Prognostic value of premaintenance FDG PET/CT response in patients with newly diagnosed myeloma from the CASSIOPEIA trial
Abstract
Abstract The CASSIOPEIA trial demonstrated superior progression-free survival (PFS) with the addition of daratumumab to bortezomib, thalidomide, and dexamethasone (D-VTd) induction/consolidation, and with daratumumab maintenance vs observation in transplant-eligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). The companion study, CASSIOPET, assessed the prognostic value of premaintenance (PM) positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) response, based on the standardized Deauville score on PFS and overall survival (OS), in addition to bone marrow (BM) minimal residual disease (MRD) detection by multiparameter flow cytometry (MFC) at 10–5 level. PM PET/CT was available for 225 patients: 112 patients treated with daratumumab after D-VTd (59) or bortezomib, thalidomide, and dexamethasone (VTd; 53), and 113 patients followed by observation after D-VTd (56) or VTd (57). At PM, 92% of the 175 baseline PET-positive patients achieved PET negativity, with a longer PFS in univariate analysis (P = .019) and a major trend of prolonged OS (P = .056). In univariate analysis, patients who achieved both PET and MFC negativity were found to have a better PFS (P < .0001) than those who had at least 1 positive result. In daratumumab-treated patients, PM PET negativity was associated with prolonged PFS and OS in univariate analysis (P = .0023 and P = .033, respectively), and double MFC and PET negativity was independently associated with PFS by multivariate analysis (P = .0006). This study confirms the prognostic relevance of a PM PET response in patients with NDMM treated with daratumumab in addition to MRD detection by MFC at the BM level. This trial was registered at ww.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02541383.
Article Details
Authors (21)
Françoise Kraeber-Bodéré
1Department of Nuclear Medicine, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Nantes, Nantes Université, Nantes, France
Bastien Jamet
1Department of Nuclear Medicine, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Nantes, Nantes Université, Nantes, France
Sonja Zweegman
Aurore Perrot
Cyrille Hulin
Service d’Hématologie, Hôpital Haut Lévêque, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) de Bordeaux, Pessac, France
Denis Caillot
6Department of Hematology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Dijon, Hôpital Du Bocage, Dijon, France
Thierry Facon
6Department of Hematology, University Hospital and INSERM Unité Mixte de Recherche S1277, Lille, France
Xavier Leleu
Service Hématologie, Hôpital Universitaire de Poitiers, Poitiers, France
Karim Belhadj
7Department of Hematology, Créteil Hospital, Assistance Publique–Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France
Emmanuel Itti
10Department of Nuclear Medicine, Hôpital Henri Mondor, Créteil, France
Lionel Karlin
Service Hématologie, Hôpital Universitaire Lyon Sud, Pierre-Bénite, France
Clément Bailly
1Department of Nuclear Medicine, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Nantes, Nantes Université, Nantes, France
Mark-David Levin
Albert Schweitzer Ziekenhuis, Dordrecht, the Netherlands
Monique C. Minnema
Caroline Bodet-Milin
Centre de Recherche en Cancérologie et Immunologie Intégrée Nantes Angers, INSERM, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Université d’Angers, Université de Nantes, Nantes, France
Bart de Keizer
Jill Corre
Unité Génomique du Myélome, Hôpital Universitaire de Toulouse Oncopole, Université de Toulouse, Toulouse, France
Pieter Sonneveld
Philippe Moreau
Thomas Carlier
1Department of Nuclear Medicine, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Nantes, Nantes Université, Nantes, France
Cyrille Touzeau