{"title":"Anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies in multiple myeloma with gain/amplification of chromosome arm 1q: a review of the literature.","authors":"Emiliano Barbieri, Enrica Antonia Martino, Elena Rivolti, Micol Quaresima, Ernesto Vigna, Antonino Neri, Fortunato Morabito, Massimo Gentile","doi":"10.1080/14712598.2024.2357382","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Gain/amplification of 1q (+1q) represents one of the most prevalent cytogenetic abnormalities (CAs) observed in multiple myeloma (MM). Historical studies predating the advent of anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies (moAbs) implicated + 1q in poor prognoses, prompting its integration into novel staging systems. However, with the emergence of daratumumab and isatuximab, two pivotal anti-CD38 moAbs, the landscape of MM therapy has undergone a profound transformation.</p><p><strong>Areas covered: </strong>This review encompasses a comprehensive analysis of diverse study methodologies, including observational investigations, clinical trials, meta-analyses, and real-world database analyses. By synthesizing these data sources, we aim to provide an overview of the current understanding of + 1q in the context of anti-CD38 moAbs therapies.</p><p><strong>Expert opinion: </strong>Despite the paucity of available data, evidence suggests a potential mitigating effect of daratumumab on the adverse prognostic implications of + 1q. However, this benefit seems to diminish in patients harboring ≥ 4 copies or with concurrent high-risk CAs. On the other hand, isatuximab demonstrated promising outcomes in the relapsed-refractory setting for + 1q MM patients. Nevertheless, direct comparison between the two compounds is currently challenging. The current evidence firmly supports the integration of anti-CD38 moAb-based therapies as the standard of care for + 1q patients, pending further elucidation.</p>","PeriodicalId":12084,"journal":{"name":"Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14712598.2024.2357382","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Gain/amplification of 1q (+1q) represents one of the most prevalent cytogenetic abnormalities (CAs) observed in multiple myeloma (MM). Historical studies predating the advent of anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies (moAbs) implicated + 1q in poor prognoses, prompting its integration into novel staging systems. However, with the emergence of daratumumab and isatuximab, two pivotal anti-CD38 moAbs, the landscape of MM therapy has undergone a profound transformation.
Areas covered: This review encompasses a comprehensive analysis of diverse study methodologies, including observational investigations, clinical trials, meta-analyses, and real-world database analyses. By synthesizing these data sources, we aim to provide an overview of the current understanding of + 1q in the context of anti-CD38 moAbs therapies.
Expert opinion: Despite the paucity of available data, evidence suggests a potential mitigating effect of daratumumab on the adverse prognostic implications of + 1q. However, this benefit seems to diminish in patients harboring ≥ 4 copies or with concurrent high-risk CAs. On the other hand, isatuximab demonstrated promising outcomes in the relapsed-refractory setting for + 1q MM patients. Nevertheless, direct comparison between the two compounds is currently challenging. The current evidence firmly supports the integration of anti-CD38 moAb-based therapies as the standard of care for + 1q patients, pending further elucidation.
期刊介绍:
Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy (1471-2598; 1744-7682) is a MEDLINE-indexed, international journal publishing peer-reviewed research across all aspects of biological therapy.
Each article is structured to incorporate the author’s own expert opinion on the impact of the topic on research and clinical practice and the scope for future development.
The audience consists of scientists and managers in the healthcare and biopharmaceutical industries and others closely involved in the development and application of biological therapies for the treatment of human disease.
The journal welcomes:
Reviews covering therapeutic antibodies and vaccines, peptides and proteins, gene therapies and gene transfer technologies, cell-based therapies and regenerative medicine
Drug evaluations reviewing the clinical data on a particular biological agent
Original research papers reporting the results of clinical investigations on biological agents and biotherapeutic-based studies with a strong link to clinical practice
Comprehensive coverage in each review is complemented by the unique Expert Collection format and includes the following sections:
Expert Opinion – a personal view of the data presented in the article, a discussion on the developments that are likely to be important in the future, and the avenues of research likely to become exciting as further studies yield more detailed results;
Article Highlights – an executive summary of the author’s most critical points.