BACKGROUND: Daratumumab (Dara) is generally well tolerated, but is associated with increased risk of infection. METHODS: We investigated hypogammaglobinemia occurrence in different Dara-based regimens. Multiple myeloma (MM) patients were treated with ⩾2 cycles of Dara-based therapy during 2016-2020, mainly for relapsed/refractory disease. Data on patient characteristics, treatment regimens, polyclonal IgG (poly-IgG) and uninvolved free light chain (Un-FLC) levels during treatment, as well as predictors for hypogammaglobinemia and predictors for infections, were evaluated retrospectively. RESULTS: A total of 84 patients, median age 67.2 years, were included. Dara, mainly as ⩾2 line therapy (88.1%, n = 74), was combined with immunomodulating drugs (IMiDs) (53%), proteasome inhibitors (PIs) (15%), IMiDs-PIs (11%), or dexamethasone only (21%). Median treatment duration was 13 months. Median Poly-IgG levels at 0, 2, and 4 months were 7.1 g/l, 4.5 g/l, and 4 g/l, respectively, and remained low throughout treatment. Lower poly-IgG pre-Dara (p = 0.001) and Dara-PIs (±IMiDs) regimen were associated with lower poly-IgG levels at 4 months (p = 0.03). Only patients treated with Dara monotherapy had partial immune reconstitution, reflected by resumption of IgM levels. Most (85%) patients developed ⩾1 infections, mostly grade 1-2 respiratory (76%). A lower poly-IgG level post Dara (RR = 1.137 p = 0.026) predicted increased risk of any infection. Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) was associated with a significant decrease in all infections. CONCLUSION: Relapsed MM patients treated with Dara, often experience persistent hypogammaglobinemia, irrespective of responsiveness to treatment. Infections, especially respiratory, are frequent and apparently related to low Poly-IgG levels. IVIG should be considered for reducing infections in these patients.
BACKGROUND: Daratumumab (Dara) is generally well tolerated, but is associated with increased risk of infection. METHODS: We investigated hypogammaglobinemia occurrence in different Dara-based regimens. Multiple myeloma (MM) patients were treated with ⩾2 cycles of Dara-based therapy during 2016-2020, mainly for relapsed/refractory disease. Data on patient characteristics, treatment regimens, polyclonal IgG (poly-IgG) and uninvolved free light chain (Un-FLC) levels during treatment, as well as predictors for hypogammaglobinemia and predictors for infections, were evaluated retrospectively. RESULTS: A total of 84 patients, median age 67.2 years, were included. Dara, mainly as ⩾2 line therapy (88.1%, n = 74), was combined with immunomodulating drugs (IMiDs) (53%), proteasome inhibitors (PIs) (15%), IMiDs-PIs (11%), or dexamethasone only (21%). Median treatment duration was 13 months. Median Poly-IgG levels at 0, 2, and 4 months were 7.1 g/l, 4.5 g/l, and 4 g/l, respectively, and remained low throughout treatment. Lower poly-IgG pre-Dara (p = 0.001) and Dara-PIs (±IMiDs) regimen were associated with lower poly-IgG levels at 4 months (p = 0.03). Only patients treated with Dara monotherapy had partial immune reconstitution, reflected by resumption of IgM levels. Most (85%) patients developed ⩾1 infections, mostly grade 1-2 respiratory (76%). A lower poly-IgG level post Dara (RR = 1.137 p = 0.026) predicted increased risk of any infection. Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) was associated with a significant decrease in all infections. CONCLUSION: Relapsed MM patients treated with Dara, often experience persistent hypogammaglobinemia, irrespective of responsiveness to treatment. Infections, especially respiratory, are frequent and apparently related to low Poly-IgG levels. IVIG should be considered for reducing infections in these patients.
Daratumumab (Dara) has become a major player in treating patients with
relapsed/refractory (RR) multiple myeloma (MM), providing high response rates and
long-term progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) as a monotherapy
and especially when administered in combination with immunomodulating drugs (IMiDs)
(Sirius Trial, Pollux Trial) or proteasome inhibitors (PIs) (Castor Trial, Candor
Trial).[1-4] Recent studies also confirmed
its role in newly diagnosed patients who were treated with Dara in combination with
chemotherapy (Alcyone Trial),
IMiDs (Maia Trial),
or IMiDs + PIs (Cassiopeia Trial, Griffin Trial, Manhattan Trial).[7-9] Although generally well
tolerated, treatment with Dara appears to be associated with an increased risk of
infections, with no clear cut evidence for higher rates of infections in patients
treated at relapse versus those treated at diagnosis.[2-8] Upper respiratory tract
infections were observed in 25–63% of patients who were treated with Dara-based
combinations, compared with 14–44% in patients treated in the control arms, which
were comprised of Dara free regimens.[2-8] (Supplemental Table S1 lists infections reported in prospective
studies that evaluated the addition of Dara to PIs/IMiDs or IMiDs-PIs in newly
diagnosed and in RRMM patients).[2-8] Grade 3 neutropenia was
reported in 9–51.9% of patients treated with Dara-based therapy,[1-8] but it was not associated with
a significant risk for neutropenic infections.[2,3,6-8] Immune suppression associated
with Dara and leading to multiple infections may be due to the suppression of normal
plasma cells, resulting in clinically significant hypogammaglobulinemia.
The current study assessed the rate, dynamics, and severity of
hypogammaglobinemia in MM patients treated with Dara-based therapy, mostly for RR
disease, by evaluating polyclonal-IgG (poly-IgG) and uninvolved free light chain
(un-FLC) levels over time. We investigated the infection rate, the risk factors for
infection, and the role of intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) treatment in patients
receiving different Dara-based regimens.
