Search PubMedSearch

PubMed · 42728379

Teclistamab versus lenalidomide-dexamethasone in high-risk smoldering multiple myeloma: a randomized phase 2 trial.

Abstract

Teclistamab, a B cell maturation antigen-targeting bispecific antibody, has demonstrated substantial activity in relapsed multiple myeloma (MM), particularly in earlier lines of therapy, and may have higher efficacy in high-risk smoldering MM (HR-SMM) with a more functional immune system. In the randomized phase 2 ImmunoPRISM trial, we compared fixed-duration teclistamab with lenalidomide-dexamethasone (Rd) in HR-SMM. After a six-patient safety run-in, patients were randomized 2:1 to teclistamab or Rd. The primary endpoint was complete response (CR) rate. As of 26 May 2026, 59 patients were treated-45 received teclistamab and 14 received Rd. Teclistamab treatment induced a CR in 77.8% patients versus 0% with Rd, and minimal residual disease negativity at 10-5 in 82.2% patients. At a median follow-up of 24.5 months, 2-year progression-free survival was 92% with teclistamab versus 49% with Rd. Overall, response rates, duration of response and time to progression (TTP) were significantly improved in teclistamab compared to Rd. Toxicities in the teclistamab arm included grades 1-2 cytokine release syndrome, no neurotoxicity and no increase in grade 3 infections compared to Rd (20% versus 21%). No deaths occurred in either arm. Teclistamab represents a highly active immune-interception strategy for HR-SMM. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT05469893 .

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Omar Nadeem, David M Cordas Dos Santos, Sophie Magidson, Jeffrey Matous, Eva Medvedova, Elizabeth O'Donnell, Robert A Redd, Yuxin Liu, Shonali Midha, Adam S Sperling, Frances Arters, Christine Davie, Caroline Ricciardi, Rosa Toenges, Nayda Bidikian, Subear Hussein, Jean-Baptiste Alberge, Sungjae Kim, Lorena Pantano-Rubino, Francesco Corrado, Hannah Ashton, Daniel Addonizio, Siham Mohamed, Ashlee Sturtevant, Marjorie Marto, Amy Bergeron, Francesco Malfona, Kevin Panaro, Paul G Richardson, Jerome Ritz, Lorenzo Trippa, Irene M Ghobrial. 2026-09-11. Teclistamab versus lenalidomide-dexamethasone in high-risk smoldering multiple myeloma: a randomized phase 2 trial.. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-026-04642-w

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Effectiveness of high-dose versus standard-dose influenza vaccines against hospitalisation according to frailty risk: a prespecified analysis of the randomised trial DANFLU-2.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a major risk factor for influenza-related complications and can influence vaccine effectiveness. We aimed to assess the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of high-dose (HD-IIV) versus standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (SD-IIV) in older adults aged 65 years or older according to frailty risk. METHODS: This study was a prespecified analysis of DANFLU-2, an open-label, individually randomised trial, conducted in Denmark during three consecutive influenza seasons (2022-23, 2023-24, and 2024-25). Adults aged 65 years or older were randomised (1:1) to the HD-IIV or SD-IIV group. The primary endpoint was hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia. Frailty was defined according to the validated Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) based on ICD-10 codes within 10 years before randomisation. Participants were stratified into three HFRS categories, namely low (<5 points), intermediate (5-15 points), and high (>15 points) frailty risk. The rVE of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint was assessed across prespecified HFRS categories and treating HFRS as a continuous variable. Pearson's chi-square test was used to compare safety events across frailty risk groups and randomisation groups. FINDINGS: Among 332&#x2009;438 randomised participants (mean age 73&#xb7;7 years [SD 5&#xb7;8]; 161&#x2009;538 [48&#xb7;6%] were female), 276&#x2009;173 (83&#xb7;1%) had low frailty risk, 52&#x2009;395 (15&#xb7;8%) had intermediate frailty risk, and 3861 (1&#xb7;2%) had high frailty risk. The primary endpoint of hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia occurred in 1424 (0&#xb7;5%) of 276&#x2009;173 participants with low frailty risk, 761 (1&#xb7;5%) of 52&#x2009;395 with intermediate frailty risk, and 163 (4&#xb7;2%) of 3861 with high frailty risk (relative risk [RR] for intermediate vs low frailty risk 2&#xb7;8 [95% CI 2&#xb7;6-3&#xb7;1]; RR for high vs low frailty risk 8&#xb7;2 [7&#xb7;0-9&#xb7;6]). HFRS as a continuous variable significantly modified the effect of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint with higher rVE estimates with increasing HFRS (pinteraction=0&#xb7;020). The rVE was 0&#xb7;2% (95% CI -10&#xb7;8 to 10&#xb7;2) among those with low frailty risk, 13&#xb7;1% (-0&#xb7;4 to 24&#xb7;8) among those with intermediate frailty risk, and 19&#xb7;9% (-10&#xb7;3 to 42&#xb7;1) among those with high frailty risk. No significant interaction was observed when HFRS was assessed according to the prespecified categorical frailty groups (pinteraction=0&#xb7;17). The proportion of participants with at least one serious adverse event increased across frailty risk groups (13&#x2009;366 [4&#xb7;8%] of 275&#x2009;795 for low frailty risk, 5475 [10&#xb7;5%] of 52&#x2009;315 for intermediate frailty risk, and 777 [20&#xb7;2%] of 3850 for high frailty risk; p<0&#xb7;0001), with similar proportions of serious adverse events in the HD-IIV and SD-IIV groups for each frailty risk group. INTERPRETATION: Among adults aged 65 years or older in Denmark, frailty risk might modify the effects of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia, with higher rVE estimates with increasing frailty risk. These findings might support considering high-dose influenza vaccines for frail older adults. However, effect modification was not evident when frailty was assessed using prespecified categorical subgroups, and subgroup-specific estimates were imprecise, with 95% CIs crossing the null. These results should be considered exploratory, warranting further investigation. FUNDING: The DANFLU-2 trial was funded by Sanofi.

Journal Article