Daratumumab with lenalidomide as maintenance after transplant in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: the AURIGA study

A Ashraf Badros L Laahn Foster (1University of Virginia Medical Center, Charlottesville, United States) L 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) C Chakra P. Chaulagain (4Myeloma and Amyloidosis Program, Department of Hematology and Oncology, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston, FL) E Erin Pettijohn (5The Cancer and Hematology Centers of Western Michigan, Grand Rapids, MI) A Andrew J. Cowan C Caitlin Costello (1Division of Blood and Marrow Transplantation, University of California San Diego, Department of Medicine, San Diego, United States) S Sarah Larson (22UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, United States) D Douglas W. Sborov (5Huntsman Cancer Institute, The University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT) K Kenneth H. Shain R Rebecca Silbermann (2Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, United States) N Nina Shah (8Astrazeneca, US, San Francisco, United States) A Alfred Chung (6University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, United States) M Maria Krevvata (Johnson & Johnson, Spring House, PA) H Huiling Pei (14Janssen Research and Development, LLC, Titusville, NJ) S Sharmila Patel (16Johnson & Johnson, Horsham, United States) V Vipin Khare (2Johnson & Johnson, Horsham, United States) A Annelore Cortoos (2Johnson & Johnson, Horsham, United States) R Robin Carson (Johnson & Johnson, Spring House, PA) T Thomas S. Lin (15Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, a Johnson & Johnson company, Horsham, PA) P Peter Voorhees (Department of Materials Science and Engineering)

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

Journal Blood
Volume / Issue Vol. 145, Issue 3
Published January 16, 2025
Pages 300-310
ISSN 0006-4971
Publisher Elsevier BV

Journal Info

Blood

Elsevier BV

ISSN: 0006-4971 Health Sciences

Authors (21)

A

Ashraf Badros

L

Laahn Foster

1University of Virginia Medical Center, Charlottesville, United States

L

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

C

Chakra P. Chaulagain

4Myeloma and Amyloidosis Program, Department of Hematology and Oncology, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston, FL

E

Erin Pettijohn

5The Cancer and Hematology Centers of Western Michigan, Grand Rapids, MI

A

Andrew J. Cowan

C

Caitlin Costello

1Division of Blood and Marrow Transplantation, University of California San Diego, Department of Medicine, San Diego, United States

S

Sarah Larson

22UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, United States

D

Douglas W. Sborov

5Huntsman Cancer Institute, The University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT

K

Kenneth H. Shain

R

Rebecca Silbermann

2Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, United States

N

Nina Shah

8Astrazeneca, US, San Francisco, United States

A

Alfred Chung

6University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, United States

M

Maria Krevvata

Johnson & Johnson, Spring House, PA

H

Huiling Pei

14Janssen Research and Development, LLC, Titusville, NJ

S

Sharmila Patel

16Johnson & Johnson, Horsham, United States

V

Vipin Khare

2Johnson & Johnson, Horsham, United States

A

Annelore Cortoos

2Johnson & Johnson, Horsham, United States

R

Robin Carson

Johnson & Johnson, Spring House, PA

T

Thomas S. Lin

15Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, a Johnson & Johnson company, Horsham, PA

P

Peter Voorhees

Department of Materials Science and Engineering