All content on this site is intended for healthcare professionals only. By acknowledging this message and accessing the information on this website you are confirming that you are a Healthcare Professional. If you are a patient or carer, please visit the International Myeloma Foundation or HealthTree for Multiple Myeloma.

  TRANSLATE

The mm Hub website uses a third-party service provided by Google that dynamically translates web content. Translations are machine generated, so may not be an exact or complete translation, and the mm Hub cannot guarantee the accuracy of translated content. The mm and its employees will not be liable for any direct, indirect, or consequential damages (even if foreseeable) resulting from use of the Google Translate feature. For further support with Google Translate, visit Google Translate Help.

The Multiple Myeloma Hub is an independent medical education platform, sponsored by Bristol Myers Squibb, GSK, Johnson & Johnson, Legend Biotech, Pfizer, Roche, and Sanofi. The levels of sponsorship listed are reflective of the amount of funding given. View funders.

Now you can support HCPs in making informed decisions for their patients

Your contribution helps us continuously deliver expertly curated content to HCPs worldwide. You will also have the opportunity to make a content suggestion for consideration and receive updates on the impact contributions are making to our content.

Find out more

AURIGA: A post hoc analysis of post-transplant D-R maintenance in NDMM

By Sheetal Bhurke

Share:

Nov 21, 2025

Learning objective: After reading this article, learners will be able to cite a new clinical development in multiple myeloma.


A post hoc analysis from the phase III AURIGA trial (NCT03901963), published by Foster et al. in the Blood Cancer Journalinvestigated the efficacy and safety of daratumumablenalidomide (D-R) maintenance (n = 99) vs R monotherapy (n = 101) in transplant-eligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). The analysis focused on clinically relevant subgroups, including those with high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities (HRCAs). The primary endpoint was the rate of measurable residual disease (MRD) negativity, at a sensitivity of 10–5 by 12 months post maintenance therapy.

Key data: MRD negative conversion rates were higher with D-R vs R across high-risk subgroups as per the original (31.8% vs 6.7%), revised (43.8% vs 13.3%), and modified IMS 2024 (41.2% vs 0%) criteria, as well as cytogenetically ultra-high-risk disease with ≥2 revised HRCAs (54.5% vs 0%). Progression-free survival (PFS) was consistently prolonged with D-R vs R across all subgroups. 

Key learning: D-R maintenance demonstrates consistent clinical benefit across patient subgroups with transplant-eligible NDMM, regardless of age or race, supporting its use in all transplant-eligible patients with NDMM.

References

Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements:

The content was clear and easy to understand

The content addressed the learning objectives

The content was relevant to my practice

I will change my clinical practice as a result of this content

Your opinion matters

HCPs, what do you view as the greatest barrier to the use of belantamab mafodotin combinations in clinical practice?