Hematology Department, University Hospital Hôtel-Dieu, Nantes, France.
Department of Hematology, Hôpital Haut Lévêque, University Hospital, Pessac, France.
Lancet Oncol. 2024 Aug;25(8):1003-1014. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(24)00282-1. Epub 2024 Jun 15.
BACKGROUND: CASSIOPEIA part 1 demonstrated superior depth of response and prolonged progression-free survival with daratumumab in combination with bortezomib, thalidomide, and dexamethasone (D-VTd) versus bortezomib, thalidomide, and dexamethasone (VTd) alone as an induction and consolidation regimen in transplant-eligible patients newly diagnosed with myeloma. In CASSIOPEIA part 2, daratumumab maintenance significantly improved progression-free survival and increased minimal residual disease (MRD)-negativity rates versus observation. Here, we report long-term study outcomes of CASSIOPEIA. METHODS: CASSIOPEIA was a two-part, open-label, phase 3 trial of patients done at 111 European academic and community-based centres. Eligible patients were aged 18-65 years with transplant-eligible newly diagnosed myeloma and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2. In part 1, patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to pre-transplant induction and post-transplant consolidation with D-VTd or VTd. Patients who completed consolidation and had a partial response or better were re-randomised (1:1) to intravenous daratumumab maintenance (16 mg/kg every 8 weeks) or observation for 2 years or less. An interactive web-based system was used for both randomisations, and randomisation was balanced using permuted blocks of four. Stratification factors for the first randomisation (induction and consolidation phase) were site affiliation, International Staging System disease stage, and cytogenetic risk status. Stratification factors for the second randomisation (maintenance phase) were induction treatment and depth of response in the induction and consolidation phase. The primary endpoint for the induction and consolidation phase was the proportion of patients who achieved a stringent complete response after consolidation; results for this endpoint remain unchanged from those reported previously. The primary endpoint for the maintenance phase was progression-free survival from second randomisation. Efficacy evaluations in the induction and consolidation phase were done on the intention-to-treat population, which included all patients who underwent first randomisation, and efficacy analyses in the maintenance phase were done in the maintenance-specific intention-to-treat population, which included all patients who were randomly assigned at the second randomisation. This analysis represents the final data cutoff at the end of the study. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02541383. FINDINGS: Between Sept 22, 2015 and Aug 1, 2017, 1085 patients were randomly assigned to D-VTd (n=543) or VTd (n=542); between May 30, 2016 and June 18, 2018, 886 were re-randomised to daratumumab maintenance (n=442) or observation (n=444). At the clinical cutoff date, Sept 1, 2023, median follow-up was 80·1 months (IQR 75·7-85·6) from first randomisation and 70·6 months (66·4-76·1) from second randomisation. Progression-free survival from second randomisation was significantly longer in the daratumumab maintenance group than the observation-alone group (median not reached [95% CI 79·9-not estimable (NE)] vs 45·8 months [41·8-49·6]; HR 0·49 [95% CI 0·40-0·59]; p<0·0001); benefit was observed with D-VTd with daratumumab maintenance versus D-VTd with observation (median not reached [74·6-NE] vs 72·1 months [52·8-NE]; 0·76 [0·58-1·00]; p=0·048) and VTd with daratumumab maintenance versus VTd with observation (median not reached [66·9-NE] vs 32·7 months [27·2-38·7]; 0·34 [0·26-0·44]; p<0·0001). INTERPRETATION: The long-term follow-up results of CASSIOPEIA show that including daratumumab in both the induction and consolidation phase and the maintenance phase led to superior progression-free survival outcomes. Our results confirm D-VTd induction and consolidation as a standard of care, and support the option of subsequent daratumumab monotherapy maintenance, for transplant-eligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. FUNDING: Intergroupe Francophone du Myélome, Dutch-Belgian Cooperative Trial Group for Hematology Oncology, and Janssen Research & Development.
