BACKGROUND: Daratumumab, an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody, has been approved for the treatment of multiple myeloma. Data are needed regarding the use of daratumumab for high-risk smoldering multiple myeloma, a precursor disease of active multiple myeloma for which no treatments have been approved. METHODS: In this phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned patients with high-risk smoldering multiple myeloma to receive either subcutaneous daratumumab monotherapy or active monitoring. Treatment was continued for 39 cycles, for 36 months, or until confirmation of disease progression, whichever occurred first. The primary end point was progression-free survival; progression to active multiple myeloma was assessed by an independent review committee in accordance with International Myeloma Working Group diagnostic criteria. RESULTS: Among the 390 enrolled patients, 194 were assigned to the daratumumab group and 196 to the active-monitoring group. With a median follow-up of 65.2 months, the risk of disease progression or death was 51% lower with daratumumab than with active monitoring (hazard ratio, 0.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36 to 0.67; P<0.001). Progression-free survival at 5 years was 63.1% with daratumumab and 40.8% with active monitoring. A total of 15 patients (7.7%) in the daratumumab group and 26 patients (13.3%) in the active-monitoring group died (hazard ratio, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.27 to 0.98). Overall survival at 5 years was 93.0% with daratumumab and 86.9% with active monitoring. The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse event was hypertension, which occurred in 5.7% and 4.6% of the patients in the daratumumab group and the active-monitoring group, respectively. Adverse events led to treatment discontinuation in 5.7% of the patients in the daratumumab group, and no new safety concerns were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with high-risk smoldering multiple myeloma, subcutaneous daratumumab monotherapy was associated with a significantly lower risk of progression to active multiple myeloma or death and with higher overall survival than active monitoring. No unexpected safety concerns were identified. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; AQUILA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03301220.).

• MeSH
• Progression-Free Survival MeSH
• Adult MeSH
• Smoldering Multiple Myeloma * diagnosis   mortality   therapy   MeSH
• Injections, Subcutaneous MeSH
• Kaplan-Meier Estimate MeSH
• Middle Aged MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Multiple Myeloma * diagnosis   epidemiology   prevention & control   MeSH
• Antibodies, Monoclonal * administration & dosage   adverse effects   MeSH
• Watchful Waiting * statistics & numerical data   MeSH
• Disease Progression MeSH
• Antineoplastic Agents * administration & dosage   adverse effects   MeSH
• Aged, 80 and over MeSH
• Aged MeSH
• Check Tag
• Adult MeSH
• Middle Aged MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Male MeSH
• Aged, 80 and over MeSH
• Aged MeSH
• Female MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Clinical Trial, Phase III MeSH
• Multicenter Study MeSH
• Randomized Controlled Trial MeSH
• Comparative Study MeSH

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This summary describes the first analysis of the PERSEUS study, which looked at adults with multiple myeloma that had never been treated before, also called newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Multiple myeloma is a type of cancer in the blood, specifically in plasma cells within the soft, spongy tissue in the center of most bones, called the bone marrow. Researchers wanted to see if adding daratumumab (D) to a standard treatment of three other medicines called VRd, which stands for bortezomib (V), lenalidomide (R), and dexamethasone (d), could stop the multiple myeloma from getting worse and help participants live longer without multiple myeloma.Half of the participants were assigned to the treatment plan with daratumumab; they received D-VRd during initial treatment phases (induction and consolidation), followed by daratumumab as well as lenalidomide (D-R) in the maintenance phase. The other half of participants received treatment without daratumumab; they received VRd induction and consolidation followed by lenalidomide alone (R) maintenance. In addition, all participants were able to receive an autologous stem cell transplant, a procedure used to further help reduce multiple myeloma. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?: At the time of this analysis of PERSEUS, about 4 years after participants started the study, participants who received D-VRd treatment followed by D-R maintenance had a better response to treatment (as measured by specific markers of multiple myeloma) and were more likely to be alive and free from their multiple myeloma getting worse in comparison to participants who received VRd followed by R maintenance. Side effects (unwanted or undesirable effects of treatment) in both treatment groups were in line with the known side effects of daratumumab and VRd. WHAT DO THE RESULTS MEAN?: The results of the PERSEUS study showed that including daratumumab in D-VRd induction/consolidation and D-R maintenance was better for treating multiple myeloma than the current standard VRd treatment followed by R maintenance alone in adults with a new diagnosis of multiple myeloma who were also able to receive an autologous stem cell transplant. Of importance, there were no unexpected side effects in either group.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02874742 (GRIFFIN) (ClinicalTrials.gov).

