The final day of IMS 2025 brought a powerful close to the meeting, underscoring how far the field has come in advancing personalized care for myeloma patients. From promising new drugs to smarter ways of tailoring treatment using biomarkers, today’s presentations made it clear: The future of myeloma therapy is not just about more options—it’s about better-matched options.

Researchers are now focusing on how to deliver the right treatment to the right patient at the right time, using tools like genetic profiling and immune markers to guide decisions.

Read on for what stood out to us.

New Treatments on the Horizon for Patients at All Stages of Disease

Day four showcased a pipeline of innovative treatments poised to transform myeloma care, from precision-targeted therapies that could redefine treatment standards to enhanced delivery methods that are more convenient for patients.

• On-body-injector for Sarclisa (isatuximab): For myeloma patients, having options that reduce discomfort and fit more easily into daily life is critical. In a phase 2 and phase 3 trial, patients with relapsed or refractory disease tried Sarclisa given through a small wearable injector instead of the traditional IV drip. Surveys looking at quality of life were given to these patients, who reported less pain, less discomfort, fewer side effects than expected, and meaningful time savings compared to IV treatment. Overall, more patients were satisfied with the on-body injector and said they would recommend it to others.
• Iberdomide: Iberdomide is part of a new class of drugs called CELMoDs. CELMoDs are related to IMiDs like Revlimid and Pomalyst, helping to boost the immune system’s ability to fight myeloma. Like IMiDs, they are also pills. In small clinical trial of 75 newly diagnosed patients who were ineligible for transplant, a combination of the oral CELMoD iberdomide with Darzalex (daratumumab) and dexamethasone (IberDd) led to responses in about 95% of people treated. Over 2 years, more patients in this study began to experience deeper responses. Side effects of the IbderDd regimen were manageable, and included infections, diarrhea, and rashes.
• Sonrotoclax: Sonrotoclax is a new oral drug designed to target a specific genetic change called t(11;14) that is found in approximately 20% of patients, and is similar to Venclexta (venetoclax), which is sometimes used off-label for patients with this genetic feature. In a phase 1/2 trial of 50 patients with relapsed/refractory myeloma, 81% responded to a combination of sonrotoclax and dexamethasone. Responses were often seen within three weeks and lasted over a year for many patients.
• HDP-101: HDP-101 is a new anti-BCMA antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) that delivers a powerful toxin directly to myeloma cells while sparing other healthy cells. In a phase 1/2 study of 42 relapsed/refractory patients, HDP-101 was generally safe, especially when given in split doses with premedication to reduce side effects like low platelets and liver changes. There was no evidence of eye-related side effects due to the drug; eye-related side effects are a common side effect with belantamab mafodotin, which is also an anti-BCMA ADC. About 50% of patients who were treated at higher doses responded to this therapy. Additional studies are underway to determine the dose that best balances safety and effectiveness. In this study, patients had already gone through about 7 different therapies, with some trying as many as 15. Even after many relapses, having new treatment options available is very encouraging. It means there is still hope and progress for patients who need more choices.

Strengthening Maintenance Therapy

As doctors work to improve myeloma treatments, researchers are studying whether using more than one treatment for maintenance therapy can help lower the chance of relapse. In a phase 3 study, patients who took a combination of Darzalex and Revlimid for two years did much better at keeping myeloma to very low, almost undetectable levels, compared to patients who took Revlimid alone. Just as important, the side effects were mild and very similar to what patients usually experience with Revlimid by itself. As discussed on day 3, these studies are especially important for patients who may have a higher risk of their disease returning quickly.

The Increasingly Important Role of Biomarkers

During the last day of IMS, we also heard updates on the growing role of biomarkers—biological signs in the body that help doctors better understand each patient’s type of myeloma. These discoveries build on earlier research from the MMRF’s CoMMpass^SM study, which is one of the most important studies ever conducted to better understand new targets for drug development and define which patients are more likely to have aggressive disease. Researchers across the field continue to leverage CoMMpass data.

• Biomarkers to predict risk: Earlier this year, experts introduced a new way to define high-risk multiple myeloma, a more aggressive form of the disease that is harder to treat. Two studies shared today showed that this new definition is not only accurate in predicting worse outcomes among high-risk patients, but it more effective than traditional staging systems, providing strong support for the use of this new definition.
• Biomarkers to guide treatment planning: Biomarkers are also helping doctors choose the best treatments for each patient. Several presentations focused on using biomarkers to predict how well a patient might respond to newer treatments like CAR T-cell therapy and bispecific antibodies, including who may be more likely to experience certain side effects. There’s also progress in using blood-based tests for monitoring, which could reduce the need for more invasive procedures like bone marrow biopsies.

