0
Thank you to our sponsors!
1
IMF Patient and Family Webinar Agenda
*times listed in US Pacific Time Zone
10:00 – 10:10 AM 10:10 – 10:30 AM
Welcome Announcements with Dr. Brian G.M. Durie Myeloma 101 Dr. Brian G.M. Durie
10:30 – 11:00 AM
Life Is A Canvas, You Are The Artist: Side Effects & Symptom Management
Kevin Brigle 11:00 – 11:20 AM
Best Myeloma Management in the Era of COVID-19 Dr. Brian G.M. Durie
11:20 – 11:35 AM
Panel Discussion
11:35 – 11:45 AM
BREAK
2
IMF Patient and Family Webinar Agenda
*times listed in US Pacific Time Zone
11:45 – 12:15 PM
Immune Therapies: Treatments That Work With Our Own Immune Systems Dr. Noopur Raje
12:15 – 12:45 PM
Approaches to Relapse: What are current relapse options? Dr. Rafat Abonour
12:45 – 1:00 PM
Summary Panel Discussion Webinar Survey & Closing Remarks
3
IMF Patient and Family Webinar
Myeloma 101 Brian G.M. Durie, MD Cedars-Sinai Outpatient Cancer Center Los Angeles, CA 4
Myeloma is treatable Over 90% of patients respond to current therapies Average first remission is 4 years or more
In 2021, average survival is at least 7-10 years Some patients live over 15-20+ years New therapies are constantly improving the outlook 5
Myeloma Expert Consultation Helps! Good to do early!
Virtual consults more available. Sets path for future Guides local doctor
SEE: Questions to ask your doctor https://www.myeloma.org/resource-library/tip-card-ask-your-doctor-these-important-questions
6
IMF Patient and Family Webinar
Smoldering Myeloma
7
New SMM Risk Score Tool* 2/20/20 Model FLC Ratio Serum M Protein Bone Marrow Plasma Cell %
20 2 g/dl 20%
Risk Factor FLC Ratio 0-10 (reference) >10-25 >25-40 >40 M protein (g/dL) 0-1.5 (reference) >1.5-3 >3 BMPC% 0-15 (reference) >15-20 >20-30 >30-40 >40 FiSH abnormality
Coefficient
Odds Ratio (95% CI)
P-value
Score
0.69 0.96 1.56
1.99 (1.15, 3.45) 2.61 (1.36, 4.99) 4.73 (2.88, 7.77)
0.014 0.004 <0.0001
0 2 3 5
0.95 1.30
2.59 (1.56, 4.31) 3.65 (2.02, 6.61)
0.0002 <0.0001
0 3 4
0.57 1.01 1.57 2.00
1.77 (1.03, 3.06) 2.74 (1.6, 4.68) 4.82 (2.5, 9.28) 7.42 (3.23, 17.02)
0.04 0.0002 <0.0001 <0.0001
0 2 3 5 6
0.83
2.28 (1.53, 3.42)
<0.0001
2
Risk Score
Low Risk High Risk
*689 of the original 2286 had complete data for all risk factors. Logistic regression analysis was performed. Principal Investigators: Mateos; Kumar; San Miguel; Durie. International Myeloma Working Group risk stratification model for smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM) Blood Cancer J. 2020 Oct 16;10(10):102. doi: 10.1038/s41408-020-00366-3. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41408-020-00366-3
8
When Should Treatment Be Initiated? Potential New Myeloma or Smoldering Myeloma
Any Myeloma Defining Events? •CRAB •≥60% PC •FLC ≥100 •MRI >1 focal lesion
Treat as Myeloma
No Myeloma Defining Events (SMM)
High-Risk SMM (Median TTP ≈2 years)
Clinical Trials
Intermediate or Low-Risk SMM
Observation 9
Rajkumar SV © 2020
HR-SMM: Management in 2021 •
Low risk of progression Observe/ monitor Intermediate
•
Consider therapy
•
Options are trial/ 2/3/4 drugs 10
HR-SMM: Management in 2021 •
Ultra high risk (score ≥ 12) Therapy recommended with minimum of single agent (e.g. Revlimid®)
11
Careful testing required for diagnosis and monitoring Bone marrow indicates % myeloma X-rays/ scans show where lesions* are located X-ray image of myeloma lesions in arm
Myeloma cells as seen in a bone marrow aspirate
See further discussion: “What is a lesion?” https://www.myeloma.org/bone-disease
12
IMWG diagnostic criteria for multiple myeloma (Myeloma Defining Events)
*CRAB Criteria C
R A B
https://www.myeloma.org/resource-library/international-myeloma-working-group-consensus-criteria-response-minimal-residual
13
More Test Details Bone marrow FiSH shows chromosome results
MRI and PET/CT show more lesions than x-rays F
FISH
PET
MRI
F D
F
D
D
D
D
Colored spots show translocations: t(11;14) FiSH – Fluorescent in Situ Hybridization
F
D
PET F = Focal D = Diffuse
14
Managing Myeloma: The Components Transplant Eligible Patients
Transplant
Maintenance
Initial Therapy Transplant Ineligible patients
Consolidation/ Maintenance/ Continued therapy
Supportive Care
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ajh.25791
15
Treatment Combinations: Now and Then NEW
VD Rev/Dex CyBorD VTD VRD KRD IRD Dara + triplet
SCT VD/VRD
Front line treatment
Induction
OLD
Thal/Dex VAD DEX
Consolidation
SCT
Thalidomide Bortezomib Lenalidomide Lenalidomide Carfilzomib Bortezomib Ixazomib Pomalidomide Ixazomib Daratumumab Daratumumab Isatuximab Pomalidomide Elotuzumab Panobinostat Bendamustine Selinexor Belantamab Mafodotin Melphalan Flufenamide (Melflufen)
Maintenance
Post consolidation
Nothing Prednisone Thalidomide
Relapsed
Rescue
Few options
16
S0777 Trial: VRd vs Rd Eight 21-day Cycles of VRd
Randomization N = 525 Newly diagnosed MM
• •
Stratification: ISS (I, II, III) Intent to transplant @ progression (yes/no)
Bortezomib 1.3/mg2 IV Days 1, 4, 8, and 11 Lenalidomide 25 mg/day PO Days 1-14 Dexamethasone 20 mg/day PO Days 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, 12
Six 28-day Cycles of Rd Lenalidomide 25 mg/day PO Days 1-21 Dexamethasone 40 mg/day PO Days 1, 8, 15, 22
6 month of triplet followed by doublet Durie BGM, et al. ASH 2015
17 17
S0777 Trial: VRd vs Rd
41 months
OS 80% = 4 years Durie et al. Blood Cancer Journal (2020) 10:53 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41408-020-0311-8
55% = 7 years
18 18
What to Expect with Treatment First “biochemical” relapse
100% Deep first response
Myeloma protein level 50%
MRD Undetected
Second response
Later relapse from MRD undetected
Possible MRD undetected
5 years
10 years 19
Treatment Options “Triple therapy”: 3 drugs recommended • Most common = VRd* [Rd for older/frail] (Velcade®/ Revlimid®/ dexamethasone) ASCT (Autologous Stem Cell Transplant) Can be considered to achieve better response (after 3-6 months of VRd) Plus
Zometa®/ Aredia or denosumab for bone lesions
* Other options include VCd (CyBorD); KRd; Dara + Rd; Vd 20
MAIA Study: Dara + Rd for transplant-ineligible
https://www.myeloma.org/videos/overall-survival-results-daratumumab-lenalidomide-dexamethasone-transplant-ineligible-MAIA
21
Progression Free Survival (PFS) data 60-month PFS rate
% surviving without progression
100 80 52.5%
60
D-Rd: median, NR 28.7%
40
Rd: median, 34.4 months 20
HR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.43-0.66; P <0.0001
0 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48 51 54 57 60 63 66 69 Months No. at risk Rd 369 333 307 280 255 237 220 205 196 179 172 155 146 133 123 113 105 94 63 36 12 4 D-Rd 368 347 335 320 309 300 290 276 266 256 246 237 232 222 210 199 195 170 123 87 51 17
2 5
0 0
• D-Rd continued to demonstrate a significant PFS benefit, with median PFS not reached with D-Rd • These data provide a new PFS benchmark in patients with NDMM who are transplant ineligible
22
Overall Survival (OS) data 60-month OS rate 100
% surviving
80
66.3% D-Rd: median, NR
53.1%
60
Rd: median, NR 40 20
HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.53-0.86; P = 0.0013
0 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48 51 54 57 60 63 66 69 72 Months No. at risk Rd 369 351 343 336 324 317 308 300 294 281 270 258 251 241 232 223 213 183 134 85 42 14 5 D-Rd 368 350 346 344 338 334 328 316 305 302 297 286 280 273 266 255 249 228 170 118 63 22 6
1 1
0 0
D-Rd demonstrated a significant benefit in OS, with a 32% reduction in the risk of death, in patients with NDMM who are transplant ineligible 23
Treatment Options Maintenance: used to sustain remission
•
Most common = Revlimid® ± Velcade®/ Ninlaro® (ixazomib)
Articles for Reference Durie B, et al. Blood Cancer Journal 2020 May 11;10(5):53. Longer term follow-up of the randomized phase III trial SWOG S0777: bortezomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone vs. lenalidomide and dexamethasone in patients (Pts) with previously untreated multiple myeloma without an intent for immediate autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) https://www.nature.com/articles/s41408-020-0311-8 Kumar S, et al. Leukemia. 2019; 33(7): 1736–1746. Ixazomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: long-term follow-up including ixazomib maintenance https://www.nature.com/articles/s41375-019-0384-1 Usmani S, et al. Blood Cancer Journal 2018 Nov 23;8(12):123. Clinical predictors of long-term survival in newly diagnosed transplant eligible multiple myeloma - an IMWG Research Project https://www.nature.com/articles/s41408-018-0155-7
24
Treatment Strategies in 2021 Triplets or quadruplets in frontline
Maintenance based upon risk
Decisive early relapse treatment (triplets if feasible)
Earlier use of new immune therapies 25
Caregivers Need Care Too!
