Hematologist based management of ocular adverse events using the VRA tool in newly-diagnosed myeloma patients, ineligible for ASCT who received belantamab mafodotin plus lenalidomide/dexamethasone: Updated results from the randomized part 2 of bela-r

Abstract Introduction Belantamab mafodotin (belamaf) combinations showed superior efficacy over standard regimens in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (MM) in the DREAMM-7/-8 trials. In this trial (BelaRd) we evaluated the safety, tolerability & efficacy of an extended belamaf dosing schedule with lenalidomide & dexamethasone (Rd), in transplant-ineligible (TI) newly diagnosed MM (NDMM). Part 2 introduced a hematologist-led ocular management strategy, using the Vision-Related Anamnestic (VRA) tool to guide dosing in the presence of Ocular Adverse Events (OAEs). Methods BelaRd is a Phase 1/2 open-label trial (NCT04808037). Part 1 evaluated belamaf at 2.5/1.9/1.4 mg/kg Q8W with Rd in 36 patients (pts) (n=12/dose), establishing the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) as 1.9 mg/kg Q8W extendable to Q12W for ocular toxicity, based on ophthalmologist-assessed Keratopathy & Visual Acuity (KVA) scale. Belamaf was withheld for Grade ≥2 OAEs & resumed upon resolution to Grade ≤1. Part 2 enrolled 30 pts at the RP2D, comparing two ocular management strategies: Group (Gr.) A (15 pts) used ophthalmologist-guided dosing as in Part 1; Gr.B (15 pts) employed a hematologist-led approach using the VRA tool (a 9-item pt-reported questionnaire for ocular symptoms & impact on daily function). Belamaf was withheld if pts reported OAEs for >50% of the time in the last 24 hours (substantial time) through the VRA & if Grade ≥3 OAEs were ophthalmologist-confirmed. This analysis presents updated RP2D safety/efficacy results, focusing on the VRA implementation. Results As of the data cut-off (01 March 2025), 42 pts overall received belamaf at the RP2D with Rd. All had baseline ocular comorbidities; 35 (85.7%) had cataract. At a median follow-up of 24.6 months (range: 3.9-47.3), 31 (73.8%) remained on treatment; 2 (4.8%) had disease progression. Median dose intensity (DI) was 1.2 mg/kg/Q8W; 1.2 in Gr.A vs 1.4 mg/kg/ Q4W in Gr.B. Belamaf was withheld in 72/219 (32.9%) of the Part 1 doses planned, 40/151 (26.5%) in Gr.A & 23/136 (16.9%) in Gr.B; most due to OAEs (110/135). Median time to belamaf re-infusion was 12.8 weeks (range 8.3-19.1), with high variability in re-infusion intervals: 29/39 pts (Part.1: 11/12, Gr.A: 10/14; Gr.B: 8/13) had a coefficient of variation [CV]>20. Among pts completing 12 months of treatment, median re-infusion time was 14.9 weeks (range: 8.3-26.5), with more consistent intervals (only 8/29 pts had a CV>20%). ORR (PR or better) was 97.6% (41/42 pts); 93.3% in Gr.A vs 100% in Gr.B. Overall median time to first response of 1.0 month (range: 0.9-3.8). Median PFS/OS were not reached. 18-month PFS was 82.9% (95%CI: 67.5-91.5); 86.7% (95%CI: 56.4–96.5) in Gr.A vs 78.6% (95%CI: 47.3–92.5) in Gr.B. 18-month TTP was 97.2% (95%CI: 81.9-99.6) overall. CR rate was 76.2% in the below median DI subgroups & 28.6% in the above median DI subgroup; TTP events were 0 & 2 (9.6%) respectively. Most common (>10%) Grade ≥3 non-ocular TEAEs were fatigue (69%), rash (19.0%) & diarrhea (11.9%). Grade ≥3 Infections & infestations occurred in 14.3% of RP2D pts. No new safety signals emerged. In Part 2, Grade≥3 OAEs occurred at similar rates across the 2 Groups. Grade ≥3 BCVA decline was reported in 5.3% (Gr.A) & 2.0% (Gr.B) of assessments. Grade ≥3 keratopathy in 0.3% & 0.0% respectively. Only 3.3% (10/300) of Gr.A & 0.8% (2/251) of Gr.B ophthalmologist assessments detected Grade ≥3 OAEs without “substantial time” reported in the VRA. None of the 121 VRA-guided dosing decisions were withheld by ophthalmologist evaluation (Grade ≥3 OAEs). Vision-related activity limitations (e.g. stopping driving or reading) were reported in only 0.0%-0.6% of assessments in both groups. Conclusions The BelaRd RP2D demonstrated substantial clinical activity, with rapid, deep & durable responses in TI NDMM. Most pts achieved ORR within 1 month & the majority remained progression-free at 18 months. Extended dosing intervals and hematologist-led ocular management via the VRA tool enabled personalized treatment. The VRA-guided approach allowed symptom-based dosing, resulting in more consistent dosing intervals and minimal impact on vision-related daily activities, without compromising safety or efficacy. These findings support the continued evaluation of belamaf in 1st line MM setting & suggest the VRA tool as a feasible model for decentralized ocular AE management and dosing guide in clinical practice.

