Welcome! We’re here to recap the latest news in Minimal Residual Disease (MRD) status from the Myeloma MRD 2025 Meeting that kicked off Friday, April 11, at the Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center in Miami. The MMRF has been part of this meeting since its inception, participating in a number of panels, presentations, and thoughtful discussions along with clinicians, researchers, companies, advocates, patients, and caregivers on the state of MRD testing.
MRD is an important part of monitoring myeloma after treatment. It measures how many cancer cells are still in the bone marrow. If someone is MRD-negative, it means the number of cancer cells is so small that that they are nearly undetectable.
Here are the major takeaway points from the MRD Meeting:
Let’s take a closer look!
Reaching MRD negativity can be good news for patients, and many clinical trials showed that sustained MRD negativity is closely tied with favorable outcomes.
However, there are several important points we have to remember. For one, these studies and others showed that MRD negativity could be reached no matter what treatment patients were on. For example, studies that compared triplet versus quadruplet myeloma therapies both showed a significant amount of patients reaching MRD negativity.
Secondly, patients may never achieve MRD negativity but still have favorable outcomes. For example, people with monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) have a higher number of plasma cells and are not MRD negative. Yet, they rarely progress to myeloma. Some myeloma patients who are very good partial responders or complete responders and have clearly detectable MRD can also stay in remission for a long time.
Lastly, being MRD negative shouldn’t be confused with being cured. In several studies, we saw that patients who were MRD negative could still relapse to being MRD positive over time.
Taken together, these examples show that MRD status is only one piece of a larger puzzle.
To fully understand a patient’s prognosis and make the best treatment decisions, their care team looks at more than just MRD status. They also consider genetic changes in their myeloma, how many treatments they’ve had before, and how well their body handles those treatments. Also, more research is still needed to figure out how well patients will do if they do not reach MRD negativity, and why some MRD negative patients relapse.
For all these reasons, the use of MRD data to inform decisions for individual patients is still an area of active research.
One discussion in Miami centered around the FDA Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee (ODAC) agreement that MRD status could be used as an intermediate endpoint in clinical trials. But what does this actually mean for patients?
For new myeloma treatments to be approved, clinical trials must first reach what are called primary endpoints. These are outcomes that can tell if the new treatment was effective or not. Many myeloma therapies rely on primary endpoints like progression free survival (PFS), or overall survival (OS). While these endpoints tell us a lot , they can take a long time to determine if a treatment is effective and safe.
Fortunately the FDA has been open to reducing that time by using an endpoint that could predict PFS. Now, MRD data has come into play because the latest clinical evidence shows that MRD can be a useful tool for predicting if a clinical trial will show a PFS benefit. And the MRD data for a clinical trial can be available years before the PFS data.
Tying this back to the ODAC in 2024, this group recommended that MRD data be considered an intermediate endpoint that the FDA could use to allow a biopharmaceutical company to market a new treatment while PFS and OS continue to be collected. This could help bring new myeloma treatment options to patients because clinical trials reach the MRD endpoint more quickly.
Given the emerging use of MRD data in clinical trials, it is even more important to understand safety and PFS in order to know what is best for patients.
The good news about MRD testing? It can be reimbursed, it is part of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines for measuring a response to treatment, and it is available at academic medical centers across the country.
The bad news? It is not widely available in the community, for a variety of reasons.
Finding out MRD status takes time. Not only does a patient need to have a bone marrow biopsy, but that sample must be taken to a lab where very sensitive tests are performed to figure out how many myeloma cells they have. This entire procedure may not be available to everyone –financial, transportation, and other logistical barriers are in the way for patients, and community providers may not have the resources needed to perform MRD testing.
Could this all change?
During the end of the workshop, presenters discussed new, innovative ways to make MRD testing easier and more accessible. Many of the techniques discussed looked to bypass the need for a bone marrow biopsy, and instead, figure out the number of myeloma cells using DNA or protein collected strictly from blood samples.
