DREAMM-2: Indirect Comparisons of Belantamab Mafodotin vs. Selinexor + Dexamethasone and Standard of Care Treatments in Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma

dc.contributor.authorPrawitz, Thibaud
dc.contributor.authorPopat, Rakesh
dc.contributor.authorSuvannasankha, Attaya
dc.contributor.authorSarri, Grammati
dc.contributor.authorHughes, Rachel
dc.contributor.authorWang, Feng
dc.contributor.authorHogea, Cosmina
dc.contributor.authorFerrante, Shannon Allen
dc.contributor.authorGorsh, Boris
dc.contributor.authorWillson, Jenny
dc.contributor.authorKapetanakis, Venediktos
dc.contributor.departmentMedicine, School of Medicine
dc.date.accessioned2024-04-08T11:28:02Z
dc.date.available2024-04-08T11:28:02Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.description.abstractIntroduction: Single-agent belantamab mafodotin (belamaf; BLENREP) demonstrated deep and durable responses in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma and ≥ 3 prior lines of therapy, including an immunomodulatory agent, proteasome inhibitor, and anti-CD38 antibody (DREAMM-2; NCT03525678). Methods: At the time of this study, STORM Part 2, NCT02336815 (selinexor plus low-dose dexamethasone; sel + dex) was systematically identified as the only feasible comparator to the DREAMM-2 cohort. Matching-adjusted indirect comparisons (MAIC) evaluated efficacy and safety of belamaf (2.5 mg/kg; n = 97) versus sel + dex (80 mg + 20 mg, respectively; n = 123). Populations were weighted for clinically validated effect modifiers and prognostic factors. Outcomes included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), duration of response (DoR), overall response rate (ORR), time to response (TTR), and safety. The relative efficacy of belamaf versus standard of care (SoC) on OS was estimated by a Bucher indirect treatment comparison using the MAIC-adjusted hazard ratios (HR) for OS of belamaf (DREAMM-2) versus sel + dex (STORM Part 2) and a HR adjusted for refractoriness to carfilzomib and high-risk cytogenetics of sel + dex (STORM) versus SoC (MAMMOTH). Results: Belamaf demonstrated improved OS (HR 0.53; 95% confidence interval 0.34, 0.83; p = 0.005) and DoR (0.41; 0.21, 0.83; p = 0.013) versus sel + dex. There were no statistically significant differences in ORR, TTR, and PFS. Belamaf had a favorable safety profile for most evaluable hematologic (any-grade, Grade 3-4) and non-hematologic (any-grade) adverse events versus sel + dex. Significantly improved OS was observed with belamaf versus SoC (0.29; 0.16, 0.54; p < 0.001). Conclusion: Single-agent belamaf represents a new treatment option for triple-class refractory patients with RRMM.
dc.eprint.versionFinal published version
dc.identifier.citationPrawitz T, Popat R, Suvannasankha A, et al. DREAMM-2: Indirect Comparisons of Belantamab Mafodotin vs. Selinexor + Dexamethasone and Standard of Care Treatments in Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma. Adv Ther. 2021;38(11):5501-5518. doi:10.1007/s12325-021-01884-7
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1805/39836
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.publisherSpringer
dc.relation.isversionof10.1007/s12325-021-01884-7
dc.relation.journalAdvances in Therapy
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial 4.0 Internationalen
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
dc.sourcePMC
dc.subjectBelamaf
dc.subjectIndirect treatment comparison
dc.subjectMatching-adjusted
dc.subjectSelinexor
dc.subjectSurvival
dc.titleDREAMM-2: Indirect Comparisons of Belantamab Mafodotin vs. Selinexor + Dexamethasone and Standard of Care Treatments in Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma
dc.typeArticle
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Prawitz2021Dreamm2-CCBYNC.pdf
Size:
1.84 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.99 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: