Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) eligible for transplantation and treated with isatuximab, lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (Isa-RVd) versus rvd alone: Results from part 1 of t

Abstract Introduction. In newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients (pts) eligible for autologous stem-cell transplant (ASCT), the phase 3 GMMG-HD7 trial (NCT03617731) Part 1 demonstrated that isatuximab, lenalidomide, bortezomib and dexamethasone (Isa-RVd) induction significantly improved minimal residual disease negativity (MRD-) rates (odds ratio: 1.82; p<0.001) and prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) compared with RVd (hazard ratio, 0.70; p=0.0184), regardless of the maintenance therapy received post-ASCT. Consequently, the 2025 EHA-EMN guidelines recommended Isa-RVd as standard of care for induction in patients with NDMM eligible for ASCT. This analysis evaluated the effect of Isa-RVd vs RVd induction on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) from first random assignment through post-ASCT. Methods. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were recorded using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30-item (EORTC QLQ-C30), the EORTC QLQ Multiple Myeloma Module 20-item (MY20), and the EuroQol 5-dimensional (EQ-5D-5L) visual analog scale (VAS) at baseline (BL), after induction, 60-90 days post-ASCT, and at the end of treatment (EOT). Prespecified analyses were conducted in the intent-to-treat population. Mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) analyzed the mean change from BL to post-ASCT. Time to first deterioration (TTFD) and time to first improvement (TTFI) were assessed using Kaplan-Meier methods and Cox proportional hazard models. Results. A total of 662 patients were randomized to Isa-RVd (n=331) or RVd (n=329) induction, followed by single or tandem ASCT and second randomization to maintenance with Isa-lenalidomide or lenalidomide alone. PRO completion rates were high across time points in both arms (≥90% at BL, ≥87% after induction, and ≥92% 60-90 days post-ASCT). At BL, patients in both arms reported similar functioning and symptom burden, QLQ-C30 Global Health Status (GHS/QoL), and EQ-5D-5L VAS. Pts on Isa-RVd reported a statistically significant reduction in fatigue vs RVd (overall mean [95% CI] difference in LS mean change from BL: -4.02 [-7.68, -0.37]; p=0.0312). Median TTFD in fatigue was longer in the Isa-RVd arm vs RVd (8.48 mo vs 5.22 mo; HR=0.78; p=0.0340), while median TTFI was shorter for Isa-RVd vs RVd (8.84 mo vs 10.05 mo; HR=1.26; p=0.0611). Clinically meaningful reduction in pain occurred in both arms, with Isa-RVd showing a numerically greater reduction vs RVd (overall mean [95% CI] difference in LS mean change from BL: -3.39 [-7.43, 0.64]; p=0.0991). Median TTFD in pain was 12.62 mo for Isa-RVd vs. 12.16 mo for RVd (HR=0.83; p=0.2336), while median TTFI was 5.06 mo for Isa-RVd vs 5.26 mo for RVd (HR=1.18; p=0.1393). No clinically meaningful deterioration in other symptom scales were observed in either arm. Both Isa-RVd and RVd showed a small improvement in physical functioning (LS mean change [SE] from BL: 4.95 [2.00] vs 3.91 [2.00]; p=0.5189) and a clinically meaningful improvement in emotional functioning (LS mean change [SE]: 13.27 [1.97] vs 12.94 [1.97]; p=0.8380). No notable differences between arms were observed for the other functional scales. Both treatments showed clinically meaningful improvement in future perspective, as measured by MY20 after induction and post-ASCT. The overall difference between arms significantly favored Isa-RVd over RVd (overall mean [95% CI] difference in LS mean change from BL: +5.64 [2.15, 9.13], p=0.0016). Each arm demonstrated clinically meaningful improvement in QLQ-C30 GHS/QoL post-ASCT, with no statistically significant difference between Isa-RVd and RVd (LS mean change [SE]: 10.17 [1.82] vs 9.22 [1.81]; p=0.5197). Similarly, pts in both treatment arms experienced a clinically meaningful improvement in EQ-5D-5L VAS post-ASCT, with numerical trend in favor of Isa-RVd (overall mean [95% CI] difference in LS mean change from BL: +1.47 [-1.28, 4.21], p=0.2939). Conclusions. The addition of isatuximab to RVd significantly improves the likelihood of achieving MRD- and prolongs PFS in transplant-eligible NDMM pts. This enhanced efficacy is observed without compromising overall HRQoL, and importantly, is associated with significant improvement in fatigue and a favorable trend in pain reduction, compared to RVd alone. These findings underscore the favorable benefit-risk profile and value of Isa-RVd quadruplet for transplant eligible NDMM pts.

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Blood
Published
2025-11-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2025-2263
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

Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) eligible for transplantation and treated with isatuximab, lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (Isa-RVd) versus rvd alone: Results from part 1 of t