Why is this important?
Improved availability and lowering logistical barriers for patients and providers could pave the way for frequent MRD testing. This could improve the prognostic information for patients and doctors, and spur on more research to optimize the use of MRD in trials and for patients.
VANCOUVER, British Columbia, February 19, 2025–Reverb Therapeutics, a leader in harnessing the natural immune system and cytokine signaling to treat life-threatening diseases, announced it has closed a USD $12 Million financing led by founding investor Amplitude Ventures. Other participants in the round include the Multiple Myeloma Research Foundation’s venture philanthropy arm, the Myeloma Investment Fund, KdT Ventures, Finchley Healthcare Ventures, InBC Investment Corp. (InBC), and Seido Capital.
Read the full press release here.
WATERTOWN, Mass., July 11, 2024 — Dynamic Cell Therapies (DCT) announces an investment of $1M from the Myeloma Investment Fund (MIF), the venture philanthropy subsidiary of the Multiple Myeloma Research Foundation (MMRF), to accelerate the development of novel CAR T-cell technologies for patients with multiple myeloma. DCT is developing technology platforms that will allow CAR T-cells to attack unique and differentiated tumor targets that will allow for durable responses to treatment, and DCT’s propriety CAR T-cells have demonstrated superiority to FDA-approved CAR T-cells in animal models. These technology platforms will improve the safety and efficacy of CAR T-cell therapies and have immediate application for patients with hematological cancers, including multiple myeloma. Supported by this recent investment, DCT is on track to advance a product into patients within the next two years.
“Despite current successes in treating patients with CAR T-cells, many patients with multiple myeloma still relapse after therapy,” said Fred Mermelstein, Ph.D., Chief Executive Officer of DCT. “The support of the MMRF & the Myeloma Investment Fund provides key expertise that will enable us to hasten the development of novel and best-in-class CAR T-cell therapies for patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma.”
“At the MMRF, we are deeply committed to advancing novel treatments intended to improve patient outcomes and get us closer to cures. We are energized by DCT’s cutting-edge cell therapy approach as a potentially transformative answer to patients with relapsed or refractory myeloma,” said Michael Andreini, President and CEO of the Multiple Myeloma Research Foundation (MMRF).
About the Myeloma Investment Fund (MIF)
The Myeloma Investment Fund is a venture philanthropy fund that invests in promising companies, clinical assets, and technologies in oncology to drive the development of new therapies for multiple myeloma. The MIF collaborates closely with portfolio companies to help them advance multiple myeloma research. This evergreen fund is supported entirely by philanthropy; all profits will be reinvested back into research for more effective treatments until there is a cure for every patient. For more information, visit www.myelomainvestmentfund.org
About the Multiple Myeloma Research Foundation (MMRF)
The Multiple Myeloma Research Foundation (MMRF) is the largest nonprofit in the world solely focused on accelerating a cure for each and every multiple myeloma patient. We drive the development and delivery of next-generation therapies, leverage data to identify optimal and more personalized treatment approaches and empower myeloma patients and the broader community with information and resources to extend their lives. Central to our mission is our commitment to advancing health equity so that all myeloma patients can benefit from the scientific and clinical advances we pursue. Since our inception, the MMRF has committed over $600 million for research, opened nearly 100 clinical trials, and helped bring 15+ FDA-approved therapies to market, which have tripled the life expectancy of myeloma patients. To learn more, visit www.themmrf.org
For MMRF or MIF media inquiries, please contact: Anna Otis, Manager, Brand Marketing, otisa@themmrf.org
About Dynamic Cell Therapies, Inc. (DCT)
Dynamic Cell Therapies (DCT) is a pre-clinical stage biopharmaceutical company engineering CAR T-cells to address unmet medical needs for patients with cancers and autoimmune diseases. DCT has licensed technology from the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, including redirectable CAR T-cell and private cytokine signaling technologies. Redirectable CAR T-cells can maximize tumor cell killing and minimize toxicity. Private cytokine signaling can enhance memory populations, which increases CAR T-cells’ persistence and durable responses. DCT is developing these technologies separately and in combination to optimize control of CAR T-cell identity and activity. To learn more, visit www.dynamiccelltherapies.com.
