The results of our prospective study have revealed great diversity in the treatment regimens used to manage MM in real-life practice. This diversity was linked to factors such as novel agent accessibility and evolving treatment recommendations. Our results provide insight into associated clinical benefits.
8501 Background: Selinexor is an oral, selective inhibitor of XPO1-mediated nuclear export, leading to the reactivation of tumor suppressor proteins. In a phase 1b/2 study, the combination of once weekly (QW) selinexor with bortezomib and dexamethasone (SVd) was well tolerated with anti-MM activity in patients (pts) with PI-sensitive and PI-refractory disease. While twice weekly (BIW) bortezomib in combination therapy is efficacious, prolonged use is limited due to peripheral neuropathy (PN, 50-60%). The BOSTON study was designed to determine if SVd improves progression free survival (PFS), overall response rates (ORR) and reduces the rate of PN vs Vd. Methods: BOSTON is a global, phase 3, randomized study of QW SVd vs BIW Vd after 1-3 prior anti-MM regimens. The primary endpoint is PFS. Secondary endpoints include ORR, overall survival (OS) and PN (rates and EORTC QLQ-CIPN20 outcomes). Randomization is stratified by treatment with prior PI therapies, number of prior anti-MM regimens (1 vs > 1), and Revised International Staging System (R-ISS; Stage III vs I or II). Following confirmation of progressive disease, pts on Vd could cross over to either: 1) SVd for pts able to tolerate continued bortezomib or 2) selinexor and dexamethasone for pts with bortezomib intolerance. Results:402 pts were enrolled; 195 and 207 to SVd and Vd, respectively. Median age was 67 (range: 38-90). Most (59.6%) pts were > 65 years and 57.1% were male. R-ISS stage at the time of MM diagnosis was III for 18.5% of pts. Baseline characteristics were balanced across the 2 arms. SVd significantly prolonged PFS vs Vd (median 13.93 vs 9.46 months, HR = 0.70, P = 0.0066). SVd was associated with a significantly higher ORR (76.4% vs 62.3%, P = 0.0012). Median OS was not reached on SVd vs 25 months on Vd (P = 0.28). Most frequent treatment-related adverse events (grade ≥3) for SVd vs Vd were thrombocytopenia (35.9% vs 15.2%), fatigue (11.3% vs 0.5%) and nausea (7.7% vs 0%). Clinically important differences were reported on the motor, autonomic and sensory scales on CIPN20. PN rates (grade ≥2) were significantly lower with SVd vs Vd (21.0% vs 34.3%, P = 0.0013). Conclusions: BOSTON is the first phase 3 study to evaluate the clinical benefit of SVd for relapsed/refractory MM. The study met the primary endpoint: once weekly SVd significantly improved PFS and ORR compared to twice weekly Vd. Rates of PN were significantly reduced with numerically fewer deaths on SVd vs Vd. Full dataset will be presented at the meeting. Clinical trial information: NCT03110562 .
8005 Background: PD-1 blockade via pembro monotherapy showed antitumor activity in R/R cHL. KEYNOTE-204 (NCT02684292) was a randomized, international, open-label, phase III study of pembro vs BV in R/R cHL. Methods: Patients (pts) were aged ≥18 y, were post−autologous stem cell transplant (auto-SCT) or ineligible for auto-SCT, and had measurable disease and ECOG PS 0 or 1. BV-naive and BV-exposed pts were eligible. Pts were randomized 1:1 to pembro 200 mg IV Q3W or BV 1.8 mg/kg IV Q3W and stratified by prior auto-SCT (yes vs no) and status after 1L therapy (primary refractory vs relapsed <12 mo vs relapsed ≥12 mo after end of 1L therapy). Primary end points: PFS by blinded independent central review (BICR) per International Working Group (IWG) criteria including clinical and imaging data after auto-SCT or allogeneic SCT (allo-SCT) and OS. Key secondary end points: PFS excluding clinical and imaging data after auto-SCT or allo-SCT (PFS-secondary), and ORR by BICR per IWG, PFS by investigator review per IWG, and safety. Exploratory end point: DOR by BICR per IWG. Results: 304 pts were randomized and 300 were treated (148, pembro; 152, BV); 256 discontinued. Median (range) follow-up: 24.7 (0.6-42.3) mo. 15 pts were BV exposed. Median (range) time on treatment was 305.0 (1-814) and 146.5 (1-794) days with pembro and BV, respectively. Statistically significant improvement was observed with pembro vs BV for primary PFS analysis (HR 0.65 [95% CI 0.48-0.88; P =0.00271]; median 13.2 vs 8.3 mo); 12-mo PFS rates were 53.9% vs 35.6%, respectively. Benefit was observed in all subgroups tested, including pts with no auto-SCT (HR=0.61), primary refractory disease (HR=0.52), prior BV (HR=0.34) and BV naive (HR=0.67). Significant improvement in PFS-secondary was observed with pembro vs BV (HR 0.62 [95% CI 0.46-0.85]; median 12.6 vs 8.2 mo). Per investigator assessment, PFS was longer with pembro vs BV (HR 0.49 [95% CI 0.36-0.67]; median 19.2 vs 8.2 mo). ORR was 65.6% for pembro and 54.2% for BV; CR rates were 24.5% and 24.2%, respectively. Median (range) DOR was 20.7 mo (0.0+ to 33.2+) for pembro and 13.8 mo (0.0+ to 33.9+) for BV. Grade 3-5 TRAEs: 19.6% of pts with pembro and 25.0% with BV. One death due to TRAE occurred with pembro (pneumonia). Conclusions: In pts with R/R cHL, pembro was superior to BV and demonstrated statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in PFS across all subgroups, with safety consistent with previous reports. Pembro monotherapy should be standard of care for this pt population with R/R/cHL. Clinical trial information: NCT02684292 .
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.