
==== Front
Blood Cancer J
Blood Cancer J
Blood Cancer Journal
2044-5385
Nature Publishing Group UK London

39261451
1135
10.1038/s41408-024-01135-2
Article
Belantamab mafodotin, pomalidomide, and dexamethasone for triple class exposed/refractory relapsed multiple myeloma: a subgroup analysis of the ALGONQUIN trial
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8809-4368
McCurdy Arleigh amccurdy@toh.ca

1
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7201-4642
Reece Donna 2
Louzada Martha L. 3
White Darrell 4
Parkin Stephen 5
Chu Michael P. 6
Kotb Rami 7
Mian Hira 8
Othman Ibraheem 9
Su Jiandong 10
Khan Aniba 10
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3922-3215
Gul Engin 10
Trudel Suzanne 2
1 https://ror.org/05jtef216 0000 0004 0500 0659 The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON Canada
2 grid.231844.8 0000 0004 0474 0428 Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON Canada
3 https://ror.org/037tz0e16 grid.412745.1 0000 0000 9132 1600 London Health Sciences Centre, Victoria & Children’s Hospital, London, ON Canada
4 grid.55602.34 0000 0004 1936 8200 Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS Canada
5 grid.17091.3e 0000 0001 2288 9830 Vancouver General Hospital, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC Canada
6 grid.17089.37 0000 0001 2190 316X Cross Cancer Institute, Edmonton, AB Canada
7 https://ror.org/005cmms77 grid.419404.c 0000 0001 0701 0170 CancerCare Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB Canada
8 grid.25073.33 0000 0004 1936 8227 Juravinski Cancer Centre, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON Canada
9 grid.419525.e 0000 0001 0690 1414 Allan Blair Cancer Centre, Regina, SK Canada
10 Canadian Myeloma Research Group (CMRG), Vaughan, ON Canada
11 9 2024
11 9 2024
12 2024
14 1 15522 3 2024
24 7 2024
28 8 2024
© The Author(s) 2024
2024
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.
Given the early use of triplet and quadruplet regimens, most patients with multiple myeloma (MM) will be exposed and/or refractory to PIs, IMiDs, and anti-CD38 mAbs after first- or second-line treatment. Effective treatment for this group of triple class exposed/refractory (TCE/R) patients is crucial. Here we present a post-hoc subgroup analysis of TCE/R patients treated on the ALGONQUIN study of belantamab mafodotin plus pomalidomide-dexamethasone (belamaf-Pd) for relapsed MM. Of the 99 patients treated on the ALGONQUIN study, 69 were TCE and 56 were TCR and were included in this analysis. Patients had a median of three prior lines of therapy. The ORR was 86.4% in TCE patients and 84.9% in TCR patients, with ≥ very good partial response rates of 64% and 68% respectively. The median progression free survival was 18.3 months in TCE patients and 19.6 months in TCR patients, with overall survival not yet reached and 34.4 months, respectively for TCE and TCR patients. No new safety signals were identified. The most common Grade ≥ 3 AEs were keratopathy (48%), decreased visual acuity (42%), neutropenia (36%), thrombocytopenia (27%), and infection (25%). In this subgroup analysis of the ALGONQUIN study, patients with TCE/TCR disease treated with belamaf-Pd achieved high clinical response rates with durable remissions, comparable to other novel therapeutics in this space.

Subject terms

Cancer therapy
Cancer therapy
Study was sponsored by the Canadian Myeloma Research Group (CMRG) with support from Glaxo-Smith-Klineissue-copyright-statement© Springer Nature Limited 2024
==== Body
pmcIntroduction

Multiple myeloma (MM) is a malignancy of terminally differentiated plasma cells. The treatment of MM has evolved rapidly over the last two decades, with the advent of novel therapeutics leading to significant increases in patient survival [1, 2]. Despite substantial improvement in patient outcomes, MM remains incurable in most patients and disease relapse is expected [3]. The mainstays of treatment for newly diagnosed and relapsed patients include various combinations of proteosome inhibitors (PIs; [bortezomib, carfilzomib, ixazomib]), immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs; [lenalidomide, pomalidomide, thalidomide]), anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies (mAbs; [daratumuab, isatuximab]), as well autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in select fit patients based on Phase 3 trials [4–11].

Ultimately, patients become triple class refractory (TCR; refractory to a PI, IMiD, and anti-CD38 mAb) or, increasingly, penta-drug refractory (refractory to bortezomib, carfilzomib, lenalidomide, pomalidomide, and daratumumab). With the upfront use of triplets and now quadruplets including a PI, IMiD, anti-CD38 mAb, and dexaemethasone in first line [12–14], this is occurring after first- or second-line treatment in many jurisdictions. Once patients are refractory to treatment, outcomes with current widely available therapeutics are almost universally poor, with median progression free survival (mPFS) and median overall survival (mOS) ranging from 3.9–4.4 months and 10.5–11.1 months, respectively [15, 16]. Therefore, new agents exploiting novel targets are required. B cell maturation antigen (BCMA) is a cell surface protein universally expressed on plasma cells and has become a therapeutic target for patients with MM using various platforms including BCMA targeted antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs), bispecific antibodies (bispecifics), and chimeric antigen receptor T cells (Car-Ts) [17–21].

Belantamab mafodotin (belamaf) is a first in class afucosylated humanized anti-BCMA IgG1 mAb conjugated to microtubule disrupting monomethyl auristatin F (MMAF). It binds to FcγRIIIa on plasma cells resulting in activation and recruitment of immune effector cells and enhanced antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity (ADCC) [17]. Belamaf has single agent activity as demonstrated in the DREAMM-1 First In Human trial, in which patients with heavily pre-treated relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM) enrolled in Part 2 of the study had an overall response rate (ORR) of 60% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 42.1–76.1); 46.2% (95% CI: 19.2–74.9) in patients who had previously had > five prior therapies and 68.2% (95% CI: 45.1–86.1) in those with ≤ five prior lines [22]. Notably, single agent belamaf had an ORR of 38.5% (95% CI: 13.9–68.4) in patients refractory to an IMiD, a PI and were daratumumab exposed [23]. At median follow up of 12.5 months, the mPFS was 12 months (95% CI: 3.1–not estimable), 6.2 months in those that were triple class exposed (TCE) [23]. The single agent clinical activity was subsequently confirmed in the Phase 2, DREAMM-2 trial, where all patients were TCR. For the patients that received single agent belamaf (2.5 mg/kg every three weeks) the ORR was 31% (97.5% CI: 20.8–42.6) and the median duration of response (mDOR) was 11 months [4]. Finally, the DREAMM-3 Phase 3 study compared single agent belamaf to pomalidomide and dexamethasone (Pd). Although the study did not meet its primary endpoint of PFS superiority over Pd (11.2 vs 7.0 months; HR 1.03; 95% CI: 0.72–1.47), the study reaffirmed the clinical activity of belamaf in heavily pre-treated patients.

The promising single agent activity in heavily pre-treated patients has supported the development of belamaf-combination regimens. The Canadian Myeloma Research Group ALGONQUIN trial is a two-part study evaluating belamaf in combination with Pd for patients that are lenalidomide refractory and PI exposed. We have recently reported outcomes of the dose and schedule optimization of the combination. We identified 2.5 mg/kg as the maximally tolerated dose (MTD) combined with standard dosing of Pd and a recommended part 2 dose (RP2D) and schedule of belamaf 2.5 mg/kg administered every eight weeks (Q8W) [24]. For the intent to treat population, the ORR was 87.7% and the PFS was 21.8 months. Herein, we report a post- hoc subgroup analysis of patients treated on the ALGONQUIN study who were TCE and/or TCR.

Methods

Study design and participants

The ALGONQUIN study is a multicenter, open-label, single arm, 2-Part study (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03715478) evaluating the combination of belamaf +Pd conducted at nine Canadian academic centres. Part 1 was a dose-exploration phase using a standard 3 + 3 dose escalation design to determine the MTD patients enrolled at belamaf doses of 1.92, 2.5, and 3.4 mg/kg combined with standard dose Pd; up to 12 patients could be enrolled in each dose cohort and the option of additional dosing cohorts to better inform the RP2D was included in the protocol. Part 2 consisted of an expansion cohort of 26 patients to further evaluate safety and efficacy of the RP2D established in Part 1 and an additional cohort of 12 patients (cohort 2b) treated at the RP2D but exploring an alternative dose modification schedule for corneal adverse events (AEs).