Methods
The study was conducted in accordance with the declaration of Helsinki and approved
by our center’s institutional review board (approval number 0371-18), which waived
informed consent for this retrospective analysis. The myeloma database at the Tel
Aviv Sourasky Medical Center was searched for all patients that had been treated
with Dara–based therapy at diagnosis or at relapse between 2016 and 2020. Patients
who failed to complete two full cycles of Dara-containing regimens (compatible with
eight doses of Dara) were considered to be unsuitable for the assessment of Dara’s
impact on the development of hypogammaglobulinemia and treatment-related infections
and were, therefore, excluded from the analysis. Data were collected from the
patient’s files, and those on patient demographics, MM characteristics at diagnosis,
treatment at diagnosis and at subsequent relapses, details on Dara-based regimens,
and response to therapy, were retrieved and evaluated according to the International
Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) criteria.
Additionally, poly-IgG levels (measured as detailed below), reciprocal
immunoglobulin levels (IgA in patients with IgG myeloma and IgM in all patients) and
un-FLC levels; FLC-Kappa in patients with FLC-Lambda MM and FLC-Lambda in patients
with FLC-Kappa excreting disease, evaluated before and every 2 months during
Dara-based therapy, were recorded.Details on the infections documented in the patients’ medical charts during
treatment, including neutropenic and non-neutropenic infections, anti-infectious
prophylaxis, and administration of IVIG were recorded. According to the department’s
policy, IVIG was generally given to patients with recurrent infections in the
presence of poly-IgG levels lower than 600 mg/dl and was administered every
3–4 weeks, at a dose of 0.3–0.5 g/kg. Factors associated with hypogammaglobinemia
and its reversal over time, as well as factors predicting a higher risk for
infections were identified and evaluated. The article was performed by following the
STROBE statement checklist
Evaluation of immunoglobulins and FLC levels
Monoclonal fraction (M spike) was determined by serum protein electrophoresis
(SPE) on the Hydrasys 2 Scan (Sebia, France) instrument, and subtracted from the
specific total immunoglobulin (IgG or IgA). Quantitative immunoglobulin
concentrations (IgG, IgM, and IgA) were determined by nephylometry-based assay
(N antisera, Siemens Healthcare GmbH, Erlangen, Germany) on BNII nephylometer
(Siemens Healthcare GmbH, Erlangen, Germany). A poly-IgG level referred to the
total IgG level as measured by serum protein electrophoresis in patients with
non-IgG MM, and to the non-monoclonal IgG level, as measured in patients with
IgG MM, by subtracting the M protein level from the total IgG level.
Hypogammaglobinemia was determined in the presence of a poly-IgG level lower
than the lowest normal range (768 mg/dl). Free light chain assays were performed
by the FreeLite assay (The Binding Site Group, Birmingham, UK) on BNII
nephylometer (Siemens Healthcare GmbH, Erlangen, Germany).
Definitions
High versus standard risk disease was defined in the presence of
an adverse fluorescence in situ hybridization result, including
t(4;14), t(14;16), t(14;20), 17p13 del, and/or 1q21 gain, fulfilling the
international myeloma criteria.
Treatment regimens were classified into four categories: (1) Dara-PIs:
Dara administered in combination with dexamethasone and PIs (carfilzomib,
bortezomib, or ixazomib); (2) Dara-IMiDs: Dara administered in combination with
dexamethasone and IMiDs (lenalidomide, or thalidomide, or pomalidomide); (3)
Dara-PIs-IMiDs: Dara administered with dexamethasone, PIs, and IMIDs; (4) Dara
monotherapy: Dara administered with dexamethasone only.An infection was defined by clear documentation of an infectious event in the
patient’s medical chart, and/or if a new anti-infection therapy had been
initiated. Infections were classified into bacterial, viral, fungal, and
pneumocystis jiroveci pneumonia (PJP). Bacterial infection was determined
whenever an antibiotic was prescribed based on a positive sputum, urine, or
blood culture result, a chest X-ray or a computerized tomography (CT) scan
demonstrating lobar pneumonia, or based on the clinical judgment of the treating
physician. Herpes simplex virus, cytomegalovirus, varicella-zoster virus, and
PJP were determined by the presence of a positive polymerase chain reaction
(PCR) test of a specimen from a bronchoalveolar lavage or from another source
(e.g., skin vesicle). A fungal infection was defined by the presence of typical
findings in a chest CT scan, in the presence of a positive galactomannan test,
and/or a positive fungal culture or stain, or proven candidemia. A viral
respiratory infection was defined by the presence of a positive test for a viral
respiratory pathogen or by the presence of acute respiratory symptoms
with/without fever that resolved without antibiotics. Recurrent infections were
determined in the presence of ⩾2 documented infections within ⩽3 months.
Statistics
IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 25.0, 2017 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA)
was applied for the following statistical analysis, and significance was
determined at p < 0.05. The Kruskal–Wallis test was applied
to examine differences in median values between the four types of treatment
groups. The Mann–Whitney test was applied to study the difference in median
values between two groups. Considering the same type of treatment group across
time, Friedman’s Q test was applied to examine differences in median values
between at least three time points, and the Wilcoxon signed-rank test was
applied to examine differences in median values between two time points.
