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, Johnson & Johnson, 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
On December 3, 2021, Saad Usmani and colleagues published the updated safety and efficacy analysis of the phase III CANDOR study (NCT03158688) in Lancet Oncology.1 This was a global, multicenter, randomized, open-label study comparing DKd (daratumumab, carfilzomib, and dexamethasone) with Kd (carfilzomib and dexamethasone) in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Union have already approved this triplet combination for patients who have received 1–3 lines of treatment, which was based on the previous data analysis.1
The current analysis was a preplanned interim analysis for overall survival; however, the data were not mature at the time of data cutoff (June 15, 2020).1 We summarize below the updated progression-free survival (PFS) data in the intention-to-treat population, with 11 months additional follow-up, as well as the updated safety analysis.
For more information on baseline characteristics, dosing schedule, and initial response rates, read our summary here.
The updated median follow-up and median PFS, and other secondary endpoints, can be seen in Table 1. The difference in median PFS between the two cohorts remained significant (hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% confidence interval, 0.45–0.78; p < 0.0001). A similar PFS benefit was reported across prespecified subgroups.
Table 1. Updated efficacy results*
|
DKd (n = 312) |
Kd (n = 154) |
HR (95% CI) |
---|---|---|---|
Median follow-up (range), months |
27.8 (25.6–29.5) |
27.0 (13.2–28.6) |
— |
Median PFS (95% CI), months |
28.6 (22.7–NE) |
15.2 (11.1–19.9) |
0.59 (0.45–0.78) |
Median time to next treatment (95% CI), months |
NE (30.1–NE) |
18.1 (13.6–25.0) |
0.47 (0.35–0.63) |
Median derived time to subsequent disease progression or death (95% CI), months |
NE (NE–NE) |
33.2 (33.2–NE) |
0.73 (0.53–1.01) |
CI, confidence interval; DKd, daratumumab, carfilzomib, dexamethasone; Kd, carfilzomib, dexamethasone; NE, not estimable; PFS, progression-free survival. |
Therapies administered in the following line, after the study treatment, were similar between arms (mostly immunomodulatory drugs); however, anti-CD38-based therapies were more frequent in patients relapsing to Kd (18%) than to DKd (2%).
Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 87% of patients in the KdD group compared with 76% in the Kd group. The most common Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events and serious adverse events can be seen in Table 2. A total of 11 patients discontinued carfilzomib due to cardiac failure, while pneumonia led to daratumumab discontinuation in four patients. This safety analysis was consistent with the primary analysis, and no new treatment-related deaths occurred.
Table 2. Most common Grade ≥3 TEAEs and serious AEs*
AE/TEAE, % |
DKd (n = 308) |
Kd (n = 153) |
---|---|---|
Grade ≥3 TEAEs |
87 |
76 |
Thrombocytopenia |
25 |
16 |
Hypertension |
21 |
15 |
Pneumonia |
18 |
9 |
Anemia |
17 |
15 |
Serious AEs |
63 |
50 |
AEs leading to death |
9 |
5 |
Septic shock |
2 |
1 |
Pneumonia |
1 |
0 |
AEs leading to K-dose reduction |
29 |
22 |
AEs leading to K discontinuation |
26 |
22 |
AEs leading to study treatment discontinuation |
28 |
25 |
AE, adverse event; DKd, daratumumab, carfilzomib, dexamethasone; K, carfilzomib; Kd, carfilzomib, dexamethasone; TEAE, treatment-emergent adverse event. |
With a longer follow-up of 11 months (~27 months in total), DKd maintained a PFS benefit over Kd. Therefore, these results support the use of DKd as a standard treatment option for patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma who have previously received 1–3 lines of therapy, including an immunomodulatory drug or a proteasome inhibitor (or both). However, overall survival results are needed to confirm a greater survival benefit with this triplet combination.
Your opinion matters
Subscribe to get the best content related to multiple myeloma delivered to your inbox