We enrolled patients with RRMM aged ≥18 with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0–2 and adequate bone marrow, cardiac and renal function who had progressive disease after ≥ one treatment line including a PI and lenalidomide (combined or in separate lines). Patients were excluded if they had unstable comorbidities or laboratory abnormalities that may affect their safety, ability to provide consent, compliance with study procedures, or if they had concurrent or prior corneal epithelial disease except for mild punctate keratopathy.

Data were collected by the sponsor with all authors having full access to data interpretation, manuscript preparation, revision, and final approval.

Procedures

In the dose escalation cohort, patients received intravenous belamaf at the following doses: 1.92 mg/kg every four weeks (Q4W) (cohort 1); 2.5 mg/kg Q4W (cohort 1a), 2.5 mg/kg Q4W split 50% on days one and eight (cohort 1b), 2.5 mg/kg loading dose cycle 1 day 1 then 1.92 mg/kg Q4W thereafter (cohort 1c), 3.4 mg/kg Q4W split 50% on days one and eight (cohort 2), 2.5 mg/kg Q8W (cohort 3a), 2.5 mg/mg every 12 weeks (Q12W) (cohort 3b). Based on the Part 1 results, patients treated in the Part 2a and 2b dose expansion portion received belamaf 2.5 mg/kg Q8W. For both Part 1 and Part 2 pomalidomide was administered using the standard dose of 4 mg daily for 21 of 28 days with dexamethasone 40 mg (20 mg if >75 years) weekly. Patients were required to undergo ophthalmology assessments prior to each dose of belamaf and use preservative free lubricating eye drops. Treatment was continued until disease progression, prohibitive toxicity, intolerance, or withdrawal of consent. Protocol-defined dose modifications (omissions, delays, reductions) were made independently for each drug as clinically indicated based on the grade of the toxicity.

Assessments

In all patients, clinical assessments, laboratory tests for hematology and biochemistry and disease assessments were done on day 1 of each cycle. Clinical activity was assessed according to the International Myeloma Working Group Uniform Response Criteria for Multiple Myeloma [25]. The National Cancer Institute Common Terminology for Adverse Events (CTCAE version 5.0) were used to grade severity of AEs. Visual acuity was assessed by the Snellen method and corneal epithelial changes were graded by prespecified keratopathy and visual acuity (KVA) scale [26].

Study endpoints/outcomes

The primary endpoints of the trial were to determine the MTD and RP2D of belamaf in combination with Pd in Part 1, as well as the ORR (PR or better) in response evaluable patients treated at the RP2D in Part 1 (cohort 3a) and Part 2 (cohort 2a). Secondary endpoints included determining the PFS, OS, DOR, and safety in the intention to treat population as previously described [24]. In this post-hoc subgroup analysis, we evaluated the ORR, PFS, DOR, OS, and AEs in patients who were TCE (exposed to a PI, lenalidomide, and an anti-CD38 mAb) and/or TCR (refractory to a PI, lenalidomide, and anti-CD38 mAb) defined as disease that is non-responsive to therapy or progression during or within 60 days of drug administration.

Statistical analysis

No formal statistical power calculations were performed to determine the sample sizes for the Part 1 of the trial or for this subgroup analysis. All analyses of outcomes from Part 1 of the study were descriptive, with results reported by dose and schedule, as relevant. For the RP2D cohort a sample size of 35 was obtained to detect a response rate of 0.60 against 0.30 as the historical response rate [2, 3], a one-side binomial proportional test was performed, type I error rate was set at 0.05 and the power was set at 97%. Also, a 10% drop rate was considered. Efficacy counts (rates) were calculated for ORR in the dose escalation and all patients treated at the RP2D that had two consecutive response assessments. Data are summarized by all treated patients, dose group, and RP2D-dosed patients. Median PFS, DOR, and OS (with 95% CI) were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Number of patients at risk and event-free rates (with 95% CI) at specific months were displayed within the survival curves. SAS 9.4 (SAS Institute Inc.) was used as a statistical tool for all analyses.

Results

Patient disposition and baseline characteristics

Baseline characteristics are presented in Table 1. Between 04 January 2019 and 14 September 2022, 99 patients were enrolled and received at least one dose of belamaf. Of these, 69 patients were identified as TCE or TCR and are the focus of this analysis, of whom 41 were treated at the RP2D. Fifty-six of the 69 (81.2%) were TCR across all cohorts. The median age of this cohort was 67 years (36–85) and 47.8% (33/69) were female. Twenty three percent (16/69) of patients were International Staging System (ISS) Stage III and 22% (15/69) had high risk cytogenetics [del(17p) and/or translocation t(4:14) and/or translocation t(14,16)]. Median number of prior therapies was 3 (range 1–5). In this subgroup analysis, 100% of patients were exposed to lenalidomide, a PI, and anti-CD38 mAb (100% TCE), with 98.6% (68/69) of patients refractory to lenalidomide, 82.6% (57/69) refractory to a PI, and 100% refractory to anti-CD38, resulting in 81.2% (56/69) TCR patients.Table 1 Baseline characteristics by Part 1, RP2D and all patients.

Characteristics	Part 1 patientsa	RP2D patientsb	All patientsc	
N = 36	N = 41	N = 69	
Median age (range), years	65 (36–78)	68 (38–85)	67 (36–85)	
Female sex, n (%)	20 (55.6%)	17 (41.5%)	33 (47.8%)	
Race, n (%)	
 Caucasian	27 (75.0%)	36 (87.8%)	56 (81.2%)	
 Asian	4 (11.1%)	2 (4.9%)	6 (8.7%)	
 Other	2 (5.6%)	2 (4.9%)	4 (5.8%)	
 Black	2 (5.6%)	0 (0.0%)	2 (2.9%)	
 Unknown	1 (2.8%)	1 (2.4%)	1 (1.4%)	
Median time since initial diagnosis (range), years	4 (1–10)	4 (1–12)	4 (1–12)	
International Staging System stage (ISS) at baseline, n (%)	
 1	12 (33.3%)	7 (17.1%)	17 (24.6%)	
 2	13 (36.1%)	13 (31.7%)	25 (36.2%)	
 3	7 (19.4%)	12 (29.3%)	16 (23.2%)	
 Missing	4 (11.1%)	9 (22.0%)	11 (15.9%)	
Baseline Cytogenetics	
 High Riskd	10 (27.8%)	10 (24.4%)	15 (21.7%)	
 Standard Riske	11 (30.6%)	17 (41.5%)	26 (37.7%)	
 Missing	15 (41.7%)	14 (34.1%)	28 (40.6%)	
Median no. prior therapies (range)	2 (2–5)	3 (1–5)	3 (1–5)	
Prior therapies, n (%)	
 Lenalidomide	36 (100.0%)	41 (100.0%)	69 (100.0%)	
 Proteosome Inhibitor	36 (100.0%)	41 (100.0%)	69 (100.0%)	
 Anti-CD38	36 (100.0%)	41 (100.0%)	69 (100.0%)	
Refractory to, n (%)	
 Lenalidomide	35 (97.2%)	40 (97.6%)	68 (98.6%)	
 Proteosome inhibitor	31 (86.1%)	33 (80.5%)	57 (82.6%)	
 LEN and PI	30 (83.3%)	32 (78.0%)	56 (81.2%)	
 Anti-CD38	36 (100.0%)	41 (100.0%)	69 (100.0%)	
 LEN, PI, and anti-CD38	30 (83.3%)	32 (78.0%)	56 (81.2%)	
LEN lenalidomide, n number of patients with characteristic, PI proteosome inhibitor, RP2D recommended part 2 dose.

aPart 1 Patients/ Dose escalation patients includes patients from Cohorts 1, 1a, 1b, 1c, 1e, 1f and 2.

bRP2D Patients includes 12 patients from Part 1 Cohort 1e and patients from Part 2 (2a, 2b).

cTotal Patients include 36 treated in part 1 and 33 treated in part 2.

dHigh risk is defined as patients presenting abnormality for del(17p), and/or translocation t(4;14), and/or translocation t(14;16)

eStandard risk is defined as patients with absence of abnormality for all of the following: del(17p), translocation t(4;14), translocation t(14;16).

