IMS 2026 | UKMRA ProMMise D interim results: VRAT-guided belantamab mafodotin dosing in RRMM

During the 23rd International Myeloma Society (IMS) Annual Meeting and Exposition, September 23–26, 2026, Glasgow, UK, the Multiple Myeloma Hub spoke with Rakesh Popat, University College Hospital, London, UK. We asked about interim results from Arm D of the UKMRA ProMMise trial in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). 

In this interview, Popat discusses interim results from Arm D of the ProMMise trial, which is evaluating a vision-related anamnestic tool (VRAT) to assess ocular symptoms and function, and guide belantamab mafodotin dosing in patients with RRMM receiving belantamab mafodotin + bortezomib + dexamethasone (BVd). Popat reviews interim results from Stage 1, including the correlation between VRAT and ocular assessments, and outlines the planned evaluation of VRAT-guided dosing without mandated ocular examinations in Stage 2.  

Key points¹ 

• Arm D of the ProMMise trial is evaluating whether belantamab mafodotin dosing can be safely guided by a VRAT, reducing the need for routine ocular examinations when using a less frequent dosing schedule. 
• The rationale for evaluating the VRAT was informed by a retrospective analysis of the DREAMM-2 trial (NCT03525678), which showed an association between OSDI responses and keratopathy.  
• The VRAT is a nine-item questionnaire based on the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI), a validated patient-reported outcome measure, consisting of five questions assessing ocular symptoms and four assessing the impact of ocular symptoms on daily activities. 
• Stage 1 included 40 patients with RRMM who had received a median of two prior lines of therapy. VRAT and ocular assessments were performed in parallel, providing 80 paired assessments to evaluate the performance of the VRAT. 
• Across the 80 paired assessments, the VRAT demonstrated a sensitivity of 83.3%, specificity of 75.7%, negative predictive value of 98.2%, and positive predictive value of 21.7%. There was one false-negative VRAT result (1.3%). 
• There were 18 false-positive VRAT results among the 80 paired assessments. Some ocular symptoms identified by the VRAT were attributable to causes other than belantamab mafodotin, highlighting the importance of patient and HCP education when administering and interpreting the questionnaire. 
• Stage 2 of Arm D will evaluate the safety of VRAT-guided belantamab mafodotin dosing without mandated ocular examinations. 
• The VRAT could provide a patient-reported approach to guide belantamab mafodotin dosing while reducing the need for routine ocular examinations. 

This educational resource is independently supported by GSK. All content is developed by SES in collaboration with an expert steering committee. Funders are allowed no influence.