These updates reflect a powerful shift in how myeloma is being treated—from relying solely on standard drug regimens to using a deeper understanding of each patient’s unique disease to guide care. As more targeted therapies and biomarker-driven tools move closer to routine use, the path forward looks increasingly personalized, offering new hope for better outcomes and a higher quality of life for patients at every stage of their journey.

Day three of IMS 2025 brought into focus three transformative trends reshaping multiple myeloma care: emerging effective strategies for early relapse, making powerful treatments more accessible to patients, and bringing later-line therapies to earlier stages of treatment.

Here, the MMRF recaps what stood out from today’s sessions.

Experts Highlight Strategies for Managing Early Relapse

The first plenary session of the day brought several myeloma experts together to outline key considerations for managing early relapse.

• Patients and their care teams should keep a close eye on myeloma markers in the blood (like M protein levels), and, where possible, access testing for minimal residual disease in the bone marrow. Don’t wait for other symptoms to reappear. To optimize outcomes, patients should begin treatment when these biochemical markers begin to rise again.
• Quadruplet therapies and combination maintenance therapy are key to helping patients with a high risk of relapsing.
• When deciding what is next after relapse, patients and providers must consider treatment logistics and access. With so many options now available in early relapse—from triplet therapies to immunotherapies like CAR T—shared decision-making is more important than ever whereby patients and their care teams evaluate the potential benefits and risks of available options.
  
• In the next few years, bispecific therapies will continue to make their way into clinical trials as earlier lines of treatment, even in high-risk newly diagnosed patients. The MMRF’s Horizon II platform is helping to lead this initiative.

These discussions signal a future where earlier intervention, innovative therapies, and collaborative decision-making can significantly improve outcomes for patients facing relapse.

Expanding Access to Bispecifics

Bispecific antibody therapies are typically given in hospital settings because they come with the risk of complications like cytokine release syndrome (CRS), a common, flu-like side effect of T cell-engaging treatments that can cause fevers, chills, and low blood pressure. Because of this, access to these powerful treatments is more limited.

We were excited to hear data at IMS showing that bispecific antibody therapies can safely be given in the community setting, without requiring a hospital stay, enabling more patients to greater access.

• Several studies, including a large real-world study of more than 200 patients, found that step-up dosing of Tecvalyi (teclistamab) and Talvey (talquetamab) can be safely given in outpatient or community clinics. Step-up dosing means slowly increasing the dose to help lower the risk of serious side effects like CRS. With careful monitoring and a clear care plan, side effects in outpatient settings were comparable to those in the hospital—showing that CRS can be managed safely by an outpatient team outside the hospital.
• Equally as exciting was another real-world study showing that relapsed/refractory patients who had a strong response to bispecific antibody therapy—targeting BCMA, GPRC5D, or both—were able to stop continuous treatment. The study analyzed 78 patients who had stopped treatment (not because of disease worsening) and were closely monitored. Nearly 70% of these patients stayed in remission for at least two years. Factors that lead to high risk of relapse included presence of extramedullary disease (myeloma outside the bone marrow) and a higher number of previous therapies.

Bringing Later Line Therapies Upfront

With numerous promising treatments now available for multiple myeloma, determining the optimal timing and sequence of therapies has become increasingly important to improve outcomes and patients’ quality of life. This has been a research focus at the MMRF through our innovative Horizon Clinical Trials Program conducted in collaboration with 14 leading cancer centers.

We were excited to hear and share research updates from our colleagues who are similarly examining the potential of giving treatments to newly diagnosed patients or patients with precursor disease that have been shown to be highly effective in relapsed/refractory patients.