At the data cutoff of 30 June 2023, 56 (57%) of 99 patients enrolled had progressed or died; 31 (45%) of 69 TCE, 14 (34%) of 41 TCE treated at the RP2D and 27 (48%) of 56 patients that were TCR and treated across all cohorts (Fig. 1).Fig. 1 CONSORT flow diagram for TCR/TCE patients enrolled onto the Algonquin Study.

AE adverse event, belamaf-Pd belantamab mafodotin, pomalidomide and dexamethasone, Q8W every 8 weeks, RP2D recommended Part 2 dose. *Includes 8 from the dose escalation treated with 2.5 mg/kg Q8W.

Efficacy

The clinical efficacy data for this subgroup of patients is shown in Table 2 and by dosing cohort for Part 1 patients in Supplementary Table 1. The combination of belamaf-Pd demonstrated deep and durable responses in patients that are TCE/R. The ORR and very good partial response (VGPR) rate or better were 86.4% (57/66) and 63.6% (42/66) for the overall cohort, respectively, and 88.6% (31/35) and 62.8% (22/35) for patients treated across various dose cohorts in Part 1, respectively. Specifically, for all TCE patients, (16/66) 24.2% achieved a complete response (CR) or stringent CR (sCR), 39.4% (26/66) achieved VGPR, and 22.7% (15/66) achieved a confirmed PR. For the 57 responders, the median time to first response of PR or better was 61 days (range, 56–82) with responses being durable with a median DOR of 22·1 months (95% CI, 18.3–not yet reached [NYR]). At a median follow up of 12.2 months (range, 0.9–34.4), the median PFS for the overall TCE group was 19.6 months (95% CI, 17.8–NYR), with median OS of 34.4 months (95% CI, 22.5–NYR) (Table 2). While the estimated median time to next treatment (TTNT) was not reached, 74.2% of patients were still on belantamab treatment without next line of treatment at 24 months (Fig. 2a and Supplementary Fig. 1). For all TCE patients that achieved a CR/sCR, the median PFS was not reached with 71.4% (95% CI, 47.8–100.0%) estimated to be progression free at 2 years (Supplementary Fig. 2).Table 2 Efficacy outcomes by part 1, RP2D, all patients, and by TCR status.

Efficacy outcomes	Part 1	RP2D	All Patients	Non-TCR	TCR	
N = 36	N = 41	N = 69	N = 13	N = 56	
ORR, n/N (%)	31/35 (88.6%)	33/39 (84.6%)	57/66 (86.4%)	12/13 (92.3%)	45/53 (84.9%)	
CR/sCR, n/N (%)	7/35 (20.0%)	11/39 (28.2%)	16/66 (24.2%)	4/13 (30.8%)	12/53 (22.6%)	
VGPR, n/N (%)	15/35 (42.9%)	15/39 (38.5%)	26/66 (39.4%)	2/13 (15.4%)	24/53 (45.3%)	
PR, n/N (%)	9/35 (25.7%)	7/39 (17.9%)	15/66 (22.7%)	6/13 (46.2%)	9/53 (17.0%)	
Median PFS, months (95%, CI)	18.2 (10.7, 22.5)	NYR (18.1, NYR)	19.6 (17.8, NYR)	18.3 (9.8, NYR)	19.6 (15.7, NYR)	
Median DOR, months (95%, CI)	18.3 (12.0, NYR)	NYR (NYR, NYR)	22.1 (18.3, NYR)	20.0 (8.4, NYR)	22.5 (18.1, NYR)	
Median OS, months (95%, CI)	NYR (NYR, NYR)	NYR (NYR, NYR)	34.4 (22.5, NYR)	NYR (20.0, NYR)	34.4 (22.5, NYR)	
Median FU, months (range)	12.4 (0.9–34.4)	12.2 (1.2–28.3)	12.2 (0.9–34.4)	10.3 (1.0–23.1)	12.4 (0.9–34.4)	
ORR, CR/sCR, VGPR, PR, and disease progression were based on 2 consecutive response assessments. Median PFS and median OS were based on intent to treat. Data on individual cohorts from Part 1 are in Supplementary Table 1.

CI confidence interval, CR complete response, DOR duration of response, FU follow up, NYR not yet reached, ORR overall response rate, OS overall survival, PFS progression-free survival, PR partial response, RP2D recommended part 2 dose, sCR stringent complete response, TCR triple-class refractory, VGPR very good partial response.

Fig. 2 Kaplan–Meier curves for median PFS, DOR and OS by overall and RP2D.

a PFS, DOR and OS KM curves for all TCE (n = 69) and all TCR (n = 56). b PFS, DOR and OS for RP2D patients (n = 41). CI confidence interval, Est estimated, DOR duration of response, HR hazard ratio, KM Kaplan–Meir, NE not estimable, OS overall survival, PFS progression-free survival, RP2D recommended part 2 dose, TCE triple-class exposed, TCR triple-class refractory.

For TCR patients, refractory to all three classes of anti-myeloma drugs, 84.9% (45/53) achieved confirmed responses including 12 CR or stringent CR, 24 VGPR, and 9 PR. Median DOR was preserved at 22.5 months (95% CI, 18.1–NYR), with median PFS of 19.6 months (95% CI, 15.7–NYR) and median OS of 34.4 months (95% CI, 22.5–NYR) for patients with TCR disease.

For the 41 TCE patients treated at the RP2D the ORR was 84.6% (33/39), ≥VGPR 66.7% (26/39) with a median DOR NYR (95% CI, NYR–NYR). At a median follow up of 12.2 months (range, 1.2–28.3) the median PFS was NYR (95% CI, 18.1–NYR) while the estimate 2-year PFS, DOR and OS were 57.0% (95% CI, 41.1–79.1), 68% (95% CI, 51.0–90.7), and 77.2% (95% CI, 62.3–95.6), respectively (Fig. 2b).

Toxicity

Adverse events reported in >20% of patients in this cohort, serious adverse events (SAEs) and median belamaf dose intensity are presented in Tables 3a, b and 4 respectively, and were similar for TCE and TCR patients. Ninety one percent (63/69) and 95% (39/41) of patients experienced a least one Grade ≥3 AE in the overall cohort and at RP2D, respectively. The most common non hematologic Grade ≥3 AEs were keratopathy (48% in all patients, 46% at RP2D), decreased visual acuity (42% in all patients, 44% at the R2PD) and infection (24.6% in all patients, 19.5% at the RP2D). With respect to Grade ≥3 hematologic toxicity, thrombocytopenia was seen in 27% of the overall cohort and 27% in RP2D patients, with 36% and 34% experiencing neutropenia respectively (Table 3a). Fatal SAEs of Grade ≥3 were experienced by 3% and 2% of patients overall and at the RP2D, respectively. Median dose holds for Grade ≥3 AEs were 5 and 4, respectively (Tables 3b and 4).Table 3 a. Adverse events experienced by >20% of patients by overall cohort and RP2D patients. b. Serious adverse events and median dose holds by overall cohort and RP2D patients.

	All patients	RP2D patients	
	N = 69	N = 41	
	All Grade	Grade ≥ 3	All Grade	Grade ≥ 3	
a	
Any AE, n (%)	69 (100.0%)	63 (91.3%)	41 (100.0%)	39 (95.1%)	
 Keratopathy	47 (68.1%)	33 (47.8%)	28 (68.3%)	19 (46.3%)	
 Decreased Visual Acuity	54 (78.3%)	29 (42.0%)	31 (75.6%)	18 (43.9%)	
 Infection	37 (53.6%)	17 (24.6%)	23 (56.1%)	8 (19.5%)	
 Fatigue	36 (52.2%)	5 (7.2%)	21 (51.2%)	2 (4.9%)	
 Thrombocytopenia	27 (39.1%)	19 (27.5%)	15 (36.6%)	11 (26.8%)	
 Neutropenia	30 (43.5%)	25 (36.2%)	17 (41.5%)	14 (34.1%)	
 Diarrhea	24 (34.8%)	3 (4.3%)	13 (31.7%)	2 (4.9%)	
 Peripheral edema	21 (30.4%)	1 (1.4%)	13 (31.7%)	0 (0.0%)	
b	
 SAE/dose holds	All Grade	Grade ≥ 3	All Grade	Grade ≥ 3	
 SAE, n (%)	40 (58.0%)	37 (53.6%)	25 (61.0%)	23 (56.1%)	
 Median (range) dose hold	1 (0–47)	5 (1–24)	1 (0–18)	4 (1–12)	
AE adverse event, RP2D recommended part 2 dose, SAE serious adverse event, TCE triple-class exposed.