Pearson’s Chi-square and Fisher’s exact tests were applied to examine the
association between categorical variables and the four types of treatment
groups. For OS and PFS, the time variable was calculated since Dara initiation
until the date of an event (progression or death), or until the last date of
follow up for non-event. Both OS and PFS were examined by the Kaplan–Meier
estimator test and Spearman’s correlation coefficient was used to evaluate the
association between poly-IgG level (as a continues variable) and continuous
variables. A multivariable linear regression was used to study the association
between poly-IgG levels and variables that were significantly associated in the
univariate analysis. Poly-IgG levels were presented in a natural logarithm that
was transformed in order to meet the regression assumptions. Univariate and
multivariable Poisson regressions were used to study the association between the
number of any infections or respiratory infections and various predictors. The
calculation of accumulated total and respiratory infections was as follows: for
each particular time interval and for a given type of treatment group, the total
and respiratory infection rates, represented by the number of infections in a
certain time interval divided by the total number of patients that were still
followed at that certain time interval, multiplied by 100, were determined.
Poisson model was used to compare the rates of infectious events before and
after IVIG administration. WINPEPI for Windows, Version 11.65 (23 August 2016)
was applied to examine the difference between two infection rates (with
person–time denominators), accompanied by 95% confidence interval (CI), which is
considered as being significant when it does not include zero.
Results
Patient characteristics and treatment regimens
A total of 113 suitable patients were identified in the multiple myeloma
database; 29 patients who had received <2 cycles of Dara-based therapy
(having experienced disease progression) were excluded. Thus, 84 patients
fulfilling the study criteria were included. Patient characteristics are
presented in Table
1; 40% (n = 34) were females. Median age at
diagnosis and at Dara initiation was 67.2 and 70.4 years, respectively. A total
of 50 patients (60%) had IgG MM, 14 (16%) had IgA MM, and 19 (22%) had
light-chain MM (LC MM). Most patients (88%, n = 74) received a
Dara-based regimen for RR disease. The median time from diagnosis to Dara
initiation was 24.2 months, and the median number of prior lines was 1 (range
0–5). High-risk cytogenetics was recorded in 34% and International Staging
System (ISS) 3 was documented in 46%. Dara was administered in combination with
dexamethasone and PIs in 15% (n = 13), in combination with
dexamethasone and IMiDs in 53% (n = 44), in combination with
both PIs and IMiDs in 11% (n = 9) and with dexamethasone only
in 21% (n = 18). Treatment details are presented in Table 1. Upfront
autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (auto HCT) was performed in
46% (n = 39). Prophylaxis with acyclovir (400 mg/day) was
administered in 98% of the patients (n = 82) and with
trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (two tablets twice a day, twice a week) in 85%
(n = 72). The median duration of treatment until treatment
cessation or until the last follow-up date was 13 months (range 0.8–35.0). As
non-responders were excluded, the overall response rate was 100%, including 77%
⩾very good partial responses and 18% partial responses. The median PFS was not
reached. A total of 19 patients discontinued treatment, all due to progressive
disease, and no patient discontinued therapy due to adverse effects. There were
no statistically significant differences between the characteristics of patients
that were treated with Dara + IMiDs, Dara + PIs, Dara + PIs + IMiDs, and Dara
monotherapy, in terms of age, sex, cytogenetic risk groups, ISS, and median
duration of exposure to Dara-based therapy. However, the patients who were
treated with Dara monotherapy were more heavily pretreated
(p = 0.001), and the patients who received Dara + PIs or
Dara + IMiDs + PIs had a shorter period from diagnosis to initiation of the Dara
regimen (p = 0.014). Table 1 presents the characteristics
of patients treated with each of these Dara-based combinations.
Table 1.
Patient characteristics (general and according to Dara-based
combinations).
Patients characteristics
Dara monotherapy
Dara-PIs
Dara-IMiDs
Dara-IMiDs-PIs
p valuea
N = 84
n = 18 (21.4%)
n = 13 (15.5%)
n = 44 (52.4%)
n = 9 (10.7%)
Age at diagnosis (years) median (range)
67.2 (41–91)
73.0 (46.2–91.3)
65.4 (45.8–81.8)
65.8 (41.2–89.5)
68.8 (53.1–84.4)
0.126
Age at Dara initiation (years) median (range)
70.4 (45.8–93.3)
75.8 (51.8–93.3)
68.2 (54.6–81.8)
69.1 (45.8–90.5)
67.8 (57.4–85.2)
0.079
Sex – males (%)
51 (60.7)
11 (61.1)
8 (61.5)
28 (63.7)
4 (44.4)
0.801
Heavy chain MM (%)
65 (77.4)
13 (72.2)
9 (69.2)
35 (79.5)
8 (88.9)
0.700
IgG
50 (59.5)
11 (61.1)
6 (46.1)
26 (59.1)
7 (77.8)
Non IgG
15 (17.9)
2 (11.1)
3 (23.1)
9 (20.5)
1 (11.1)
FLC type Kappa
52 (61.9)
12 (66.7)
8 (61.5)
24 (54.5)
8 (88.8)
0.325
Lambda
31 (36.9)
6 (33.3)
5 (38.5)
19 (43.2)
1 (11.1)
Cytogenetic risk (%)
High risk
29 (34.5)
3 (16.7)