• MeSH
• Bortezomib * administration & dosage   therapeutic use   MeSH
• Dexamethasone * administration & dosage   therapeutic use   MeSH
• Adult MeSH
• Clinical Trials, Phase II as Topic MeSH
• Lenalidomide * administration & dosage   therapeutic use   MeSH
• Middle Aged MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Multiple Myeloma * drug therapy   diagnosis   MeSH
• Antibodies, Monoclonal * administration & dosage   therapeutic use   MeSH
• Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols * therapeutic use   adverse effects   MeSH
• Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic MeSH
• Aged MeSH
• Treatment Outcome MeSH
• Check Tag
• Adult MeSH
• Middle Aged MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Male MeSH
• Aged MeSH
• Female MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Patient Education Handout MeSH

BACKGROUND: In the GLOW study, fixed-duration ibrutinib-venetoclax showed superior progression-free survival versus chlorambucil-obinutuzumab in patients with previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia who were older or had comorbidities, or both, at a median follow up of 27·7 months. In this Article, we report updated outcomes from GLOW after a 46-month median follow-up. METHODS: GLOW was a randomised, multicentre, phase 3 study done at 67 hospital centres across 14 countries. Patients aged 65 years and older or 18-64 years with previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia and a cumulative illness rating scale score of more than 6 or creatinine clearance less than 70 mL/min, or both, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or less were randomly assigned (1:1) via an interactive web system with permuted blocks (block size of four) and stratified by IGHV mutational status and the presence of del11q aberration to the ibrutinib-venetoclax group (three cycles of ibrutinib lead-in [420 mg/day, orally], followed by 12 cycles of ibrutinib plus venetoclax [400 mg/day, orally, including a 5-week dose ramp-up]) or the chlorambucil-obinutuzumab group (six cycles of chlorambucil [0·5 mg/kg, orally, on days 1 and 15 of each cycle], and obinutuzumab [1000 mg, intravenously, on days 1 (or 100 mg on day 1 and 900 mg on day 2), 8, and 15 of cycle 1 and day 1 of cycles 2-6]). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population, assessed by an independent review committee. The safety population included all randomised patients who received at least one dose of the study treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03462719) and the EU Clinical Trials Register (EudraCT 2017-004699-77). FINDINGS: Between May 4, 2018, and April 5, 2019, 211 patients (122 [58%] were male and 89 [42%] were female) were randomly assigned to receive ibrutinib-venetoclax (n=106) or chlorambucil-obinutuzumab (n=105). At a median of 46 months (IQR 43-47) of follow-up, progression-free survival remained superior for the ibrutinib-venetoclax group (hazard ratio 0·214 [95% CI 0·138-0·334]; p<0·0001); 42-month progression-free survival rates were 74·6% (95% CI 65·0-82·0) for ibrutinib-venetoclax and 24·8% (16·5-34·1) for chlorambucil-obinutuzumab. Following the primary analysis, one patient in the chlorambucil-obinutuzumab group had a serious adverse event of myelodysplastic syndrome. Treatment-related deaths were reported in one patient receiving ibrutinib-venetoclax (cardiac failure, pneumonia, and sinus node dysfunction) and in one patient receiving chlorambucil-obinutuzumab (pneumonia). There were 15 deaths in the ibrutinib-venetoclax group (of which three were due to post-treatment infections) and 30 deaths in the chlorambucil-obinutuzumab group (of which 10 were due to post-treatment infections). INTERPRETATION: After 4 years of follow-up, ibrutinib-venetoclax continues to significantly prolong progression-free survival (vs chemoimmunotherapy) in patients with previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia, supporting its use as a first-line option. FUNDING: Janssen Research & Development and Pharmacyclics.