Note: Median (range) dose hold were the cumulative times of dose hold, based on patients having AEs leading to dose hold.

Table 4 Summary of belamaf dosing by Part 1, RP2D, and all patients.

Belamaf dosing parameters	Part 1	RP2D	All patients	
N = 36	N = 41	N = 69	
Number of cycles administered, median (range)	12 (1–37)	13 (1–26)	12 (1–37)	
Number of expected doses, median (range)	8 (1–37)	8 (1–13)	8 (1–37)	
Number of doses administered, median (range)	6 (1–22)	5 (1–15)	5 (1–22)	
Number of doses missed, median (range)	2 (0–27)	2 (0–9)	2 (0–27)	
Intended dose intensity (mg/kg/Q4W)	1.41a	1.25	1.43b	
Actual dose intensity (mg/kg/Q4W), median (range)	0.7 (0.1–6.5)	0.6 (0.1–2.5)	0.6 (0.1–6.5)	
% Relative dose intensity, median (range)	45 (14–100)	44 (11–100)	44 (11–100)	
Q4W every 4 weeks, RP2D recommended part 2 dose.

aAverage calculated based on 36 patients with various dose intensities.

bAverage calculated based on 69 patients with various dose intensities.

Discussion

In this subgroup analysis of belamaf-Pd treated patients on the ALGONQUIN trial, we demonstrate that TCE/TCR patients attain high response rates with durable remissions, with ORRs of 86%/85%, mPFS of 19.6/19.6 months, mDOR 22.1/22.5 months, and mOS of 34.4/34.4 months respectively. Patients treated at the RP2D had an ORR of 85% with median PFS NYR and estimated 24-month PFS rate of 57%. These findings support belamaf-Pd as a highly clinically active therapeutic option in patients who are TCE/TCR.

The majority of patients with RRMM will soon be exposed and/or refractory to PIs, IMIDs, and anti-CD38 mAbs after first- or second-line therapy given the increasing use of triplet [4–6] and quadruplet [12–14] therapies earlier in the disease course. The MAMMOTH study first reported on the outcomes of patients that are refractory to anti-CD38 mAbs of which 79.1% were TCR. The data were sobering demonstrating an ORR of 31% and mOS of 8.6 months. The results of the MAMMOTH study were validated in the prospective LocoMMotion study that evaluated the outcome of TCE patients treated with widely available, real-life standard of care (SOC) treatments [15]. For patients that were TCE/TCR the ORR was 29.8%/25.1%, mPFS 4.6/3.9 months, and mOS 12.4/11.1 months, respectively. Consistently, in a retrospective cohort study of 199 TCR patients treated with SOC regimens in Canada, the ORR was 40%, the mPFS similarly poor at 4.4 months, and mOS was 10.5 months [16]. These studies not only serve as a benchmark for comparison to new therapies being evaluated in in this setting but also highlight the urgent unmet clinical need of this expanding patient population.

The phase 2 DREAMM-2 trial enrolled RRMM patients who had received 3 or more lines of therapy and were refractory to IMiDs, PIs and an anti-CD38 mAb. For the patients that received single agent belamaf (2.5 mg/kg Q3W) the ORR was 32% (97.5% CI: 21.7–43.6) ref. [27]. Although the mPFS was 2.8 months, for those patients that achieved a PR or better, the responses were durable with a mDOR of 11.0 months (95% CI, 4.2–not reached) and a mOS that was not reached with estimated 1-year survival probability of 87% (95% CI, 69%–95%). Although these results confirmed the single agent activity of belamaf in TCR patients, they suggested a need to improve on the response rates. The results of the ALGONQUIN study demonstrate that adding Pd to belamaf the improvement of ORR to 85% translated to a more clinically meaningful mPFS of 19.6 months in TCR patients.

Certainly, an evolving option for patients who are TCE are the most novel T-cell re-directing therapeutics, chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapies and the bispecific Abs, many of which share a common target with belamaf. The anti-BCMA bispecific Abs, teclistamab and elranatamab, received regulatory approval based on the results of the single-arm phase 2 studies, MajesTEC-1 and MagnestisMM-3, respectively. Patients with a median of 5 prior treatment lines of whom 78% were TCR on the Majestec-1 trial had an ORR of 63% with median PFS of 11.3 months (95% CI, 8.8–17.1) ref. [28]. In a retrospective subgroup analysis, the ORR was preserved in TCR patients. Ninety-seven percent of patients enrolled in the MagnetisMM-3 study were TCR. Patients treated with elranatamab achieved an ORR of 61% and with an estimated 51% of patients remaining in remission at 15 months [29]. In addition, the CD3 redirecting bispecific Abs targeting antigens beyond BMCA are demonstrating clinical activity in RRMM. In the phase 2 MonumenTal-1 trial, patients with ≥3 prior lines including ≥1 PI, ≥1IMiD, and ≥1 anti-CD 38 mAb received Talquetamab, a G protein-coupled receptor, family C, group 5, member D (GPRC5D) bispecific [30]. In this cohort, of whom 84% were TCR, the ORR was 74% with median PFS of 7.5 and 11.9 months for the weekly and Q2W cohorts respectively [30]. Finally, in the first-in-human study of cevostamab, a CD3 T-cell engaging bispecific antibody that targets Fc receptor-homolog 5 (FcRH5), 84.5% of patients were TCR and the ORR was 56.7% in those receiving doses of 132–198 mg Q3W [31]. In context, and with the known limitations of cross-trial comparisons, our study using the anti-BCMA ADC belamaf in combination with Pd in this subgroup analysis of patients who were universally TCE and almost all TCR appears to have comparable if not improved ORR and PFS.

It is important to consider the updated results recently presented from the phase 1b/2 Cartitude-1 trial demonstrating unprecedented results in RRMM. In this study, patients with a median 6 prior lines of treatment, 88% TCR, treated with ciltacabtagene autoleucel (cilta-cel) had an ORR of 98% and mPFS of 34.9 months [32]. The initial results of the randomized Cartitude-4 trial of cilta-cel vs. SOC regimens (PVd or DPd) were also recently presented. In this trial, patients with one to three prior lines of treatment who were lenalidomide refractory also showed high response rates, with an ORR in the intent to treat population of 85% vs. 67% in the standard regimen group, with a 12-month PFS of 76% vs 49%, respectively [33]. Alternatively, results from the randomized KarMMa-3 trial of idecabtagene vicleucel (ide-cel) vs. SOC regimens in patients with two to four prior lines of treatment showed an ORR of 71% and mPFS 13.3 months in the ide-cel group [34], noting however that the percent of TCR patients in Cartitude-4 was much lower at 14.4% compared 65% in the KarMMa-3. Despite the exciting cilta-cel data, we currently face several issues limiting access to Car-T therapy in most jurisdictions, due to challenges with product access (manufacturing capacity, distribution, reimbursement), as well as patient factors such as rapid disease progression, access to effective bridging, financial toxicity, and fitness. As such, many patients and providers will need to consider alternative anti-BCMA treatments for most TCE/TCR patients in the immediate future, until Car-T is more accessible to the global RRMM population.