5 (38.5)
16 (36.4)
5 (55.6)
0.534
Standard risk
37 (44.0)
11 (61.1)
5 (38.5)
19 (43.2)
2 (22.2)
Not available
18 (21.4)
4 (22.2)
3 (23.1)
9 (20.5)
2 (22.2)
ISS (%)
47 (56.0)
8 (44)
8 (61)
26 (59)
5 (55)
0.891
1
17 (20.2)
2 (11.1)
4 (30.7)
9 (20.5)
2 (22.2)
2
8 (9.5)
1 (5.6)
2 (15.4)
4 (9.1)
1 (11.1)
3
22 (26.2)
5 (27.8)
2 (15.4)
13 (29.5)
2 (22.2)
Number of lines prior Dara, median (range)
1 (0–5)
3
1
1
1
0.001
Refractory or relapsed patients
74 (88.1%)
18 (100)
7 (53.8)
43 (97.7)
6 (66.7)
<0.001
AutoHCT prior Dara
39 (46.4)
8 (44.4)
3 (23.1)
25 (26.8)
3 (33.3)
0.143
Time from diagnosis to Dara (months), median(range)
24.2 (0.1–297)
31.9 (11.3–98.9)
4.9 (0.1–196.4)
24.2 (0.3–297.2)
10.4 (0.3–72.0)
0.014
Dara duration (months) median(range)
11 (3–35)
11.9 (0.8–34.9)
17.4 (5.9–26.9)
10.7 (3.4–35.0)
9.7 (2.8–15.4)
0.184
Prophylaxis
TRM/SUL (%)
72 (85.7)
10 (55.6)
13 (100)
40 (90.9)
9 (100)
0.001
Acyclovir (%)
82 (97.6)
16 (88.9)
13 (100)
44 (100)
9 (100)
0.077
Hematologic response
CR (%)
18 (21.4)
1 (5.6)
5 (38.5)
10 (22.7)
2 (22.2)
0.613
VGPR (%)
47 (56.0)
12 (66.7)
8 (61.1)
24 (54.5)
3 (33.3)
PR/SD (%)
19 (22.6)
5 (27.7)
0
10 (22.7)
4 (44.5)
Statistical analysis performed as described in the Statistics section
in Methods to determine significant differences between the four
types of treatment groups.
Patient characteristics (general and according to Dara-based
combinations).Statistical analysis performed as described in the Statistics section
in Methods to determine significant differences between the four
types of treatment groups.AutoHCT, autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation; CR,
complete response; Dara, daratumumab; FLC, free light chain; IgG,
immunoglobulin G; IMiDs, immunomodulating drugs; ISS, international
staging system; PD, progression of disease; PFS, progression free
survival; PIs, proteasome inhibitors; PR, partial response; SD,
stable disease; TRM/SUL, trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole; VGPR, very
good partial response.
Immunoglobulins and free light chains levels following treatment
The median poly-IgG level prior to Dara administration was 7.1 g/l (interquartile
range 4.7–10.3). Lower poly-IgG levels at Dara initiation were observed in
patients diagnosed with LC MM (p = 0.049) and in those treated
with Dara within a shorter period since diagnosis (p = 0.004).
Supplemental Table S2A and Table 2 present the univariate and
multivariate analyses for factors associated with lower poly-IgG levels at Dara
initiation. The median poly-IgG level declined by 47% to 4.5 g/l at 2 months,
reaching 4.1 g/l at 4 months, 4.2 g/l at 6 months, and 4 g/l at 12 months (Figure 1a). A univariate
analysis identified older age at diagnosis (p = 0.049), low
poly-IgG level prior to Dara administration (p = 0.001), and
the administration of Dara in combination with PIs with and without the addition
of IMiDs (p = 0.001 and p = 0.049,
respectively) as being associated with lower poly-IgG levels at 4 months since
treatment initiation (Supplemental Table S2B). Of note, there were no differences in
the degree of reduction or in absolute levels of poly IgG levels measured at 2
and 4 months since Dara initiation between patients treated with Dara + PIs
compared with those treated with Dara + PIs + IMiDs. A multivariate analysis
(Table 3)
confirmed a low poly-IgG level prior therapy (p = 0.001) and
the administration of a Dara + PIs regimen (with/without IMiDs)
(p = 0.044) as being associated with significantly lower
Poly-IgG levels at 4 months since the initiation of therapy (Figure 2a). Un-FLC levels
also decreased rapidly and remained relatively low over time (Figure 1b). Un-FLC
levels, measured at 4 months since treatment initiation, were significantly
lower in patients who received Dara + PIs containing regimens compared with
those who received other Dara-based combinations (p = 0.019)
for MM-Kappa patients (Figure
2b), and (p = 0.004) for MM-Lambda patients, with no
significant differences between patients treated with Dara + PIs or
Dara-PIs-IMiDs (Figure
2c). The achievement of a marked clinical response was not associated
with reconstitution of poly-IgG and un-FLC levels. Reciprocal immunoglobulin
median levels at Dara initiation, referring to IgA for 50 IgG MM patients and
IgM for all 84 patients, were 0.4 g/l and 0.21 g/l, respectively. Both globulins
declined markedly following Dara administration: IgA decreased to 0.26 g/l at 2
and 4 months and IgM decreased to 0.18 g/l at 2 and 4 months. In contrast, the
IgA levels remained low continuously, irrespective of treatment type or response
to treatment, whereas the IgM levels gradually increased in patients treated
with Dara monotherapy but remained low in patients treated with
Dara + PIs ±vIMiDs and Dara + IMiDs (Figure 2d).
Table 2.
Multivariate analysis for factors associated with lower poly IgG levels
prior initiation of Dara.
Variable
Percent
95% CI
p Value
MM type: LCMM versus HCMM
−38.6a
−4.7
−83.5
0.023
Time from diagnosis to Dara ⩽12 months
−37.3a
−0.9
−86.9
0.043
The degree of reduction in Poly IgG levels, presented by
percentages.
CI, confidence interval; Dara, daratumumab; HCMM, heavy chain MM;
LCMM, light chain MM; MM, multiple myeloma; poly IgG, polyclonal
IgG.