For any DCT inquiries, please contact: Alex Rabby, Chief Business Officer, arabby@dynamiccelltherapies.com
Multiple myeloma is a cancer of the immune system. In myeloma, the type of cell that becomes cancerous (i.e. grows out of control) is the plasma cell, which is a type of immune cell that normally creates molecules called antibodies that help protect the body from infection. Your immune system can recognize substances as “foreign” and create antibodies that help your immune system to eliminate them. Similarly, cancer cells can also sometimes be recognized as foreign and killed by your own body’s immune system. But all too often, cancer cells are tricky and evade detection by the immune system.
Myeloma cells grow inside the bone marrow, which is a complex cellular environment. There are many different types of cells in the bone marrow, as it is the body’s blood cell factory. How the myeloma cells interact with this environment (also known as the bone marrow microenvironment) can impact how well the myeloma cells grow and how well the body can fight them.
Back in 2019, the MMRF envisioned a collaborative project called Immune Atlas to further define the immune microenvironment in the bone marrow and the role it might play in myeloma and in how different patients respond to therapy. At the time, there was limited knowledge regarding the bone marrow environment in MM patients and how it might influence disease development, progression, and response to therapy. There had been several smaller studies, but none with the necessary number of patients to account for the differences between myeloma patients and their cancers, and the data had not been widely shared. The initial idea was to combine the genomic (DNA) and clinical treatment landscape of each patient with their immune landscape, in the hope of better understanding which patients would respond best to certain therapies.
Our first action was to create a network of 5 leading academic medical centers (Emory University, Beth Israel Deaconess, Washington University in St. Louis, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, and Mayo Clinic) that had robust myeloma research programs. In collaboration, these 5 institutions and MMRF developed a uniform assay strategy using a common sample set to ensure that the data generated by the selected cutting-edge technology platforms (able to extract highly detailed information from patient samples at the level of a single cell) were harmonized across these centers.
Through 2020-2023, this Immune Atlas team has completed immune profiling of hundreds of bone marrow and blood samples from our CoMMpass study utilizing single cell RNA sequencing (scRNAseq) and Cytometry by Time-Of-Flight (CyTOF) assays. Analysis of both baseline (at diagnosis) and longitudinal (e.g., after stem cell transplant or at clinical response or relapse) samples allow for scientists to ask questions about the relationship between different immune cell populations and (i) patient genomics and disease risk, (ii) patients who experienced rapid progression after transplant (functional high-risk patients) and those whose remission lasted longer (standard risk patients), and (iii) changes in the immune environment over time and after treatment with doublet or triplet therapy. To date, the Immune Atlas team has generated data from over 1,100 samples collected from approximately 700 myeloma patients who were enrolled in the MMRF CoMMpass study, and has just completed and submitted a manuscript for publication in a major scientific journal describing their detailed analysis of over 1.1 million cells from 263 newly diagnosed myeloma patients.
In most cases, myeloma cells release monoclonal antibodies (M-protein) into your blood and urine. In rare cases, myeloma cells do not make any monoclonal antibodies, a condition called non-secretory myeloma. It can be difficult to diagnose patients with non-secretory myeloma because they have no M spike. While treatment for non-secretory myeloma is often the same as for other types of myeloma, it is more difficult to monitor treatment efficacy since doctors cannot use a simple blood test to detect the M protein.