背景:CASSIOPEIA 第 1 部分显示,与硼替佐米、沙利度胺和地塞米松(VTd)单独作为诱导和巩固方案相比,达雷妥尤单抗联合硼替佐米、沙利度胺和地塞米松(D-VTd)在适合移植的新诊断多发性骨髓瘤患者中具有更深的缓解深度和更长的无进展生存期。在 CASSIOPEIA 第 2 部分中,与观察相比,达雷妥尤单抗维持治疗显著改善了无进展生存期并增加了微小残留病(MRD)阴性率。在此,我们报告了 CASSIOPEIA 的长期研究结果。
方法:CASSIOPEIA 是一项在 111 个欧洲学术和社区为基础的中心进行的两部分、开放性、3 期试验。符合条件的患者为年龄在 18-65 岁之间、适合移植的新诊断多发性骨髓瘤且东部合作肿瘤学组体能状态为 0-2 的患者。在第 1 部分中,患者随机(1:1)接受 D-VTd 或 VTD 进行移植前诱导和移植后巩固治疗。完成巩固治疗且达到部分缓解或更好的患者被重新随机(1:1)接受静脉注射达雷妥尤单抗维持治疗(16mg/kg,每 8 周一次)或观察治疗 2 年或更短时间。这两种随机化方法均使用交互式网络系统进行,使用随机化块进行平衡,块大小为 4。第一次随机化(诱导和巩固阶段)的分层因素为:研究地点、国际分期系统疾病分期和细胞遗传学风险状态。第二次随机化(维持阶段)的分层因素为:诱导治疗和诱导及巩固阶段的缓解深度。诱导和巩固阶段的主要终点是巩固后达到严格完全缓解的患者比例;该终点的结果与之前报告的结果保持不变。维持阶段的主要终点是从第二次随机化开始的无进展生存期。诱导和巩固阶段的疗效评估基于意向治疗人群,包括所有接受第一次随机化的患者;维持阶段的疗效分析基于维持治疗特异性意向治疗人群,包括所有在第二次随机化时被随机分配的患者。这一分析代表了研究结束时的最终数据截止日期。该试验在 ClinicalTrials.gov 注册,NCT02541383。
结果:2015 年 9 月 22 日至 2017 年 8 月 1 日,1085 名患者被随机分配至 D-VTd 组(n=543)或 VTD 组(n=542);2016 年 5 月 30 日至 2018 年 6 月 18 日,886 名患者被重新随机分配至达雷妥尤单抗维持治疗组(n=442)或观察组(n=444)。在临床截止日期 2023 年 9 月 1 日,从第一次随机化开始的中位随访时间为 80.1 个月(IQR 75.7-85.6),从第二次随机化开始的中位随访时间为 70.6 个月(66.4-76.1)。从第二次随机化开始,达雷妥尤单抗维持治疗组的无进展生存期明显长于观察组(中位无进展生存期未达到[95%CI 79.9-NE] vs 45.8 个月[41.8-49.6];HR 0.49[95%CI 0.40-0.59];p<0.0001);与 D-VTd 联合观察相比,D-VTd 联合达雷妥尤单抗维持治疗与 D-VTd 联合观察(中位无进展生存期未达到[74.6-NE] vs 72.1 个月[52.8-NE];0.76[0.58-1.00];p=0.048)和 VTD 联合达雷妥尤单抗维持治疗与 VTD 联合观察(中位无进展生存期未达到[66.9-NE] vs 32.7 个月[27.2-38.7];0.34[0.26-0.44];p<0.0001)。
结论:CASSIOPEIA 的长期随访结果显示,在诱导和巩固阶段以及维持阶段联合使用达雷妥尤单抗可带来更好的无进展生存期结果。我们的结果证实了 D-VTd 诱导和巩固作为标准治疗的地位,并支持适合移植的新诊断多发性骨髓瘤患者随后选择达雷妥尤单抗单药维持治疗。
资金来源:骨髓瘤多国研究组,荷兰-比利时血液肿瘤协作组,杨森研发。
Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2025-7-7
Blood Neoplasia. 2024-9-16
Hematol Oncol. 2025-6
Mediterr J Hematol Infect Dis. 2025-5-1
N Engl J Med. 2024-1-25
N Engl J Med. 2022-7-14