KarMMa-3 subgroup analysis in older patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma treated with idecabtagene vicleucel
Abstract
Abstract Introduction: Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapies are an effective treatment option for patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Idecabtagene vicleucel (ide-cel) is a B-cell maturation antigen-targeted CAR T-cell therapy approved for patients with RRMM with ≥2 prior lines of therapy. Developing a better understanding of the relationship between patient age and CAR T-cell therapy outcomes may help guide treatment and clinical practice. This analysis of data from the KarMMa-3 trial (NCT03651128) describes efficacy and safety outcomes in older and younger patients who received either ide-cel or standard therapy regimens. Methods: KarMMa-3 is an open-label, phase 3 trial that includes adults with RRMM who have received 2-4 prior treatment regimens with disease refractory to the last therapy. Enrolled patients were randomized (2:1) to receive either a one-time infusion of ide-cel or 1 of 5 standard regimens. This subgroup analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of ide-cel compared with standard regimens in KarMMa-3 patients by age group (≥70 vs <70 yrs). Outcome measures assessed include overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), patient-reported quality of life (QoL), and incidence of selected adverse events. Results: A total of 386 patients were evaluated; 19.3% (49/254) of those receiving ide-cel and 20.5% (27/132) of those receiving standard regimens were aged ≥70 yrs. Compared with older patients, younger patients receiving ide-cel exhibited more high-risk baseline characteristics, including high-risk cytogenic abnormalities (44.4% vs 32.7%) and triple-class refractory disease (66.8% vs 55.1%). The median time to progression during the most recent prior anti-myeloma treatment was longer for patients aged ≥70 yrs who received ide-cel vs standard regimens (8.6 mo vs 6.7 mo) but was similar for patients aged <70 yrs (6.5 mo vs 6.9 mo). ORR for patients aged <70 yrs was 68.8% (95% CI: 62.4, 75.1) with ide-cel and 41.0% (95% CI: 31.5, 50.4) with standard regimens (P<0.0001). Patients aged ≥70 yrs treated with ide-cel achieved an ORR of 81.6% (95% CI: 70.8, 92.5) vs 48.1% (95% CI: 29.3, 67.0) with standard regimens (P<0.01). Median PFS for patients aged <70 yrs was longer with ide-cel treatment vs standard regimens (12.5 mo [95% CI: 11.2, 15.4] vs 4.2 mo [95% CI: 3.5, 5.7]; P<0.0001). Similar trends were seen in patients aged ≥70 yrs, where median PFS was 18.9 mo (95% CI: 12.1, 24.5) with ide-cel treatment and 5.7 mo (95% CI: 2.2, 12.2) with standard regimens (P<0.01). Median OS was not reached in older patients in either treatment arm; in younger patients, median OS was 39.5 mo (95% CI: 27.8, NR) with ide-cel and 27.9 mo (95% CI: 20.6, NR) with standard regimens. Incidence of adverse events reported with ide-cel treatment was generally similar between age groups for cytokine release syndrome, neurotoxicity, and infections. Analyses of patient-reported QoL data and other relevant safety endpointsare ongoing and will be included in the presentation. Conclusions: In the KarMMa-3 trial, patients aged ≥70 years derived substantial benefit from ide-cel treatment, demonstrated by longer PFS and a notable ORR compared with standard regimens. While efficacy and safety outcomes of ide-cel treatment in older patients were consistent with younger patients, it is important to note that patients in the trial aged ≥70 yrs were more likely to have favorable baseline characteristics and less aggressive and heavily pretreated disease. This may reflect a selection bias towards enrolling older patients considered to be easier to treat. In contrast, real-world data from late-line settings suggest that older patients are undergoing treatment based on less restrictive selection criteria—eg, including those with higher-risk baseline features—reflecting a more representative and broader population. These observations reinforce the potential for durable benefit with a single ide-cel infusion in a real-world context without additional adverse safety signals, supporting its use across age groups.
Article Details
Authors (14)
Sikander Ailawadhi
17Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL
Bertrand Arnulf
Hôpital Universitaire St. Louis, Assistance Publique–Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Paris
Krina Patel
4The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, United States
Michele Cavo
Ajay Nooka
4Emory University, Winship Cancer Institute, Atlanta, United States
Salomon Manier
Shinsuke Iida
Sophie Hello
8Bristol Myers Squibb, Princeton, United States
Devender Dhanda
8Bristol Myers Squibb, Princeton, United States
Prachi Ghodke
8Bristol Myers Squibb, Princeton, United States
Martina Raggi
Bristol Myers Squibb, Boudry, Switzerland
Roland Marion Gallois
8Bristol Myers Squibb, Princeton, United States
Jaclyn Davis
8Bristol Myers Squibb, Princeton, United States
Paula Rodriguez-Otero