Daratumumab monotherapy versus active monitoring in patients with high-risk smoldering multiple myeloma: Aquila outcomes based on mayo 2018/IMWG 2020 risk stratification, IMWG 2020 plus cytogenetic criteria, and age
Abstract
Abstract Introduction : Current standard of care for smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM), an asymptomatic precursor of multiple myeloma (MM), is observation until progression to active MM. Increasing evidence suggests that patients (pts) with SMM at high risk for progression to active MM may benefit from early treatment (tx). In AQUILA, a phase 3 study in pts with high-risk SMM (NCT03301220), daratumumab (Dara) monotherapy significantly reduced risk of progression to active MM or death with a trend of extending overall survival (OS) vs active monitoring (ActMon), with no new safety concerns. Given the evolution in SMM risk stratification, a post hoc analysis was performed to assess outcomes using the IMWG 2020 and IMWG 2020 plus cytogenetic risk models to assess which AQUILA pts benefited most from Dara monotherapy. Safety and efficacy analysis by age and stem cell collection outcomes were also assessed. Methods: Eligible pts with a confirmed diagnosis (≤5 y) of high-risk SMM per IMWG 2014 criteria, defined as clonal bone marrow plasma cells (BMPC) ≥10% and ≥1 risk factor (IgA SMM, serum protein ≥30 g/dL, serum involved:uninvolved free light chain [I/U FLC] ratio ≥8 and <100, immunoparesis with reduction of 2 uninvolved Ig isotypes, and/or clonal BMPC >50% to <60%) at study entry, were randomized 1:1 to receive subcutaneous Dara or ActMon for 39 cycles, 36 months, or until confirmed disease progression (PD), whichever came first. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) assessed by independent review committee, defined as progression to active MM (based on IMWG SLiM-CRAB diagnostic criteria) or death. Secondary endpoints included time to first-line (1L) MM tx and OS. For this post hoc analysis, we assessed outcomes by age, IMWG 2020 high-risk SMM criteria (BMPC >20%, monoclonal spike >2 g/dL, serum FLC ratio >20; ≥2 factors=high risk; also known as the Mayo 2018 or the 20-2-20 criteria), and the IMWG 2020 plus cytogenetic criteria (IMWG 2020 criteria + presence of ≥1 high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities [t(4;14), t(14;16), +1q and/or del13q]; ≥3 factors=high risk). Results : Dara tx showed a PFS benefit across all IMWG 2020 risk subgroups (low: hazard ratio [HR], 0.59; intermediate: HR, 0.70), with the largest benefit in the high-risk subgroup, where the PD/death rate in the ActMon arm was ~1.6-fold that in the Dara arm (62.8% vs 37.5%; HR, 0.36). This benefit of Dara vs ActMon was preserved over time, with 5-year PFS rates of 78.2% vs 71.6%, 56.2% vs 42.9%, and 60.4% vs 23.6% in IMWG 2020 low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups, respectively. There was a positive trend favoring Dara for time to 1L MM treatment across all IMWG 2020 risk groups (low-risk HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.22–1.80; intermediate-risk HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.35–0.92; high-risk HR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.25–0.62). IMWG 2020 plus cytogenetic risk classification results will be available at the time of presentation. When comparing the younger (<65y HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.32–0.79) vs the older (≥65y, HR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.32–0.77) pt population, a PFS benefit was observed regardless of age. Similarity was also observed in TEAE incidence rate when looking into <65, 65 to <75, and ≥75 y subgroups (82.7%, 81.1%, and 87.5% with ActMon; 96.2%, 98.5%, and 95.2% with Dara); however, serious TEAEs were more frequently observed in older ActMon pts (12.2%, 18.9%, and 50.0% with ActMon; 24.8%, 35.8%, and 28.6% with Dara). Across all pts treated/monitored in AQUILA, 23 (11.9%) and 41 (20.9%) pts in the Dara and ActMon arms, respectively, received autologous stem cell transplant as part of their first tx after progressing to active MM, with very limited plerixafor use (Dara, 3 [1.6%] vs ActMon, 9 [4.6%]). Median (range) CD34+ cell yield was 5.0 (2–20)×106 cells/kg body weight among 22 pts in the Dara arm and 5.1 (2–21)×106 cells/kg body weight among 39 pts in the ActMon arm. Conclusions : In this analysis, pts with high-risk SMM from the phase 3 AQUILA study treated with Dara monotherapy experienced long-term PFS benefit across IMWG 2020 subgroups, with the most pronounced benefit in the high-risk subgroup. No notable differences in PFS or safety were observed across age subgroups. Early Dara tx for high-risk SMM did not have a detrimental impact on stem cell yield. Although mature OS analyses are forthcoming, overall, these results further support early intervention with Dara monotherapy vs ActMon among pts with high-risk SMM, regardless of risk stratification criteria used.
Article Details
Authors (39)
Peter Voorhees
Department of Materials Science and Engineering
Meletios Dimopoulos
18Department of Clinical Therapeutics, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, School of Medicine, Athens, Greece
Yaël Cohen
7Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center & Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, Tel Aviv, Israel
Fredrik Schjesvold
Vania Hungria
Clinica São Germano, São Paulo
Irwindeep Sandhu
1University of Alberta, Hematology, Edmonton, Canada
Jindriska Lindsay
1University College London Hospitals, London, United Kingdom
Ross Baker
1Perth Blood Institute, Perth, Australia
Kenshi Suzuki
Hiroshi Kosugi
11Ogaki Municipal Hospital, Ogaki City, Japan
Mark-David Levin
Albert Schweitzer Ziekenhuis, Dordrecht, the Netherlands
Meral Beksac
Keith Stockerl-Goldstein
1Washington University School of Medicine, Division of Oncology, Department of Medicine, Saint Louis, United States
Hila Magen
Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Albert Oriol
Institut Català d’Oncologia and Institut Josep Carreras, Hospital Germans Trias i Pujol, Badalona, Spain
Gabor Mikala
18South Pest Central Hospital, National Institute for Hematology and Infectious Diseases, Budapest, Hungary
Gonzalo Garate
Koen Theunissen
12Jessa Ziekenhuis, Department of Hematology, Hasselt, Belgium
Ivan Špička
9Charles University and General Faculty Hospital in Prague, Prague, Czech Republic
Anne Mylin
14Department of Hematology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
Simon Hallam
23Department of Haemato-Oncology, St Bartholomew's Hospital, London, United Kingdom
Sara Bringhen
4Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino, Turin, Italy
Katarina Uttervall
2Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
Bartosz Pula
2Medical University of Łódź, Department of Hematology, Łódź, Poland
Abdullah Khan
Eva Medvedova
Knight Cancer Institute, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland
J Christine Ye
1The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Lymphoma and Myeloma, Houston, United States
Andrew Cowan
3University of Washington and Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, United States
Philippe Moreau
María-Victoria Mateos
Hartmut Goldschmidt
Internal Medicine V, Hematology, Oncology and Rheumatology, German-Speaking Myeloma Multicenter Group Study Group, Heidelberg University Hospital and National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg, Germany
Diego Vieyra
Johnson & Johnson, Spring House, PA
Ashta Raval
36Johnson & Johnson, Raritan, United States
Linlin Sha
37Johnson & Johnson, Shanghai, China
Liang Li
Els Rousseau
38Johnson & Johnson, Beerse, Belgium
Robyn Dennis
36Johnson & Johnson, Raritan, United States
Robin Carson
Johnson & Johnson, Spring House, PA
S. Vincent Rajkumar