• MeSH
• Chlorambucil MeSH
• Leukemia, Lymphocytic, Chronic, B-Cell * drug therapy   MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Follow-Up Studies MeSH
• Pneumonia * chemically induced   MeSH
• Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols adverse effects   MeSH
• Check Tag
• Humans MeSH
• Male MeSH
• Female MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Clinical Trial, Phase III MeSH
• Multicenter Study MeSH
• Randomized Controlled Trial MeSH

INTRODUCTION: Two phase 3 studies demonstrated superior efficacy of intravenous daratumumab (DARA IV) plus bortezomib/melphalan/prednisone (ALCYONE) or lenalidomide/dexamethasone (Rd; MAIA) versus standard-of-care regimens for transplant-ineligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. In these studies, patients could switch from DARA IV to subcutaneous daratumumab (DARA SC) while receiving daratumumab monotherapy in ALCYONE (as of Cycle 11) or daratumumab plus Rd in MAIA. The phase 3 COLUMBA study demonstrated noninferiority of DARA SC to DARA IV. DARA SC reduced administration time, allowing patients to spend less time in healthcare settings, a relevant practical consideration for patient care in the COVID-19 pandemic/settings of limited healthcare resources. METHODS: DARA SC 1800 mg was administered every 4 weeks, per approved dosing schedules. We evaluated safety and patient-reported experience (ALCYONE only) among patients who switched from DARA IV to DARA SC. RESULTS: Fifty-seven patients in ALCYONE and 135 in MAIA switched to DARA SC. Three (2.2%; MAIA) patients reported injection-site reactions, all of which were mild. No infusion-related reactions occurred with DARA SC. In ALCYONE, >80% of patients preferred DARA SC over DARA IV. Grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in 5.3% of patients in ALCYONE and 25.9% in MAIA; one (0.7%; MAIA) patient experienced a TEAE with an outcome of death. CONCLUSION: For transplant-ineligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, DARA SC (monotherapy/with Rd) was safe and preferred over DARA IV. ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02195479/NCT02252172.

• MeSH
• Bortezomib therapeutic use   MeSH
• COVID-19 * MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Multiple Myeloma * drug therapy   MeSH
• Pandemics MeSH
• Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols adverse effects   MeSH
• Check Tag
• Humans MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Clinical Trial, Phase III MeSH

PURPOSE: In GLOW, fixed-duration ibrutinib + venetoclax showed superior progression-free survival (PFS) versus chlorambucil + obinutuzumab in older/comorbid patients with previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). The current analysis describes minimal residual disease (MRD) kinetics and any potential predictive value for PFS, as it has not yet been evaluated for ibrutinib + venetoclax treatment. METHODS: Undetectable MRD (uMRD) was assessed by next-generation sequencing at <1 CLL cell per 10,000 (<10-4) and <1 CLL cell per 100,000 (<10-5) leukocytes. PFS was analyzed by MRD status at 3 months after treatment (EOT+3). RESULTS: Ibrutinib + venetoclax achieved deeper uMRD (<10-5) rates in bone marrow (BM) and peripheral blood (PB), respectively, in 40.6% and 43.4% of patients at EOT+3 versus 7.6% and 18.1% of patients receiving chlorambucil + obinutuzumab. Of these patients, uMRD (<10-5) in PB was sustained during the first year post-treatment (EOT+12) in 80.4% of patients receiving ibrutinib + venetoclax and 26.3% receiving chlorambucil + obinutuzumab. Patients with detectable MRD (dMRD; ≥10-4) in PB at EOT+3 were more likely to sustain MRD levels through EOT+12 with ibrutinib + venetoclax versus chlorambucil + obinutuzumab. PFS rates at EOT+12 were high among patients treated with ibrutinib + venetoclax regardless of MRD status at EOT+3: 96.3% and 93.3% in patients with uMRD (<10-4) and dMRD (≥10-4) in BM, respectively, versus 83.3% and 58.7% for patients receiving chlorambucil + obinutuzumab. PFS rates at EOT+12 also remained high in patients with unmutated immunoglobulin heavy-chain variable region (IGHV) receiving ibrutinib + venetoclax, independent of MRD status in BM. CONCLUSION: Molecular and clinical relapses were less frequent during the first year post-treatment with ibrutinib + venetoclax versus chlorambucil + obinutuzumab regardless of MRD status at EOT+3 and IGHV status. Even for patients not achieving uMRD (<10-4), PFS rates remained high with ibrutinib + venetoclax; this is a novel finding and requires additional follow-up to confirm its persistence over time.