Figure 1.
Median poly-IgG (a) and un-FLC (b) levels following Dara initiation
(independent on treatment type).
Dara, daratumumab; n, number of patients at initiation
time (time = 0); poly-IgG, polyclonal IgG; un-FLC, uninvolved free light
chain.
Table 3.
Multivariate analysis for factors associated with lower poly IgG levels
at 4 months post Dara initiation.
Variable
Percent
95% CI
p value
Dara + PIs ± IMiDs versus Dara + IMiDs/Dara
mono
−18.7a
−0.52
−32.6
0.044
Poly-IgG level prior Dara
0.28b
0.12
0.44
0.001
The degree of reduction in Poly IgG levels, presented by
percentages.
A higher level of Poly IgG of 1% prior Dara, predicted a higher level
of Poly IgG level (of 0.28%) at 4 months post Dara.
Median levels of poly-IgG (a), un-FLC lambda (b), un-FLC Kappa (c), and
IgM (d), following Dara initiation, dependent on treatment type. There
were no statistically significant differences in poly IgG and un-FLC
levels between Dara + PIs versus Dara + IMiDs + PIs
patients. (d) There were no statistically significant differences in IgM
levels between the four treatment groups in general and pairwise, and
there were no significant trends in IgM levels among Dara monotherapy
patients across time.
Multivariate analysis for factors associated with lower poly IgG levels
prior initiation of Dara.The degree of reduction in Poly IgG levels, presented by
percentages.CI, confidence interval; Dara, daratumumab; HCMM, heavy chain MM;
LCMM, light chain MM; MM, multiple myeloma; poly IgG, polyclonal
IgG.Median poly-IgG (a) and un-FLC (b) levels following Dara initiation
(independent on treatment type).Dara, daratumumab; n, number of patients at initiation
time (time = 0); poly-IgG, polyclonal IgG; un-FLC, uninvolved free light
chain.Multivariate analysis for factors associated with lower poly IgG levels
at 4 months post Dara initiation.The degree of reduction in Poly IgG levels, presented by
percentages.A higher level of Poly IgG of 1% prior Dara, predicted a higher level
of Poly IgG level (of 0.28%) at 4 months post Dara.CI, confidence interval; Dara, daratumumab; IMiDs, immunomodulating
drugs; mono, monotherapy; PIs, proteasome inhibitors; poly-IgG,
polyclonal IgG.Median levels of poly-IgG (a), un-FLC lambda (b), un-FLC Kappa (c), and
IgM (d), following Dara initiation, dependent on treatment type. There
were no statistically significant differences in poly IgG and un-FLC
levels between Dara + PIs versus Dara + IMiDs + PIs
patients. (d) There were no statistically significant differences in IgM
levels between the four treatment groups in general and pairwise, and
there were no significant trends in IgM levels among Dara monotherapy
patients across time.Dara, daratumumab; FLC-K-MM, free light chain kappa multiple myeloma;
FLC-L-MM, free light chain lambda multiple myeloma; IMiDs,
immunomodulating drugs; Mono, monotherapy; PIs, proteasome inhibitors;
poly-IgG, polyclonal IgG; un-FLC, uninvolved free light chain.
Infections following treatment
A total of 72 (85%) patients had at least one documented infection during their
Dara-based treatment. The median time to first infection was 2 months; 22% of
the patients (n = 19) had ⩾ grade 3 infections, including 8%
(n = 7) who developed neutropenic infections. An antibiotic
was prescribed in 49% (n = 41). None of the infectious episodes
were fatal. Table 4
presents the types of infection for the entire cohort and according to treatment
type. There was a median of two documented infections per patient (range 0–6),
and the infection rate was 2.5 per year (0.2 per month). The cumulative risk of
infection at 2, 4, 6, and 12 months was 0.5, 0.8, 1.2, and 2.5 percent,
respectively (Figure
3a). A univariate analysis found high-risk cytogenetics
(p = 0.01), Dara + PIs (p = 0.04),
Dara + PIs + IMiDs (p = 0.01), and low poly-IgG
(p = 0.02) measured at 2 months post-Dara initiation, to be
associated with increased risk of infection (Table S3A, supplemental file). A multivariate analyses confirmed
high-risk cytogenetics (relative risk = 1.53, p = 0.018) and
lower poly-IgG levels at 2 months post-Dara initiation (relative risk = 1.15,
p = 0.026) to be the most predictive factors for an
increased infection rate (Table 5). Of all documented infections, 76%
(n = 122) were respiratory. A univariate analysis revealed
lower poly-IgG levels that were measured at 2 (p = 0.014) and
4 months (p = 0.008) since Dara initiation and treatment with
Dara-PIs (p = 0.04) or Dara + PIs + IMiDs
(p = 0.018) as being associated with increased risk for
respiratory infections (Supplemental Table S3B and Figure 3b). A multivariate analysis
confirmed that treatment with Dara + PIs + IMiDs (relative risk = 1.642,
p = 0.048) and lower poly-IgG levels at 2 months since Dara
initiation (relative risk = 0.89, p = 0.029) were associated
with an increased rate of treatment-related respiratory infections (Table 6).
Table 4.
Type and sites of infections dependent on treatment type.