With access becoming more widely available to anti-BCMA approaches and with studies evaluating these agents in earlier lines of therapy, the age-old question of treatment sequencing in myeloma remains relevant. Data is emerging on the effectiveness of BCMA targeted agents in patients previously exposed to an alternate BCMA directed therapy. This evolving literature, as well as further work on mechanisms of response and resistance, will be paramount as we aim to select optimal treatments for individual patients. Recently presented data are reassuring, suggesting that prior exposure to BMCA targeted ADCs such as belamaf does not preclude responses to other BMCA targeting agents. For example, in the cohort C (n = 40) of the MajesTEC-1 study 72.5% of patients were ADC exposed and received teclistamab. The ORR for patients previously treated with a BMCA targeting ADC was 52.5% ref. [35]. Furthermore, a pooled analysis of patients with prior anti-BCMA directed therapy (n = 87) treated with elranatamab on MagnetisMM studies revealed an ORR and mDOR for patients with prior BMCA-targeting ADC of 42.4% and 13.6 months, respectively [36]. Twenty-four patients treated in cohort C of the Cartitude-1 trial (n = 20) had prior anti-BCMA treatment, with ORR of 61% for those with prior ADC (n = 13) and a mPFS of 12.3 months [37], demonstrating in principle that patients treated with anti-BCMA ADCs can respond to anti-BCMA Car-T treatment. Finally, data on sequencing of belamaf after BMCA directed therapies are more limited but in a real-world study, 19 patients received anti-BMCA Car-T (n = 12), bispecific Ab (n = 6) or treatment with belamaf. Response to belamaf was similar in those with prior BMCA exposure compared to BMCA-naïve patients with a mPFS of 4 months reported in both groups [38]. Ongoing trials of the growing BCMA arsenal and their analyses in these patient subgroups will be imperative to optimizing the use of BMCA containing regimens such as belamaf-Pd in the treatment algorithm for individual patients.

The safety profile was similar for TCE patients compared to the intent to treat population (Supplementary Table 2). This includes the risk of serious infections that has emerged as a significant challenge with T-cell re-directing therapies. Indeed, the relative low rate of Grade ≥3 infections (24.6%) is consistent with what is reported in the DREAMM3 study [39] and further supports the notion that belamaf poses less infection risk. Nevertheless, it is important to discuss that ocular toxicity remains the main clinical challenge with belamaf administration, with no additional safety signals found in this analysis. In this subgroup, Grade ≥ 3 ocular AEs were keratopathy (48% in all patients, 46% at RP2D) and decreased visual acuity (42% in all patients, 44% at the R2PD). Longer dosing intervals did not compromise efficacy in our study, similar to the findings with the use of belamaf given every 12 weeks in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone resulting in 11–13% Grade 3 visual acuity changes [40]. To evaluate if ocular toxicity can be further improved, we have added an additional cohort to part 2 of this trial where by patients will receive belamaf 1.92 mg/m2 every 8 weeks with standard Pd, based on emerging data from the DREAMM-9 trial that this dose resulted in reduced toxicity with preserved response rates [41]. We have also embarked on an optional ocular sub-study using bandage contact lenses to attempt to reduce corneal toxicity, with results to be reported at a later date. While optimization efforts continue, routine eye examinations remain a requirement for patients being treated with belamaf, and clinicians must be informed on symptom management and dose-modification. However, there are divergent challenges with alternative novel agents in this patient population, including infection (61.8–76%) and CRS (50.6–72%) with the anti-BCMA bispecifics [28, 29], CRS/ICANS (84–92%/17–18%) with Car-T therapy [20, 32], and dysgeusia (37–65%), skin (24–67%) and nail changes (20–57%) with talquetamab [42], supporting the need for individualized treatment based on patient and disease characteristics and patient choice.

While our results are encouraging, we recognize there are several limitations to our study, including the short follow up time and small number of patients. In addition, the results of our phase 1–2 trial need to be confirmed in a large phase 3 trial with an appropriate comparator, such as the DREAMM-8 trial which compares belamaf-Pd to PVd and is expected to read out soon [43].

In summary, patients with TCE/TCR disease treated with belamaf-Pd on the ALGONQUIN trial experienced clinical benefits that are markedly superior to those reported with real-life SOC therapies and competitive with other BCMA agents including the bispecifics and ide-cel. These data support the use of belamaf-Pd as a highly effective therapy to address the unmet need of particularly challenging RRMM patient population.

Supplementary information

Supplementary data

Supplementary information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1038/s41408-024-01135-2.

Acknowledgements

ST is supported by grants from the Canadian Institute for Health Research (grant number 175267). Medical editorial support was provided by Lama Yamani (Veristat, LLC) and funded by the CMRG. The authors thank the patients who participated in this study as well as their caregivers, families, the members and the following individuals from GSK: Dr Antonio Palumbo (data interpretation and manuscript review) and Anna Lowry (clinical trial management).

Author contributions

All authors participated in study design and conduct; data acquisition, analysis, and interpretation; drafting and revising the article; and approved the final version before submission. JS performed statistical analyses. ST, AM, AK, and DR verified the underlying data. All authors had access to the study data and had final responsibility for the decision to submit the article for publication.

Funding

This study was sponsored by the Canadian Myeloma Research Group (CMRG) with support from Glaxo-Smith-Kline.

Data availability

The data generated for this study is available upon reasonable request from the corresponding author.

Competing interests

The authors declare the following competing interests: AM received honoraria from Celgene, Janssen, Amgen, Takeda, Sanofi, and GSK. DR received research funding and honoraria from, and is on the advisory board of, Janssen, BMS, and Takeda; received research funding from Millennium Pharmaceuticals; and received honoraria from Amgen, Sanofi, and GSK. ML received research support from BMS/Celgene and Janssen; and honoraria from BMS/Celgene, Janssen, Gilead, AbbVie, AstraZeneca, and Takeda. SP received consultancy honoraria from Janssen, BMS, FORUS, and Apotex; study funding from GSK; and funding from BMS. DW received honoraria from Amgen, Antengene, BMS, FORUS Therapeutics, GSK, Janssen, Karyopharm, Pfizer, Sanofi, and Takeda. MC received research support from BMS/Celgene and Janssen; and honoraria from BMS/Celgene, Janssen, Gilead, AbbVie, AstraZeneca, and Takeda. RK received honoraria from Akcea Therapeutics, Amgen, BMS, Janssen, Merck, Sanofi, Celgene, Pfizer, and Takeda; received research funding from Merck and Sanofi; and is a current equity holder in the private company Karyopharm. HM received advisory fees from Janssen, Takeda, Amgen, Pfizer, BMS, FORUS, and Sanofi; received research funding from Janssen; and is supported by the early career award from Hamilton Health Sciences. IO participated in advisory boards for and received honoraria from Amgen, BMS, Celgene, FORUS Therapeutics, Janssen, Pfizer, Sanofi-Genzyme, and Takeda; and received research funding from Janssen. JS, AK, and EG are employees of CMRG. ST received grant support from GSK, Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS), Janssen, Pfizer, Amgen, Roche, and Genentech; consulting fees from BMS, GSK, and Roche; and honoraria from BMS, Janssen, Amgen, Sanofi, and Pfizer.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The trial was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, International Council Harmonization Good Clinical Practice Guidelines, local regulation governing the conduct of clinical studies and institutional guidelines. Approval to conduct the trial was provided by Ontario Cancer Research Ethics Board (OCREB; IRB00003960); project ID 1598. Informed consent was obtained from all patients.

