The New England journal of medicine 2024 Jun 03
Isatuximab, Bortezomib, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone for Multiple Myeloma.
Abstract
Background
Bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRd) is a preferred first-line treatment option for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Whether the addition of the anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody isatuximab to the VRd regimen would reduce the risk of disease progression or death among patients ineligible to undergo transplantation is unclear.
Methods
In an international, open-label, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned, in a 3:2 ratio, patients 18 to 80 years of age with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were ineligible to undergo transplantation to receive either isatuximab plus VRd or VRd alone. The primary efficacy end point was progression-free survival. Key secondary end points included a complete response or better and minimal residual disease (MRD)-negative status in patients with a complete response.
Results
A total of 446 patients underwent randomization. At a median follow-up of 59.7 months, the estimated progression-free survival at 60 months was 63.2% in the isatuximab-VRd group, as compared with 45.2% in the VRd group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.60; 98.5% confidence interval, 0.41 to 0.88; P<0.001). The percentage of patients with a complete response or better was significantly higher in the isatuximab-VRd group than in the VRd group (74.7% vs. 64.1%, P = 0.01), as was the percentage of patients with MRD-negative status and a complete response (55.5% vs. 40.9%, P = 0.003). No new safety signals were observed with the isatuximab-VRd regimen. The incidence of serious adverse events during treatment and the incidence of adverse events leading to discontinuation were similar in the two groups.
Conclusions
Isatuximab-VRd was more effective than VRd as initial therapy in patients 18 to 80 years of age with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were ineligible to undergo transplantation. (Funded by Sanofi and a Cancer Center Support Grant; IMROZ ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03319667.).
Related Questions
How does one approach maintenance treatment in transplant ineligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma?
IMROZ and BENEFIT trials are interesting in that they are billed as for transplant-ineligible patients, yet frail patients were excluded, so I don't think they give us the answer for how to maintain a frail patient. The best answer for a frail patient is, I believe, the MAIA trial, which gives DRD t...
What are your top takeaways in Hematologic Malignancies from ASCO 2024?
The top three would be IMROZ DREAMM-8 BENEFIT
Based on the DREAMM-7 and DREAMM-8 data, how would you incorporate belantamab mafadotin in your practice?
This is definitely top of mind with the publication of the DREAMM, BENEFIT, and IMROZ trials. Given my standard sequencing of myeloma treatments in non t(11;14) patients who are not clinical trial candidates, there is no longer a good time to incorporate a toxic BCMA antibody drug conjugate into the...
Based on the IMROZ and BENEFIT data, would you recommend quadruplet therapy for non transplant eligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma?
Excellent question - to add citations for those who missed ASCO 2024 (I did since I was on inpatient!) and would like to jump to the manuscripts: IMROZ: Isa-VRd versus VRd (Facon et al., PMID 38832972) BENEFIT/IFM 2020-05: Isa-VRd versus Isa-Rd (Leleu et al., PMID 38830994) Both trials enrolled pati...