As optimal tolerance is the key for developing new treatments for the very elderly population, the aim of the study is to compare the efficacy and tolerance of isatuximab in combination with lenalidomide+dexamethasone (Rd) versus Rd only in very elderly patients aged 70 years or older. ln sum, a clear and clinically highly relevant benefit is expected with the isatuximab-based triple combination compared to the standard Rd doublet.
The treatment goals in elderly patients with multiple myeloma (MM) are similar to those in younger patients: rapid and long-lasting symptom control, deep response and durable remissions as well as increased survival are at the forefront, similar to therapy goals in younger patients. Elderly patients frequently present with comorbidities, reduced treatment tolerance and greater frequency of treatment discontinuations. Hence, treatment needs to be adapted to the specific needs of this patient population. ln the recent decade lenalidomide-based therapies have been established as effective treatment modalities in elderly patients. In elderly patients lenalidomide + dexamethasone (Rd) is one of the most frequently used treatment regimens, which is effective and well tolerated. MM is a high unmet medical need and as a result, several agents are currently under clinical investigation in MM. Monoclonal antibodies (mAb) are one of the most promising groups of drugs in development in the treatment of MM with several of them demonstrating activity in this disease. lsatuximab is a highly effective monoclonal antibody with an excellent activity and tolerance profile, active as single agent therapy in patients with multiple prior lines of treatment. Presently several trials with isatuximab-lenalidomide containing treatment regimens are ongoing. The expected benefits of adding isatuximab to Rd over Rd alone in very elderly patients seem to outweigh possible risks by far. A greater depth of response is anticipated including greater number of MRD (minimal residual disease) negative patients, higher response rates, and longer progression free survival. Risk conferred with the addition of isatuximab are mainly restricted to a roughly 40% rate of infusion reactions, which usually are seen at the first infusion only. ln addition, there is an increased risk for grade 4 leukopenia, grade 2 and 3 thrombocytopenia, and grade 3 infection and fatigue.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Induction: 10mg/kg on day 1,8,15,22 in cycle 1, subsequently on day 1, 15; every 28 days (q28 days) Maintenance: 10mg/kg, day1, q28 days until progression or intolerance but for a maximum of 24 cycles from start of maintenance
Induction: 25mg\*, day 1-21, every 28 days (q28 days); Maintenance: 5-10mg, day 1-21, q28 days (according to individual tolerance) until progression or intolerance but for a maximum of 24 cycles from start of maintenance \*) for patients with moderate renal impairment (30≤ GFR (MDRD formula) \< 50 mL/min) starting dose is 10 mg
Induction: Patients aged \<75 years: 40mg, once weekly; Patients aged ≥75 years: 20mg, once weekly
Bezirkskrankenhaus Kufstein, Innere Medizin, Interne II u. onkologische Tagesklinik
Kufstein, Austria
LKH Hochsteiermark - Leoben, Abt. f. Innere Medizin, Haemato-Onkologie
Leoben, Austria
Proportion of patients with MRD (minimal residual disease) negativity (defined by NGF [next generation flow] at 10^-5) after end of induction treatment in the two arms.
To demonstrate the benefit of isatuximab in combination with lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone followed by isatuximab and lenalidomide maintenance therapy in changing the proportion of patients with MRD negativity as compared to lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone followed by lenalidomide maintenance treatment in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM).
Time frame: After 8 months of induction treatment (8 cycles, each cyle is 28 days)
Percentage of patients with response to study treatment
Effect of treatment on Overall Response Rate (ORR) including patients with Partial Response (PR), Very Good Partial Response (VGPR) and Complete Response (CR) as per International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) criteria in each arm.
Time frame: After 32 months (8 months of induction treatment and a maximum of 24 months of maintenance treatment)
Progression-free Survival
Effectiveness of treatments on Progression-free survival (PFS)
Time frame: After 44 months (8 months of induction treatment and a maximum of 24 months of maintenance treatment and a minimum of 12 months of follow-up)
Overall Survival
Effectiveness of treatments on Overall Survival (OS)
Time frame: After 44 months (8 months of induction treatment and a maximum of 24 months of maintenance treatment and a minimum of 12 months of follow-up)
Effectiveness of treatments on MRD negativity
To evaluate the proportion of patients with MRD negativity (defined by NGF \[next generation flow\] at 10\^-5) after 12 months (13 cycles) of maintenance treatment.
Time frame: After 20 months (8 months of induction treatment and 12 months of maintenance treatemnent)
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
198
Univ.Klinikum Krems, Klin. Abt. f. Innere Medizin 2
Mitterweng, Austria
PMU Salzburg: Universitätsklinik für Innere Medizin III
Salzburg, Austria
Univ.-Klinikum St. Pölten, Innere Medizin 1
Sankt Pölten, Austria
Krankenhaus d. Barmh. Schwestern Wien, 1. Med. Abteilung, Onkologie und Hämatologie
Vienna, Austria
Hanusch Krankenhaus der Österreichischen Gesundheitskasse, 3. Med. Abteilung
Vienna, Austria
Klinik Ottakring, 1.Med.Abt., Zentrum f. Onkologie, Haematologie und Palliativmedizin
Vienna, Austria
Krankenhaus Zams, Innere Medizin, Internistische Onkologie-Haematologie
Zams, Austria
General Hospital of Athens "Evangelismos", Hematology Clinic
Athens, Greece
...and 4 more locations
Effectiveness of treatments on preventing progressive disease
To evaluate the Time to Progression (TTP) in each arm.
Time frame: After 44 months (8 months of induction treatment and a maximum of 24 months of maintenance treatment and a minimum of 12 months of follow-up)
Progression-free Survival in different high-risk cytogenetic populations
Effectiveness of treatment on PFS in high risk cytogenetic populations defined as patients carrying a) del(17p), t(4;14), t(14;16) in each arm and b) the same aberrations plus amp1q21.
Time frame: After 44 months (8 months of induction treatment and a maximum of 24 months of maintenance treatment and a minimum of 12 months of follow-up)
Duration of response
Length of time between response and progression or death.
Time frame: After 44 months (8 months of induction treatment and a maximum of 24 months of maintenance treatment and a minimum of 12 months of follow-up)
Incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (Safety and tolerability)
Number of participants with treatment-emergent adverse events as assessed by NCI-CTCAE Version 5.0.
Time frame: After 32 months (8 months of induction treatment and a maximum of 24 months of maintenance treatment)
Changes in quality of life (QoL) using general questionnaire European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of life questionnaire (QLQ) Core 30 (C 30) (EORTC-QLQ-C30)
Changes in quality of life will be analyzed by using the cancer patient-specific questionnaire EORTC-QLQ-C30.
Time frame: After 32 months (8 months of induction treatment and a maximum of 24 months of maintenance treatment)
Changes of general health status using questionnaire EQ (EuroQol) 5 dimension (5D) 5 level (5L) (EQ-5D-5L)
Changes in general health status will be analyzed by using the questionnaires EQ-5D-5L. QoL.
Time frame: After 32 months (8 months of induction treatment and a maximum of 24 months of maintenance treatment)
Changes in quality of life (QoL) using multiple myeloma specific questionnaire EORTC-QLQ Myeloma (MY) 20 (EORTC-QLQ-MY20)
Changes in quality of life will be analyzed by using the multiple myeloma-specific questionnaire EORTC-QLQ-MY20.
Time frame: After 32 months (8 months of induction treatment and a maximum of 24 months of maintenance treatment)
Progression-free survival after second line therapy
Influence of potential second line therapy on Progression-free Survival
Time frame: After end of study treatment until 12 months of follow up as a minimum (until LPLV)