This is an advantage of having multiple ways to measure MRD. For the clonoSEQ test, a patient needs a baseline bone marrow biopsy sample to establish the presence of an individual’s DNA sequence in the myeloma cells that can then be tracked over time. Flow cytometry does not require a baseline sample from the patient, so this is an alternative test to measure MRD if the initial bone marrow biopsy sample is not available. Flow cytometry can be used to simply count the number of myeloma cells from a recent bone marrow biopsy.
Currently there is no test that is FDA approved to measure MRD from a peripheral blood sample. There are several studies that are evaluating the use of blood-based test to measure the levels of M-proteins or circulating tumor DNA; that is a DNA fragment released by myeloma cells during cell death. Additional studies are needed to determine if a blood-based MRD test could be introduced in the clinical in the near future.
The age and the performance status of the patient play a role in determining which treatment is selected. Someone who is frail and/or has a poor performance status may be better suited for a bispecific antibody. Whereas a younger patient with a good performance status could be a better candidate for CAR T-cell therapy. There is currently no limit on the age of a patient who can receive bispecific antibody therapy. Healthcare professionals should have a discussion with the patient to see what is in line with the goals of the patient.
That is the million-dollar question. Findings from recent clinical trials have shown that the overall response rate was higher in patients who have received CAR T therapy first. Generally, the myeloma community believes that you can use CAR-T first and then use bispecific antibody therapy following relapse. If we treat patients with a BCMA-directed bispecific antibody first, the efficacy of a follow-up BCMA-directed CAR-T therapy may not be as strong. However, every situation is unique. For example, one doctor had a patient who had rapidly progressive disease and needed treatment immediately with a bispecific antibody while the CAR-T was being developed.
While we have moved the needle and improved outcomes for patients with standard risk disease, there is a long way to go when it comes to improving outcomes in patients with high-risk myeloma. That is why we have the MMRF HORIZON platform trials. We need new trials with new designs to see how bispecific antibodies can improve the outcomes of patients with high-risk disease. There is a lot of interest in the community to see how these newer trials can address the unmet need of this patient population.
Multiple myeloma is a complex cancer, different in every patient. This complexity makes it difficult to predict what therapy will work best for each patient. Knowing a patient’s prognosis at the time of their diagnosis can help their care team decide which therapy would be most effective for first line treatment.
Differences in myeloma in each patient can be traced back to the complex DNA changes (also known as the “genomic landscape”) in each patient’s myeloma cells. This information can only be measured in tumor cells collected during the bone marrow biopsy. Researchers have long looked to catalog what these changes are, and which ones are important to a patient’s overall survival. This type of work requires a large dataset of DNA sequences from many myeloma patients, their clinical history (i.e., what they were treated with and how well the treatment worked) and their demographic data. No single clinical center in the world sees enough patients to generate a data set like this on its own.
We began our multi-year CoMMpass study back in 2011 to build such a dataset. It is the largest and most complete dataset of its type in myeloma, and more than 605 researchers around the world have used this dataset to form and test their hypotheses. CoMMpass holds the detailed genomic and clinical data of over 1000 newly diagnosed patients from 76 centers in 4 countries. These patients agreed to join this research study, enrolled over the course of 4 years and were followed for 8 years; the data is freely available to researchers worldwide. Numerous papers are published yearly using CoMMpass data, and it has been invaluable in helping to develop early risk and prognosis models in myeloma patients.
Recently, Dr. Francesco Maura of the Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center at the University of Miami, and colleagues from various institutions, published a new model of genomic classification and prognosis in multiple myeloma. The model was developed using detailed clinical, genomic, and therapeutic data from 1933 patients, 1062 of which were from the CoMMpass dataset. Using this data, the investigators developed a model called Individualized Risk Model for Myeloma (IRMMa) that found 12 genomic groups with high prognostic accuracy compared to earlier models. The IRMMa model was then confirmed on 256 patients enrolled in the GMMG-HD6 clinical trial and was used to show which patients benefitted significantly from autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) vs. those who saw limited benefit. The model performed well, with good overlap seen between observed risk and risk predicted by the model for each patient. This machine learning model is now publicly available for other myeloma researchers, who are encouraged to add their own patient data to it. Further testing is necessary before this preliminary model becomes a clinical test. It is only through analyzing large data sets that researchers can accurately identify predictive signatures that could guide clinical decision-making.