• MeSH
• Bridged Bicyclo Compounds, Heterocyclic adverse effects   MeSH
• Chlorambucil adverse effects   MeSH
• Leukemia, Lymphocytic, Chronic, B-Cell * drug therapy   MeSH
• Progression-Free Survival MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols adverse effects   MeSH
• Neoplasm, Residual drug therapy   MeSH
• Aged MeSH
• Check Tag
• Humans MeSH
• Aged MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH

CONTEXT: Minimal residual disease (MRD) is a predictive marker for progression-free survival (PFS) in chronic leukocytic leukemia (CLL) following chemoimmunotherapy and fixed-duration treatment with venetoclax and anti-CD20 antibodies. This has not been explored for ibrutinib+venetoclax (Ibr+Ven), a fixed-duration treatment with mechanisms of action that synergistically eliminate CLL subpopulations in distinct tumor compartments. OBJECTIVE: Investigate MRD outcomes at primary analysis of phase 3 GLOW study (NCT03462719). DESIGN: Randomized, open-label, active-control study. PATIENTS: Patients aged ≥65 years or 18-64 years with a CIRS score >6 or creatinine clearance <70 mL/min were randomized 1:1, stratified by IGHV mutational and del11q status, to Ibr+Ven (n=106) or chlorambucil+obinutuzumab (Clb+O) (n=105). Excluded: patients with del17p or known TP53 mutations. INTERVENTIONS: Ibr+Ven (3 cycles of ibrutinib lead-in, then 12 cycles of Ibr+Ven) or 6 cycles of Clb+O. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary endpoint: independent review committee-assessed PFS; secondary endpoint: rate of undetectable MRD (uMRD; <10-4); exploratory endpoints: MRD analyses. MRD results are by next-generation sequencing, reported 3 months after end of treatment (EOT+3) unless otherwise noted. RESULTS: Rates of uMRD<10-4 were higher for Ibr+Ven versus Clb+O in bone marrow (BM) (51.9% vs. 17.1%; P<0.0001) and peripheral blood (PB) (54.7% vs. 39.0%; P=0.0259). For Ibr+Ven, BM uMRD was higher for uIGHV (58.2%) versus mutated IGHV (44.4%). With Ibr+Ven, 84.5% (49/58) of patients maintained PB uMRD from EOT+3 to EOT+12 versus 29.3% (12/41) with Clb+O. Rates of uMRD<10-5 were higher for Ibr+Ven versus Clb+O in BM (40.6% vs. 7.6%), including patients with uIGHV (45.5% vs. 5.6%). uMRD<10-5 in PB was largely sustained from EOT+3 to EOT+12 with Ibr+Ven (80.4% [37/46]) but not Clb+O (26.3% [5/19]). PFS rates for Ibr+Ven during the 12 months after EOT were >90% for patients with uMRD<10-4 and patients with detectable MRD; however, Clb+O arm patients with detectable PB MRD relapsed more quickly than those with uMRD<10-4. CONCLUSIONS: All-oral, once-daily, fixed-duration Ibr+Ven demonstrated superior uMRD responses that were deeper and better sustained post-treatment versus Clb+O in older adult or unfit patients with previously untreated CLL.

• MeSH
• Adenine analogs & derivatives   MeSH
• Bridged Bicyclo Compounds, Heterocyclic MeSH
• Chlorambucil MeSH
• Leukemia, Lymphocytic, Chronic, B-Cell * pathology   MeSH
• Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized MeSH
• Creatinine MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Piperidines MeSH
• Prospective Studies MeSH
• Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols adverse effects   MeSH
• Neoplasm, Residual etiology   MeSH
• Aged MeSH
• Sulfonamides MeSH
• Check Tag
• Humans MeSH
• Aged MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Randomized Controlled Trial MeSH