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
==== Refs
References

1. Mian H Reece D Masih-Khan E McCurdy A Kardjadj M Jimenez-Zepeda VH Survival and Outcomes of Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Patients Stratified by Transplant Status 2007–2018: Retrospective Analysis from the Canadian Myeloma Research Group Database Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk 2022 22 608 17 10.1016/j.clml.2022.03.002 35379589
Mian H, Reece D, Masih-Khan E, McCurdy A, Kardjadj M, Jimenez-Zepeda VH, et al. Survival and Outcomes of Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Patients Stratified by Transplant Status 2007–2018: Retrospective Analysis from the Canadian Myeloma Research Group Database. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk. 2022;22:608–17.35379589 10.1016/j.clml.2022.03.002
2. Puertas B, González-Calle V, Sobejano-Fuertes E, Escalante F, Queizán JA, Bárez A, et al. Novel Agents as Main Drivers for Continued Improvement in Survival in Multiple Myeloma. Cancers. 2023;15:1558.
3. McCurdy A Seow H Pond GP Gayowsky A Chakraborty R Visram A Cancer-specific mortality in multiple myeloma: a population-based retrospective cohort study Haematologica 2023 108 3384 91 10.3324/haematol.2023.282905 37439357
McCurdy A, Seow H, Pond GP, Gayowsky A, Chakraborty R, Visram A, et al. Cancer-specific mortality in multiple myeloma: a population-based retrospective cohort study. Haematologica. 2023;108:3384–91.37439357 10.3324/haematol.2023.282905
4. Richardson PG Jacobus SJ Weller EA Hassoun H Lonial S Raje NS Triplet Therapy, Transplantation, and Maintenance until Progression in Myeloma N Engl J Med 2022 387 132 47 10.1056/NEJMoa2204925 35660812
Richardson PG, Jacobus SJ, Weller EA, Hassoun H, Lonial S, Raje NS, et al. Triplet Therapy, Transplantation, and Maintenance until Progression in Myeloma. N Engl J Med. 2022;387:132–47.35660812 10.1056/NEJMoa2204925
5. Moreau P Hulin C Macro M Caillot D Chaleteix C Roussel M VTD is superior to VCD prior to intensive therapy in multiple myeloma: results of the prospective IFM2013-04 trial Blood 2016 127 2569 74 10.1182/blood-2016-01-693580 27002117
Moreau P, Hulin C, Macro M, Caillot D, Chaleteix C, Roussel M, et al. VTD is superior to VCD prior to intensive therapy in multiple myeloma: results of the prospective IFM2013-04 trial. Blood. 2016;127:2569–74.27002117 10.1182/blood-2016-01-693580
6. Facon T Kumar SK Plesner T Orlowski RZ Moreau P Bahlis N Daratumumab, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone versus lenalidomide and dexamethasone alone in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MAIA): overall survival results from a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial Lancet Oncol 2021 22 1582 96 10.1016/S1470-2045(21)00466-6 34655533
Facon T, Kumar SK, Plesner T, Orlowski RZ, Moreau P, Bahlis N, et al. Daratumumab, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone versus lenalidomide and dexamethasone alone in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MAIA): overall survival results from a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2021;22:1582–96.34655533 10.1016/S1470-2045(21)00466-6
7. Dimopoulos MA Oriol A Nahi H San-Miguel J Bahlis NJ Usmani SZ Overall Survival With Daratumumab, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone in Previously Treated Multiple Myeloma (POLLUX): A Randomized, Open-Label, Phase III Trial J Clin Oncol 2023 41 1590 9 10.1200/JCO.22.00940 36599114
Dimopoulos MA, Oriol A, Nahi H, San-Miguel J, Bahlis NJ, Usmani SZ, et al. Overall Survival With Daratumumab, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone in Previously Treated Multiple Myeloma (POLLUX): A Randomized, Open-Label, Phase III Trial. J Clin Oncol. 2023;41:1590–9.36599114 10.1200/JCO.22.00940
8. Sonneveld P Chanan-Khan A Weisel K Nooka AK Masszi T Beksac M Overall Survival With Daratumumab, Bortezomib, and Dexamethasone in Previously Treated Multiple Myeloma (CASTOR): A Randomized, Open-Label, Phase III Trial J Clin Oncol 2023 41 1600 9 10.1200/JCO.21.02734 36413710
Sonneveld P, Chanan-Khan A, Weisel K, Nooka AK, Masszi T, Beksac M, et al. Overall Survival With Daratumumab, Bortezomib, and Dexamethasone in Previously Treated Multiple Myeloma (CASTOR): A Randomized, Open-Label, Phase III Trial. J Clin Oncol. 2023;41:1600–9.36413710 10.1200/JCO.21.02734
9. Usmani SZ Quach H Mateos MV Landgren O Leleu X Siegel D Final analysis of carfilzomib, dexamethasone, and daratumumab vs carfilzomib and dexamethasone in the CANDOR study Blood Adv 2023 7 3739 48 10.1182/bloodadvances.2023010026 37163358
Usmani SZ, Quach H, Mateos MV, Landgren O, Leleu X, Siegel D, et al. Final analysis of carfilzomib, dexamethasone, and daratumumab vs carfilzomib and dexamethasone in the CANDOR study. Blood Adv. 2023;7:3739–48.37163358 10.1182/bloodadvances.2023010026
10. Richardson PG Perrot A San-Miguel J Beksac M Spicka I Leleu X Isatuximab plus pomalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone versus pomalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone in patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (ICARIA-MM): follow-up analysis of a randomised, phase 3 study Lancet Oncol 2022 23 416 27 10.1016/S1470-2045(22)00019-5 35151415
Richardson PG, Perrot A, San-Miguel J, Beksac M, Spicka I, Leleu X, et al. Isatuximab plus pomalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone versus pomalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone in patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (ICARIA-MM): follow-up analysis of a randomised, phase 3 study. Lancet Oncol. 2022;23:416–27.35151415 10.1016/S1470-2045(22)00019-5
11. Richardson PG Kumar SK Masszi T Grzasko N Bahlis NJ Hansson M Final Overall Survival Analysis of the TOURMALINE-MM1 Phase III Trial of Ixazomib, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone in Patients With Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma J Clin Oncol 2021 39 2430 42 10.1200/JCO.21.00972 34111952
Richardson PG, Kumar SK, Masszi T, Grzasko N, Bahlis NJ, Hansson M, et al. Final Overall Survival Analysis of the TOURMALINE-MM1 Phase III Trial of Ixazomib, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone in Patients With Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma. J Clin Oncol. 2021;39:2430–42.34111952 10.1200/JCO.21.00972
12. Voorhees PM, Sborov DW, Laubach J, Kaufman JL, Reeves B, Rodriguez C, et al. Addition of daratumumab to lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone for transplantation-eligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (GRIFFIN): final analysis of an open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial. Lancet Haematol. 2023;10:e825–37.
13. Moreau P Hulin C Perrot A Arnulf B Belhadj K Benboubker L Maintenance with daratumumab or observation following treatment with bortezomib, thalidomide, and dexamethasone with or without daratumumab and autologous stem-cell transplant in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (CASSIOPEIA): an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial Lancet Oncol 2021 22 1378 90 10.1016/S1470-2045(21)00428-9 34529931
Moreau P, Hulin C, Perrot A, Arnulf B, Belhadj K, Benboubker L, et al. Maintenance with daratumumab or observation following treatment with bortezomib, thalidomide, and dexamethasone with or without daratumumab and autologous stem-cell transplant in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (CASSIOPEIA): an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2021;22:1378–90.34529931 10.1016/S1470-2045(21)00428-9
14. Goldschmidt H Mai EK Bertsch U Fenk R Nievergall E Tichy D Addition of isatuximab to lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone as induction therapy for newly diagnosed, transplantation-eligible patients with multiple myeloma (GMMG-HD7): part 1 of an open-label, multicentre, randomised, active-controlled, phase 3 trial Lancet Haematol 2022 9 e810 21 10.1016/S2352-3026(22)00263-0 36328040
Goldschmidt H, Mai EK, Bertsch U, Fenk R, Nievergall E, Tichy D, et al. Addition of isatuximab to lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone as induction therapy for newly diagnosed, transplantation-eligible patients with multiple myeloma (GMMG-HD7): part 1 of an open-label, multicentre, randomised, active-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet Haematol. 2022;9:e810–21.36328040 10.1016/S2352-3026(22)00263-0
