-Author name in bold denotes the presenting author
-Asterisk * with author name denotes a Non-ASH member
Clinically Relevant Abstract denotes an abstract that is clinically relevant.

PhD Trainee denotes that this is a recommended PHD Trainee Session.

Ticketed Session denotes that this is a ticketed session.

4748 Weekly Selinexor, Bortizomib and Dexamethasone (SVd) Versus Twice Weekly Bortizomib and Dexamethasone (Vd) in Chinese Patients with Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM): Primary Analysis of Phase 3 Bench Study

Program: Oral and Poster Abstracts
Session: 654. Multiple Myeloma: Pharmacologic Therapies: Poster III
Hematology Disease Topics & Pathways:
Research, Clinical trials, Clinical Research, Registries
Monday, December 9, 2024, 6:00 PM-8:00 PM

Jin Lu, MD, PhD1*, Liangquan Geng, MD, PhD2*, Lijuan Chen3*, Peng Liu, MD4, Yuping Zhong, MD, PhD5*, Zhuogang Liu6*, Zhongjun Xia, MD, PhD7, Jianqing Mi, MD, PhD8*, Chunrui Li, MD, PhD9, Xi Zhang, PhD10, Yanjuan He11*, Yongqiang Wei, MD12*, Baijun Fang13*, Fei Li14, Zhen Cai15*, Yafei Wang16*, Dongping Huang, MD, PhD17*, Hong Liu18*, Ming Hou19*, Rong Fu20*, Xin Du21*, Xiaosheng Fang22*, Qingshu Zeng23*, Wen Gao24, Wei Wang25*, Chunkang Chang26*, Guifang Ouyang27*, Jing Liu, PhD28*, Jianyu Weng, MD, PhD29*, Xiaobing Huang, MD, PhD30*, Yang Yu31*, Zhi Guo31*, Jun Zhao31* and Jian Hou32*

1Peking University People’s Hospital, National Clinical Research Center for Hematologic Disease; Collaborative Innovation Center of Hematology, Beijing, China
2First Affiliated Hospital of University of Science and Technology of China (USTC) Anhui Provincial Hospital, Hefei, China
3Jiangsu Province Hospital, Nanjing, CHN
4Department of Hematology, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
5Qingdao Municipal Hospital, Qingdao, China
6Department of Hematology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China
7State Key Laboratory of Medical Genomics, National Research Center for Translational Medicine, Shanghai Institute of Hematology, Ruijin Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China
8Shanghai Institute of Hematology, State Key Laboratory of Medical Genomics, National Research Center for Translational Medicine at Shanghai, Ruijin Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China
9Department of Hematology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
10Medical Center of Hematology, Xinqiao Hospital of Army Medical University, State Key Laboratory of Trauma and Chemical Poisoning, Chongqing Key Laboratory of Hematology and Microenvironment, Chongqing, China
11Department of Hematology, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China
12Nanfang Hospital of Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China
13Henan Cancer Hospital, Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Henan, China
14Department of Hematology, Jiangxi Clinical Research Center for Hematologic Disease, Jiangxi Provincial Key Laboratory of Hematological Diseases, The First Affiliated Hospital, Jiangxi Medical College, Nanchang, China;, Nanchang, China
15The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University Medical College, Zhejiang, China
16Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin, China
17The First Affiliated Hospital of Wannan Medical College, Wuhu, China
18Affiliated Hospital of Nantong University, Nantong, China
19Department of Hematology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, China
20Department of Hematology, Tianjin Medical University General Hospital, Tianjin, China
21Department of Hematology and Shenzhen Bone Marrow Transplantation Public Service Platform, Shenzhen Second People's Hospital, The First Affiliated Hospital of Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, China
22Department of Hematology, Shandong Provincial Hospital Affiliated to Shandong First Medical University, Jinan, China
23Department of Hematology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Hefei, China
24Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China
25Department of Hematology, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, China
26People's Hospital of Shanghai, Shanghai, China
27The First Affiliated Hospital of Ningbo University, Ningbo, China
28Department of Hematology, The Third Xiangya Hospital of Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China
29Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital, Guangdong, China
30Sichuan Academy of Medical Sciences, Sichuan Provincial People’s Hospital, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China
31Antengene Therapeutics Ltd., Shanghai, China
32Renji Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China

