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.
Introducing
Now you can personalise
your Multiple Myeloma Hub experience!
Bookmark content to read later
Select your specific areas of interest
View content recommended for you
Find out moreThe 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 Bristol Myers Squibb, GSK, Pfizer, Roche and Sanofi. The levels of sponsorship listed are reflective of the amount of funding given. Digital educational resources delivered on the Multiple Myeloma Hub are supported by an educational grant from Janssen Biotech, Inc. View funders.
Bookmark this article
The combination of lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rd) is commonly utilized as induction therapy for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) who are not eligible for autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT). Daratumumab is an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody which has proven efficacy both as monotherapy (GEN5011 and SIRIUS2) and in combination with other established regimens in both the frontline setting (ALCYONE 3) and the relapsed/refractory setting (CASTOR4 and POLLUX5).
The phase III MAIA study (NCT02252172) is investigating whether the addition of daratumumab to Rd (dara-Rd) as frontline therapy reduces the risk of progression or death in patients with NDMM who are not eligible for ASCT, compared to Rd alone.6
During the 60th American Society of Hematology (ASH) meeting, the second interim results from the MAIA study were presented by Professor Thierry Facon.7 Subsequently, an approval request was submitted to the United States (U.S.) Food & Drug Administration (FDA) for the triplet combination based on these results, which was shortly followed by a submission to the European Medicines Agency (EMA).8,9 The results of the second interim analysis were subsequently published in the New England Journal of Medicine and are summarized here at a median follow-up of 28 months.6
Randomized, open-label phase III trial
Patients with NDMM (N= 737) who were ineligible for ASCT (due to age [≥ 65 years] or the presence of coexisting conditions) were randomized 1:1 to:
Dara-Rd, n= 368
Rd, n= 369
Patient stratification was by International Staging System (ISS) stage disease, geographic region and age (< 75 vs ≥ 75 years)
Treatment schedule per each 28-day cycle:
Lenalidomide (orally): 25mg on days 1–21
Dose reductions were recommended as follows:
Creatinine clearance of 30–50ml per minute: 10mg daily
Neutropenia and thrombocytopenia: interruption of treatment followed by the administration at the next lower dose
Dexamethasone (orally): 40mg on days one, eight, 15 and 22
Dose reduction to 20mg once weekly was recommended for patients ≥ 75 years old and those with a body mass index < 18.5
Daratumumab (intravenous): 16mg/kg once weekly in cycles one and two, every two weeks in Cycles 3–6 and every four weeks after cycle six
Median age: 73 years (45–90)
High-risk cytogenetics: 14.3%
Median time since diagnosis: 0.9 months (0–14.5)
Treatment continued until disease progression (PD) or unacceptable side effects
Primary endpoint: progression-free survival (PFS)
Secondary endpoints included:
Time to progression (TTP)
Percentage of patients with a complete response (CR)
Stringent CR plus a normal free light-chain ratio and absence of clonal plasma cells
Negative status for minimal residual disease (MRD) assessment
Overall response
Very good partial response (VGPR) or better
Overall survival (OS)
Time to response
Duration of response
Efficacy by cytogenetic subgroup
Safety
Median treatment duration: 25.3 (0.1–40.4) vs 21.3 (0.03–40.6) months
The median number of treatment cycles: 27 (1–44) vs 22 (1–43)
More patients in the dara-Rd group had dose modifications of lenalidomide due to adverse events (AEs)
Lenalidomide discontinuations: 20.9% vs 17 %
In the dara-Rd group, 35 patients discontinued Rd therapy but continued to receive daratumumab monotherapy for an average of 7.3 months (0.03–31.2)
Efficacy analysis was conducted in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population (all randomized patients) and is summarized in Table 1
Hazard ratio (HR) for PD or death with dara-Rd= 0.56 (95% CI, 0.43–0.73), p< 0.001
PFS benefit observed in all subgroups including age, ISS stage disease, cytogenetic profile, race and geographic region
Exception: those with hepatic impairment at baseline (HR= 1.08)
The rates of MRD-negativity were three times higher in the dara-Rd group compared to Rd (Table 1)
MRD-negativity was associated with prolonged PFS regardless of treatment arm
All patients who were MRD-negative had CR or better
OS was not reached (NR) in either arm, with follow-up ongoing
Of the responding patients, 80.3% in the dara-Rd arm and 65.7% in the Rd arm sustained the response for 30 months
The median time to CR or better: 10.4 vs 11.2 months
|
Dara-Rd (n= 368) |
Rd (n= 369) |
p value |
---|---|---|---|
ORR, % |
92.9 |
81.3 |
< 0.001 |
Best overall response |
|||
≥ CR, % |
47.6 |
24.9 |
< 0.001 |
≥ VGPR, % |
79.3 |
53.1 |
< 0.001 |
MRD status |
|||
Undetectable MRD*, % |
24.2 |
7.3 |
< 0.001 |
Survival probability |
|||
PD or death, % |
26.4 |
38.8 |
- |
Deaths, % |
16.8 |
20.6 |
- |
Median OS, months |
NR |
NR |
- |
PFS probability, 30 months, %95% CI |
70.6 65–75.4 |
55.6 49.5–61.3 |
- |
Median PFS, months95% CI |
NR |
31.9 28.9–NR |
- |
* MRD measured as one tumor cell per 105 white cells. ORR; overall response rate |
Safety analysis was conducted in all patients who received ≥ one dose of study treatment (dara-Rd: 364, Rd: 365)
Most common grade III/IV AEs occurring in > 10% of patients:
Neutropenia: 50% vs 35.3%
Anemia: 11.8% vs 19.7%
Lymphopenia: 15.1% vs 10.7%
Pneumonia: 13.7% vs 7.9%
Any grade infection: 86.3% vs 73.4%
Grade III/IV infection: 32.1% vs 23.3%
Discontinuation due to infection: 0.5% vs 1.4%
Most common: pneumonia 13.2% vs 7.4 %
AE leading to discontinuation: 7.1% vs 15.9%
AE leading to death: 6.9% vs 6.3 %
Most common: pneumonia 0.5% vs 0.8%
Invasive secondary primary cancers: 3.3% vs 3.6%
Infusion-related reactions (IRRs) related to daratumumab: 40.9%
Of these, 2.7% were grade III or IV
No grade V events
IRR led to discontinuation in one patient
Patients with NDMM who are ineligible for ASCT had a 44% reduced risk of PD or death when treated with dara-Rd compared to Rd alone. Patients receiving dara-Rd had a longer PFS, higher response rate, increased the depth of response and longer duration of response compared to Rd.
Notably, in this trial, 99% of patients were aged 65 or older, and the PFS benefit was maintained regardless of age. The HR for PD or death in patients aged over 75 treated with dara-Rd was 0.63 reflecting a 37% reduction compared to Rd alone. However, regimen selection should be carefully considered in patients with hepatic impairment given the benefit in PFS was not observed in this population.
Your opinion matters
Subscribe to get the best content related to multiple myeloma delivered to your inbox