15. Mateos MV Weisel K De Stefano V Goldschmidt H Delforge M Mohty M LocoMMotion: a prospective, non-interventional, multinational study of real-life current standards of care in patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma Leukemia 2022 36 1371 6 10.1038/s41375-022-01531-2 35332278
Mateos MV, Weisel K, De Stefano V, Goldschmidt H, Delforge M, Mohty M, et al. LocoMMotion: a prospective, non-interventional, multinational study of real-life current standards of care in patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma. Leukemia. 2022;36:1371–6.35332278 10.1038/s41375-022-01531-2
16. Visram A De La Torre A White D Kardjadj M Masih-Khan E Chu MP Real World Data on Outcomes of Anti-CD38 Antibody Refractory, Including Triple Class Refractory, Patients with Multiple Myeloma: A Multi-Institutional Report from the Canadian Myeloma Research Group (CMRG) Database Blood 2022 140 4287 9 10.1182/blood-2022-168843
Visram A, De La Torre A, White D, Kardjadj M, Masih-Khan E, Chu MP, et al. Real World Data on Outcomes of Anti-CD38 Antibody Refractory, Including Triple Class Refractory, Patients with Multiple Myeloma: A Multi-Institutional Report from the Canadian Myeloma Research Group (CMRG) Database. Blood. 2022;140:4287–9.10.1182/blood-2022-168843
17. Tai YT Mayes PA Acharya C Zhong MY Cea M Cagnetta A Novel anti-B-cell maturation antigen antibody-drug conjugate (GSK2857916) selectively induces killing of multiple myeloma Blood 2014 123 3128 38 10.1182/blood-2013-10-535088 24569262
Tai YT, Mayes PA, Acharya C, Zhong MY, Cea M, Cagnetta A, et al. Novel anti-B-cell maturation antigen antibody-drug conjugate (GSK2857916) selectively induces killing of multiple myeloma. Blood. 2014;123:3128–38.24569262 10.1182/blood-2013-10-535088
18. Pillarisetti K Powers G Luistro L Babich A Baldwin E Li Y Teclistamab is an active T cell-redirecting bispecific antibody against B-cell maturation antigen for multiple myeloma Blood Adv 2020 4 4538 49 10.1182/bloodadvances.2020002393 32956453
Pillarisetti K, Powers G, Luistro L, Babich A, Baldwin E, Li Y, et al. Teclistamab is an active T cell-redirecting bispecific antibody against B-cell maturation antigen for multiple myeloma. Blood Adv. 2020;4:4538–49.32956453 10.1182/bloodadvances.2020002393
19. Shah N Chari A Scott E Mezzi K Usmani SZ B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA) in multiple myeloma: rationale for targeting and current therapeutic approaches Leukemia 2020 34 985 1005 10.1038/s41375-020-0734-z 32055000
Shah N, Chari A, Scott E, Mezzi K, Usmani SZ. B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA) in multiple myeloma: rationale for targeting and current therapeutic approaches. Leukemia. 2020;34:985–1005.32055000 10.1038/s41375-020-0734-z
20. Munshi NC Anderson LD Jr Shah N Madduri D Berdeja J Lonial S Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma N Engl J Med 2021 384 705 16 10.1056/NEJMoa2024850 33626253
Munshi NC, Anderson LD Jr, Shah N, Madduri D, Berdeja J, Lonial S, et al. Idecabtagene Vicleucel in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma. N Engl J Med. 2021;384:705–16.33626253 10.1056/NEJMoa2024850
21. Berdeja JG Madduri D Usmani SZ Jakubowiak A Agha M Cohen AD Ciltacabtagene autoleucel, a B-cell maturation antigen-directed chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (CARTITUDE-1): a phase 1b/2 open-label study Lancet 2021 398 314 24 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00933-8 34175021
Berdeja JG, Madduri D, Usmani SZ, Jakubowiak A, Agha M, Cohen AD, et al. Ciltacabtagene autoleucel, a B-cell maturation antigen-directed chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (CARTITUDE-1): a phase 1b/2 open-label study. Lancet. 2021;398:314–24.34175021 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00933-8
22. Trudel S Lendvai N Popat R Voorhees PM Reeves B Libby EN Targeting B-cell maturation antigen with GSK2857916 antibody-drug conjugate in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (BMA117159): a dose escalation and expansion phase 1 trial Lancet Oncol 2018 19 1641 53 10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30576-X 30442502
Trudel S, Lendvai N, Popat R, Voorhees PM, Reeves B, Libby EN, et al. Targeting B-cell maturation antigen with GSK2857916 antibody-drug conjugate in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (BMA117159): a dose escalation and expansion phase 1 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2018;19:1641–53.30442502 10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30576-X
23. Trudel S Lendvai N Popat R Voorhees PM Reeves B Libby EN Antibody-drug conjugate, GSK2857916, in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: an update on safety and efficacy from dose expansion phase I study Blood Cancer J 2019 9 37 10.1038/s41408-019-0196-6 30894515
Trudel S, Lendvai N, Popat R, Voorhees PM, Reeves B, Libby EN, et al. Antibody-drug conjugate, GSK2857916, in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: an update on safety and efficacy from dose expansion phase I study. Blood Cancer J. 2019;9:37.30894515 10.1038/s41408-019-0196-6
24. Trudel S, McCurdy A, Louzada ML, Parkin S, White D, Chu MP, et al. Belantamab mafodotin, pomalidomide, and dexamethasone in refractory multiple myeloma: a phase 1/2 trial. Nat Med. 2023;30:543–51.
25. Kumar S Paiva B Anderson KC Durie B Landgren O Moreau P International Myeloma Working Group consensus criteria for response and minimal residual disease assessment in multiple myeloma Lancet Oncol 2016 17 e328 46 10.1016/S1470-2045(16)30206-6 27511158
Kumar S, Paiva B, Anderson KC, Durie B, Landgren O, Moreau P, et al. International Myeloma Working Group consensus criteria for response and minimal residual disease assessment in multiple myeloma. Lancet Oncol. 2016;17:e328–46.27511158 10.1016/S1470-2045(16)30206-6
26. Farooq AV Degli Esposti S Popat R Thulasi P Lonial S Nooka AK Corneal Epithelial Findings in Patients with Multiple Myeloma Treated with Antibody-Drug Conjugate Belantamab Mafodotin in the Pivotal, Randomized, DREAMM-2 Study Ophthalmol Ther 2020 9 889 911 10.1007/s40123-020-00280-8 32712806
Farooq AV, Degli Esposti S, Popat R, Thulasi P, Lonial S, Nooka AK, et al. Corneal Epithelial Findings in Patients with Multiple Myeloma Treated with Antibody-Drug Conjugate Belantamab Mafodotin in the Pivotal, Randomized, DREAMM-2 Study. Ophthalmol Ther. 2020;9:889–911.32712806 10.1007/s40123-020-00280-8
27. Lonial S Lee HC Badros A Trudel S Nooka AK Chari A Belantamab mafodotin for relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (DREAMM-2): a two-arm, randomised, open-label, phase 2 study Lancet Oncol 2020 21 207 21 10.1016/S1470-2045(19)30788-0 31859245
Lonial S, Lee HC, Badros A, Trudel S, Nooka AK, Chari A, et al. Belantamab mafodotin for relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (DREAMM-2): a two-arm, randomised, open-label, phase 2 study. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21:207–21.31859245 10.1016/S1470-2045(19)30788-0
28. Moreau P Garfall AL van de Donk N Nahi H San-Miguel JF Oriol A Teclistamab in Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma N. Engl J Med 2022 387 495 505 10.1056/NEJMoa2203478 35661166
Moreau P, Garfall AL, van de Donk N, Nahi H, San-Miguel JF, Oriol A, et al. Teclistamab in Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma. N. Engl J Med. 2022;387:495–505.35661166 10.1056/NEJMoa2203478
29. Lesokhin AM Tomasson MH Arnulf B Bahlis NJ Miles Prince H Niesvizky R Elranatamab in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma: phase 2 MagnetisMM-3 trial results Nat Med 2023 29 2259 67 10.1038/s41591-023-02528-9 37582952
Lesokhin AM, Tomasson MH, Arnulf B, Bahlis NJ, Miles Prince H, Niesvizky R, et al. Elranatamab in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma: phase 2 MagnetisMM-3 trial results. Nat Med. 2023;29:2259–67.37582952 10.1038/s41591-023-02528-9
30. Schinke CD Touzeau C Minnema MC van de Donk N Rodríguez-Otero P Mateos MV Pivotal phase 2 MonumenTAL-1 results of talquetamab (tal), a GPRC5DxCD3 bispecific antibody (BsAb), for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) J Clin Oncol 2023 41 8036 10.1200/JCO.2023.41.16_suppl.8036