BACKGROUND: In the phase 3 ALCYONE study, daratumumab plus bortezomib/melphalan/prednisone (D-VMP) versus bortezomib/melphalan/prednisone (VMP) significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in transplant-ineligible, newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients. We present a subgroup analysis of ALCYONE by patient frailty status. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Frailty assessment was performed retrospectively using age, Charlson comorbidity index, and baseline Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score. Patients were classified as fit (0), intermediate (1), or frail (≥2); a nonfrail category combined fit and intermediate patients. RESULTS: Among randomized patients (D-VMP, n = 350; VMP, n = 356), 391 (55.4%) were nonfrail (D-VMP, 187 [53.4%]; VMP, 204 [57.3%]) and 315 (44.6%) were frail (163 [46.6%]; 152 [42.7%]). After 40.1-months median follow-up, nonfrail patients had longer PFS and OS than frail patients, but benefits of D-VMP versus VMP were maintained across subgroups: PFS nonfrail (median, 45.7 vs. 19.1 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.36; P < .0001), frail (32.9 vs. 19.5 months; HR, 0.51; P < .0001); OS nonfrail (36-month rate, 83.6% vs. 74.5%), frail (71.4% vs. 59.0%). Improved greater than or equal to complete response and minimal residual disease (10-5)-negativity rates were observed for D-VMP versus VMP across subgroups. The 2 most common grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events were neutropenia (nonfrail: 39.2% [D-VMP] and 42.4% [VMP]; frail: 41.3% and 34.4%) and thrombocytopenia (nonfrail: 32.8% and 36.9%; frail: 36.9% and 39.1%). CONCLUSION: Our findings support the clinical benefit of D-VMP in transplant-ineligible NDMM patients enrolled in ALCYONE, regardless of frailty status.

• MeSH
• Bortezomib pharmacology   therapeutic use   MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Melphalan pharmacology   therapeutic use   MeSH
• Multiple Myeloma drug therapy   MeSH
• Antibodies, Monoclonal pharmacology   therapeutic use   MeSH
• Prednisone pharmacology   therapeutic use   MeSH
• Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols pharmacology   therapeutic use   MeSH
• Aged, 80 and over MeSH
• Aged MeSH
• Check Tag
• Humans MeSH
• Male MeSH
• Aged, 80 and over MeSH
• Aged MeSH
• Female MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH

Daratumumab, a CD38 human monoclonal antibody, demonstrated significant clinical activity in combination with bortezomib and dexamethasone versus bortezomib and dexamethasone alone in the primary analysis of CASTOR, a phase 3 study in relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma. A post hoc analysis based on treatment history and longer follow up is presented. After 19.4 (range: 0-27.7) months of median follow up, daratumumab plus bortezomib and dexamethasone prolonged progression-free survival (median: 16.7 versus 7.1 months; hazard ratio, 0.31; 95% confidence interval, 0.24-0.39; P<0.0001) and improved the overall response rate (83.8% versus 63.2%; P<0.0001) compared with bortezomib and dexamethasone alone. The progression-free survival benefit of daratumumab plus bortezomib and dexamethasone was most apparent in patients with 1 prior line of therapy (median: not reached versus 7.9 months; hazard ratio, 0.19; 95% con fidence interval, 0.12-0.29; P<0.0001). Daratumumab plus bortezomib and dexamethasone was also superior to bortezomib and dexamethasone alone in subgroups based on prior treatment exposure (bortezomib, thalidomide, or lenalidomide), lenalidomide-refractory status, time since last therapy (≤12, >12, ≤6, or >6 months), or cytogenetic risk. Minimal residual disease-negative rates were >2.5-fold higher with daratumumab across subgroups. The safety profile of daratumumab plus bortezomib and dexamethasone remained consistent with longer follow up. Daratumumab plus bortezomib and dexamethasone demonstrated significant clinical activity across clinically relevant subgroups and provided the greatest benefit to patients treated at first relapse. Trial registration: clinicaltrials.gov identifier: 02136134.

• MeSH
• Bortezomib administration & dosage   MeSH
• Drug Resistance, Neoplasm MeSH
• Dexamethasone administration & dosage   MeSH
• Adult MeSH
• Outcome Assessment, Health Care methods   statistics & numerical data   MeSH
• Kaplan-Meier Estimate MeSH
• Middle Aged MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Neoplasm Recurrence, Local MeSH
• Multiple Myeloma drug therapy   pathology   MeSH
• Antibodies, Monoclonal administration & dosage   MeSH
• Follow-Up Studies MeSH
• Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols therapeutic use   MeSH
• Neoplasm, Residual diagnosis   MeSH
• Aged, 80 and over MeSH
• Aged MeSH
• Check Tag
• Adult MeSH
• Middle Aged MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Male MeSH
• Aged, 80 and over MeSH
• Aged MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Clinical Trial, Phase III MeSH
• Multicenter Study MeSH
• Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
• Randomized Controlled Trial MeSH