Infections presented by
pathogen
Treatment combination
Dara monotherapy
Dara + IMiDs
Dara + PIs
Dara + PIs + IMiDs
All regimens
N = 18 (%)
N = 44 (%)
N = 13 (%)
N = 9 (%)
(N = 84) (%)
Viral
13 (39.4)
35 (46.6)
13 (44.8)
10 (43.5)
71 (43.6)
Bacterial
17 (51.5)
35 (46.6)
14 (48.3)
13 (56.5)
82 (50.3)a
PJP
0 (0.0)
0 (0.0)
1 (3.4)
0 (0.0)
1 (0.6)
Fungal
1 (3.0)
0 (0.0)
1 (3.4)
0 (0.0)
2 (1.2)
Not specified
2 (6.1)
5 (6.4)
0 (0.0)
0 (0.0)
7 (4.3)
Entire number of infectious events
33
75
29
23
160
Infections presented by sites
Respiratory
23 (69.7)
58 (77.3)
24 (82.8)
17 (73.9)
122 (76.3)
GI
2 (6.1)
6 (8.0)
0 (0.0)
2 (8.7)
10 (6.3)
GU
6 (18.2)
5 (6.7)
1 (3.4)
0 (0.0)
12 (7.5)
SSTI
1 (3.0)
2 (2.7)
2 (6.9)
2 (8.7)
7 (4.4)
Other
1 (3.0)
4 (5.3)
2 (6.9)
2 (8.7)
9 (5.6)
Total
33
75
29
23
160
50.3% bacterial events, involving 49% of patients, were reported.
Accumulated rates of total (a) and respiratory (b) infections, following
Dara initiation, dependent on treatment type. The infection rate in a
certain month interval represents the number of infections in a certain
time interval divided by the total patients that were still being
followed up at that certain time interval, multiplied by 100. Each
accumulated rate in a certain month interval represents the sum of the
infection rate of that certain month interval with its preceding month
interval’s accumulated rate of infections.
Type and sites of infections dependent on treatment type.50.3% bacterial events, involving 49% of patients, were reported.Dara, daratumumab; IMiDs, immunomodulating drugs; GI,
gastrointestinal; GU, gyneco-urological; PJP, pneumocystis jiroveci
pneumonia; PIs, proteasome inhibitors; SSTI, skin soft tissue.Accumulated rates of total (a) and respiratory (b) infections, following
Dara initiation, dependent on treatment type. The infection rate in a
certain month interval represents the number of infections in a certain
time interval divided by the total patients that were still being
followed up at that certain time interval, multiplied by 100. Each
accumulated rate in a certain month interval represents the sum of the
infection rate of that certain month interval with its preceding month
interval’s accumulated rate of infections.Dara, daratumumab; IMiDs, immunomodulating drugs; PIs, proteasome
inhibitors.Multivariate analysis for factors associated with increased risk of
infections.CI, confidence interval; poly-IgG, polyclonal IgG.Multivariate analysis for factors associated with increased risk of
respiratory infections.CI, confidence interval; Dara, daratumumab; IMiDs, immunomodulating
drugs; PIs, proteasome inhibitors; poly-IgG, polyclonal IgG.
Impact of IVIG therapy on rate and severity of infections
In all, 16% (n = 14) of the patients received IVIG therapy. The
median time to IVIG administration was 9 months following the initiation of Dara
(range 2–21 months), and IVIG was given for a median period of 6.2 months (range
2–13). The indication for IVIG administration in 86% of patients
(n = 12) was recurrent infections in the presence of a
decreased poly-IgG level (median 3.34 g/l, range: 1.8–6 g/l). In 14%
(n = 2), IVIG was started due to a low poly-IgG levels of
2.6 g/l and 3 g/l, respectively. The administration of IVIG resulted in a
significant decrease in total infection rate [relative risk = 0.344, 95%
confidence interval (CI) 0.163–0.724, p = 0.005] and
respiratory infection rate (relative risk = 0.274. 95% CI 0.126–0.0595,
p = 0.001). Figure 4 shows the decrease in
cumulative infections rate after IVIG administration. No grade ⩾3 infections
were reported following the initiation of IVIG. There were no adverse events
reported due to IVIG administration.
Figure 4.
Pre and post IVIG administration’s accumulated rates of any infection.
The infection rate in a certain month interval represents the number of
infections in a certain time interval divided by the total patients that
were still being followed-up at that certain time period, multiplied by
100. Each accumulated rate in a certain month interval represents the
sum of the infection rate of that certain month interval with its
preceding month interval’s accumulated rate of infections.
IVIG, intravenous immunoglobulin.
Pre and post IVIG administration’s accumulated rates of any infection.
The infection rate in a certain month interval represents the number of
infections in a certain time interval divided by the total patients that
were still being followed-up at that certain time period, multiplied by
100. Each accumulated rate in a certain month interval represents the
sum of the infection rate of that certain month interval with its
preceding month interval’s accumulated rate of infections.IVIG, intravenous immunoglobulin.
Discussion
Dara has emerged as one of the most potent therapeutic agents in the treatment of MM.
