After the MAJESTEC-3 results, and once approved, what is your approach to choosing between tec-dara vs. cilta-cel versus another triplet for multiple myeloma in first relapse?  

This is an excellent question, and literally a million-dollar question for various companies involved. It's worth noting that the US FDA can change the package insert at will (and has done so) compared to what the trials did, so there's no guarantee as of yet that Tec-Dara (based on MajesTEC-3) will...

MajesTEC-3 studied Teclistamab + Daratumumab compared to standards of care (Dara-Pd or Dara-Vd) in relapsed myeloma with 1-3 prior lines of therapy. The HR for PFS was an impressive 0.17, and the 36-month PFS for all comers in the Tec-dara arm was a whopping 83.4%! The HR was similar across most sub...

I agree with @Rahul Banerjee that this is an expensive question and do appreciate his comparison between the two options.I'm certain that the published MajesTEC-3 data did not represent the true toxicity profile. IG replacement was only required partway through enrollment, limiting the clarity of wh...

I agree with @Rahul Banerjee's thoughtful and nuanced framework. I particularly appreciate the emphasis on shared decision-making, access considerations, and the concept of “time toxicity,” which I think will matter greatly in real-world practice as these options move earlier. In my pra...