Daratumumab with lenalidomide as maintenance after transplant in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: the AURIGA study
Abstract
Abstract No randomized trial has directly compared daratumumab and lenalidomide (D-R) maintenance with standard-of-care lenalidomide (R) alone after transplant. Herein, we report the primary results of the phase 3 AURIGA study evaluating D-R vs R maintenance in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) who had very good or better partial response, were minimal residual disease (MRD)-positive (10–5) and anti-CD38–naïve after transplant. Two hundred patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to D-R (n = 99) or R (n = 101) maintenance for up to 36 cycles. The MRD-negative (10–5) conversion rate by 12 months from start of maintenance (primary end point) was significantly higher for D-R than R (50.5% vs 18.8%; odds ratio [OR], 4.51; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.37-8.57; P < .0001). MRD-negative (10–6) conversion rate was similarly higher with D-R (23.2% vs 5.0%; OR, 5.97; 95% CI, 2.15-16.58; P = .0002). At median follow-up (32.3 months), D-R achieved a higher overall MRD-negative (10–5) conversion rate (D-R, 60.6% vs R, 27.7%; OR, 4.12; 95% CI, 2.26-7.52; P < .0001) and complete response rate or better (75.8% vs 61.4%; OR, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.08-3.69; P = .0255) vs R. Progression-free survival (PFS) favored D-R vs R (hazard ratio, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.29-0.97); estimated 30-month PFS rates were 82.7% for D-R and 66.4% for R. Incidences of grade 3/4 cytopenias (54.2% vs 46.9%) and infections (18.8% vs 13.3%) were slightly higher with D-R than R. In conclusion, D-R maintenance achieved a higher MRD-negative conversion rate and improved PFS after transplant vs R, with no new safety concerns. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT03901963.
Article Details
Authors (21)
Ashraf Badros
Laahn Foster
1University of Virginia Medical Center, Charlottesville, United States
Larry D. Anderson
1Myeloma, Waldenstrom’s, and Amyloidosis Program, Section of Hematologic Malignancies and Cellular Therapy, Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center, The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
Chakra P. Chaulagain
4Myeloma and Amyloidosis Program, Department of Hematology and Oncology, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston, FL
Erin Pettijohn
5The Cancer and Hematology Centers of Western Michigan, Grand Rapids, MI
Andrew J. Cowan
Caitlin Costello
1Division of Blood and Marrow Transplantation, University of California San Diego, Department of Medicine, San Diego, United States
Sarah Larson
22UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, United States
Douglas W. Sborov
5Huntsman Cancer Institute, The University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT
Kenneth H. Shain
Rebecca Silbermann
2Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, United States
Nina Shah
8Astrazeneca, US, San Francisco, United States
Alfred Chung
6University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
Maria Krevvata
Johnson & Johnson, Spring House, PA
Huiling Pei
14Janssen Research and Development, LLC, Titusville, NJ
Sharmila Patel
16Johnson & Johnson, Horsham, United States
Vipin Khare
2Johnson & Johnson, Horsham, United States
Annelore Cortoos
2Johnson & Johnson, Horsham, United States
Robin Carson
Johnson & Johnson, Spring House, PA
Thomas S. Lin
15Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, a Johnson & Johnson company, Horsham, PA
Peter Voorhees
Department of Materials Science and Engineering