• A Phase I clinical trial of 37 newly-diagnosed patients showed that a combination of the bispecific Elrexfio (elranatamab), Revlimid +/-Daralex may be effective for those not eligible for a stem cell transplant. In this study, 97% responded to the treatment, and most had deep responses within just a few months. Side effects like low blood counts and infections were common but manageable, and most cases of CRS were mild.
• A Phase 2 trial of 74 newly-diagnosed patients who are ineligible for a transplant may benefit from Sarclisa and Velcade, Revlimid, and dexamethasone (Isa SC-VRd). Isa SC is unique in that it is delivered beneath the skin through a special a device worn on the belly. The Isa SC treatment regimen that has shown already promise in clinical trials patients with relapsed/refractory myeloma. After eight months, 88% of patients who received Isa SC-VRd had a very good response or better, with 24% achieving complete remission, and 35% showing no detectable disease.
• Lastly, the newly approved bispecific treatment Lynozyfic (Linvoseltamab) was recently tested in high-risk smoldering multiple myeloma patients. While this study was small (only 19 patients who completed at least one treatment cycle), all of them responded and have not progressed to active myeloma. Side effects (such as infections and CRS) were manageable and did not lead to any treatment discontinuations.

Updates on New Treatments for Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Myeloma

We conclude by sharing exciting updates on arlo-cel, a type of CAR T-cell therapy that targets GPRC5D. We shared promising results from a phase 1 study on the first day of IMS. Today, researchers presented data from a second study that showed similarly encouraging results. In this phase 1 study of 31 relapsed/refractory patients who had received one to three prior lines of therapy, 96% responded to arlo-cel. Side effects—including CRS, loss of taste, and nerve-related symptoms—were common but mostly mild and resolved on their own.

Day three’s presentations demonstrate how myeloma care is evolving to become more accessible and strategically timed—bringing us closer to more personalized strategies that maximize both effectiveness and patients’ quality of life.

Saturday marks the final day of the IMS 2025 meeting. Stay tuned for highlights from the concluding sessions.

Day two of IMS 2025 reinforced a central theme: Innovation in multiple myeloma treatment is expanding at every stage of the patient journey. From new options for newly diagnosed patients to groundbreaking multi-target CAR T therapies for those facing relapsed disease, researchers are pushing the boundaries of what’s possible while never losing sight of the ultimate goal—delivering safe and effective new treatments to every patient who needs them. 

Today’s presentations highlighted both the potential of emerging therapies and the critical importance of understanding their real-world impact on patients’ lives.  

Here MMRF highlights the latest developments. 

New Treatments for Newly Diagnosed Patients 

• Iberdomide belongs to a new class of oral myeloma drugs called CELMoDs. The CELMoDs work similarly to immune-based therapies like Revlimid but are more powerful. Doctors are studying CELMoDs in many clinical trials, including as an early treatment for people newly diagnosed with multiple myeloma.  

One recent study looked at Iberdomide combined with two other medicines: Darzalex (an antibody treatment) and dexamethasone (a steroid). This was tested in 77 patients who were unable to have a stem cell transplant. The results were very promising: More than 90% of patients responded to the treatment and nearly 80% of patients had their disease stay under control for at least a year. Only three patients discontinued treatment due to adverse effects. 

Researchers will continue following these patients to see how long the benefits last and to better understand how well this treatment works over time.  

Multi-Target CAR T-Cell Therapies 

New CAR T-cell therapies are being designed to attack more than one target on myeloma cells. This may help prevent myeloma from becoming resistant to treatment. Today’s presentations highlighted two unique ways of reaching this goal: 

• TriPRIL is a type of CAR T that targets two proteins on myeloma cells:
  BCMA and TACI. In a small study of 10 participants with relapsed/refractory myeloma, eight responded to TriPRIL. Importantly, this included four patients who did not respond to previous CAR T therapy. 

• In another phase 1 study, two different sets of CAR T-cells that target BCMA and GPRC5D were delivered at the same time to patients who had received at least three prior lines of therapy. 87% of the 19 patients responded to the dual CAR T-cell therapies, including those who received the BCMA CAR T therapy alone.  

In both studies, side effects were manageable, with no serious long-term neurological problems. 

Weighing the Risk/Benefits of Currently Approved CAR T-Cell Therapies  

Abecma, also known as ide-cel, and Carvykti, also known as cilta-cel, are the first CAR T-cell therapies approved for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. They work by targeting a protein called BCMA on myeloma cells. Both therapies continue to draw attention as potent treatment options, though many patients can experience significant side effects from either of them. 

