Corneal Epithelial Findings in Patients with Multiple Myeloma Treated with Antibody–Drug Conjugate Belantamab Mafodotin in the Pivotal, Randomized, DREAMM-2 Study
Author
Farooq, Asim V.Degli Esposti, Simona
Popat, Rakesh
Thulasi, Praneetha
Lonial, Sagar
Nooka, Ajay K.
Jakubowiak, Andrzej
Sborov, Douglas
Zaugg, Brian E.
Badros, Ashraf Z.
Jeng, Bennie H.
Callander, Natalie S.
Opalinska, Joanna
Baron, January
Piontek, Trisha
Byrne, Julie
Gupta, Ira
Colby, Kathryn
Date
2020-07-25Journal
Ophthalmology and TherapyPublisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLCType
Article
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
Introduction: Patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) represent an unmet clinical need. Belantamab mafodotin (belamaf; GSK2857916) is a first-in-class antibody–drug conjugate (ADC; or immunoconjugate) that delivers a cytotoxic payload, monomethyl auristatin F (MMAF), to myeloma cells. In the phase II DREAMM-2 study (NCT03525678), single-agent belamaf (2.5 mg/kg) demonstrated clinically meaningful anti-myeloma activity (overall response rate 32%) in patients with heavily pretreated disease. Microcyst-like epithelial changes (MECs) were common, consistent with reports from other MMAF-containing ADCs. Methods: Corneal examination findings from patients in DREAMM-2 were reviewed, and the clinical descriptions and accompanying images (slit lamp microscopy and in vivo confocal microscopy [IVCM]) of representative events were selected. A literature review on corneal events reported with other ADCs was performed. Results: In most patients receiving single-agent belamaf (72%; 68/95), MECs were observed by slit lamp microscopy early in treatment (69% had their first event by dose 4). However, IVCM revealed hyperreflective material. Blurred vision (25%) and dry eye (15%) were commonly reported symptoms. Management of MECs included dose delays (47%)/reductions (25%), with few patients discontinuing due to MECs (1%). The first event resolved in most patients (grade ≥2 MECs and visual acuity[each 77%], blurred vision [67%], and dry eye [86%]), with no reports of permanent vision loss to date. A literature review confirmed that similar MECs were reported with other ADCs; however, event management strategies varied. The pathophysiology of MECs is unclear, though the ADC cytotoxic payload may contribute to on- or off-target effects on corneal epithelial cells. Conclusion: Single-agent belamaf represents a new treatment option for patients with RRMM. As with other ADCs, MECs were observed and additional research is warranted to determine their pathophysiology. A multidisciplinary approach, involving close collaboration between eye care professionals and hematologist/oncologists, is needed to determine appropriate diagnosis and management of these patients. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier, NCT03525678. © 2020, The Author(s).Description
See also: Corrections at https://doi.org/10.1007/s40123-020-00289-zKeyword
Antibody–drug conjugateBelantamab mafodotin
Cornea
In vivo confocal microscopy
Microcyst-like epithelial changes
Monomethyl auristatin F
Multiple myeloma
Oncology
Identifier to cite or link to this item
http://hdl.handle.net/10713/13478ae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1007/s40123-020-00280-8
Scopus Count
Collections
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0