Blood
Multiple Myeloma Research and Treatments
article

Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) eligible for transplantation and treated with isatuximab, lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (Isa-RVd) versus rvd alone: Results from part 1 of t

article en

Abstract

Abstract Introduction. In newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients (pts) eligible for autologous stem-cell transplant (ASCT), the phase 3 GMMG-HD7 trial (NCT03617731) Part 1 demonstrated that isatuximab, lenalidomide, bortezomib and dexamethasone (Isa-RVd) induction significantly improved minimal residual disease negativity (MRD-) rates (odds ratio: 1.82; p<0.001) and prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) compared with RVd (hazard ratio, 0.70; p=0.0184), regardless of the maintenance therapy received post-ASCT. Consequently, the 2025 EHA-EMN guidelines recommended Isa-RVd as standard of care for induction in patients with NDMM eligible for ASCT. This analysis evaluated the effect of Isa-RVd vs RVd induction on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) from first random assignment through post-ASCT. Methods. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were recorded using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30-item (EORTC QLQ-C30), the EORTC QLQ Multiple Myeloma Module 20-item (MY20), and the EuroQol 5-dimensional (EQ-5D-5L) visual analog scale (VAS) at baseline (BL), after induction, 60-90 days post-ASCT, and at the end of treatment (EOT). Prespecified analyses were conducted in the intent-to-treat population. Mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) analyzed the mean change from BL to post-ASCT. Time to first deterioration (TTFD) and time to first improvement (TTFI) were assessed using Kaplan-Meier methods and Cox proportional hazard models. Results. A total of 662 patients were randomized to Isa-RVd (n=331) or RVd (n=329) induction, followed by single or tandem ASCT and second randomization to maintenance with Isa-lenalidomide or lenalidomide alone. PRO completion rates were high across time points in both arms (≥90% at BL, ≥87% after induction, and ≥92% 60-90 days post-ASCT). At BL, patients in both arms reported similar functioning and symptom burden, QLQ-C30 Global Health Status (GHS/QoL), and EQ-5D-5L VAS. Pts on Isa-RVd reported a statistically significant reduction in fatigue vs RVd (overall mean [95% CI] difference in LS mean change from BL: -4.02 [-7.68, -0.37]; p=0.0312). Median TTFD in fatigue was longer in the Isa-RVd arm vs RVd (8.48 mo vs 5.22 mo; HR=0.78; p=0.0340), while median TTFI was shorter for Isa-RVd vs RVd (8.84 mo vs 10.05 mo; HR=1.26; p=0.0611). Clinically meaningful reduction in pain occurred in both arms, with Isa-RVd showing a numerically greater reduction vs RVd (overall mean [95% CI] difference in LS mean change from BL: -3.39 [-7.43, 0.64]; p=0.0991). Median TTFD in pain was 12.62 mo for Isa-RVd vs. 12.16 mo for RVd (HR=0.83; p=0.2336), while median TTFI was 5.06 mo for Isa-RVd vs 5.26 mo for RVd (HR=1.18; p=0.1393). No clinically meaningful deterioration in other symptom scales were observed in either arm. Both Isa-RVd and RVd showed a small improvement in physical functioning (LS mean change [SE] from BL: 4.95 [2.00] vs 3.91 [2.00]; p=0.5189) and a clinically meaningful improvement in emotional functioning (LS mean change [SE]: 13.27 [1.97] vs 12.94 [1.97]; p=0.8380). No notable differences between arms were observed for the other functional scales. Both treatments showed clinically meaningful improvement in future perspective, as measured by MY20 after induction and post-ASCT. The overall difference between arms significantly favored Isa-RVd over RVd (overall mean [95% CI] difference in LS mean change from BL: +5.64 [2.15, 9.13], p=0.0016). Each arm demonstrated clinically meaningful improvement in QLQ-C30 GHS/QoL post-ASCT, with no statistically significant difference between Isa-RVd and RVd (LS mean change [SE]: 10.17 [1.82] vs 9.22 [1.81]; p=0.5197). Similarly, pts in both treatment arms experienced a clinically meaningful improvement in EQ-5D-5L VAS post-ASCT, with numerical trend in favor of Isa-RVd (overall mean [95% CI] difference in LS mean change from BL: +1.47 [-1.28, 4.21], p=0.2939). Conclusions. The addition of isatuximab to RVd significantly improves the likelihood of achieving MRD- and prolongs PFS in transplant-eligible NDMM pts. This enhanced efficacy is observed without compromising overall HRQoL, and importantly, is associated with significant improvement in fatigue and a favorable trend in pain reduction, compared to RVd alone. These findings underscore the favorable benefit-risk profile and value of Isa-RVd quadruplet for transplant eligible NDMM pts.

BloodVol. 146(Supplement 1)
Goethe University Frankfurt (DE), Universität Hamburg (DE), Koblenz University of Applied Sciences (DE), University of Applied Sciences Mainz (DE), Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz (DE), Bielefeld University (DE), Heidelberg University (DE), Universitätsklinikum Gießen und Marburg (DE), University Hospital Bonn (DE), University Hospitals of the Ruhr-University of Bochum (DE), University Hospital Heidelberg (DE), IQVIA (United Kingdom) (GB), AVEO Oncology (United States) (US), Asklepios Klinik Altona (DE), Düsseldorf University Hospital (DE), München Klinik Schwabing (DE), Sanofi (Austria) (AT), University Hospital Münster (DE), Klinikum Region Hannover (DE), University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (DE), IQVIA (United States) (US), National Center for Tumor Diseases (DE), Essen University Hospital (DE), Asklepios Klinik St. Georg (DE), Krankenhaus Barmherzige Brüder (DE), University Children's Hospital Tübingen (DE), Instituts Français de Recherche à L'Étranger (FR), Klinikum Ludwigshafen (DE), Klinikum Bielefeld (DE), NIHR Evaluation Trials and Studies Coordinating Centre (GB), C3I (United States) (US), Marien Hospital Düsseldorf (DE), University Hospital Frankfurt (DE), University Hospital Cologne (DE), University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus (DE), Klinikum Chemnitz (DE), Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf (DE), Technische Universität Dresden (DE), Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin (DE), University of Tübingen (DE), RWTH Aachen University (DE), Ruhr University Bochum (DE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 28%
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.