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Blood
Published
2025-11-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2025-4038
Primary Topic
Multiple Myeloma Research and Treatments
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Hematologist based management of ocular adverse events using the VRA tool in newly-diagnosed myeloma patients, ineligible for ASCT who received belantamab mafodotin plus lenalidomide/dexamethasone: Updated results from the randomized part 2 of bela-r

Blood
Multiple Myeloma Research and Treatments
article

Hematologist based management of ocular adverse events using the VRA tool in newly-diagnosed myeloma patients, ineligible for ASCT who received belantamab mafodotin plus lenalidomide/dexamethasone: Updated results from the randomized part 2 of bela-r

article en

Abstract

Abstract Introduction Belantamab mafodotin (belamaf) combinations showed superior efficacy over standard regimens in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (MM) in the DREAMM-7/-8 trials. In this trial (BelaRd) we evaluated the safety, tolerability & efficacy of an extended belamaf dosing schedule with lenalidomide & dexamethasone (Rd), in transplant-ineligible (TI) newly diagnosed MM (NDMM). Part 2 introduced a hematologist-led ocular management strategy, using the Vision-Related Anamnestic (VRA) tool to guide dosing in the presence of Ocular Adverse Events (OAEs). Methods BelaRd is a Phase 1/2 open-label trial (NCT04808037). Part 1 evaluated belamaf at 2.5/1.9/1.4 mg/kg Q8W with Rd in 36 patients (pts) (n=12/dose), establishing the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) as 1.9 mg/kg Q8W extendable to Q12W for ocular toxicity, based on ophthalmologist-assessed Keratopathy & Visual Acuity (KVA) scale. Belamaf was withheld for Grade ≥2 OAEs & resumed upon resolution to Grade ≤1. Part 2 enrolled 30 pts at the RP2D, comparing two ocular management strategies: Group (Gr.) A (15 pts) used ophthalmologist-guided dosing as in Part 1; Gr.B (15 pts) employed a hematologist-led approach using the VRA tool (a 9-item pt-reported questionnaire for ocular symptoms & impact on daily function). Belamaf was withheld if pts reported OAEs for >50% of the time in the last 24 hours (substantial time) through the VRA & if Grade ≥3 OAEs were ophthalmologist-confirmed. This analysis presents updated RP2D safety/efficacy results, focusing on the VRA implementation. Results As of the data cut-off (01 March 2025), 42 pts overall received belamaf at the RP2D with Rd. All had baseline ocular comorbidities; 35 (85.7%) had cataract. At a median follow-up of 24.6 months (range: 3.9-47.3), 31 (73.8%) remained on treatment; 2 (4.8%) had disease progression. Median dose intensity (DI) was 1.2 mg/kg/Q8W; 1.2 in Gr.A vs 1.4 mg/kg/ Q4W in Gr.B. Belamaf was withheld in 72/219 (32.9%) of the Part 1 doses planned, 40/151 (26.5%) in Gr.A & 23/136 (16.9%) in Gr.B; most due to OAEs (110/135). Median time to belamaf re-infusion was 12.8 weeks (range 8.3-19.1), with high variability in re-infusion intervals: 29/39 pts (Part.1: 11/12, Gr.A: 10/14; Gr.B: 8/13) had a coefficient of variation [CV]>20. Among pts completing 12 months of treatment, median re-infusion time was 14.9 weeks (range: 8.3-26.5), with more consistent intervals (only 8/29 pts had a CV>20%). ORR (PR or better) was 97.6% (41/42 pts); 93.3% in Gr.A vs 100% in Gr.B. Overall median time to first response of 1.0 month (range: 0.9-3.8). Median PFS/OS were not reached. 18-month PFS was 82.9% (95%CI: 67.5-91.5); 86.7% (95%CI: 56.4–96.5) in Gr.A vs 78.6% (95%CI: 47.3–92.5) in Gr.B. 18-month TTP was 97.2% (95%CI: 81.9-99.6) overall. CR rate was 76.2% in the below median DI subgroups & 28.6% in the above median DI subgroup; TTP events were 0 & 2 (9.6%) respectively. Most common (>10%) Grade ≥3 non-ocular TEAEs were fatigue (69%), rash (19.0%) & diarrhea (11.9%). Grade ≥3 Infections & infestations occurred in 14.3% of RP2D pts. No new safety signals emerged. In Part 2, Grade≥3 OAEs occurred at similar rates across the 2 Groups. Grade ≥3 BCVA decline was reported in 5.3% (Gr.A) & 2.0% (Gr.B) of assessments. Grade ≥3 keratopathy in 0.3% & 0.0% respectively. Only 3.3% (10/300) of Gr.A & 0.8% (2/251) of Gr.B ophthalmologist assessments detected Grade ≥3 OAEs without “substantial time” reported in the VRA. None of the 121 VRA-guided dosing decisions were withheld by ophthalmologist evaluation (Grade ≥3 OAEs). Vision-related activity limitations (e.g. stopping driving or reading) were reported in only 0.0%-0.6% of assessments in both groups. Conclusions The BelaRd RP2D demonstrated substantial clinical activity, with rapid, deep & durable responses in TI NDMM. Most pts achieved ORR within 1 month & the majority remained progression-free at 18 months. Extended dosing intervals and hematologist-led ocular management via the VRA tool enabled personalized treatment. The VRA-guided approach allowed symptom-based dosing, resulting in more consistent dosing intervals and minimal impact on vision-related daily activities, without compromising safety or efficacy. These findings support the continued evaluation of belamaf in 1st line MM setting & suggest the VRA tool as a feasible model for decentralized ocular AE management and dosing guide in clinical practice.

BloodVol. 146(Supplement 1)
Korea University (KR), National and Kapodistrian University of Athens (GR), Korea University (JP), Edwards Lifesciences (Switzerland) (CH)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 29%
Multiple Myeloma Research and Treatments
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.