Sikander Ailawadhi, Bertrand Arnulf, Krina Patel, Michele Cavo, Ajay K Nooka, Salomon Manier, Natalie Callander, Luciano J Costa, Ravi Vij, Nizar J Bahlis, Philippe Moreau, Scott Solomon, Ingerid Weum Abrahamsen, Rachid Baz, Annemiek Broijl, Christine Chen, Sundar Jagannath, Noopur Raje, Christof Scheid, Michel Delforge, Reuben Benjamin, Thomas Pabst, Shinsuke Iida, Jesús Berdeja, Sergio Giralt, Anna Truppel-Hartmann, Yanping Chen, Xiaobo Zhong, Fan Wu, Julia Piasecki, Laurie Eliason, Devender Dhanda, Jasper Felten, Andrea Caia, Mark Cook, Mihaela Popa McKiver, Paula Rodríguez-Otero
{"title":"Ide-cel与标准疗法在三联疗法复发和难治性多发性骨髓瘤中的应用:最新的KarMMa-3分析。","authors":"Sikander Ailawadhi, Bertrand Arnulf, Krina Patel, Michele Cavo, Ajay K Nooka, Salomon Manier, Natalie Callander, Luciano J Costa, Ravi Vij, Nizar J Bahlis, Philippe Moreau, Scott Solomon, Ingerid Weum Abrahamsen, Rachid Baz, Annemiek Broijl, Christine Chen, Sundar Jagannath, Noopur Raje, Christof Scheid, Michel Delforge, Reuben Benjamin, Thomas Pabst, Shinsuke Iida, Jesús Berdeja, Sergio Giralt, Anna Truppel-Hartmann, Yanping Chen, Xiaobo Zhong, Fan Wu, Julia Piasecki, Laurie Eliason, Devender Dhanda, Jasper Felten, Andrea Caia, Mark Cook, Mihaela Popa McKiver, Paula Rodríguez-Otero","doi":"10.1182/blood.2024024582","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>Outcomes are poor in triple-class-exposed (TCE) relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (R/RMM). In the phase 3 KarMMa-3 trial, patients with TCE R/RMM and 2 to 4 prior regimens were randomized 2:1 to idecabtagene vicleucel (ide-cel) or standard regimens (SRs). An interim analysis (IA) demonstrated significantly longer median progression-free survival (PFS; primary end point; 13.3 vs 4.4 months; P < .0001) and higher overall response rate (ORR) with ide-cel vs SRs. At final PFS analysis (median follow-up, 30.9 months), ide-cel further improved median PFS vs SRs (13.8 vs 4.4 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.38-0.63). PFS benefit with ide-cel vs SRs was observed regardless of number of prior lines of therapy, with greatest benefit after 2 prior lines (16.2 vs 4.8 months, respectively). ORR benefit was maintained with ide-cel vs SRs (71% vs 42%; complete response, 44% vs 5%). Patient-centric design allowed crossover from SRs (56%) to ide-cel upon progressive disease, confounding overall survival (OS) interpretation. At IA of OS, median was 41.4 (95% CI, 30.9 to not reached [NR]) vs 37.9 (95% CI, 23.4 to NR) months with ide-cel and SRs, respectively (HR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.73-1.40); median OS in both arms was longer than historical data (9-22 months). Two prespecified analyses adjusting for crossover showed OS favoring ide-cel. This trial highlighted the importance of individualized bridging therapy to ensure adequate disease control during ide-cel manufacturing. Ide-cel improved patient-reported outcomes vs SRs. No new safety signals were reported. These results demonstrate the continued favorable benefit-risk profile of ide-cel in early-line and TCE R/RMM. This trial was registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov as #NCT03651128.</p>","PeriodicalId":9102,"journal":{"name":"Blood","volume":" ","pages":"2389-2401"},"PeriodicalIF":21.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ide-cel vs standard regimens in triple-class-exposed relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma: updated KarMMa-3 analyses.\",\"authors\":\"Sikander Ailawadhi, Bertrand Arnulf, Krina Patel, Michele Cavo, Ajay K Nooka, Salomon Manier, Natalie Callander, Luciano J Costa, Ravi Vij, Nizar J Bahlis, Philippe Moreau, Scott Solomon, Ingerid Weum Abrahamsen, Rachid Baz, Annemiek Broijl, Christine Chen, Sundar Jagannath, Noopur Raje, Christof Scheid, Michel Delforge, Reuben Benjamin, Thomas Pabst, Shinsuke Iida, Jesús Berdeja, Sergio Giralt, Anna Truppel-Hartmann, Yanping Chen, Xiaobo Zhong, Fan Wu, Julia Piasecki, Laurie Eliason, Devender Dhanda, Jasper Felten, Andrea Caia, Mark Cook, Mihaela Popa McKiver, Paula Rodríguez-Otero\",\"doi\":\"10.1182/blood.2024024582\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>Outcomes are poor in triple-class-exposed (TCE) relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (R/RMM). In the phase 3 KarMMa-3 trial, patients with TCE R/RMM and 2 to 4 prior regimens were randomized 2:1 to idecabtagene vicleucel (ide-cel) or standard regimens (SRs). An interim analysis (IA) demonstrated significantly longer median progression-free survival (PFS; primary end point; 13.3 vs 4.4 months; P < .0001) and higher overall response rate (ORR) with ide-cel vs SRs. At final PFS analysis (median follow-up, 30.9 months), ide-cel further improved median PFS vs SRs (13.8 vs 4.4 