Introduction:

Selinexor (ATG-010) is a first-in-class, orally bioavailable XPO1 inhibitor which binds to exportin 1, inhibiting nuclear export of tumor suppressor proteins. It synergizes with proteasome inhibitors (PIs) in preclinical studies and produces high response rates in patients (pts) with PI refractory and non-refractory MM. In the global phase 3 BOSTON study (NCT03110562), SVd significantly improved progression free survival (PFS), compared to twice weekly Vd [harzard ratio (HR) 0.70)]. The China registrational bridging study, BENCH (NCT04939142) aimed to demonstrate the consistency of efficacy and safety outcomes between these 2 studies.

Methods:

This phase 3, randomized, open label, study was conducted at 33 sites in China. The adult pts with RRMM, who had previously been treated with 1 to 3 lines of therapy, were randomly allocated (2:1) to receive SVd: selinexor (100 mg once per week), bortezomib (1.3mg/m2 once per week) and dexamethasone (20 mg twice per week), or Vd: bortezomib (1.3mg/m2 twice per week for the first 24 weeks and once per week thereafter) and dexamethasone (20 mg four times per week for the first 24 weeks and twice per week thereafter). Pts receiving Vd could cross over to either SVd or Sd treatment after confirmation of progression. The primary endpoint was PFS in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. The key secondary endpoints included ORR (≥PR), response rate of ≥VGPR and the incidence of Grade ≥2 peripheral neuropathy (PN). Efficacy was assessed by independent review committee per IMWG 2016. The PFS HR should reach less than 0.85 to show consistency (at least 50% efficacy with BOSTON study).

Results:

As of 9th May 2024, a total of 154 Chinese RRMM pts were randomized to SVd group (n=101) or Vd group (n=53) and 152 pts received at least one dose of study drug (safety population). The baseline demographic and clinical characteristics were approximately balanced across the two treatment groups. The median age was 62 (range: 33-78). 87 pts (56.5%) were male and 67 pts (43.5%) were female. R-ISS stage III and high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities (including del(17p), t(14;16), t(4;14), 1q21) were present in 18 (11.7%) and 105 (68.2%) pts, respectively. However, SVd group included more pts with extramedullary disease than Vd group [24 (23.8%) vs 4 (7.5%)].

At a median follow-up time of 20.6 months (range:10.2-33.4), the median PFS was 8.1 months with SVd group and 6.3 months with Vd group. The HR reached 0.74 (95% CI 0.48-1.15; P=0.180). A similar reduction in the risk of progression was observed for SVd group between BENCH and BOSTON study. The ORR was higher in SVd group than in Vd group (72.3% vs 62.3%, P=0.173). SVd group had a significantly higher proportion of pts with response of VGPR or better (45.5% vs 22.6%, P=0.005). Among pts with response of CR or better, 59% (13/22) vs 25% (1/4) (SVd vs Vd) achieved MRD negativity (<1x10-5). The median time to response and the median duration of response were 0.8 vs 1.4 months and 9.7 vs 7.2 months (SVd vs Vd) respectively. The median overall survival was not reached in both groups.

The most frequent Grade 3-4 adverse events (AEs) for SVd and Vd (≥10%) were thrombocytopenia (55.0% vs 28.8%), lymphocytopenia (37.0% vs 17.3%), anemia (25% vs 17.3%), neutropenia (17.0% vs 3.8%), pneumonia (14.0% vs 13.5%), cataract (13.0% vs 0%), diarrhea (6.0% vs 15.4%) and hypokalemia (8.0% vs 11.5%). The incidence of Grade≥2 PN was significantly lower in SVd than in Vd group (8% vs 32.7%, P=0.001).

Conclusion:

SVd regimen decreased the risk of progression and obtained much more profound responses compared to standard Vd regimen in Chinese pts with RRMM. The incidence of Grade ≥2 PN were significantly reduced. The results of BENCH study were consistent with the BOSTON study despite differences in patient populations and the primary end point achieved.

Disclosures: Fu: Takeda (China) International Trading Co., Ltd: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Yu: Antengene Therapeutics Ltd.: Current Employment. Guo: Antengene Therapeutics Ltd.: Current Employment. Zhao: Antengene Therapeutics Ltd.: Current Employment.

*signifies non-member of ASH