Summary: Chimeric antigen receptor T (CAR T) cell and bispecific antibody therapies have shown unprecedented efficacy in heavily pretreated patients with multiple myeloma (MM). However, their use is associated with a significant risk of severe infections, which can be attributed to various factors such as hypogammaglobulinemia, neutropenia, lymphopenia, T‐cell exhaustion, cytokine‐release syndrome and immune‐effector cell‐associated neurotoxicity syndrome. As these therapies have been recently approved by regulatory agencies, it is crucial to establish practical guidelines for infection monitoring and prevention until robust data from prospective clinical trials become available. To address this issue, a panel of experienced investigators from the Academic Consortium to Overcome Multiple Myeloma through Innovative Trials (COMMIT) developed consensus recommendations for mitigating infections associated with CAR T‐cell and bispecific antibody therapies in MM patients.

Despite the benign nature of monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS), mounting data are associating MGUS with the development of organ dysfunction, specifically monoclonal gammopathy of renal significance (MGRS) and monoclonal gammopathy of neurological significance (MGNS), which could be associated with substantial morbidity. Emerging evidence suggests that patients with MGRS and MGNS could benefit from treatments used for myeloma, Waldenström macroglobulinemia, or chronic lymphocytic leukemia, depending on the underlying pathology. However, the treatment of MGRS and MGNS is not standardized, and potentially effective therapies might not be reimbursed because these conditions do not formally meet the criteria for malignant processes. The present review aims at establishing standards for the evaluation and management of MGRS and MGNS, which can facilitate the diagnosis of and provide therapeutic options for treating practitioners and patients affected by these conditions. The careful design and execution of clinical trials for patients with MGRS and MGNS are positively encouraged.

Competent T-cells with sufficient levels of fitness combat cancer formation and progression. In multiple myeloma (MM), T-cell exhaustion is caused by several factors including tumor burden, constant immune activation due to chronic disease, age, nutritional status, and certain MM treatments such as alkylating agents and proteasome inhibitors. Many currently used therapies, including bispecific T-cell engagers, anti-CD38 antibodies, proteasome inhibitors, and CART-cells, directly or indirectly depend on the anti-cancer activity of T-cells. Reduced T-cell fitness not only diminishes immune defenses, increasing patient susceptibility to opportunistic infections, but can impact effectiveness MM therapy effectiveness, bringing into focus sequencing strategies that could modulate T-cell fitness and potentially optimize overall benefit and clinical outcomes. Certain targeted agents used to treat MM, such as selective inhibitors of nuclear export (SINE) compounds, have the potential to mitigate T-cell exhaustion. Herein referred to as XPO1 inhibitors, SINE compounds inhibit the nuclear export protein exportin 1 (XPO1), which leads to nuclear retention and activation of tumor suppressor proteins and downregulation of oncoprotein expression. The XPO1 inhibitors selinexor and eltanexor reduced T-cell exhaustion in cell lines and animal models, suggesting their potential role in revitalizating these key effector cells. Additional clinical studies are needed to understand how T-cell fitness is impacted by diseases and therapeutic factors in MM, to potentially facilitate the optimal use of available treatments that depend on, and impact, T-cell function. This review summarizes the importance of T-cell fitness and the potential to optimize treatment using T-cell engaging therapies with a focus on XPO1 inhibitors.

There is a lack of consensus on therapy sequencing in previously treated multiple myeloma, particularly after anti-B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA) therapy. Earlier reports on selinexor (X) regimens demonstrated considerable efficacy in early treatment, and after anti-BCMA-targeted chimeric antigen receptor-T cell therapy. Here, we present data from 11 heavily pretreated patients who predominantly received BCMA-antibody-drug conjugate therapy. We observe that X-containing regimens are potent and achieve durable responses with numerically higher overall response and clinical benefit rates, as well as median progression free survival compared to patients' prior anti-BCMA therapies, despite being used later in the treatment course. In an area of evolving unmet need, these data reaffirm the efficacy of X-based regimens following broader anti-BCMA therapy.

The hepatocyte growth factor/c-MET pathway has been implicated in the pathobiology of multiple myeloma, and c-MET inhibitors induce myeloma cell apoptosis, suggesting that they could be useful clinically. We conducted a phase II study with the c-MET inhibitor tivantinib in patients with relapsed, or relapsed and refractory myeloma whose disease had progressed after one to four prior therapies. Tivantinib, 360 mg orally per dose, was administered twice daily continuously over a 4-week treatment cycle without a cap on the number of allowed cycles, barring undue toxicities or disease progression. Primary objectives were to determine the overall response rate and the toxicities of tivantinib in this patient population. Sixteen patients were enrolled in a two-stage design. Notable grade 3 and 4 hematological adverse events were limited to neutropenia in five and four patients, respectively. Nonhematological adverse events of grade 3 or higher included hypertension (in four patients); syncope, infection, and pain (two each); and fatigue, cough, and pulmonary embolism (one each). Four of 11 evaluable patients (36%) had stable disease as their best response, while the remainder showed disease progression. Overall, tivantinib as a single agent did not show promise for unselected relapsed/refractory myeloma patients. However, the ability to achieve stable disease does suggest that combination regimens incorporating targeted inhibitors in patients with c-MET pathway activation could be of interest.

Objective: To identify the optimal dose of selinexor in combination with pomalidomide and dexamethasone (SPd).Methods: An analysis of efficacy and safety of 2 once-weekly selinexor regimens (60 mg and 40 mg) with pomalidomide and dexamethasone (SPd-60 and SPd-40, respectively) given to patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) in the STOMP (NCT02343042) and XPORT-MM-028 (NCT04414475) trials.Results: Twenty-eight patients (60.7% males, median age 67.5 years) and 20 patients (35.0% males, median age 65.5 years) were analyzed in the SPd-40 and SPd-60 cohorts, respectively. Overall response rate was 50% (95% confidence interval [CI] 30.6-69.4%) and 65% (95% CI 40.8-84.6%), respectively. Very good partial response or better was reported in 28.6% (95% CI 13.2-48.7%) and 30.0% (95% CI 11.9-54.3%) of patients, respectively. Among 27 responders in both cohorts, the 12-month sustained response rate was 83.3% (95% CI 64.7-100.0%) for SPd-40 and 28.1% (95% CI 8.9-88.8%) for SPd-60. Median progression-free survival was 18.4 months (95% CI 6.5 months, not evaluable [NE]) and 9.5 months (95% CI 7.6 months-NE) for SPd-40 and SPd-60, respectively. Twenty-four-month survival rates were 64.2% (95% CI 47.7-86.3%) for SPd-40 and 51.1% (95% CI 29.9-87.5%) for SPd-60. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) included neutropenia (all grades: SPd-40 64.3% versus SPd-60 75.0%), anemia (46.4% versus 65.0%), thrombocytopenia (42.9% versus 45.0%), fatigue (46.4% versus 75.0%), nausea (32.1% versus 70.0%) and diarrhea (28.6% versus 35.0%).Conclusion: The all-oral combination of SPd exhibited preliminary signs of efficacy and was generally tolerable in patients with RRMM. The overall risk-benefit profile favored the SPd-40 regimen.