Thierry Facon, Meletios-Athanasios Dimopoulos, Xavier P Leleu, Meral Beksac, Ludek Pour, Roman Hájek, Zhuogang Liu, Jiri Minarik, Philippe Moreau, Joanna Romejko-Jarosinska, Ivan Spicka, Vladimir I Vorobyev, Britta Besemer, Tadao Ishida, Wojciech Janowski, Sevgi Kalayoglu-Besisik, Gurdeep Parmar, Pawel Robak, Elena Zamagni, Hartmut Goldschmidt, Thomas G Martin, Salomon Manier, Mohamad Mohty, Corina Oprea, Marie-France Brégeault, Sandrine Macé, Christelle Berthou, David Bregman, Zandra Klippel, Robert Z Orlowski
{"title":"Isatuximab, Bortezomib, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone for Multiple Myeloma.","authors":"Thierry Facon, Meletios-Athanasios Dimopoulos, Xavier P Leleu, Meral Beksac, Ludek Pour, Roman Hájek, Zhuogang Liu, Jiri Minarik, Philippe Moreau, Joanna Romejko-Jarosinska, Ivan Spicka, Vladimir I Vorobyev, Britta Besemer, Tadao Ishida, Wojciech Janowski, Sevgi Kalayoglu-Besisik, Gurdeep Parmar, Pawel Robak, Elena Zamagni, Hartmut Goldschmidt, Thomas G Martin, Salomon Manier, Mohamad Mohty, Corina Oprea, Marie-France Brégeault, Sandrine Macé, Christelle Berthou, David Bregman, Zandra Klippel, Robert Z Orlowski","doi":"10.1056/NEJMoa2400712","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRd) is a preferred first-line treatment option for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Whether the addition of the anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody isatuximab to the VRd regimen would reduce the risk of disease progression or death among patients ineligible to undergo transplantation is unclear.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In an international, open-label, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned, in a 3:2 ratio, patients 18 to 80 years of age with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were ineligible to undergo transplantation to receive either isatuximab plus VRd or VRd alone. The primary efficacy end point was progression-free survival. Key secondary end points included a complete response or better and minimal residual disease (MRD)-negative status in patients with a complete response.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 446 patients underwent randomization. At a median follow-up of 59.7 months, the estimated progression-free survival at 60 months was 63.2% in the isatuximab-VRd group, as compared with 45.2% in the VRd group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.60; 98.5% confidence interval, 0.41 to 0.88; P<0.001). The percentage of patients with a complete response or better was significantly higher in the isatuximab-VRd group than in the VRd group (74.7% vs. 64.1%, P = 0.01), as was the percentage of patients with MRD-negative status and a complete response (55.5% vs. 40.9%, P = 0.003). No new safety signals were observed with the isatuximab-VRd regimen. The incidence of serious adverse events during treatment and the incidence of adverse events leading to discontinuation were similar in the two groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Isatuximab-VRd was more effective than VRd as initial therapy in patients 18 to 80 years of age with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were ineligible to undergo transplantation. (Funded by Sanofi and a Cancer Center Support Grant; IMROZ ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03319667.).</p>","PeriodicalId":54725,"journal":{"name":"New England Journal of Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":96.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New England Journal of Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2400712","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRd) is a preferred first-line treatment option for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Whether the addition of the anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody isatuximab to the VRd regimen would reduce the risk of disease progression or death among patients ineligible to undergo transplantation is unclear.
Methods: In an international, open-label, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned, in a 3:2 ratio, patients 18 to 80 years of age with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were ineligible to undergo transplantation to receive either isatuximab plus VRd or VRd alone. The primary efficacy end point was progression-free survival. Key secondary end points included a complete response or better and minimal residual disease (MRD)-negative status in patients with a complete response.
Results: A total of 446 patients underwent randomization. At a median follow-up of 59.7 months, the estimated progression-free survival at 60 months was 63.2% in the isatuximab-VRd group, as compared with 45.2% in the VRd group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.60; 98.5% confidence interval, 0.41 to 0.88; P<0.001). The percentage of patients with a complete response or better was significantly higher in the isatuximab-VRd group than in the VRd group (74.7% vs. 64.1%, P = 0.01), as was the percentage of patients with MRD-negative status and a complete response (55.5% vs. 40.9%, P = 0.003). No new safety signals were observed with the isatuximab-VRd regimen. The incidence of serious adverse events during treatment and the incidence of adverse events leading to discontinuation were similar in the two groups.
Conclusions: Isatuximab-VRd was more effective than VRd as initial therapy in patients 18 to 80 years of age with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were ineligible to undergo transplantation. (Funded by Sanofi and a Cancer Center Support Grant; IMROZ ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03319667.).
期刊介绍:
The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) stands as the foremost medical journal and website worldwide. With an impressive history spanning over two centuries, NEJM boasts a consistent publication of superb, peer-reviewed research and engaging clinical content. Our primary objective revolves around delivering high-caliber information and findings at the juncture of biomedical science and clinical practice. We strive to present this knowledge in formats that are not only comprehensible but also hold practical value, effectively influencing healthcare practices and ultimately enhancing patient outcomes.