Schinke CD, Touzeau C, Minnema MC, van de Donk N, Rodríguez-Otero P, Mateos MV, et al. Pivotal phase 2 MonumenTAL-1 results of talquetamab (tal), a GPRC5DxCD3 bispecific antibody (BsAb), for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). J Clin Oncol. 2023;41:8036.10.1200/JCO.2023.41.16_suppl.8036
31. Trudel S Cohen AD Krishnan AY Fonseca R Spencer A Berdeja JG Cevostamab Monotherapy Continues to Show Clinically Meaningful Activity and Manageable Safety in Patients with Heavily Pre-Treated Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM): Updated Results from an Ongoing Phase I Study Blood 2021 138 157 60 10.1182/blood-2021-147983
Trudel S, Cohen AD, Krishnan AY, Fonseca R, Spencer A, Berdeja JG, et al. Cevostamab Monotherapy Continues to Show Clinically Meaningful Activity and Manageable Safety in Patients with Heavily Pre-Treated Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM): Updated Results from an Ongoing Phase I Study. Blood. 2021;138:157–60.10.1182/blood-2021-147983
32. Lin Y Martin TG Usmani SZ Berdeja JG Jakubowiak AJ Agha ME CARTITUDE-1 final results: Phase 1b/2 study of ciltacabtagene autoleucel in heavily pretreated patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma J Clin Oncol 2023 41 8009 10.1200/JCO.2023.41.16_suppl.8009
Lin Y, Martin TG, Usmani SZ, Berdeja JG, Jakubowiak AJ, Agha ME, et al. CARTITUDE-1 final results: Phase 1b/2 study of ciltacabtagene autoleucel in heavily pretreated patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. J Clin Oncol. 2023;41:8009.10.1200/JCO.2023.41.16_suppl.8009
33. Dhakal B Yong K Harrison SJ Mateos MV Moreau P van de Donk N First phase 3 results from CARTITUDE-4: Cilta-cel versus standard of care (PVd or DPd) in lenalidomide-refractory multiple myeloma J Clin Oncol 2023 41 LBA106 LBA 10.1200/JCO.2023.41.17_suppl.LBA106
Dhakal B, Yong K, Harrison SJ, Mateos MV, Moreau P, van de Donk N, et al. First phase 3 results from CARTITUDE-4: Cilta-cel versus standard of care (PVd or DPd) in lenalidomide-refractory multiple myeloma. J Clin Oncol. 2023;41:LBA106–LBA.10.1200/JCO.2023.41.17_suppl.LBA106
34. Rodriguez-Otero P Ailawadhi S Arnulf B Patel K Cavo M Nooka AK Ide-cel or Standard Regimens in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma N Engl J Med 2023 388 1002 14 10.1056/NEJMoa2213614 36762851
Rodriguez-Otero P, Ailawadhi S, Arnulf B, Patel K, Cavo M, Nooka AK, et al. Ide-cel or Standard Regimens in Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma. N Engl J Med. 2023;388:1002–14.36762851 10.1056/NEJMoa2213614
35. Touzeau C Krishnan AY Moreau P Perrot A Usmani SZ Manier S Efficacy and safety of teclistamab (tec), a B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA) x CD3 bispecific antibody, in patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) after exposure to other BCMA-targeted agents J Clin Oncol 2022 40 8013 10.1200/JCO.2022.40.16_suppl.8013
Touzeau C, Krishnan AY, Moreau P, Perrot A, Usmani SZ, Manier S, et al. Efficacy and safety of teclistamab (tec), a B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA) x CD3 bispecific antibody, in patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) after exposure to other BCMA-targeted agents. J Clin Oncol. 2022;40:8013.10.1200/JCO.2022.40.16_suppl.8013
36. Nooka AK Lesokhin AM Mohty M Niesvisky R Maisel C Arnulf B Efficacy and safety of elranatamab in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) and prior B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA)-directed therapies: A pooled analysis from MagnetisMM studies J Clin Oncol 2023 41 8008 10.1200/JCO.2023.41.16_suppl.8008
Nooka AK, Lesokhin AM, Mohty M, Niesvisky R, Maisel C, Arnulf B, et al. Efficacy and safety of elranatamab in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) and prior B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA)-directed therapies: A pooled analysis from MagnetisMM studies. J Clin Oncol. 2023;41:8008.10.1200/JCO.2023.41.16_suppl.8008
37. Cohen AD Mateos M-V Cohen YC Rodriguez-Otero P Paiva B van de Donk N Efficacy and safety of cilta-cel in patients with progressive multiple myeloma after exposure to other BCMA-targeting agents Blood 2023 141 219 30 10.1182/blood.2022015526 36095849
Cohen AD, Mateos M-V, Cohen YC, Rodriguez-Otero P, Paiva B, van de Donk N, et al. Efficacy and safety of cilta-cel in patients with progressive multiple myeloma after exposure to other BCMA-targeting agents. Blood. 2023;141:219–30.36095849 10.1182/blood.2022015526
38. Hultcrantz M Kleinman D Vij R Escalante F Kotoswky N Bitetti J Belantamab Mafodotin (Belamaf) for Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM): A Real-World Observational Study Blood 2022 140 10124 6 10.1182/blood-2022-164929
Hultcrantz M, Kleinman D, Vij R, Escalante F, Kotoswky N, Bitetti J, et al. Belantamab Mafodotin (Belamaf) for Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM): A Real-World Observational Study. Blood. 2022;140:10124–6.10.1182/blood-2022-164929
39. Dimopoulos MA Hungria VT Radinoff A Delimpasi S Mikala G Masszi T Efficacy and safety of single-agent belantamab mafodotin versus pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (DREAMM-3): a phase 3, open-label, randomised study Lancet Haematol 2023 10 e801 e12 10.1016/S2352-3026(23)00243-0 37793771
Dimopoulos MA, Hungria VT, Radinoff A, Delimpasi S, Mikala G, Masszi T, et al. Efficacy and safety of single-agent belantamab mafodotin versus pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (DREAMM-3): a phase 3, open-label, randomised study. Lancet Haematol. 2023;10:e801–e12.37793771 10.1016/S2352-3026(23)00243-0
40. Terpos E Gavriatopoulou M Ntanasis-Stathopoulos I Malandrakis P Fotiou D Migkou M Safety and clinical activity of belantamab mafodotin plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone in transplant ineligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: The phase 1/2, prospective, open-label, BelaRd study J Clin Oncol 2023 41 8050 10.1200/JCO.2023.41.16_suppl.8050
Terpos E, Gavriatopoulou M, Ntanasis-Stathopoulos I, Malandrakis P, Fotiou D, Migkou M, et al. Safety and clinical activity of belantamab mafodotin plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone in transplant ineligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: The phase 1/2, prospective, open-label, BelaRd study. J Clin Oncol. 2023;41:8050.10.1200/JCO.2023.41.16_suppl.8050
41. Usmani SZ Alonso Alonso A Quach H Koh Y Guenther A Min C-K DREAMM-9: Phase I Study of Belantamab Mafodotin Plus Standard of Care in Patients with Transplant-Ineligible Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Blood 2021 138 2738 10.1182/blood-2021-153315
Usmani SZ, Alonso Alonso A, Quach H, Koh Y, Guenther A, Min C-K, et al. DREAMM-9: Phase I Study of Belantamab Mafodotin Plus Standard of Care in Patients with Transplant-Ineligible Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma. Blood. 2021;138:2738.10.1182/blood-2021-153315
42. Chari A Minnema MC Berdeja JG Oriol A van de Donk N Rodriguez-Otero P Talquetamab, a T-Cell–Redirecting GPRC5D Bispecific Antibody for Multiple Myeloma N Engl J Med 2022 387 2232 44 10.1056/NEJMoa2204591 36507686
Chari A, Minnema MC, Berdeja JG, Oriol A, van de Donk N, Rodriguez-Otero P, et al. Talquetamab, a T-Cell–Redirecting GPRC5D Bispecific Antibody for Multiple Myeloma. N Engl J Med. 2022;387:2232–44.36507686 10.1056/NEJMoa2204591
43. Trudel S Davis R Lewis NM Bakshi KK Chopra B Montes de Oca R DREAMM-8: A Phase III Study of the Efficacy and Safety of Belantamab Mafodotin with Pomalidomide and Dexamethasone (B-Pd) Vs Pomalidomide Plus Bortezomib and Dexamethasone (PVd) in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM) Blood 2020 136 4 10.1182/blood-2020-139785 32614961
Trudel S, Davis R, Lewis NM, Bakshi KK, Chopra B, Montes de Oca R, et al. DREAMM-8: A Phase III Study of the Efficacy and Safety of Belantamab Mafodotin with Pomalidomide and Dexamethasone (B-Pd) Vs Pomalidomide Plus Bortezomib and Dexamethasone (PVd) in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM). Blood. 2020;136:4.32614961 10.1182/blood-2020-139785