In conclusion, predictive models of this type require large datasets for their accurate development. The MMRF built the CoMMpass dataset for exactly this purpose, and this treasure trove of myeloma data is now bearing fruit. It is hoped that additional data added to the IRMMa model will sharpen its predictive ability so that eventually, every newly diagnosed patient will receive the best, most effective therapy for their own unique type of myeloma.
1. With the difficulty in a timely diagnosis of multiple myeloma (MM) for underserved patient populations, including Black African Americans and Hispanics, what are the early symptoms that a patient can share with their health care provider (HCP)?
There are significant disparities with regards to the timely diagnosis of MM in underserved patient populations. While many symptoms of MM such as fatigue and bone pain are nonspecific and can be seen in many other conditions, patients should see a doctor to determine the cause of these symptoms. It is very important for patients to be advocates for their own health and to be persistent in finding a cause for their symptoms.
2. Given the disparity in treatment of MM in certain underserved patient populations, what is the standard of care that patients should be asking for?
Unfortunately, there are barriers to appropriate therapy that contribute to application of treatment approaches for underserved patient populations that are inconsistent with current recommended practice. Currently there is a no one-size-fits-all treatment option for MM. There are very broad guidelines doctors adhere to when selecting treatment for each individual patient. A newly diagnosed patient should be treated with either a 3- or 4-drug regimen as first-line therapy. There are different factors that would favor the use of either the 3- or 4-drug combination. All patients should be evaluated to see if they are eligible for a stem cell transplant. Supportive care should be provided to every patient. Supportive care is treatment that addresses the symptoms and complications of a disease rather than the disease itself. Examples include bisphosphonates for bone health, antibiotics for infections, and pain control measures.
In the relapse setting, it is very important for patients to ask their doctor why a certain treatment is being chosen, and if possible, patients should be included in the decision-making process. Also, it is vital that patients seek the opinion of a myeloma specialist during key treatment decision points, such as when relapse necessitates a change in therapies.
The final day of ASH gave us an important late-breaking abstract on Darzalex Faspro (daratumumab and hyaluronidase-fihj) in combination with the standard care regimen of Velcade (bortezomib), Revlimid (lenalidomide), and dexamethasone (VRd) in newly diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma (NDMM) who were eligible for an autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT).
Dr. Pieter Sonneveld and colleagues from the Netherlands presented findings from the phase 3 PERSEUS trial that showed the that subcutaneous Darzalex Faspro-based induction, consolidation and maintenance regimen reduced risk of progression or death by 58 percent compared to RVD (Abstract LBA-1).
Results of the trial, which included 709 patients with NDMM who were eligible for ASCT, were simultaneously published in the New England Journal of Medicine (Sonneveld P, NEJM 2023). The researchers reported that the 4-year PFS was 84% with D-VRd compared with 68% with VRd. Significantly more patients achieved higher minimum residual disease (MRD)-negative rates with the addition of Darzalex Faspro (75%) compared to VRd (48%). The overall safety profile of D-VRd was similar to previously reported (Voorhees PM, Lancet Haematol 2023) side effects with D-VRd. The most common (>10 percent) serious grade side effects with D-VRd vs VRd were low white blood cell counts (62% vs 51%), low platelet counts (29% vs 17%), diarrhea (11% vs 8%), and pneumonia (11% vs 6%).
The authors conclude that these results support Darzalex-based quadruplet induction and consolidation regimen and doublet maintenance regimen as a potential new standard of care for transplant-eligible patients with NDMM.
