Overall the issue of patients above 65-70 years of age being that it is impossible for most of them to undergo an intensive treatment like autologous stem cell transplant with little prospect of debulking effectively the bone marrow with chemotherapy, and also few possibilities to harass the bone microenvironment in the tumoral niche. If, advanced age in frail patients is predictive of an increased risk of treatment-related toxicity, there is a growing number of elderly patients in regards to transplantation, but still fit if one considers the objectives of life characterized with prolonged survival. These patients might have the same treatment as to the transplant eligible, but without the transplant procedure. The development of immunotherapy has transformed the treatment landscape of cancer, particularly in MM, increasing the treatment possibilities with possibly fewer adverse events. The therapeutic strategy and treatment options for NTE patients moved from melphalan-based induction regimens to lenalidomide-based associations, which is now the backbone of most treatment for NTE patients. Even though the latest melphalan, bortezomib and prednisone (MPV) association was considered somewhat effective it was not so well tolerated. Furthermore, MPV hardly prolonged PFS beyond 2 years. It was recently improved with the addition of Daratumumab, first in class anti CD38 Mab in the phase III ALCYONE. The association lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rd) has significantly improved the easiness of treating the NTE population and all drugs seem to be possible to combine to Rd. In that extent, proteasome inhibitors have always been one of the most impactful family of agents in MM, and as expected Bortezomib plus Rd has become a very relevant and commonly used regimen in NTE NDMM. These groundbreaking results have favored the development of 2 randomized phase 3 studies for registration of combination of antiCD38Mab (Daratumumab (Cepheus, NCT03652064), Isatuximab (Imroz, NCT03319667) +Rd +Velcade in comparison to VRd. Both studies have used as a comparator the VRd regimen which is today one of the safest, active and popular triplet based Rd regimen, approved, and therefore the best control arm possibly for these studies. However, as much as there has been no direct head to head comparison of VRd to Dara Rd, when looking at the data from Maia it is anticipated that DRd will become a standard of care, and might challenge strongly VRd. Yet, multiple questions remain still, anticipating the change in backbone from VRd to antiCD38 +Rd becoming the new standard of care for NTE NDMM patients. The investigators have therefore planned to answer the critical question of the role of proteasome inhibitors in NTE non frail NDMM when considering anti CD38 +Rd as the backbone.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
270
Isatuximab by IV route, per 28 days cycle - Cycle1: 10 mg/kg on days 1, 8, 15, and 22. Cycles 2 to 12: 10 mg/kg on days 1 and 15. From cycle 13: 10 mg/kg on day 1.
Lenalidomide by oral route, per 28 days cycle - 25 mg daily on days 1-21.
Bortezomib sub-cutaneous, per 28 days cycle - Cycles 1 to 12: 1.3 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, 15. Cycles 13-18: 1.3 mg/m2 on days 1, 15.
Dexamethasone by oral route, per 28 days cycle - 20 mg daily on days 1, 8, 15 and 22.
CHU Poitiers
Poitiers, France
Minimal Residual Disease (MRD) rate at 10-5 at 18 months
Proportion of patients with a reduction tumoral mass ≥50 percent who experience a Minimal Residual Disease (MRD) 10-5 per IMWG (International Myeloma Working Group) criteria.
Time frame: at 18 months
Safety of trial treatments
List of AE frequency (AE assessed by Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) criteria, version 5.0)
Time frame: Up to 5 years
To determine the best response to the treatment
Per International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) criteria
Time frame: Up to 5 years
Progression Free survival
Time to relapse or death, whatever occurs first
Time frame: Up to 5 years
To determine the time to reach MRD negative rate at 10-5
The time from randomization to the date of the first MRD negative rate at 10-5
Time frame: Up to 5 years
To determine the time to loss of MRD negative rate at 10-5
Time from randomization or from the date of MRD negative at 10-5 to the date of MRD positive at 10-5
Time frame: Up to 5 years
To evaluate the MRD rate at 10-5 at 12 months, and yearly (and at 10-6)
Proportion of patients with a reduction tumoral mass ≥75 percent or who has reached at least SD and with MRD negative at the previous MRD assessment who experience a Minimal Residual Disease (MRD) 10-5 per IMWG (International Myeloma Working Group) criteria.
Time frame: Up to 5 years
To determine the rate of loss of MRD at 10-5 at each time point
Proportion of patients with MRD negative at 10-5 who lose the MRD negative status at the next evaluation.
Time frame: Up to 5 years
To determine the sustained MRD rate at 10-5 (similar time points)
Proportion of patients with sustained MRD in bone marrow aspirate (\< 10-5) between 2 evaluations as determined in the protocol.
Time frame: Up to 5 years
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.