26
IMF Website – http://www.myeloma.org http://www.myeloma.org
27
28
IMF Patient and Family Webinar
Kevin Brigle, PhD, ANP Massey Cancer Center, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA
Life Is A Canvas, You Are The Artist: Side Effects & Symptom Management 29
Patient & Family Seminar August 14th, 2021
LIFE IS A CANVAS, YOU ARE THE ARTIST SIDE EFFECTS & SYMPTOM MANAGEMENT
Kevin Brigle, PhD, NP Virginia Commonwealth University Massey Cancer Center
Patient Education Slides 2021
GALLERY OF GOALS MYELOMA TREATMENT • Rapid and effective disease control • Durable disease control • Improved overall survival • Minimize side effects
SUPPORTIVE THERAPIES • Prevent disease- and treatmentrelated side effects • Optimize symptom management • Allow for good quality of life
• Allow for good quality of life
DISCUSS GOALS AND PRIORITIES WITH YOUR HEALTHCARE TEAM 31
COLOR WHEEL OF TREATMENT OPTIONS -Mibs
Frontline
Maintenance
Relapse
Velcade® (bortezomib)
-MAbs
-Mides
Steroids
Darzalex® (daratumumab)
Thalomid® (thalidomide) Revlimid® (lenalidomide)
Dexamethasone Prednisone Prednisolone SoluMedrol
Velcade® (bortezomib)
Kyprolis® (carfilzomib) Ninlaro® (ixazomib)
Others
Melphalan Cyclophosphamide
Darzalex® (daratumumab) Empliciti® (elotuzumab) Sarclissa® (Isatuximab)
Thalomid® (thalidomide) Revlimid® (lenalidomide) Pomalyst® (pomalidomide)
Dexamethasone Prednisone Prednisolone SoluMedrol
Melphalan Cyclophosphamide Bendamustine Pepaxto® (melphalan flufenamide) “Melflufen”
CelMods • Iberdomide • CC-92480
Neuropathy Carfilzomib: Cardiac
ImmunoTherapy
Cellular Therapies Melphalan + ASCT
Revlimid® (lenalidomide)
Pending FDA Approval
Noted Side effects
Alkylators
Infusion reaction
DVT/PE
See steroid slide
Myelosuppression
Blenrep® (Belantamab mafodotin) “Belamaf”
Xpovio® (Selinexor) Doxil (liposomal doxorubicin) Farydak® (panobinostat)
• Antibody Drug Conjugates • Bispecific Antibodies eg. Teclistamab Talquetamab Cevostamab
Venclexta® (venetoclax)
Other CAR-T • Cilta-Cel
Infusion reaction Blenrep: Keratopathy
Myelosuppression, GI Selinexor: Low sodium
Infection risk CAR-T: CRS and neurotoxicity
Melphalan + ASCT Ide-Cel (CAR-T)
32
THE BRIGHT
&
DARK SIDE TO STEROIDS
Steroid Synergy Steroids are a backbone and work in combination to enhance myeloma therapy
Steroid Side Effects • Irritability, mood swings, depression • Difficulty sleeping
(insomnia), fatigue
Managing Steroid Side Effects • Consistent schedule (AM vs. PM) • Take with food • Stomach discomfort: Over-the-counter or
prescription medications • Medications to prevent shingles, thrush, or other infections
Do not stop or adjust steroid doses without discussing it with your health care provider
• Increased risk of
infections, heart disease
• Muscle
weakness, cramping
• Increased blood
pressure, water retention
• Blurred vision, cataracts • Flushing/sweating • Stomach bloating,
hiccups, heartburn, ulcers, or gas
• Weight gain, hair
thinning/loss, skin rashes
• Increased blood
sugar levels, diabetes
Rajkumar SV, Jacobus S, Callander NS, Fonseca R, Vesole DH, Williams ME, Abonour R, Siegel DS, Katz M, Greipp PR, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (2010) Lenalidomide plus highdose dexamethasone versus lenalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone as initial therapy for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: an open-label randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 11(1):29–37. King T, Faiman B. Steroid-Associated Side Effects: A Symptom Management Update on Multiple Myeloma Treatment . Clin J Oncol Nurs. 2017 Apr 1;21(2):240-249. doi: 10.1188/17.CJON.240249. PMID: 28315528.
33
ADDITIONAL TOOLS TO COMPLETE THE PICTURE
Non-medication Therapies
Lifestyle Options
DVT/PE Prevention
Bone Health
Compression stockings
Radiation Surgery Immobilization Physical therapy
Activity Stop smoking Weight loss
Activity
Renal Health
Infection Prevention
Peripheral Neuropathy
GI Symptoms
Dialysis
Masking Activity
Massage Acupuncture Cocoa Butter
Dietary choices Relaxation
Hydration
Handwashing Avoid crowds & sick people Monitor for fever COVID precautions
Activity Diabetes management
Activity Hydration Avoid greasy foods
34
PATIENT-REPORTED SYMPTOMS A meta-analysis identified the most common patient-reported symptoms and their impact on QOL. Symptoms were present at all stages of disease. Symptoms resulted from both disease and treatment, including transplant, and were in these categories:
Physical
Psychological
• Fatigue
• Depression
• Constipation
• Anxiety
• Pain
• Sleep Disturbance
• Neuropathy
• Decreased Cognitive Function
• Impaired Physical Functioning • Sexual Dysfunction
Ramsenthaler, et al. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejh.12790.
Financial • Financial burden (80%) • Financial toxicity (43%)
• Decreased Role & Social Function
35
GI SYMPTOMS: PREVENTION & MANAGEMENT Diarrhea may be caused by medications and supplements • • • •
Laxatives, antacids with magnesium Antibiotics, antidepressants, others Milk thistle, aloe, cayenne, saw palmetto, ginseng Sugar substitutes in sugar free gum
Avoid caffeinated, carbonated, or heavily sugared beverages Take anti-diarrheal medication • Imodium®, Lomotil®, or Colestid® or Welchol® if recommended • Fiber binding agents – Metamucil®, Citrucel®, Benefiber®
Smith LC, et al. CJON.2008;12(3)suppl:37-52. Faiman B. CJON. 2016;20(4):E100-E105.
Physical
Constipation may be caused by medications and supplements • Opioid pain relievers, antidepressants, heart or blood pressure medications • Supplements: Calcium, Iron, vitamin D (rarely), vitamin B-12 deficiency
Increase fiber • Fruits, vegetables, high fiber whole grain foods • Fiber binding agents – Metamucil®, Citrucel®, Benefiber®
Fluid intake can help with both diarrhea and constipation and helps kidney function. Discuss GI issues with health care providers to identify causes and make adjustments to medications and supplements. 36
PAIN PREVENTION AND MANAGEMENT
Physical
Pain can significantly compromise quality of life Sources of pain include bone disease, neuropathy and medical procedures
Management • Prevent pain when possible • Bone strengtheners to decrease fracture risk; anti viral to prevent shingles; sedation before procedures
• Interventions depends on source of pain • May include medications, activity, surgical intervention, radiation therapy, etc • Complementary therapies (Mind-body, medication, yoga, supplements, acupuncture, etc)
Faiman B, et al. CJON. 2017;21(5)suppl:19-36.