Day 3 was a big day at ASH, with over a dozen abstracts that featured updates on CAR T-cell therapy, bispecific antibodies, the impact of age on transplant outcomes, and novel therapies in early phase clinical trials. Let us break down the key findings for you…
Induction therapy with proteasome inhibitors (PIs) and immunomodulatory agents (IMiDs) followed by high-dose chemotherapy and autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (ASCT) is considered a standard of care for front-line treatment of patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). Some individuals ages 65 and older may have a higher risk of complications and prolonged hospitalizations following ASCT. Therefore, healthcare professionals must carefully assess each patient when recommending ASCT.
Dr. Shohei Mizuno and colleagues from Japan analyzed global registry data that included over 60,000 patients to assess the impact of age on outcomes following ASCT (Abstract 785). Their results showed that patients aged 75 or older had a significantly lower progression free survival (PFS)—that is, the length of time during and after treatment in which a patient is living with a disease that does not get worse and overall survival. The researchers note that incidence of relapse was similar regardless of age and the incidence of death not related to disease progression or treatment failure was low (4%) compared to patients in other age groups (0%, 1%, 2%, and 2% for patients aged 18–39, 40–64, 65–69, and 70–74 ). While ASCT has been generally reserved for patients younger than 65, the authors note that age should not be considered a barrier to receiving this type of treatment.
Dr. Paula Rodríguez Otero and colleagues from Spain presented (Abstract 1028) the final PFS analysis of KarMMa-3 (Rodríguez-Otero et al. NEJM 2023), which showed that a single infusion of the CAR T-cell therapy, Abecma (idecabtagene vicleucel), significantly prolonged PFS and improved response rates in patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) who had received two to four prior lines of therapy, including an immunomodulatory drug (IMiD), a proteasome inhibitor (PI), and an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody, which makes them “triple-class exposed”. The researchers reported that patients treated with Abecma had a median PFS of 13.8 months compared with 4.4 months for standard regimens. Overall response rates (ORR) were higher with Abecma (71%) compared to standard regimens (42%). The authors noted that Abecma side effect profile was consistent with previous reports.
Dr. Jens Hillengass and colleagues from Roswell Park reported (Abstract 1021) follow-up results for patients in two of those groups: Cohort A, who had received between one and three prior lines of therapy (LOT) and whose disease progressed while receiving Revlimid and Cohort B, who had relapsed a year or less after either ASCT or from the beginning of initial treatment if they did not undergo ASCT. The results showed:
Talvey is the first approved bispecific antibody targeting G protein–coupled receptor family C group 5 member D (GPRC5D) for patients with RRMM who have received at least four prior lines of therapy, including a IMiD, a PI, and an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody. The FDA granted an accelerated approval to Talvey based on initial findings from the MonumenTAL-1 study (Chari A NEJM 2022), which showed that patients who received the 0.8 mg/kg biweekly dose had an overall response rate (ORR) of 74%, similar to those who had received the 0.4 mg/kg biweekly dose. The most common side effects related to treatment with Talvey include cytokine release syndrome (CRS; which is a flu–like syndrome in which a patient experiences fevers, chills, and low blood pressure), immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (neurologic symptoms like confusion, but in some cases patients experience severe symptoms like delirium or seizures), infections, skin and nail disorders such as brittle or discolored nails, and oral toxicities such as dry mouth, difficulty swallowing, and altered taste.
In this presentation, Dr. Ajai Chari and colleagues at Mount Sinai School of Medicine (Abstract 1010) reported that dose modifications of Talvey improved side effects while maintaining responses for patients with RRMM. For this analysis, 9 patients received a starting dose of Talvey at 0.8 mg/kg every 2 weeks, which was reduced to 0.4 mg/kg every 2 weeks following a partial response (PR) or better. A separate group of 10 participants started at 0.8 mg/kg every 2 weeks, which was reduced to 0.8 mg/kg every 4 weeks following a PR or better. The results showed:
The researchers concluded that these data support flexibility to adjust the dosing of Talvey in patients who respond to potentially improve patient experience while maintaining efficacy.
