Front-Line Daratumumab-VTd Versus Standard-of-Care in ASCT-Eligible Multiple Myeloma: Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison
Philippe Moreau, Benjamin Hébraud, Thierry Façon, Xavier Leleu, Cyrille Hulin, Mahmoud Hashim, Yannan Hu, Denis Caillot, Lofti Benboubker, Sonja Zweegman, Maximilian Merz, Katja Weisel, Hans Salwender, Elias K Mai, Hartmut Goldschmidt, Uta Bertsch, Véronique Vanquickelberghe, Tobias Kampfenkel, Carla de Boer, Stanimira Krotneva, Irina Proskorovsky, Jianming He, Annette Lam, Charlene Lee, Sarah Côté, Pieter Sonneveld
Abstract
Aim: To compare daratumumab plus standard-of-care (SoC; bortezomib/thalidomide/dexamethasone [VTd]) and VTd alone with other SoC for transplant-eligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Patients & methods: We conducted an unanchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison of progression-free and overall survival (PFS/OS) with D-VTd/VTd versus bortezomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone (VRd), bortezomib/cyclophosphamide/dexamethasone (VCd) and bortezomib/dexamethasone (Vd). Results: After matching adjustment, significant improvements in PFS were estimated for D-VTd versus VRd (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.47 [95% CI: 0.33–0.69]), VCd (HR: 0.35 [95% CI: 0.21–0.58]) and Vd (HR: 0.42 [95% CI: 0.28–0.63]). OS was significantly longer with D-VTd versus VRd (HR: 0.31 [95% CI: 0.16–0.57]), VCd (HR: 0.35 [95% CI: 0.14–0.86]) and Vd (HR: 0.38 [95% CI: 0.18–0.77]). No significant PFS/OS differences were seen for VTd versus other SoC. Conclusion: This analysis supports front-line daratumumab for transplant-eligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.