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 nuclear export protein, exportin 1 (XPO1), is overexpressed in multiple myeloma (MM), resulting in a decreased abundance of tumor suppressor proteins in the nucleus. Selinexor is a first-in-class, orally available, selective inhibitor of nuclear export (SINE), which binds to and inactivates XPO1, reinstating physiological tumor suppressor levels.1
Data from part two of the STORM study provided grounds for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of selinexor in combination with low dose dexamethasone (dex) for the treatment of patients with relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM). Here, we provide a summary of the latest advances of selinexor in triplet regimens for the treatment of RRMM, as presented at this year’s virtual American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meeting.
The STOMP study (NCT02343042) is a phase Ib/ II dose escalation and expansion trial evaluating selinexor in combination with eight established MM backbone therapies across nine arms for the treatment of patients with RRMM. During this year’s ASCO Meeting, Cristina Gasparetto discussed the data from two arms of the STOMP study—watch the interview here. The Multiple Myeloma Hub is pleased to present a summary.
Selinexor and daratumumab (dara) have both demonstrated single-agent clinical activity in MM. One arm of the STOMP study sought to determine the efficacy and safety profiles of SDd in patients with RRMM.
Table 1. Baseline characteristics of patients enrolled on the STOMP SDd arm1
Auto-SCT, autologous stem cell transplantation; BIW, biweekly; dara, daratumumab; IMiD, immunomodulatory drug; PI, proteasome inhibitor; QW, weekly; SDd, selinexor + daratumumab + dexamethasone * RP2D. † Patients pre-treated with bortezomib, carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and pomalidomide. |
|
Characteristic |
N = 34 |
Regimen, n |
|
BIW selinexor |
3 |
QW selinexor* |
31 |
Median age, years (range) |
68 (44–83) |
Male, % |
56 |
Median time from diagnosis to SDd, years (range) |
5.6 (<1–14) |
Median prior regimens, n (range) |
3 (2–10) |
Prior treatment, % |
|
PI (exposed:refractory) |
100:85 |
IMiD (exposed:refractory) |
100:76 |
Quad exposed† |
23.5 |
Auto-SCT |
73.5 |
Dara treated |
6 |
Figure 1. Patient outcomes to SDd treatment regimen1
A ORRs and B survival outcomes to SDd in all enrolled patients, patients who are dara naïve, and patients who received the RP2D.
CBR, clinical benefit rate; dara, daratumumab; ORR, overall response rates; PD, progressive disease; PR, partial response; RP2D, recommended phase II dose; SD, stable disease; SDd, selinexor + daratumumab + dexamethasone; VGPR, very good partial response
CBR = ORR + minimal response
Table 2. Common Grade 3–4 TRAEs observed in > 5% of patients receiving SDd at the RP2D1
RP2D, recommended phase II dose; TRAE, treatment-related adverse event |
|
Grade 3–4 TRAEs |
% of patients (N = 34) |
Thrombocytopenia |
47.0 |
Anemia |
32.4 |
Neutropenia |
26.5 |
Fatigue |
17.6 |
Hyponatremia |
11.8 |
Nausea |
8.8 |
The study identified an SDd treatment regimen that was well tolerated in patients with PI- and IMiD-refractory MM and suggests that clinical improvement is achievable with the RP2D.
This study set out to determine the efficacy and safety profiles of SKd in patients with RRMM.
Table 3. Dosing schedules of SKd2
IV, intravenous; PO, per os * C1D1 dose of carfilzomib was 20 mg/m2 for all patients |
|||
Dose level |
Selinexor, mg PO Days 1, 8, 15, 22 |
Dex, mg IV or PO Days 1, 8, 15, 22 |
Carfilzomib, mg/m2 IV* Days 1, 8, 15 |
1 |
100 |
40 |
56 |
–1 |
80 |
40 |
56 |
–1a |
80 |
40 |
70 |
Results
Table 4. Baseline characteristics of patients enrolled on the STOMP SKd arm2
SCT, stem cell transplantation; SKd, selinexor + carfilzomib + dexamethasone *n = 23 |
|
Characteristic |
N = 24 |
Median age, years (range) |
70.5 (50–76) |
Male, % |
62.5 |
Median time from diagnosis to SKd, years (range)* |
5.01 (2.7–11.3) |
Median prior regimens, n (range)* |
3 (1–8) |
Prior treatment, % |
|
Bortezomib |
100 |
Carfilzomib |
4.2 |
Lenalidomide |
95.8 |
Pomalidomide |
62.5 |
Daratumumab |
58.3 |
SCT |
79.2 |
Figure 2. Patient outcomes to SKd treatment regimen2
CBR, clinical benefit rate; CR, complete response; PR, partial response; SD, stable disease; VGPR, very good partial response
CBR = ORR + minimal response.
Table 5. Common Grade 3–4 TRAEs observed in > 5% of patients receiving SKd at the RP2D2
RP2D, recommended phase II dose; TRAE, treatment-related adverse event *Data cutoff: May 1, 2020 |
|
Grade ≥ 3 TRAEs |
% of patients (N = 24)* |
Thrombocytopenia |
54 |
Anemia |
20.8 |
Leukopenia |
12.5 |
Neutropenia |
8.3 |
Fatigue |
8.3 |
QW SKd demonstrated deep responses and appears to be well tolerated in patients with RRMM following a median of four prior lines of therapy. These data support further investigation of the regimen.
The phase III BOSTON trial (NCT03110562) aimed to compare the efficacy of selinexor + bortezomib + dex (SVd) with bortezomib + dex (Vd), and to determine if SVd reduces the rate of PN compared with Vd alone. At this year’s virtual ASCO Annual Meeting, Meletios A. Dimopoulos outlined the initial results, summarized here.3
Data from the aforementioned studies support the incorporation of selinexor into triplet regimens for the treatment of MM. Selinexor appears to enhance the clinical efficacy of currently established regimens and could provide an alternative to IMiD-based therapeutics in the relapsed setting.
For more information on the current status of selinexor for the treatment of R/R diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, click here.
Your opinion matters
Subscribe to get the best content related to multiple myeloma delivered to your inbox