In this presentation, Dr. Jeffrey Matous and colleagues at the Colorado Blood Institute presented (Abstract 1014) initial efficacy and safety results of an early phase trial examined the combination of Talvey with Pomalyst. The results showed rapid, deep responses with the combination of Talvey and Pomalyst in patients with RRMM that had received 2 or more prior lines of therapy. Side effects of the combination were consistent with previous reports of the individual agents:
Dr. Chari and colleagues conclude that these findings support future investigation into the use of combination Talvey and Pomalyst in patients with RRMM.
CELMoDs are a new class of myeloma drugs that work like immunomodulators such as Revlimid and Pomalyst and are orally administered. They also stimulate the immune system and kill myeloma cells directly, even for patients whose myeloma has become resistant to certain treatment. Dr. Paul Richardson and colleagues presented their findings from an early phase trial evaluating mezigdomide (Abstract 1013), an oral CELMoD, in combination with Darzalex and dexamethasone (MeziDd) or Empliciti (elotuzumab) and dexamethasone (MeziEd) in RRMM. Data collected from 45 RRMM patients who received 2-4 prior lines of therapy showed:
Sonrotoclax is a next-generation BCL-2 inhibitor that has shown more potency than venetoclax in preclinical studies in patients who have a translocation of chromosomes 11 and 14 (t(11;14)). In this presentation (Abstract 1011), Dr. Hang Quach and colleagues in Australia reported preliminary findings from an early phase study of sonrotoclax in combination with dexamethasone in 10 RRMM patients with t(11;14). 70% of patients who received the highest dose of sonrotoclax (640mg) achieved a treatment response. 26% of patients experienced severe grade side effects such as increased liver enzymes, diarrhea, low potassium levels, cataracts, and retinal detachment.
Dr. Susan Bal and colleagues at the University of Alabama at Birmingham reported data from an early phase clinical trial with 70 patients that evaluated 5 different doses of BMS-986393, a novel GPRC5D-targeted CAR T-cell therapy for RRMM (Abstract 219). The results showed:
In the next presentation, Dr. Matthew Frigault and colleagues at Harvard Medical School reported data from an early phase trial of CART-ddBCMA, now known as anitocabtagene autoleucel (anito-cel) in 38 patients with RRMM who have received 3 or more lines of therapy (Abstract 1023). CART-ddBCMA has a unique protein, called a D-Domain, that is designed to bind more firmly to BCMA and reduce the risk of side effects such as CRS.
The results showed:
Dr. Aina Calde and colleagues in Spain shared an update on an early phase trial of ARI0002h (Cesnicabtagene Autoleucel), a novel CAR T-cell therapy for RRMM patients (Abstract 1026). Earlier this year, Dr. Calde reported (Oliver-Caldés, Lancet Onc. 2023) that ARI0002h produced durable responses in 30 patients with RRMM who had received at least 2 prior lines of therapy, including a PI, IMiD, and an anti-CD38 antibody, and were refractory to the last line of treatment. This update included 30 additional patients and a longer follow-up of the initial 30 patients treated with ARI0002h.
The results showed:
The final abstract features data from an early phase trial of a novel tri-specific antibody, HPN217, which binds to three targets: BCMA, CD3, and albumin. Researchers note that HPN217 was designed to bind to albumin to extend the length of time the tri-specific antibody can attack myeloma cells and reduce side effects. Dr. Sumit Madan and colleagues from the Banner MD Anderson Cancer Center shared their results of 97 patients with RRMM who had received at least three prior therapies (Abstract 1012). Their findings showed:
Ongoing studies will continue to explore the potential of these novel therapies for patients with RRMM.
Be sure to hear what myeloma experts Dr. Urvi Shah and Dr. Benjamin Diamond, had to say about the day’s presentations here.
Stay tuned for more updates from the final day of ASH 2023!