Its administration in combination with IMiDs and/or PIs was shown to significantly
improve the outcome of newly diagnosed and RR MM patients, providing stronger and
longer-lasting responses compared with IMiDs/PIs Dara-free based regimens[1-8,12] Moreover, Dara in combination
with PIs + IMiDs[7,13] was shown to provide the best minimal residual negativity rates
ever reported, supporting the expanding employment of this new combination in newly
diagnosed MM patients. However, treatment with Dara in patients with RR disease was
shown to be followed rapidly by a steep decrease in un-FLC and immunoglobulin levels
caused by its depleting effect on non-malignant plasma cells.[10,14] In our
cohort, including patients mostly with RRMM, we observed that un-FLC and poly-IgG
levels reached their nadir within 2–4 months, and that those levels remained low
irrespective of the patient’s responsiveness to treatment. Our observation is in
line with data presented by Frerichs et al.,
who reported a rapid decline in poly-IgG levels in RRMM patients who were
receiving Dara monotherapy, together with the achievement of sustainably low
poly-IgG levels, reflecting a residual proportion of normal plasma cells that
“downregulated” CD38 on their cell surface. According to our data, the greatest
immunoparesis observed following Dara was detected in patients who presented with
the lower poly-IgG levels at the initiation of Dara treatment, as well as in those
treated with Dara + PIs/Dara + PIs + IMiDs. Indeed, patients in the Dara-PIs cohort
(treated or untreated with additional IMiDs) had lower poly-IgG levels prior to Dara
administration compared with their Dara + IMiDs counterparts. This finding is either
incidental or reflects the differences between patients treated with Dara + PIs and
those treated with a Dara + IMiDs/Dara monotherapy-based regimen. Despite the fact
that both Dara + PIs and Dara + IMiDs were used mainly as second-line treatment,
time from diagnosis to Dara administration was significantly shorter among patients
treated with Dara + PIs, suggesting that the marked pre-Dara immunoparesis observed
in these patients, was an indication of their refractoriness to first-line
treatment, requiring an early employment of a second-line Dara-based treatment.
Nevertheless, the Dara + PIs-containing regimen was independently associated with
greater hypogammaglobinemia than any other tested regimen, most probably due to the
remarkable non-selective plasma cell-depleting effect that was induced, particularly
by PIs.[15-17] Interestingly, all of the
Dara-based regimens with the exception of Dara monotherapy resulted in a sustained
decline in IgM levels, whereas Dara monotherapy was associated with a gradual
recovery in IgM levels. That observation was recently reported by Frerichs et al.,
who investigated patients who were solely receiving Dara monotherapy.
Those authors proposed that response indicated a preserved differentiation of
B cells into plasma cells during Dara treatment.
Infections appear to be one of the most common adverse events among
Dara-treated patients, having been reported in 86% of patients treated with
Dara + RD in the Maia Trial,
65% with Dara + VTD (Cassiopeia),
and 91% with Dara + VRD (Griffin),
higher than reported in the Dara-free comparable cohorts. A higher incidence
of infections was also demonstrated in patients treated with Dara based triplets for
RR disease (Pollux, Castor, and Candor trials) (Table S1).[2-4] Van de donk et
al. pooled 710 newly diagnosed MM patients treated with Dara through the Alcyone and
Maia studies, and identified age ⩾75 years, elevated baseline alanine
aminotransferase ALT, a high LDH and albumin level ⩽35g/l (both known to predict a
high risk disease), to be associated with increased risk for ⩾3 grade infections.
(Table S1, supplemental file, presents infections being reported in
phase III, 2b studies, investigating the addition of Dara in patients with newly
diagnosed or relapsed disease).[2-8] Despite being reported in
9–51.9% of Dara-treated patients,[1-8] grade ⩾3 neutropenia has rarely
resulted in neutropenic infections. Contrarily, we now demonstrate that decreased
poly-IgG levels and high-risk cytogenetics (potentially, being a surrogate for
higher employment of PI), were both associated with higher risk of infections. In
line with other studies,[2-9,12] the infections sustained in
our cohort were mainly respiratory and observed mostly among the Dara + -VRD-treated
patients. Nevertheless, most infections were only grade 1–2, as reported by
others,[2,3,6-8,12] suggesting that infections,
though frequent, are unlikely to be life-threatening and are often self-resolving.
The fact that most of our patients had RRMM (versus newly diagnosed
disease) might contributed to the relatively high risk of infections observed in our
study. Indeed, RRMM was shown to be associated with profound immunodeficiency,
resulting in an increased risk of infection compared with that reported in
patients with a newly diagnosed disease.[19,20] As mentioned earlier,
treatment type has also an impact on immune function; for example, PIs depletes
alloreactive T cells and dexamethasone also suppresses cell-mediated
immunity,[21,22] whereas monoclonal antibodies induce a significant hypogammaglobulinemia.
In line with previous publications, administration of IVIG has led to a
significant reduction in infection rate.[23,24] Despite the lack of
IVIG-related adverse events in our series, however, the administration of IVIG might
be associated with allergic reactions, acute renal failure, thrombotic events and hypertension.
Therefore, deciding upon IVIG administration should be individualized.Our study has several limitations, mainly attributed to its retrospective nature and
the limited number of patients in our cohort. Low levels of both poly-IgG and
Dara + PIs were independently associated with increased risk for sustained
hypogammaglobulinemia and infections, yet, patients treated with Dara-PIs already
had lower poly-IgG levels prior to Dara initiation. This raises the question of
whether Dara-PIs ±IMiDs is indeed a worse regimen than Dara + IMiDs in term of
immunosuppression, or merely reflects greater immunosuppression among these patients
prior to Dara initiation. Moreover, a physician’s decision to add PI might reflect a
selection of patients with high risk disease with more aggressive features and
reduced MM response, which could also contribute to their immunosuppression. Another
drawback is that, despite the very careful monitoring of our patients and the
availability of an “emergency room” service in our daycare unit (providing rapid
investigation and management of treatment-related complications), it is likely that
treatment-related infections, especially self-resolving grade 1–2 infections, were
underreported. Moreover, the discrimination between viral and bacterial infections
might be inaccurate, since they often relied upon clinical assessment or chest X-ray
results rather than cultures. As the vast majority of patients in our cohort were RR
myeloma patients, it was not possible to directly assess the effect of disease stage
(newly diagnosed versus RR) on immunosuppression or infection rate.