Tell your health care provider about any new bone pain or chronic pain that is not adequately controlled
37
PERIPHERAL NEUROPATHY MANAGEMENT Peripheral neuropathy: damage to nerves in extremities (hands, feet, or limbs) • • • • • •
Numbness Tingling Prickling sensations Sensitivity to touch Burning and/or cold sensation Muscle weakness
Report symptoms of peripheral neuropathy early to your health care provider; nerve damage from neuropathy can be permanent if unaddressed
Faiman B, et al. CJON. 2017;21(5)suppl:19-36. Tariman, et al. CJON.2008;12(3)suppl:29-36.
Physical
Prevention / management: • Bortezomib once-weekly or subcutaneous administration • Massage area with cocoa butter regularly • Supplements:
• B-complex vitamins (B1, B6, B12) • Folic acid, and/or amino acids but do not take on day of Velcade® (bortezomib) infusion
• Safe environment: rugs, furnishings, shoes
If neuropathy worsens, your provider may: • Change your treatment • Prescribe oral or topical pain medication • Suggest physical therapy
38
FATIGUE, ANXIETY & DEPRESSION
Physical Psychological
All can affect quality of life and relationships
• Fatigue is the most commonly reported symptom (98.8%) Sources include anemia, pain, reduced activity, insomnia, treatment toxicity, bone marrow suppression
• Anxiety reported in >35% of patients • Depression in nearly 25% Financial concerns, disease progression, end-of-life, and changes in social and sexual function were highlighted sources
Often, people do not share these symptoms with their provider. Talk to your provider about symptoms that are not well controlled or if you have thoughts of self harm. Help is available. Ramsenthaler, et al. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejh.12790. Catamero D et al. CJON. 2017; 21(5)suppl:7-18.
39
REST AND RELAXATION CONTRIBUTE TO GOOD HEALTH � Adequate rest and sleep are
essential to a healthful lifestyle
Shortened and disturbed sleep increase risk of • Heart related death • Increase anxiety • Weakened immune system • Worsened pain • Falls and personal injury
� Things that can interfere with sleep • Medications: steroids, stimulants, herbal
supplements • Psychologic: fear, anxiety, stress • Physiologic: sleep apnea, heart issues, pain Rod NH et al 2014. PloS one. 9(4):e91965; Coleman et al. 2011. Cancer Nurs. 34(3):219-227. National Sleep Foundation. At: http://sleepfoundation.org/ask-the-expert/sleep-hygiene
Psychological
� Sleep hygiene is necessary for
quality nighttime sleep and daytime alertness
• Engage in exercise but not too near • • • • • •
bedtime Increase daytime natural light exposure Avoid daytime napping Establish a bedtime routine - warm bath, cup of warm milk or tea Associate your bed ONLY with sleep Sleep aid may be needed Avoid before bedtime: • Caffeine, nicotine , alcohol and sugar • Large meals and especially spicy, greasy foods • Computer screen time
Mustian et al. Journal of clinical Oncology. Sep 10 2013;31(26):3233-3241. Stan DL, et al. Clin J Oncol Nurs. Apr 2012;16(2):131-141. Zeng Y et al., Complementary therapies in medicine. Feb 2014;22(1):173-186.
40
Financial
FINANCIAL BURDEN Financial burden comes from
Funding and assistance may be available
• Medical costs
• Federal programs
• • • •
Premiums Co-payments Travel expenses Medical supplies
• Prescription costs
• Loss of income • Time off work or loss of employment • Caregiver time off work
Contact the Social Services department at your hospital or clinic to talk to a social worker for assistance.
• Pharmaceutical support
• Non-profit organizations • Websites: • • • • • • •
Medicare.gov SSA.gov LLS.org Rxassist.org NeedyMeds.com HealthWellFoundation.org Company-specific website
41
KNOWLEDGE IS POWER USE REPUTABLE SOURCES Website: http://myeloma.org
IMF TV Teleconferences
eNewsletter: Myeloma Minute
Download or order at myeloma.org
IMF InfoLine 1-800-452-CURE 9am to 4pm PST 42
IMF Patient and Family Webinar
Best Myeloma Management in the Era of COVID-19 Brian G.M. Durie, MD Cedars-Sinai Outpatient Cancer Center Los Angeles, CA 43
Global cases of COVID-19 reported
Data from the CDC and WHO. The data includes cases as of August 13, 2021. https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#global-counts-rates and https://covid19.who.int/
44
Overall U.S. COVID-19 Data Tracker
Overall US COVID-19 Vaccine | Deliveries and Administration; Maps, charts, and data provided by CDC https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#vaccinations and https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#datatracker-home
45
Delta Variant: Infections and Spread
CDC -- Delta Variant: What We Know About the Science https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/variants/delta-variant.html
46
Vaccination for Myeloma Patients YES!!! Impact of ongoing treatment unclear Use common sense
Antibody responses suboptimal 47
Vaccination for Myeloma Patients Checking neutralizing antibody levels = OK! nd (if feasible at ~2-3 weeks post 2 dose)
rd 3
(booster) dose approved by FDA
48
Which vaccine? Pfizer/ Moderna – Excellent!
J&J – not live!/ single shot only Blood clot risk AstraZeneca – 79%76% efficacy
(slightly reduced) Blood clot risk
100% reduction of hospitalizations and deaths
49
Masks – still required! Airborne transmission dominant Variants a serious challenge Beware asymptomatic spread
Watch out for young people! Still avoid travel Indoor space a severe problem 50
Masks – still required! So: use best masks possible – N95 or double (nose and mouth) Consider googles/ glasses – if risk situation Remember: antibody levels may be low post vaccination CDC: Your Guide to Masks https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/about-face-coverings.html
51
What Can You Do Once You’re Vaccinated?
New York Times – March 30, 2021 https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/03/30/opinion/coronavirus-vaccine-risks.html
52
When you’ve been fully vaccinated
CDC: When You’ve Been Fully Vaccinated - How to Protect Yourself and Others https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/fully-vaccinated.html
53
Patient Guidance Question: Can I go for a walk?
• Yes Question: Can I go to the dentist?
• Yes, with care 54
Common Issues Pandemic fatigue/ stress Not feeling resilient Healthcare team not coordinated Not prepared for Zoom or appointments Need electronic help! Contacts with unknown COVID-19 status 55
Pandemic Fatigue Real for everyone!
Important to reach out to family and friends Try to de-stress
Shedd Aquarium – Penguins Work on resilience Living Well with Myeloma: Building Your
Resilience During Challenging Times (IMF video) Resilience Builder Tool (link on IMF website)
56
What does the future hold?
Vaccination essential.
Masks required. Caution in indoor spaces.
57
Other IMF Resources: Ask Dr. Durie Videos
COVID-19 FAQ #35: What should myeloma patients know about antibody testing and booster shots?
COVID-19 FAQ #34: How can myeloma patients protect themselves
https://www.myeloma.org/videos/covid-19-faq-35-shouldmyeloma-patients-know-about-antibody-testing-booster-shots
https://www.myeloma.org/videos/covid-19-faq-34-how-canmyeloma-patients-protect-themselves-against-delta-variant
against the Delta variant?
58
Support Group Virtual GoToMeetings
Over 90 support groups are now holding monthly virtual GoToMeetings through the IMF
59
Support Group Virtual GoToMeetings
Over 90 support groups are now holding monthly virtual GoToMeetings through the IMF
60
We will get through this together! Myeloma has no borders
“Do Remember They Can’t Cancel the Spring” – David Hockney
Support messages in the sky above Los Angeles An apricot tree grows in Turkey
61
Panel Discussion
Type and submit your questions here. Click the Q&A icon circled below if you have minimized the Ask Question window.