BACKGROUND: Daratumumab, a human IgGκ monoclonal antibody that targets CD38, induces direct and indirect antimyeloma activity and has shown substantial efficacy as monotherapy in heavily pretreated patients with multiple myeloma, as well as in combination with bortezomib in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. METHODS: In this phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned 498 patients with relapsed or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma to receive bortezomib (1.3 mg per square meter of body-surface area) and dexamethasone (20 mg) alone (control group) or in combination with daratumumab (16 mg per kilogram of body weight) (daratumumab group). The primary end point was progression-free survival. RESULTS: A prespecified interim analysis showed that the rate of progression-free survival was significantly higher in the daratumumab group than in the control group; the 12-month rate of progression-free survival was 60.7% in the daratumumab group versus 26.9% in the control group. After a median follow-up period of 7.4 months, the median progression-free survival was not reached in the daratumumab group and was 7.2 months in the control group (hazard ratio for progression or death with daratumumab vs. control, 0.39; 95% confidence interval, 0.28 to 0.53; P<0.001). The rate of overall response was higher in the daratumumab group than in the control group (82.9% vs. 63.2%, P<0.001), as were the rates of very good partial response or better (59.2% vs. 29.1%, P<0.001) and complete response or better (19.2% vs. 9.0%, P=0.001). Three of the most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events reported in the daratumumab group and the control group were thrombocytopenia (45.3% and 32.9%, respectively), anemia (14.4% and 16.0%, respectively), and neutropenia (12.8% and 4.2%, respectively). Infusion-related reactions that were associated with daratumumab treatment were reported in 45.3% of the patients in the daratumumab group; these reactions were mostly grade 1 or 2 (grade 3 in 8.6% of the patients), and in 98.2% of these patients, they occurred during the first infusion. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with relapsed or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma, daratumumab in combination with bortezomib and dexamethasone resulted in significantly longer progression-free survival than bortezomib and dexamethasone alone and was associated with infusion-related reactions and higher rates of thrombocytopenia and neutropenia than bortezomib and dexamethasone alone. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02136134.).

• MeSH
• ADP-ribosyl Cyclase 1 antagonists & inhibitors   MeSH
• Bortezomib administration & dosage   adverse effects   MeSH
• Drug Resistance, Neoplasm MeSH
• Dexamethasone administration & dosage   adverse effects   MeSH
• Adult MeSH
• Infusions, Intravenous MeSH
• Middle Aged MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Multiple Myeloma drug therapy   MeSH
• Antibodies, Monoclonal administration & dosage   adverse effects   MeSH
• Disease-Free Survival MeSH
• Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols therapeutic use   MeSH
• Recurrence MeSH
• Aged MeSH
• Check Tag
• Adult MeSH
• Middle Aged MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Male MeSH
• Aged MeSH
• Female MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Clinical Trial, Phase III MeSH
• Multicenter Study MeSH
• Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
• Randomized Controlled Trial MeSH

This study aimed to characterize the pharmacokinetic parameters of telaprevir (TVR) in patients with moderate and severe hepatic impairment, measure the unbound (pharmacologically active) plasma concentrations of TVR, and determine if any changes in TVR exposure were of clinical relevance. Ten patients with moderate (Child-Pugh B) hepatic impairment, 10 matched healthy control volunteers, and 4 nonmatched patients with severe (Child-Pugh C) hepatic impairment received 750 mg TVR every 8 hours for 6 days. Venous blood samples were collected at various times throughout the study. Single-dose and steady-state pharmacokinetics of total and unbound TVR were calculated. Safety and tolerability of TVR were also assessed. The mean maximum plasma concentration and area under the curve values of total and unbound TVR were lower in patients with moderate hepatic impairment compared with matched healthy controls following a single dose and at steady state but did not consistently meet statistical significance. This trend was also present when patients with severe hepatic impairment were compared with the nonmatched healthy controls. However, the safety profile of TVR in the patient and healthy volunteer groups was comparable with previously published data. These results indicate that reduced plasma concentrations of total and unbound TVR in patients with hepatic impairment are unlikely to be clinically relevant.

• MeSH
• Antiviral Agents adverse effects   blood   pharmacokinetics   MeSH
• Middle Aged MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Liver Diseases blood   MeSH
• Oligopeptides adverse effects   blood   pharmacokinetics   MeSH
• Aged MeSH
• Check Tag
• Middle Aged MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Male MeSH
• Aged MeSH
• Female MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Controlled Clinical Trial MeSH
• Clinical Trial, Phase I MeSH
• Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH