Cytogenetics-based clinical trajectories of patients with MRD negativity post autologous stem cell transplant for multiple myeloma

E Estefania Gauto Mariotti (1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States) S Shaji Kumar W Wilson Gonsalves (1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States) P Prashant Kapoor (Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN) A Angela Dispenzieri F Francis Buadi (1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States) D David Dingli (1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States) D Dragan Jevremovic (1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States) S Suzanne Hayman (1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States) N Nelson Leung (1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States) J Joselle Cook (1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States) N Nadine Abdallah (2Mayo Clinic, Division of Hematology, Rochester, United States) M Moritz Binder (Division of Hematology, Department of Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic) E Eli Muchtar (Mayo Clinic) R Rahma Warsame (1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States) T Taxiarchis Kourelis (1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States) R Ronald Go (2Mayo Clinic, Hematology, Rochester, United States) Y Yi Hwa (1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States) M Miriam Hobbs (1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States) A Amie Fonder (1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States) M Mustaqeem Siddiqui (1Mayo Clinic, Department of Internal Medicine, Rochester, United States) Y Yi Lin R Robert Kyle (1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States) M Morie Gertz (11Division of Hematology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN) S S. Vincent Rajkumar S Saurabh Zanwar

Abstract

Abstract Background Measurable residual disease (MRD) negativity post- autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) is associated with favorable outcomes and may overcome the adverse impact of high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities (HRCAs). However, as the definition of high risk evolves and MRD emerges as a key endpoint, understanding its prognostic value within individual HRCAs is critical for treatment guidance. Methods We retrospectively included patients with NDMM that underwent an ASCT between September 19, 2016, and October 19, 2023, and achieved MRD negativity on Day 100 post ASCT. The MRD testing was conducted using multiparameter flow cytometry with a sensitivity of 2x10. HRCAs were defined as del(17p), 1q21+ gain or amplification (1q21+), t(4;14), t(14;16), t(14;20) and del(1p) and rest were considered standard risk (SRCA). Patients were grouped by the number of HRCAs (0, 1, ≥2). An adaptation of the recently proposed International Myeloma Society (IMS)/International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) classification for high-risk disease (TP53 mutation unavailable) was also used. Progression-free survival (PFS), measured from stem-cell infusion to progression or death, was estimated using Kaplan–Meier methodology and compared using log-rank test. Results We identified 386 patients with MRD negativity post ASCT, of which 381 had cytogenetic data available for analysis. The median follow-up for the study cohort was 47.3 months (95% CI: 43.2-50). The median age at the time of ASCT was 65.7 (25.4-79.2) years and 58.3% patients were males. A total of 49% (n=189) patients had standard-risk cytogenetics, 31.4 % (n=121) harbored 1 HRCA, 15.3% (n=59) patients had two HRCAs and 3.1% (n=12) had 3 HRCAs. The individual HRCA by their prevalence were: 1q21+ in 35.5%(n=137), del(17p) in 14.3% (n=55), t(4;14) in 10.9% (n=42), t(14;16) in 5.4% (n=21), del(1p) in 4.2% (n=16), and t(14;20) in 1.04% (n=4) of patients. The most common double-hit lesions were1q21+ gain and/or amplification co-occurring with t(4;14) (33.9%, n=20) and del(17p) with 1q21+ (18.6%, n=11). Despite universal MRD negativity at Day 100, several HRCAs remained prognostically significant for PFS. Patients with del(17p) had worse 3-year PFS (71%) than those without (81%) [hazard ratio (HR)=1.85, 95% CI 1.11–3.07, p = 0.0172], though 3-year OS did not significantly differ at data cutoff (80% vs. 92%, p=0.1176). Presence of 1q21+ was associated with an inferior 3-year PFS (73%) compared to those without [84%, HR: 1.96 (95% CI: 1.25–3.06), p=0.0026], while 3-year OS was similar (88% vs. 91%, HR:1.33 p=0.36). Isolated 1q21+ had inferior PFS with comparable OS when compared to SRCA [3-year PFS of 82% vs. 88% respectively (HR:1.97, p=0.0177)]; 3-year OS was 91% vs. 94% (HR:1.38, p=0.44)]. Among 1q21+ patients, those with co-occurring HRCAs had a 3-year PFS of 66% vs. 81% for isolated 1q21+ (HR: 1.47, p=0.21). Patients with t(4;14) had worse 3-year PFS (64%) vs. 82% in non t(4;14) [HR 2.11(95% CI: 1.21-3.67) p=0.0064], and 3-year OS of 82% compared to 91% [HR 2.14 (95% CI: 1.02–4.49), p=0.038]. Isolated t(4;14) showed a 3-year PFS of 59% vs. 87% in standard-risk (p=0.06), and 3-year OS of 90% vs. 93% [HR 3.29, 95% CI 0.95–11.33, p = 0.06]. The presence of t(14;16), t(14;20), and del(1p) did not significantly affect 3-year PFS (all p>0.1), likely due to small subsets. When patients were grouped by the number of HRCAs, PFS declined with increasing cytogenetic complexity. Compared to standard risk, the 3-year PFS was 77% for 1 HRCA vs [HR = 2.11 (95% CI: 1.29–3.46), p = 0.0027], 67% for ≥2 HRCA [HR = 2.64 (95% CI: 1.53–4.57), p = 0.0005]. Maintenance therapy was used in 98% of patients. Patients with HRCAs received a doublet maintenance compared to SRCA (p<0.0001), even in MRD negative disease post ASCT. Conclusion In patients with certain HRCA, achievement of MRD negativity post-ASCT does not overcome the adverse impact of HRCA on PFS. In our cohort, patients with del(17p), t(4;14), or 1q21+ continued to exhibit significantly shorter PFS despite achieving MRD-negative status. These findings underscore the need for ongoing risk-adapted strategies even in patients with MM who attain MRD-negative state. The OS estimates are immature at this time.

Article Details

Journal Blood
Volume / Issue Vol. 146, Issue Supplement 1
Published November 03, 2025
Pages 362-362
ISSN 0006-4971
Publisher Elsevier BV

Journal Info

Blood

Elsevier BV

ISSN: 0006-4971 Health Sciences

Authors (26)

E

Estefania Gauto Mariotti

1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States

S

Shaji Kumar

W

Wilson Gonsalves

1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States

P

Prashant Kapoor

Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN

A

Angela Dispenzieri

F

Francis Buadi

1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States

D

David Dingli

1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States

D

Dragan Jevremovic

1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States

S

Suzanne Hayman

1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States

N

Nelson Leung

1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States

J

Joselle Cook

1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States

N

Nadine Abdallah

2Mayo Clinic, Division of Hematology, Rochester, United States

M

Moritz Binder

Division of Hematology, Department of Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic

E

Eli Muchtar

Mayo Clinic

R

Rahma Warsame

1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States

T

Taxiarchis Kourelis

1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States

R

Ronald Go

2Mayo Clinic, Hematology, Rochester, United States

Y

Yi Hwa

1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States

M

Miriam Hobbs

1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States

A

Amie Fonder

1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States

M

Mustaqeem Siddiqui

1Mayo Clinic, Department of Internal Medicine, Rochester, United States

Y

Yi Lin

R

Robert Kyle

1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States

M

Morie Gertz

11Division of Hematology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN

S

S. Vincent Rajkumar

S

Saurabh Zanwar