62
IMF Patient and Family Webinar
63
IMF Patient and Family Webinar Agenda
*times listed in US Pacific Time Zone
11:45 – 12:15 PM
Immune Therapies: Treatments That Work With Our Own Immune Systems Dr. Noopur Raje
12:15 – 12:45 PM
Approaches to Relapse: What are current relapse options? Dr. Rafat Abonour
12:45 – 1:00 PM
Summary Panel Discussion Webinar Survey & Closing Remarks
64
IMF Patient and Family Webinar
Noopur Raje, MD
Immune Therapies: Treatments That Work With Our Own Immune Systems
Massachusetts General Hospital Boston, MA
65
Immunotherapies: Treatments that work with our own immune system Noopur Raje, MD
Director, Center for Multiple Myeloma MGH Cancer Center Professor of Medicine Harvard Medical School
Disclosures • Consultant /Advisory Board: Celgene, Takeda, Amgen, Janssen, BMS, Merck, Bluebird, Immuneel, Caribou Biosciences • Research Funding: Astra Zeneca, Bluebird bio • Steering Committee: Amgen, Roche
67
Harnessing the immune system IMiD
ADCC, antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity; ADPC, antibody-dependent cellular phagocytosis; BTZ, bortezomib; cADPR, cyclic ADP-ribose; CDC, complement-mediated cytotoxicity; Dex, dexamethasone; IMiD, Immunomodulatory imide drug; MAC, membrane attack complex; Mel, melphalan; MM, multiple myeloma; NAD, nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide; NAADP, nicotinic acid adenine dinucleotide phosphate; NK, natural killer.
68 Laubach JP, et al. Expert Opinion on Investigational Drugs 2014; 23:445–452.
Potential new immune strategies • New monoclonal antibodies: isatuximab
• Novel immunomodulators: iberdomide (CC220), CC-92480 • Conjugated antibodies
• Bispecific T cell engagers • Cellular therapy: CAR T cells, NK cells
69 CAR, chimeric antigen receptor; DC, dendritic cell; NK, natural killer; PVX, PVX-410 vaccine; SMM, smoldering multiple myeloma.
Precursor Disease States • Does the Immune System See Precursor Lesions ? • Does this recognition correlate with outcome ?
70
Continuous Lenalidomide vs Observation in Smoldering Multiple Myeloma Continuous lenalidomide (25 mg d1-21 of 28 d) vs observation in SMM using Mayo 2018 Risk Criteria (>20% plasma cells, M protein >2 gm/dL, serum-free light chain ratio >20)
High Risk
• • • •
Intermediate Risk
Decreased progression of high risk SMM to to MM 11.4% vs 3.4% secondary malignancies 51% discontinuation rate No OS difference
Low Risk
71
Myeloma Ag Specific Peptide-based Vaccination Single Antigen Targeting Peptides-Polyfunctional responses: IFN-γ, cytotoxicity, proliferation, CD107a degranulation to patient MM cells and MM cell lines Bae et al Blood 2006 Bae et al Blood 2007 Bae et al CCR 2010
Vaccination Using Cocktail of Peptides
• •
Bae et al, BJH 2012; 157: 687-701. Bae et al, CCR 2012; 17:4850-60.
On Going Clinical Study of Multi-peptide Vaccination with Lenalidomide in Smoldering Myeloma – Immune responses to vaccine; lenalidomide and vaccine cohort enrolling
72
73
Vaccine Gradually Induces XBP1/CD138/CS1-Specific CTL in SMM patient Stimulator: XBP1us / XBP1sp / CD138 / CS1 Peptides Baseline (Wk 0)
Post-2 Vac (Wk 4)
Post- 6 Vac (1M FW)
Post- 6 Vac (3M FW)
Post-4 Vac (Wk 8)
SUMMARY Induction of XBP1/CD138/CS1 Peptides-Specific CTL by Vaccine
74
NOVEL CELMODS: Iberdomide Mechanism of Action •
Iberdomide enhanced in vitro immune stimulatory activity versus lenalidomide and pomalidomide1
Synergizes with bortezomib and daratumumab demonstrating enhanced apoptosis and antibody dependent cellular cytotoxicity 3 Induces NK cell proliferation and may help rescue NK cell depletion by daratumumab3
•
Lenalidomide2
Iberdomide2
IL-2 secretion by treated PBMCs
EC50, nM2
Ikaros
Aiolos
Lenalidomide
67
87
Pomalidomide
24
22
Iberdomide
1
0.5
Secreted IL-2 (ng/mL)
1,500
Lenalidomide Pomalidomide Iberdomide
1,000
500
MM cell survival in co-culture with treated PBMCs 120
Live Cells (% DSMO)
•
100 80 60 40
0
Lenalidomide Pomalidomide Iberdomide
20
Compound Concentration (nM)
Compound Concentration (nM)
1. Bjorklund C, et al. Unpublished 2. Adapted with permission from Matyskiela ME, et al. J Med Chem. 2018;61:535–42 © 2018 American Chemical Society. 3. Amatangelo M, et al. Blood. 2018;132(Suppl1): Abstract 1935.
75
CELMod CC-92480 and Dexamethasone in RRMM
76
BCMA as target for myeloma therapy BCMA Immunoglobulin BM Pro-B Pre-B Transitional
LN Naive
GC B
Memory Plasmablast
BM, LN
Short-lived PC
PC Long-lived PC
• • • • • •
• •
MM
BCMA TACI BAFF-R
BCMA is an antigen expressed specifically on PCs and myeloma cells Cell surface receptor of TNF superfamily Higher expression in myeloma cells than normal PCs Not expressed in other tissues Key role in B-cell maturation and differentiation Promotes myeloma cell growth, chemotherapy resistance, and immunosuppression in the bone marrow microenvironment Expression of BCMA increases as the disease progresses from MGUS to advanced myeloma Additional ligands for BMCA include APRIL and TACI
77 APRIL, a proliferation-inducing ligand; BAFF-R, B-cell activating factor receptor; GC, germinal center; sBCMA, soluble BCMA; TACI, transmembrane activator and CAML interactor.
Cho SF et al., Front Immunol 2018;9:1821. Moreaux J et al. Blood 2004;103:3148-57. Sanchez E et al., Br J Haematol 2012;158:727-38.
BCMA-Targeted Immunotherapy in MM bb2121, LCAR-B38M, P-BCMA-101
BCMA CAR T bb21217 JCARH125 MCARH171 FCARH143 CT053 BCMA-CART Descartes-08
BCMA CAR T
BCMA-T Bi Ab
TNB-383B, PF-06863135, JNJ-64007957, EM801
T AMG 420; AMG 701
MM
BCMA-BiTE
Apoptotic MM cells
MM cell lysis
GSK2857916, MEDI2228
BCMA-ADC M
AMG 224
NK , Monocyte
BCMA CD3 Cytotoxic granule (perforin, granzyme B)
78
Belantamab Mafodotin Targets BCMA Four mechanisms of action: 1. ADC mechanism 2. ADCC mechanism 3. Immunogenic cell death 4. BCMA receptor signaling inhibition
• Humanized, afucosylated IgG1 anti-BCMA antibody drug conjugate • Cytotoxic agent: MMAF (non-cell permeable, highly potent auristatin)
ADC
1
• Afucosylation enhances ADCC • Neutralizes soluble BCMA • Preclinical studies demonstrate its selective and potent activity ADCC=antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity; BCMA=B-cell maturation antigen; IgG=immunoglobulin G; MMAF=monomethyl auristatin F. Tai YT, et al. Blood. 2014;123(20):3128–3138; Trudel S, et al. Abstract 741; Presented at ASH 2017; Atlanta, Georgia; Lancet Oncology. 2018.
BCMA BCMA
Lysosome
3 3 4
BCMA 4
BCMA
Fc receptor
Effector cell
2
x
• Linker stable in circulation
ADCC
1
Malignant plasma cell
Cell death
79
Overview of DREAMM-2 Study Design IDMC recommended study continue as planned to primary analysis
Randomize 1:1
Screening
N=99 Discontinue 1 arm if deemed inferior per protocol; patients to switch over to the other arm if eligible
Belantamab mafodotin 3.4 mg/kg Q3W
ORR futility analysis Belantamab mafodotin 2.5 mg/kg Q3W
N=97
*According to the 2016 IMWG Response Criteria by Independent Review Committee. Lonial S, et al. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21(2):207-221.
N=25/arm
Primary endpoint • ORR*
Treatment until PD or discontinuation for other reasons Secondary endpoints • • • • • •
CBR* PFS, DoR, TTR, TTP, OS Safety PK profiles ADAs against belantamab mafodotin PROs
80
Overview of DREAMM-2: Overall Response Rate 40 35
Response, %
30
ORR=31%
sCR CR VGPR PR
ORR=34%
25 20 15 10
• Overall IRC-assessed ORR (97.5% CI) • 2.5 mg/kg (n=97): 31% (20.8, 42.6) • 3.4 mg/kg (n=99): 34% (23.9, 46.0) • High concordance between IRC and INC assessment
5 0 2.5 mg/kg
3.4 mg.kg
CR=complete response; NE=not evaluable; ORR=overall response rate; PD=progressive disease; PR=partial response; sCR=stringent complete response; SD=stable disease; VGPR=very good partial response. Lonial S, et al. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21(2):207-221.
81
Overview of DREAMM-2: Efficacy Data - ProgressionFree Survival Based on IRC Assessment 1.0
Median PFS, mo (95% CI)
Proportion alive and progression free
Dose 0.8 0.6
2.5 mg/kg
2.9 (2.1, 3.7)
3.4 mg/kg
4.9 (2.3, 6.2)
0.4 0.2 0.0
At risk (censored), n 2.5 mg/kg 3.4 mg/kg
0
1
2
97 (0) 99 (0)
64 (24) 62 (24)
54 (33) 54 (32)
3 4 5 6 7 Time from randomization, months 34 (47) 45 (36)
29 (51) 38 (41)
27 (53) 36 (43)
22 (54) 29 (48)
14 (55) 10 (54)
8
9
10
5 (56) 4 (55)
1 (56) 3 (33)
0 (56) 0 (55)
82
BCMA bispecific antibodies in myeloma • Potential to overcome the limitations of immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment by redirecting T cells to kill tumor target cells
Mechanism of action of CC-93269 BCMA-TCB
• BCMA (B-cell maturation antigen, CD269) • IgG-like bispecific antibody (long serum half-life, retain Fc function):1–3 • • • •
Anti-BCMAxCD3 (Pfizer)4 Ab-957 (GenmabDuoBody/Janssen)1 CC-93269 (EngMab/Celgene)2,3 Bi-Fab5
• Non-IgG like BiTE® (better tissue penetrance, access to epitopes): • BI 836909 (Boehringer Ingelheim; AMG420,
BCMA, B cell maturation antigen; CTL, cytotoxic T cell; Ig, immunoglobulin; TCB, T-cell bispecific.
Amgen)6
-BCMA: bivalent high affinity binding -CD3 chain: monovalent low affinity binding
1.Pillarisetti K, et al. Abstract 2116; Presented at ASH 2016; San Diego, California; 2. Seckinger A, et al. Cancer Cell 2017;31:396–410; 3. Cho S-F, et al. Front Immunol 2018;9:1821; 4 Panowski SH, et al. Abstract 383; Presented at ASH 2016; San Diego, California; 5. Ramadoss NS, et al. J Am Chem Soc 2015;137:5288– 91; 6. Hipp S, et al. Leukemia 2017;31:1743–51.
83
CC-93269 KEY ENGINEERING CHARACTERISTICS • CC-93269 is a humanized 2+1 IgG1-based TCE that binds to BCMA on myeloma cells and to CD3ε on T cells, enabling specific and tight BCMAbinding1,2 Anti-BCMA (bivalent)1–5 Bivalent binding to BCMA in a 2+1 format for superior potency, tumor targeting, and retention
Anti-CD3ε (monovalent)1–5 Head‐to‐tail geometry of BCMA- and CD3ε-binding Fab domains using a flexible linker Heterodimeric FcγR-silent Fc1–6 No binding to Fc R and C1q to minimize infusionrelated reactions and binding to FcRn retained for IgG-like PK
• CC-93269 induces tumor regression in animal models of myeloma and promotes myeloma cell death in primary patient bone marrow aspirates1,2 BCMA, B-cell maturation antigen; CD3, cluster of differentiation 3; Fab, antigen-binding fragment; FcɣR, Fc gamma receptor, FcRn, neonatal Fc receptor; Ig, immunoglobulin; PK, pharmacokinetics; TCE, T cell engager.
1.
84
Seckinger A, et al. Cancer Cell. 2017;31:396-410. 2. Vu DM, et al. Blood 2015;128;abstract 2998. 3. Klein C, et al. Cancer Res. 2017;77:abstract 3629. 4. Bacac M, et al. Clin Cancer Res. 2016;22:3286-3297. 5. Lehmann S, et al. Clin Cancer Res. 2016;22:4417-4427. 6. Schlothauer T, et al. Prot Eng Des Sel. 2016;29:457-466.
Best Overall Responsea (%)
CC-93269 PRELIMINARY EFFICACY 100 90 80 70
ORR 88.9%
sCR/CR VGPR PR
44.4
60 50
ORR 35.7% 7.1 7.1
40 30 20 10
ORR 0%
21.4
≤ 3 mg (n = 7)
3→6 mg and 6 mg (n = 14)
33.3 11.1
0
6→10 mg and 10 mg (n = 9)
Maximum Dose • In all patients (N = 30), the ORR was 43.3% with a sCR/CR of 16.7% • Among patients receiving 10 mg (n = 9), the ORR was 88.9% with a sCR/CR of 44.4% Data as of October 28, 2019. a Response as assessed by the investigator. CR, complete response; ORR, overall response rate (PR or better); PR, partial response; sCR, stringent complete response; VGPR, very good partial response.
85
10 mg
RESPONSE OVER TIME †
6→10 mg
• 11 of 13 responses are ongoing • 5 of 30 (16.7%) patients achieved an MRD-negative sCR/CR
† PD
6 mg
†
PD
LTB
– Of 13 responding patients, 92.3% achieved MRD negativity (≤ 1/105) in the bone marrow on or before C4D1 by Euroflowa
PD † PD PD PD
HTB
3→6 mg
• Median time to first response was 4.1 weeks (range 4.0–13.1)
PD
sCR/CR
≤ 3 mg
PD PD † PD
0
1
PD PD
VGPR
†
†
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
PD † Death
PR
Ongoing
MR
CC-93269 dose
SD
MRD-negative
86
Time on Study (months) Data as of October 28, 2019. MRD negativity by Euroflow analysis was reported only if a minimum sensitivity of ≤ 1 tumor cell in 105 nucleated cells was achieved and in patients who had ≥ 1 baseline and ≥ 1 post-baseline MRD assessment. HTB, high tumor burden (defined as > 50% bone marrow plasma cells or > 5 extramedullary lesions); LTB, low tumor burden (defined as ≤ 50% bone marrow plasma cells and ≤ 5 extramedullary lesions); MR, minimal response. a
Preliminary Safety, Efficacy, Pharmacokinetics, and Pharmacodynamics of Subcutaneously (SC) Administered PF-06863135, a B-Cell Maturation Antigen (BCMA)–CD3 Bispecific Antibody, in Patients With Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM) Alexander M. Lesokhin, Moshe Y. Levy, Andrew P. Dalovisio, Nizar J. Bahlis, Melhem Solh, Michael Sebag, Andrzej Jakubowiak, Yogesh S. Jethava, Caitlin L. Costello, Michael P. Chu, Michael R. Savona, Cristina Gasparetto, Suzanne Trudel, Jeffrey Chou, Chandrasekhar Udata, Cynthia Basu, Heike I. Krupka, and Noopur S. Raje Poster # 3206 Presented at the American Society of Hematology Annual Meeting 2020 (ASH Virtual), December 5-8, 2020
87
Background and study objectives •
PF-06863135 (PF-3135) is a full-length, humanized, bispecific antibody (IgG2a) targeting BCMA (highly expressed on multiple myeloma cells) and CD3 (on T cells).1
•
IV dosing of PF-3135 was previously evaluated at 0.1–50 μg/kg once weekly in a phase I, dose-escalation study, with preliminary evidence of anti-myeloma activity in RRMM.2
•
In this part of the study (NCT03269136), we evaluated SC administration of PF-3135 in patients with RRMM, with the intent to achieve a wider therapeutic window. •
Primary objectives of dose escalation were to assess safety and tolerability of PF-3135 administered SC, to determine the maximum tolerated dose and select the recommended phase II dose.
•
Secondary objectives included evaluation of anti-myeloma activity, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of PF-3135 administered SC.
1. Panowski SH, et al. Blood 2016;128:383; 2. Raje NS, et al. Blood 2019;134(suppl.1):1869. BCMA=B-cell maturation antigen; RRMM=relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.
88
Treatment duration and IMWG response The response rate was 80% (16/20 patients) at the 215 μg/kg to 1000 μg/kg dose levels.
pBCMA: patients had received prior BCMA-targeted therapy. Numbers at the end of bar represent the best percent change in S:serum m-spike if a patient met inclusion criteria serum m-spike ≥ 0.5 g/dL and had not taken daratumumab within 114 day before C1D1 or otherwise F:delta FLC (free light chain). C1D1=cycle 1 day 1; CR=complete response; IMWG=International Myeloma Working Group; MR=minimal response; PD=progressive disease; PR=partial response; sCR=stringent complete response; SD=stable disease; VGPR=very good partial response.
