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.
The Multiple Myeloma 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 Multiple Myeloma Hub cannot guarantee the accuracy of translated content. The Multiple Myeloma Hub 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 Abbvie, Roche, Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer, GSK, Johnson & Johnson, Legend Biotech and Caribou Biosciences. Funders are allowed no direct influence on our content. 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
Create an account to access:
Bookmark & personalize site content
Receive alerts for new content in your areas of interest
View multiple myeloma content recommended for you
Final results from the phase I DREAMM-9 trial (NCT04091126), evaluating belantamab mafodotin (belamaf) + bortezomib + lenalidomide + dexamethasone (BVRd) in adults with transplant-ineligible (TI) newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) (N = 118; safety population, n = 115), were presented by Enrique M. Ocio at the European Hematology Association (EHA) 2026 Congress, June 11–14, 2026, Stockholm, SE. The study aimed to identify the optimal belamaf dose and schedule among eight induction/maintenance schedules: 1.0, 1.4, or 1.9 mg/kg every 3 weeks (Q3W) during induction followed by every 4 weeks (Q4W) during maintenance; 1.4 or 1.9 mg/kg every 6 weeks (Q6W) followed by every 8 weeks (Q8W); first-dose step-down regimens of 1.9 mg/kg followed by 1.4 mg/kg every 9 weeks (Q9W), or 1.4 mg/kg followed by 1.0 mg/kg Q9W, during induction, with every 12 weeks (Q12W) during maintenance; and 1.0 mg/kg Q12W throughout. The primary endpoint was safety, including dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) and adverse events (AEs).
Key data: Grade ≥3 ocular AEs occurred in 74%, 88%, and 35% of patients with the Q3/4W, Q6/8W, and Q9/12W or Q12/12W schedules, respectively; first-event resolution rates were 97%, 86%, and 100%, respectively. Belamaf discontinuation due to Grade ≥3 ocular events was low (3%), occurring only in the Q3/4W cohorts. The overall response rates (ORRs) were 90%, 96%, and 85% with the Q3/4W, Q6/8W, and Q9/12W or Q12/12W schedules, respectively; complete response or better (≥CR) rates were 68%, 88%, and 59%, respectively. In the Q6/8W cohorts, belamaf induction at 1.9 mg/kg vs 1.4 mg/kg showed higher rates of ≥CR (92% vs 83%) and MRD-negativity (67% vs 42%). Relative dose intensity (RDI) was highest and most stable with extended dosing schedules, while vision-related functioning (VRF) was generally maintained with extended dosing intervals.
Key learning: DREAMM-9 data support a BVRd induction/maintenance dosing strategy with higher belamaf dose intensity during induction to deepen responses, followed by extended maintenance intervals to improve tolerability. These findings support the 1.9 mg/kg Q8W for 24 weeks followed by Q12W dosing schedules being used in the ongoing phase III DREAMM-10 and PrE1005 trials.
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