Two important studies presented at IMS provided valuable insights for patients and providers weighing CAR T treatment decisions: 

• Researchers analyzed patient outcomes from ide-cel and cilta-cel in more than 1,500 patients with relapsed/refractory myeloma who had at least six prior lines of therapy. While cilta-cel demonstrated higher response rates, deeper remissions, and longer progression-free and overall survival, it also carried a higher risk of delayed neurologic toxicities and slightly increased treatment-related mortality. Although ide-cel and cilta-cel haven’t been directly compared in clinical trials, studies using real-world data like this can help patients and their doctors weigh the potential benefits and risks of each.  

• In a separate analysis, researchers interviewed 38 patients who had received cilta-cel treatment and remained treatment-free for at least six months. Patients described this treatment-free period as profoundly meaningful, highlighting improved quality of life, increased energy, freedom from side effects, and the ability to return to normal routines and family activities.  

Together, these studies reinforce that making the decision to have CAR T-cell therapy requires weighing not only clinical outcomes and safety concerns but also understanding how the therapy can affect patients’ quality of life and long-term well-being. 

As we continue our coverage from Toronto, we’re encouraged by the depth of innovation happening across the myeloma research community and the field’s commitment to balancing clinical effectiveness, safety, and the patient experience. 

Stay tuned for tomorrow’s highlights and more updates from IMS 2025 all meeting long. 

This week, the International Myeloma Society (IMS) is hosting its 22nd Annual Meeting—the world’s largest gathering of multiple myeloma researchers and clinicians. The MMRF team is on the ground in Toronto attending scientific sessions, connecting with experts, and bringing you real-time coverage of the latest breakthroughs.

Over the next four days, we’ll highlight the most promising research and key insights shaping the future of myeloma treatment. Much of the science being presented is closely aligned with MMRF’s strategic research priorities and addresses critical unmet needs in patient care, including:

• New therapies for patients at all stages of the disease
• New therapies for patients with high-risk disease
• Expanding bispecific antibody treatment from hospital to community settings
• Optimizing CAR T-cell therapy approaches
• Understanding markers that predict risk and may inform treatment decisions

Here’s what captured our attention on day one.

New Treatments on the Horizon for Relapsed/Refractory Patients

Data from early-phase studies of several new treatments were very encouraging, particularly for groups of patients who have exhausted current treatment options. Here are three with exciting potential:

• Cevostamab is a new bispecific antibody that goes after a different target on myeloma cells (called FcRH5) compared to the other available bispecific treatments. In a phase 1 study of 32 relapsed/refractory patients—most relapsing after two prior therapies—response rates were 86% with low-dose cevostamab plus Pomalyst/dexamethasone and 88% with the higher dose. Side effects such as infections did occur but were treatable and did not lead to anyone stopping treatment.
• ISB 2001 is a new trispecific antibody that is designed to more strongly bind to myeloma cells and destroy them. In a phase 1 study of 35 relapsed/refractory patients, about 74% responded to ISB 2001, many of whom (43%) already had a prior CAR T or bispecific treatment. Patients experienced deep, lasting benefits at about six months of follow-up. In the study, ISB 2001 was given by injection once a week, but may eventually be given monthly due to how long it lasts in the body.
• Arlo-cel is a new CAR T-cell therapy that targets GPRC5D, the same protein targeted by the bispecific therapy Talvey. In a phase 1 study of 86 relapsed/refractory patients, more than 90% of patients responded to the treatment. At least 45% of these patients had already tried bispecific or CAR T therapies, so this treatment could offer hope for people who are running out of options. We’ll share more on arlo-cel in the days to come, so stay tuned.

While the results of these studies are promising, more work is needed to figure out how well they compare to currently approved myeloma treatments.

Treatments for Patients with High-Risk Disease

Patients with high-risk multiple myeloma face a more aggressive and treatment-resistant form of the disease, so they often have a worse prognosis. Research is needed to find and improve effective strategies for newly diagnosed and relapsed patients who fall into this high-risk category.

Several abstracts highlighted encouraging progress in this area. One standout study looked at the combination of Talvey (talquetamab) and Tecvayli (teclistamab) in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma and extramedullary disease—a group of patients who have myeloma in other organs of the body beyond the bone marrow. Nearly 80% of patients responded to this combination of bispecifics.

Importantly, the combination of Talvey and Tecvayli worked better for patients than either drug by itself. In fact, about twice as many people improved with the combination compared to just one of the treatments.

We are encouraged by these developments and will continue to monitor advancements in this important area of research.

Stay tuned for more daily highlights and expert perspectives from the conference this week.