(N of prior regimens), best unconfirmed response
•
89
Five anti-BCMA bispecific antibodies presented at ASH 2020
90
Nearly all patients had prior anti-CD38 antibody across these trials Responses shown for: CC-93269: 10 mg dosing, IV weekly (ASH 2019) Teclistamab: recommended phase 2 dose, SC weekly AMG 701: most recent evaluable cohort, IV weekly REGN5458: DL6, IV weekly TNB-383B: 40-60 mg IV q3 weeks Elranatamab (PF-06863135): 215-1000 μg/kg SC
Neurotoxicity (%)
Response rate (%)
CRS (%)
Grade 3+ Grade 1-2
Grade 1-2 neurotoxicity only
91
Promising responses in patients with ”triple-class exposed” disease, with associated CRS toxicities
Chimeric antigen receptors (CAR) and CAR-T technology • CARs are engineered transmembrane receptors with two distinct functional components: • Antibody fragment or target binding domain that recognizes targets on the surface of cancer cells • Signaling domains that rapidly and powerfully activate the T cell to attack and kill cancer cells
• CAR structure: – Extracellular domain: antibody domain (scFv) against a tumor antigen – Transmembrane domain – Intracellular domain: First generation CARs: CD3ζ (T cell coreceptor necessary for T cell activation) Second generation CARs: CD3ζ + either CD28 or 4-1BB (costimulatory domain) Third generation CARs to come: CD3ζ + two costimulatory domains (CD28, 4-1BB, OX40, ICOS, CD27)
92 CAR, chimeric antigen receptor.
Maus and Levine The Oncologist 2016; Li and Zhao Protein Cell 2017; Chang and Chen Trends Mol Med 2017; Brudno JN & Kochenderfer N. Nat Rev Clin Onc 2018;15:31–46.
How are CAR T cells manufactured?
93 CAR, chimeric antigen receptor; CT, computed tomography; RT-PCR, reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction.
Jacobson CA and Ritz J. Blood 2011; 118:4761–4762.
Idecabtagene vicleucel (ide-cel; bb2121) BCMA CAR T-cell construct design Extracellular domain Targeting domain Hinge / TM domain
Anti-BCMA
CD8 hinge / TM domain
Intracellular domain Co-stimulatory domain T-cell activation domain
Ide-cel CAR design MND SP
Anti-BCMA scFv
CD8
4-1BB
Tumor-binding domain
CD3ζ
Ide-cel is a 2nd-generation CAR construct CD3 ζ
Linker
Promoter
4-1BB
Signaling domains
• Autologous T cells transduced with a lentiviral vector encoding CAR specific for BCMA 4-1BB associated with less toxicity and more • Targeting domain: anti-BCMA durable CAR T-cell persistence than CD28 • Co-stimulatory domain: 4-1BB costimulatory domain • T-cell activation domain: CD3 ζ
94
Raje NS, et al. J Clin Oncol 2018;36:8007. Presented at ASCO 2018.
Slide 3
95 Presented By Nikhil Munshi at TBD
Best Overall Response
96 Presented By Nikhil Munshi at TBD
Progression-Free Survival
97 Presented By Nikhil Munshi at TBD
Cilta-cel is the same construct as LCAR-B38M Development for LCAR-B38M occurred in China; LEGEND-2 study initially presented at ASCO 2017
LCAR-B38M JNJ-68284528 Ciltacabtagene autoleucel
Cilta-cel
Ide-cel (bb2121)
Ide-cel (bb2121)
N
97
54
128
Dose
0.75 × 106 cells/kg
450 × 106 cells
150-450 × 106 cells
Median prior lines
6 (3-18)
6 (3-16)
6 (3-16)
Triple-class refractory
88%
81%
84%
ORR
96.9%
81%
73%
MRD−
54.6%
48%
39%
≥CR
67%
39%
33%
PFS
76.6% at 12 months
12.1 months
8.8 months
ASH 2020
ASCO 2020
ASCO 2020
Triple-class = at least 1 PI, 1 IMiD, and 1 anti-CD38 antibody MRD− at 10−5 sensitivity by NGS of all treated patients
98
Anti-BCMA CAR T-cell therapy achieves deep responses in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma
Cilta-cel
Ide-cel (bb2121)
N
97
54*
CRS
94.8%
96%
≥3
5.2%
6%
Tocilizumab
69.1%
67%
Corticosteroids
21.6%
22%
Anakinra
18.6%
0%
ASH 2020
ASCO 2020
Cilta-cel
Ide-cel (bb2121)
N
97
54*
Neurotoxicity
20.6%
20%
10.3%
6%
12.4%
Not reported
9.3%
Not reported
ASH 2020
ASCO 2020
≥3 Other (not ICANS)† ≥3
†Other includes movement, neurocognitive changes, nerve palsy, peripheral motor neuropathy
*Target dose of 450M cells
Promising responses and PFS, but await further follow up of “late” neurotoxicities with cilta-cel
99
Multiple anti-BCMA CAR T-cell therapies in clinical trials, presented at recent meetings
Main differences relate to how they bind to BCMA, manufacturing Too early to know which one is better Different stages in clinical development Ide-cel now approved in March 2021 A different approach: ALLO-715, ”off-the-shelf” allogeneic CAR T-cells; cells manufactured from healthy donors
100
Targeting BCMA may be is a new standard Antibody drug conjugate
Bispecific antibody
CAR T-cell
Approved product
Belantamab mafodotin (August 2020)
Several in phase II
Ide-cel (March 2021)
Efficacy
++ (as single agent; higher in combinations)
+++
++++
How given
IV, q3 weeks, until progression
IV or SC, weekly or q2 weeks until progression
One-and-done
Where given
Community
Academic medical centers
Academic medical centers
Notable adverse events
Ocular (corneal)
CRS and neurotoxicity
CRS and neurotoxicity
CRS
Not seen
++
+++
Neurotoxicity
Not seen
+
++
Availability
Off-the-shelf; after ophthalmology evaluation
Off-the-shelf
Wait time for manufacturing
101
Mechanisms of resistance to anti-BCMA CAR T cell therapy in MM CAR-T cell intrinsic
Lack of persistence T cell exhaustion
MM cell intrinsic
Microenvironment
BCMA loss BCMA downregulation
This figure was created using Servier Medical Art templates, https://smart.servier.com. Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Immunesuppressive ligands/molecules
102
bb21217 = bb2121 cultured with PI3 kinase inhibitor
Slide from Shah N et al., ASH 2018
103
Current Understanding and Future Directions • BCMA is a promising target • Conjugates, T cell engagers and cellular products all show efficacy • Future will be to define how to combine /sequence these • Next generation approaches will focus on improving efficacy and DOR
104
Acknowledgements
Our Patients nraje@mgh.harvard.edu @NoopurRajeMD
105
IMF Patient and Family Webinar
Approaches to Relapse: What are current relapse options? Rafat Abonour, MD Indiana University School of Medicine Indianapolis, IN
106
How Do I Treat Relapsed Multiple Myeloma? Rafat Abonour, M.D.
Harry and Edith Gladstein Professor of Cancer Research Professor of Medicine, Pathology and Laboratory Medicine Director, Multiple Myeloma, Waldenstrom's Disease and Amyloidosis Program Indiana University School of Medicine
When should we treat relapsed disease? • At biochemical relapse? • When myeloma protein starts rising! • When involved free light chain starts rising! • At Clinical relapse? • CRAB criteria (Anemia, kidney failure, high calcium or new bone disease) • Extramedullary disease (myeloma growing at tumors outsides the bone) 108
When should we treat relapsed disease? • We do not know, but we can speculate! • Most approved treatment in relapsed myeloma were based on biochemical relapse. • Some observations support better outcome when treating biochemical relapse: • Mayo clinic showed better overall survival when treating biochemical relapse (median 125 vs 81 months)
109
Pros and Cons of treating Biochemical Relapse • Con: • 25% of biochemical relapse patients will have a smoldering course. No progression for 2 years. • Pros: • Median time between biochemical relapse and clinical symptoms is about 5-6 months. • If you do not get it right at first relapse you may not get it right at subsequent relapses
110
Response Duration Decreases with each relapse
Median response duration (months)
12
10
8
6
4
2
0 First
Second
Third
Fourth
Treatment Regimen
Fifth
Sixth
111
Genomic Heterogeneity Affects the Course of MM • Most patients with MM have multiple distinct subclonal populations as a result of the expansion of genetically different myeloma cells; this causes intratumoral heterogeneity1 • MM is clonally heterogeneous at diagnosis and throughout treament2 • The genomic heterogeneity of MM contributes to treatment resistance and relapse3 • Wide variety of mutations found within •
Evolution of Clonal Populations of Myeloma Cells 4
a single patient may result in treatment resistance and refractory disease1,3,4 Furthermore, subclones continually mutate over time, including after treatment, which may contribute to resistance and result in disease progression1,5 Republished with permission of American Society of Hematology, from Keats JJ et al. Blood. 2012;120(5):1067-1076; via Copyright Clearance Center, Inc.