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.38-0.63). PFS benefit with ide-cel vs SRs was observed regardless of number of prior lines of therapy, with greatest benefit after 2 prior lines (16.2 vs 4.8 months, respectively). ORR benefit was maintained with ide-cel vs SRs (71% vs 42%; complete response, 44% vs 5%). Patient-centric design allowed crossover from SRs (56%) to ide-cel upon progressive disease, confounding overall survival (OS) interpretation. At IA of OS, median was 41.4 (95% CI, 30.9 to not reached [NR]) vs 37.9 (95% CI, 23.4 to NR) months with ide-cel and SRs, respectively (HR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.73-1.40); median OS in both arms was longer than historical data (9-22 months). Two prespecified analyses adjusting for crossover showed OS favoring ide-cel. This trial highlighted the importance of individualized bridging therapy to ensure adequate disease control during ide-cel manufacturing. Ide-cel improved patient-reported outcomes vs SRs. No new safety signals were reported. These results demonstrate the continued favorable benefit-risk profile of ide-cel in early-line and TCE R/RMM. This trial was registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov as #NCT03651128.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9102,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Blood\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"2389-2401\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":21.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Blood\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1182/blood.2024024582\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Blood","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1182/blood.2024024582","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
三类暴露(TCE)复发/难治性多发性骨髓瘤(RRMM)的治疗效果不佳。在3期KarMMa-3(clinicaltrials.gov; NCT03651128)试验中,接受过2-4种治疗方案的TCE RRMM患者以2:1的比例随机接受idecabtagene vicleucel(ide-cel)或标准治疗方案(SRs)。中期分析(IA)显示,中位无进展生存期(PFS;主要终点;13.3 个月 vs 4.4 个月;P
Ide-cel vs standard regimens in triple-class-exposed relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma: updated KarMMa-3 analyses.
Abstract: Outcomes are poor in triple-class-exposed (TCE) relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (R/RMM). In the phase 3 KarMMa-3 trial, patients with TCE R/RMM and 2 to 4 prior regimens were randomized 2:1 to idecabtagene vicleucel (ide-cel) or standard regimens (SRs). An interim analysis (IA) demonstrated significantly longer median progression-free survival (PFS; primary end point; 13.3 vs 4.4 months; P < .0001) and higher overall response rate (ORR) with ide-cel vs SRs. At final PFS analysis (median follow-up, 30.9 months), ide-cel further improved median PFS vs SRs (13.8 vs 4.4 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.38-0.63). PFS benefit with ide-cel vs SRs was observed regardless of number of prior lines of therapy, with greatest benefit after 2 prior lines (16.2 vs 4.8 months, respectively). ORR benefit was maintained with ide-cel vs SRs (71% vs 42%; complete response, 44% vs 5%). Patient-centric design allowed crossover from SRs (56%) to ide-cel upon progressive disease, confounding overall survival (OS) interpretation. At IA of OS, median was 41.4 (95% CI, 30.9 to not reached [NR]) vs 37.9 (95% CI, 23.4 to NR) months with ide-cel and SRs, respectively (HR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.73-1.40); median OS in both arms was longer than historical data (9-22 months). Two prespecified analyses adjusting for crossover showed OS favoring ide-cel. This trial highlighted the importance of individualized bridging therapy to ensure adequate disease control during ide-cel manufacturing. Ide-cel improved patient-reported outcomes vs SRs. No new safety signals were reported. These results demonstrate the continued favorable benefit-risk profile of ide-cel in early-line and TCE R/RMM. This trial was registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov as #NCT03651128.
期刊介绍:
Blood, the official journal of the American Society of Hematology, published online and in print, provides an international forum for the publication of original articles describing basic laboratory, translational, and clinical investigations in hematology. Primary research articles will be published under the following scientific categories: Clinical Trials and Observations; Gene Therapy; Hematopoiesis and Stem Cells; Immunobiology and Immunotherapy scope; Myeloid Neoplasia; Lymphoid Neoplasia; Phagocytes, Granulocytes and Myelopoiesis; Platelets and Thrombopoiesis; Red Cells, Iron and Erythropoiesis; Thrombosis and Hemostasis; Transfusion Medicine; Transplantation; and Vascular Biology. Papers can be listed under more than one category as appropriate.