survival was 14.5 (95% CI 9.5–19.6) months, and not reached for responders. To conclude, in a real‐world setting, belantamab mafodotin monotherapy showed efficacy comparable with the prospective clinical trials, with a tolerable toxicity profile.

Therapeutic options in relapsed refractory (R/R) light-chain (AL) amyloidosis patients are limited. Given the encouraging results in t(11;14) multiple myeloma and the high prevalence of t(11;14) in AL amyloidosis, venetoclax is an attractive treatment option in this setting. We report here the results of a multi-center retrospective study on 26 R/R AL amyloidosis patients treated off-label with venetoclax. The median lines of therapy prior to venetoclax was 3.5 (range 1–7), and 88% of our cohort had t (11;14). Twenty-two patients (85%) were previously treated with daratumumab. The overall hematologic response rate was 88%, 35% achieved a CR, and 35% achieved VGPR. The median event-free survival was 25 months (m) (95% CI 9.7 m-not reached), and the median overall survival was 33 m (95% CI 25.9–39.2 m). Most of the patients in this cohort are in ongoing deep responses and continuing venetoclax therapy. The treatment was relatively safe. One patient died due to infection, and there were two grade 3 infections in our cohort. Tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) was not seen in any patient. Dose reductions were frequent but did not affect the efficacy. These promising results require confirmation in a randomized controlled trial.

Amyloidosis refers to a clinically heterogeneous group of disorders characterized by the extracellular deposition of amyloid proteins in various tissues of the body. To date, 42 different amyloid proteins that originate from normal precursor proteins and are associated with distinct clinical forms of amyloidosis have been described. Identification of the amyloid type is essential in clinical practice, since prognosis and treatment regimens both vary according to the particular amyloid disease. However, typing of amyloid protein is often challenging, especially in the two most common forms of amyloidosis, i.e., the immunoglobulin light chain amyloidosis and transthyretin amyloidosis. Diagnostic methodology is based on tissue examinations as well as on noninvasive techniques including serological and imaging studies. Tissue examinations vary depending on the tissue preparation mode, i.e., whether it is fresh-frozen or fixed, and they can be carried out by ample methodologies including immunohistochemistry, immunofluorescence, immunoelectron microscopy, Western blotting, and proteomic analysis. In this review, we summarize current methodological approaches used for the diagnosis of amyloidosis and discusses their utility, advantages, and limitations. Special attention is paid to the simplicity of the procedures and their availability in clinical diagnostic laboratories. Finally, we describe new methods recently developed by our team to overcome limitations existing in the standard assays used in common practice.

High cytogenetic risk abnormalities confer poor outcomes in multiple myeloma patients. In POLLUX, daratumumab/lenalidomide/dexamethasone (D-Rd) demonstrated significant clinical benefit versus lenalidomide/dexamethasone (Rd) in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) patients. We report an updated subgroup analysis of POLLUX based on cytogenetic risk. The cytogenetic risk was determined using fluorescence in situ hybridization/karyotyping; patients with high cytogenetic risk had t(4;14), t(14;16), or del17p abnormalities. Minimal residual disease (MRD; 10^–5) was assessed via the clonoSEQ^® assay V2.0. 569 patients were randomized (D-Rd, n = 286; Rd, n = 283); 35 (12%) patients per group had high cytogenetic risk. After a median follow-up of 44.3 months, D-Rd prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) versus Rd in standard cytogenetic risk (median: not estimable vs 18.6 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.43; P < 0.0001) and high cytogenetic risk (median: 26.8 vs 8.3 months; HR, 0.34; P = 0.0035) patients. Responses with D-Rd were deep, including higher MRD negativity and sustained MRD-negativity rates versus Rd, regardless of cytogenetic risk. PFS on subsequent line of therapy was improved with D-Rd versus Rd in both cytogenetic risk subgroups. The safety profile of D-Rd by cytogenetic risk was consistent with the overall population. These findings demonstrate the improved efficacy of daratumumab plus standard of care versus standard of care in RRMM, regardless of cytogenetic risk.