112 1. Bolli N et al. Nat Commun. 2014;5:2997. 2. Walker BA et al. Leukemia. 2014;28(2):384-390. 3. Kyrtsonis M et al. Appl Clin Genet. 2010;3:41-51. 4. Keats JJ et al. Blood. 2012;120(5):1067-1076. 5. Abdi J et al. Oncotarget. 2013;4(12):2186-2207.
Clonal heterogeneity in English • Myeloma cells in each patients are a family of odds and aggressive members • The longer this family sticks around the odder and more aggressive it becomes • Family therapy is not going to work, you can not be politically correct here, eradicate them early. • This is making the case for early treatment and with combination regimen 113
Factors influencing the choice of therapy at Relapse • Disease related • Regimen related • Patients related
114
Disease related Factors • Clinical features associated with relapse (elevated calcium, renal failure, anemia, bone lesions) • Expanding or new plasmacytomas or hyperviscosity • High-risk cytogenetics • Extramedullary disease or plasma cell leukemia • High ISS stage
115
Regimen-related Factors • Previous treatment and dose • Duration of prior response • Side effects, tolerability, and toxicity of prior treatment(s) and treatment combinations • Depth and duration of previous transplant
116
Patient-related Factors • Performance status • Patient comorbidities • Transplant eligibility • Frailty • Patient preference • Cost/socioeconomics
117
Currently available Anti-Multiple Myeloma Agents Steroids
Conventional Chemo
ImIDs
Proteasome Inhibitors
HDAC inhibitor
Immunologic approaches
XPO inhibitor
Prednisone
Melphalan
Thalidomide
Bortezomib
Panobinostat
Daratumumab (anti-CD38)
Selinexor
Dexamethasone
Cyclophosphamide
Lenalidomide
Carfilzomib
Isatuximab (anti-CD38)
Doxorubicin
Pomalidomide
Ixazomib
Elotuzumab (anti-CS1)
Belantamab DCEP/D-PACE
(anti-BCMA + MMAF)
ABECMA METRO28 Carmustine Bendamustine
Melflufen
118 INDIANA UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE
How does your oncologist decide what to do?
This is a very short menu
119
How does your oncologist decide what to do? This is not a very short menu
GREAT NEWS WE HAVE OPTIONS BAD NEWS YOUR DOCTOR MAY GET CONFUSED
120
Mayo Practical Approach- First Relapse
121
Mayo Practical Approach- 2nd/ later Relapse
122
Combination is Better. Multicenter, randomized (1:1), open-label, active-controlled, phase 3 study
DRd (n = 286) Key eligibility criteria • RRMM • ≥1 prior line of therapy • Prior lenalidomide exposure, but not refractory • Creatinine clearance ≥30 mL/min
Stratification factors
R A N D O M I Z E
Daratumumab 16 mg/kg IV • Qw in Cycles 1 to 2, q2w in Cycles 3 to 6, then q4w until PD R 25 mg PO • Days 1 to 21 of each cycle until PD d 40 mg PO • 40 mg weekly until PD 1:1
Rd (n = 283) R 25 mg PO • Days 1 to 21 of each cycle until PD d 40 mg PO • 40 mg weekly until PD
• PFS Secondary endpoints • TTP • OS • ORR, VGPR, CR • MRD • Time to response • Duration of response Statistical analyses
• No. of prior lines of therapy • ISS stage at study entry
Primary endpoint
Cycles: 28 days
• Primary analysis: ~177 PFS events
• Prior lenalidomide
Pre-medication for the DRd treatment group consisted of dexamethasone 20 mg,a acetaminophen, and an antihistamine ISS, international staging system; DRd, daratumumab/lenalidomide/dexamethasone; IV, intravenous; qw, weekly; q2w, every 2 weeks; q4w, every 4 weeks; PD, progressive disease; R, lenalidomide; PO, oral; d, dexamethasone; Rd, lenalidomide/dexamethasone; PFS, progression-free survival; TTP, time to progression; OS, overall survival; ORR, overall response rate; VGPR, very good partial response; CR, complete response; MRD, minimal residual disease. aOn daratumumab dosing days, dexamethasone 20 mg was administered as pre-medication on Day 1 and Day 2.
123
POLLUX updated analysis: PFS (time without relapse is much better with 3 drugs....)
% surviving without progression
Progression-free survivala 100
30-month PFSb
80
58%
60
DRd Median: not reached 35%
40
Rd Median: 17.5 months
20
HR 0.44; 95% CI, 0.34-0.55; P <0.0001 0
No. at risk Rd DRd
0
3
6
9
12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 Months
283 249 206 181 160 143 126 111 100 89 80 36 286 266 249 238 229 214 203 194 183 167 145 67
5 16
1 2
0 0
Median follow-up: 32.9 months (range, 0 - 40.0 months) 56% reduction in risk of progression/death for DRd versus Rd HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval. aExploratory analyses based on clinical cut-off date of October 23, 2017; bKaplan-Meier estimate.
124 Dimopoulos MA, et al. Presented at ASH 2017 (Abstract 739), oral presentation.
Time From Last Line of Therapy to Study Treatment of > or ≤12 Months >12 Months: Late relapses 18-month PFSa
100
% surviving without progression
83% 80
DRd
60% 60
Rd 40
20
HR: 0.37 (95% CI: 0.23-0.61; P <0.0001)
0 0
3
6
9
139 133
123 127
111 122
No. at risk Rd >12 DRd >12
149 140
12 15 Months
18
21
24
27
103 118
26 44
4 9
0 1
0 0
88 109
DRd is superior to Rd regardless of time since last therapy aKaplan-Meier
estimate. population.
bResponse-evaluable
Moreau P, et al. Presented at ASH 2016 (Abstract 1151), oral presentation
125
Isatuximab: CD38 antibody Median PFS, mos 100
PFS (%)
80 60 40 20
Isatuximab-Pd Pd 11.53 6.47
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 No. at risk Mos 314 1 Isa-Pd 154 129 106 89 81 52 153 80 105 63 51 33 17 5 0 Pd
HR: 0.596 (95% CI: 0.4360.814); P = .001
PFS HR (95% CI) Len refractory: 0.59 (0.43-0.82) Len refractory in last line: 0.50 (0.340.76) Len / PI refractory: 0.58 (0.40-0.84)
• Phase III ICARIA-MM: Isatuximab + Pom/Dex vs Pom/Dex in R/R MM • FDA approved isatuximab in combination with Pd for patients with R/R MM who had received ≥ 2 previous lines of treatment, including lenalidomide and a PI
126 INDIANA UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE
Anti-Multiple Myeloma Novel Immunotherapeutic Agent Structures Antibody Drug Conjugate
T-Cell Bispecific Antibody
T-Cell Trispecific Antibody
Designed ankyrin repeat proteins (DARPins)
Lancman, et al. ASH 2020.
127 INDIANA UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE
Comparison of Novel Immunotherapeutic Approaches Pros
Chimeric antigen receptor T cells (CAR-T)
Bispecific antibodies
Antibody-drug conjugates
Unprecedented ORR including MRD neg in heavily pre-treated patients
Off the shelf
Off the shelf
Deep responses
Encouraging response rates
Limited severe CRS - ? Safety in frail elderly
1 hour infusion every 3 weeks
One time intervention; long chemo holiday resulting in median PFS ~1 year
Cons
Manufacturing time makes impractical for patients with aggressive/rapidly progressing disease Requires complex infrastructure – stem cell lab, RN/ ICU/ER training – thus restricted to accredited centers CRS ? role in frail elderly Impact of bridging chemo on remission duration
Can be given in community settings after 1st cycle ? Need for admissions with initial doses until CRS risk low
No CRS, can be given in community settings Ocular toxicity – requires close collaboration with opthamology & impact on pt quality of life
Dosing/schedule to be determined
Thrombocytopenia
Need for continuous treatment until progression
Need for continuous treatment until progression
Toxicities require further study – Modest ORR and PFS in triple infections, neurotoxicty class/penta refractory
Low WBC and plts post CAR-T Cost given relapses even in MRD neg patients; mgmt. challenging especially if soon after flu/cy given impact on T cells
Lancman, et al. ASH 2020.