Finally, the retrospective design of this study precluded our ability to investigate
the patient’s quality of life, which might be adversely affected by recurrent infections.In conclusion, Dara-based therapies, especially PI-containing regimens are associated
with rapid development of hypogammaglobulinemia and higher risk of infections
compared with their Dara-free counterparts (Supplemental Table S1)[2-9] at least in patients with RRMM,
which accounted for the majority of our cohort. The decrease in levels of
immunoglobulins occurs rapidly and is predictive of a higher risk for subsequent
infections. Early introduction of IVIG appears to be useful and safe, and it should
be considered for patients treated with Dara-based combinations, especially if they
include PIs. The specific impact of different therapeutic regimens and the role of
prophylactic antibacterial antibiotics in patients at higher risk for infections
should be further evaluated, even though most of the infections were self-limited
and/or easily controlled in an outpatient setting.Click here for additional data file.Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-tah-10.1177_20406207211035272 for Daratumumab in
combination with proteasome inhibitors, rapidly decreases polyclonal
immunoglobulins and increases infection risk among relapsed multiple myeloma
patients: a single center retrospective study by Roy Vitkon, Dan Netanely, Shai
Levi, Tomer Ziv-Baran, Ronit Ben-Yzak, Ben-Zion Katz, Noam Benyamini, Svetlana
Trestman, Moshe Mittelman, Yael Cohen and Irit Avivi in Therapeutic Advances in
Hematology
Authors: Peter M Voorhees; Jonathan L Kaufman; Jacob Laubach; Douglas W Sborov; Brandi Reeves; Cesar Rodriguez; Ajai Chari; Rebecca Silbermann; Luciano J Costa; Larry D Anderson; Nitya Nathwani; Nina Shah; Yvonne A Efebera; Sarah A Holstein; Caitlin Costello; Andrzej Jakubowiak; Tanya M Wildes; Robert Z Orlowski; Kenneth H Shain; Andrew J Cowan; Sean Murphy; Yana Lutska; Huiling Pei; Jon Ukropec; Jessica Vermeulen; Carla de Boer; Daniela Hoehn; Thomas S Lin; Paul G Richardson Journal: Blood Date: 2020-08-20 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Kristine A Frerichs; Patricia W C Bosman; Jeroen F van Velzen; Pieter L A Fraaij; Marion P G Koopmans; Guus F Rimmelzwaan; Inger S Nijhof; Andries C Bloem; Tuna Mutis; Sonja Zweegman; Niels W C J van de Donk Journal: Haematologica Date: 2019-09-26 Impact factor: 9.941
Authors: Thierry Facon; Shaji Kumar; Torben Plesner; Robert Z Orlowski; Philippe Moreau; Nizar Bahlis; Supratik Basu; Hareth Nahi; Cyrille Hulin; Hang Quach; Hartmut Goldschmidt; Michael O'Dwyer; Aurore Perrot; Christopher P Venner; Katja Weisel; Joseph R Mace; Noopur Raje; Michel Attal; Mourad Tiab; Margaret Macro; Laurent Frenzel; Xavier Leleu; Tahamtan Ahmadi; Christopher Chiu; Jianping Wang; Rian Van Rampelbergh; Clarissa M Uhlar; Rachel Kobos; Ming Qi; Saad Z Usmani Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2019-05-30 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Antonio Palumbo; Asher Chanan-Khan; Katja Weisel; Ajay K Nooka; Tamas Masszi; Meral Beksac; Ivan Spicka; Vania Hungria; Markus Munder; Maria V Mateos; Tomer M Mark; Ming Qi; Jordan Schecter; Himal Amin; Xiang Qin; William Deraedt; Tahamtan Ahmadi; Andrew Spencer; Pieter Sonneveld Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2016-08-25 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Sagar Lonial; Brendan M Weiss; Saad Z Usmani; Seema Singhal; Ajai Chari; Nizar J Bahlis; Andrew Belch; Amrita Krishnan; Robert A Vescio; Maria Victoria Mateos; Amitabha Mazumder; Robert Z Orlowski; Heather J Sutherland; Joan Bladé; Emma C Scott; Albert Oriol; Jesus Berdeja; Mecide Gharibo; Don A Stevens; Richard LeBlanc; Michael Sebag; Natalie Callander; Andrzej Jakubowiak; Darrell White; Javier de la Rubia; Paul G Richardson; Steen Lisby; Huaibao Feng; Clarissa M Uhlar; Imran Khan; Tahamtan Ahmadi; Peter M Voorhees Journal: Lancet Date: 2016-01-07 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: W J Chng; A Dispenzieri; C-S Chim; R Fonseca; H Goldschmidt; S Lentzsch; N Munshi; A Palumbo; J S Miguel; P Sonneveld; M Cavo; S Usmani; B G M Durie; H Avet-Loiseau Journal: Leukemia Date: 2013-08-26 Impact factor: 11.528
Authors: Nick Willcox; Pilar Martinez-Martinez; Mario Losen; Alejandro M Gomez; Kathleen Vrolix; Jonas Hummel; Gisela Nogales-Gadea; Abhishek Saxena; Hans Duimel; Fons Verheyen; Peter C Molenaar; Wim A Buurman; Marc H De Baets Journal: J Immunol Date: 2014-06-27 Impact factor: 5.422
Authors: Francesca Farina; V Ferla; S Marktel; D Clerici; S Mastaglio; T Perini; C Oltolini; R Greco; F Aletti; A Assanelli; M T Lupo-Stanghellini; M Bernardi; C Corti; F Ciceri; M Marcatti Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2022-07-18 Impact factor: 5.738