Clinical course, predictors of development, and therapeutic response in multiple myeloma with central nervous system involvement

Abstract

Abstract Background Central nervous system involvement in multiple myeloma (CNS-MM) is a rare but highly aggressive manifestation. Limited data exists regarding its incidence, biology, treatment patterns, and outcomes. A deeper understanding of the features unique to CNS-MM will help inform risk stratification and management strategies. Methods We conducted a retrospective study of CNS-MM patients at our institution between January 2000 and December 2023. We identified 305 MM patients with pathology-proven extramedullary disease (EMD). CNS involvement was defined as the presence of parenchymal (brain or spine) or leptomeningeal involvement by MM. Univariate analysis was performed to compare the clinical characteristics between EMD patients with and without CNS-MM. Results Out of 305 patients with EMD, we identified 22 patients with CNS-MM. Common symptoms prompting evaluation of CNS-MM were headaches (32%), numbness or tingling (32%), weakness (27%), confusion (23%), falls (23%), and visual disturbances (14%). Among these patients, 17 (77%) had detectable disease in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), 12 (55%) in the brain parenchyma, 4 (18%) in the spinal cord parenchyma and 6 (27%) in the leptomeninges. Of the CNS-MM patients, the median age at diagnosis of MM was 58.3 years and the median time to CNS-MM involvement was 16.2 months, with 3 (14%) patients having CNS involvement at diagnosis. The predictors of CNS-MM development were high-risk cytogenetics (OR 2.9, p=0.04) and presence of additional visceral organ involvement outside of the CNS (OR 3.4, p=0.03). EMD was multifocal in 20 CNS-MM patients (83%) and visceral organ involvement [most commonly lymphadenopathy (27%), solid organ (18%) and pleural fluid (14%)] was present in 14 (64%) of these patients, compared to 54% in EMD patients without CNS-MM. High-risk cytogenetics [del(17p), 1q gain/amplification, t(4;14), t(14;16), t(14;20)] were seen in 16 (73%) patients, most commonly 1q gain or amplification (40%), t(4;14) (23%), and del(17p) (18%). Five (23%) exhibited a double-hit profile. In comparison, 113 (40%) EMD patients without CNS-MM had high risk cytogenetics. The median overall survival (OS) from diagnosis of CNS-MM was 6 months (95%CI:1.26-36) compared to 15.6 months (95%CI: 12-18) from diagnosis of EMD in EMD patients without CNS-MM (p=0.05). Median OS from diagnosis of MM in the CNS-MM cohort was 36 months (95%CI: 22.8-NA) compared to 55.2 months (95%CI: 45.6-68.4) in EMD patients without CNS-MM (P=0.11). When excluding CAR-T or bispecific therapy recipients, median OS from diagnosis of MM for CNS-MM was 22 months versus 48 months in EMD patients without CNS-MM (P=0.02). Overall response rate in our CNS-MM cohort with first treatment for EMD was 32% compared to 48% in EMD patients without CNS-MM (p=0.04). In patients with CNS-MM, median progression-free survival (PFS) from CNS-MM diagnosis was 3.3 months (95%CI: 0.8-12) versus 3.9 months (95%CI: 3-5.1) in EMD patients without CNS involvement (p=0.2). Six (27%) CNS-MM patients received CAR-T; 3 received cilta-cel, 2 received ide-cel and one received a BCMA CAR-T on trial. Bispecific therapy was used in 4 (18%) patients, with 2 receiving Teclistamab and 2 Talquetamab. Three (14%) CNS-MM patients received both CAR-T and bispecific therapy. The median PFS on CAR-T therapy was 10.5 (95%CI: 5.6-NA) months and 12.7 (95%CI: 10.2-NA) months on bispecific therapy. The median OS from diagnosis of CNS-MM for patients who received CAR-T or bispecific therapy was 36 months (95%CI: 14.0-NA), compared to 1.2 months (95%CI: 0-14.4) for those who did not (p=0.002). Six (27%) patients with CNS-MM, all of whom had CSF involvement of disease, received intrathecal therapy; methotrexate in 3, cytarabine in 2, and one receiving both. Two of these patients demonstrated improvement in cerebrospinal fluid findings following intrathecal chemotherapy, in conjunction with other therapies. Patients who received intrathecal chemotherapy had a median OS measured from development of EMD of 10.8 (95%CI: 3.6-NA) months, compared to 15 months (95%CI: 4.8-NA) in those without IT chemotherapy (p=0.59). Conclusion Central nervous system involvement in MM is relatively uncommon and associated with dismal outcomes. High-risk cytogenetics and involvement of other visceral sites are associated with a higher risk of CNS involvement. Intrathecal therapy offers limited value and immune effector therapies represent efficacious options for treatment.