128
BCMA (B-cell maturation antigen) • Receptor for BAFF and APRIL • Expressed on mature B cell subsets, PC’s, and plasmacytoid DC’s • Maintains plasma cell homeostasis • BCMA-/- mice have normal B cell #s, impaired PC survival
Hengeveld et al Bl Cancer J 2015 ; Maus, June, Clin Can Res 2013
129
Belantamab Mafodotin: BCMA-Targeted ADC Four mechanisms of action:
• Belantamab mafodotin (GSK2857916): Humanized, afucosylated, IgG1 BCMA-targeted ADC that neutralizes soluble BCMA
1. 2. 3. 4.
ADC ADCC Immunogenic cell death BCMA receptor signaling inhibition ADC
• Preclinical studies demonstrate selective, potent activity
1 1
Belantamab Mafodotin
BCMA BCMA
Afucosylation
Linker
–MMAF (non–cell-permeable, highly potent auristatin) –Enhanced ADCC –Stable in circulation
4
ADCC
Lysosome
3
BCMA
Effector cell 2
4 BCMA
x
Cytotoxic agent
3
Fc receptor
Malignant plasma cell
Cell death
Tai. Blood. 2014;123:3128. Trudel. Lancet Oncol. 2018;19:1641. Trudel. Blood Cancer J. 2019;9:37.
130
131
Belantamab Mafodotin
132
BCMA Antibody Drug Conjugates Study Phase
DREAMM-1
DREAMM-2
DREAMM-4
DREAMM-6
MEDI2228
I
II
I/II
I/II
I
Belamaf dose (OP-106): Belamaf Belamaf Belamaf 2.5 mg/kg MEDI2228 (BCMAHORIZON Updated Efficacy and escalation, 2.5 or 3.4 mg/kg 2.5 or 3.4 mg/kg + bortezomib-dex Ig-DNA crossexpansion 3.4 + pembrolizumab linking Safety of Melflufen in Relapsed/Refractory mg/kg pyrrolobenzodiaze pine (PBD) dimer ) Multiple Myeloma Refractory to Daratumumab Patients n=35 n=196 n=13 n=18 n= 82 Median prior lines 5 6-7 8/ 5 3 range 2-11 and/or Pomalidomide Triple-class refractory 37% 100% NR NR NR (100% Treatment (All are IV q 3wk)
ORR % PFS
exposed) Paul G. Richardson, MD1; Albert Oriol, MD2; Alessandra Larocca, MD3; Paula Rodriguez Otero, MD4; Maxim Norkin, MD5; 60% (38.5% if prior 31% / 34% 67% / 14% 78% 61% (25/41) Joan Bladé, MD6; Michele Cavo, MD7; Hani Hassoun, MD8; Xavier Leleu9; Adrián Alegre, MD10; Christopher Maisel, MD11; dara12exposure) (0.14 mg /kg) Agne Paner, MD ; Amitabha Mazumder, MD13; Jeffrey A. Zonder, MD14; Noemí Puig, MD15; John Harran, BSN1; 16; Sara Thuresson, MSc16; Hanan Zubair, MSc16; and Maria-Victoria Mateos, MD, PhD15 Johan Harmenberg, MD(6.8 12 months 2.9 / 4.9 months NR NR NR months if prior 1Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, dara) Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; 2Hospital Germans Trias i Pujol, Badalona, Spain; 3A.O.U. Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino - S.C. Ematologia U, Torino, Italy; 4Clínica Universidad de Navarra, Pamplona, Spain; 5University of Florida Health Cancer Center,
AEs- all grade (gr3+) FL, USA; 6Hospital Clínica de Barcelona - Servicio de Onco-Hematología, Barcelona, Spain; 7Policlinico S. Orsola Malpighi, Bologna, Italy; Gainesville, 8Myeloma Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA; 9CHU de Poitiers, Poitiers, France; 10Hospital Keratopathy 52% (3%) 70% (27%)/ 75% (21%) 67% (33%) 100% (56%) 0% Universitario La Princesa, Madrid, Spain; 11Baylor Scott & White Charles A. Sammons Cancer Center, Dallas, TX, USA; 12Rush University Medical Center, Thrombocytopenia 63% (35%) 35% (20%)/ 58% (34%) 67% (61%) 32% (NR) Chicago, IL, USA; 13 The Oncology Institute of Hope and Innovation, Glendale, CA, USA; 14Karmanos Cancer Institute, Detroit, MI, USA; 15Hospital Clinico 16 Anemia 28% Universitario (17%) 24% (20) / Salamanca, 37% (25%)Spain; and 50% (0%) de Salamanca, Oncopeptides AB, Stockholm, Sweden Infusion reaction 12% (3%) 21% (3%) / 16% (1%) 17% (0%) Photophobia 54% Phase 3 DREAMM studies recruiting: 3: Blmf vs Pd, 7: BlmfVd vs DVd, 8: BlmfPd vs VPd Other Dry eye 20% Rash (29%) Trudel, et al. Blood Cancer J 2019; Lonial, et al. Lancet Oncol 2019; Nooka, et al. Hematology Reports 2020;; Popat, et al. ASH 2020; Kumar, et al. ASH 2020 Pleural eff (20%)
133
Melflufen Is a Lipophilic Peptide-Conjugated Alkylator That Rapidly Delivers a Highly Cytotoxic Payload Into Myeloma Cells Peptidase-enhanced activity in multiple myeloma cells Peptidases are expressed in several cancers, including multiple myeloma1-3
Melflufen is rapidly taken up by myeloma cells due to its high lipophilicity4,5
Melflufen rapidly induces irreversible DNA damage, leading to apoptosis of myeloma cells4,8
Melflufen Once inside the myeloma cell, melflufen is immediately cleaved by peptidases5-7
pFPhe (carrier) Peptidase Alkylator payload
The hydrophilic alkylator payloads are entrapped5-7
Melflufen is 50-fold more potent than melphalan in myeloma cells in vitro due to increased intracellular alkylator activity4,5 1. Hitzerd SM, et al. Amino Acids. 2014;46:793-808. 2. Moore HE, et al. Mol Cancer Ther. 2009;8:762-770. 3. Wickström M, et al. Cancer Sci. 2011;102:501-508. 4. Chauhan D, et al. Clin Cancer Res. 2013;19:3019-3031. 5. Wickström M, et al. Oncotarget. 2017;8:66641-66655. 6. Wickström M, et al. Biochem Pharmacol. 2010;79:1281-1290. 7. Gullbo J, et al. J Drug Target. 2003;11:355-363. 8. Ray A, et al. Br J Haematol. 2016;174:397-409.
Richardson PG, et al
EHA 2019
#S1605
3
134
Rapid response in highly resistant myeloma Best Response (%)
Best Response (IMWG1) 100 36
80 46
60 40 20
SD MR PR VGPR sCR
9
ORR CBR 55%
12
ORR 28%
0
19
9 ITT (n=113)
1
40%
36
49 CBR 64%
14 5 Double-Class Refractory a
10
ORR 22%
15 8 Anti-CD38 Refractory (n=89)
(PI + IMiD incl POM)
49
CBR 33% ORR
20%
11 12 8
CBR 32%
Triple-Class Refractory (n=83)
(n=22)
• 8 pts did not have available response information at data cutoff; 2 pts response evaluable, PI exposed, but refractoriness to PI subject to confirmation, so excluded from subgroup analysis • One pt with sCR also confirmed as MRD negative (10-6 sensitivity), with ongoing progression-free period of 13.6 mos • Median time to response 1.2 mos aNot
1. Rajkumar SV, et al. Blood. 2011;117:4691-4695.
anti-CD38 refractory.
Data cutoff 06 May 2019.
Richardson PG, et al
EHA 2019
#S1605
13
135
Best therapy for Relapse
• • • • •
Not all relapses are the same. Combination therapies provide better outcomes. Available drugs and combinations are increasing. The optimal therapy is the one based on your needs. We need to get right at first relapse.
136
Summary Panel Discussion
Type and submit your questions here. Click the Q&A icon circled below if you have minimized the Ask Question window.
137
IMF Patient and Family Webinar
Webinar Survey Click here to complete the webinar survey. Your feedback is highly appreciated.
138
IMF Patient and Family Webinar
Closing Remarks
139
Thank you to our sponsors!
140
141