Matching‐adjusted indirect comparison of isatuximab plus carfilzomib and dexamethasone with daratumumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone in relapsed multiple myeloma

Abstract

Abstract Backgound Lenalidomide‐based regimens are commonly used for early relapse in patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) receiving at least one prior line of therapy. In the absence of head‐to‐head comparison, matching‐adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) was conducted to demonstrate efficacy and safety of isatuximab+carfilzomib+dexamethasone (Isa‐Kd) versus daratumumab + lenalidomide + dexamethasone (Dara‐Rd) in RRMM. Methods Patient‐level data from IKEMA trial (Isa‐Kd, n = 179) were matched to aggregate data from POLLUX (Dara‐Rd, n = 286). Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were generated by weighted Cox proportional hazard models. Odds ratios (OR), 95% CI, and p‐value were calculated for ≥very good partial response (≥VGPR) and treatment‐emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Results After matching, no significant differences were observed between Isa‐Kd and Dara‐Rd in baseline characteristics except for patients with >3 prior lines (0.0% vs. 4.9%). Isa‐Kd showed significantly better PFS (HR [95% CI]: 0.46 [0.24–0.86]; p = 0.0155), statistically non‐significant improvement favoring Isa‐Kd in OS (0.47 [0.20–1.09]; 0.0798), and ≥VGPR (OR [95% CI]: 1.53 [0.89–2.64]; p = 0.1252) than Dara‐Rd. Odds of occurrence were significantly lower for some all‐grade and grade 3/4 TEAEs with Isa‐Kd than Dara‐Rd. Conclusion These results support Isa‐Kd as an efficacious treatment for early relapse in non‐lenalidomide refractory patients.

Keywords

• comparative efficacy
• daratumumab
• isatuximab
• matching‐adjusted indirect comparison
• relapsed refractory multiple myeloma