
 
        
         
		FREDERIK SCHJESVOLD (OSLO)  
   
 SHOULD EVERY PATIENT RECEIVE DARATUMUMAB IN FIRST LINE?  
 OF COURSE NOT  
   
   
 Dept. of Haematology, Oslo Myeloma Centre, Oslo, Norway  
    
 Daratumumab has recently been approved in first line, both for the younger and the elderly patient  
 populations in multiple myeloma 1-3, providing PFS and/or OS benefit over the control arm in each  
 study. This is solid and good, but not enough.  
   
 The main problem is that the control arms in all these studies are inferior to what today is the standard-of- 
 care without daratumumab. In the elderly, VRd is a better treatment that both Rd and MPV, the  
 control arms in Alcyone (D-VMP vs VMP) and Maia (DRd vs Rd) 4. And in the transplant-eligible, VRd  
 is the best triplet to date, not VTd, as stated in the recently published ESMO guidelines 5. In addition  
 comes the higher infection rates with dara-based regimens, the increased cost, and lack of benefit in  
 important sub-groups of patients. Altogether, I argue that daratumumab should not be the first choice  
 in most of these situations.  
   
 So which patients should receive daratumumab in first line? I will go through the potential populations.  
   
 Frail patients  
   
 Frail patients are a large minority of the transplant-ineligible (TIE) patients and are defined by being  
 the patients with the shortest survival. There are several classifications of frailty, trying to capture this  
 population upfront, which I won’t go into her. However, it’s interesting to look at the patient group  
 with  early  mortality  after  diagnosis  to  see  what  causes  this.  A  large  population-based  work  from  
 Denmark showed that out of 1497 TIE patients, 330 patients (22%) died within 180 days after diagnosis  
 6.  This  is  the  frail  population,  disregarding  if  they  were  acknowledged  as  frail  before  start  of  
 treatment. When we look at the cause of death in these patients, the majority dies from infections,  
 and the rest of the mortality is caused by a variety of reasons. Bottom line is that for frail patients in  
 the real world, early mortality caused by infections has a huge impact.  
   
 So  how  does  this  affect  the  dara  data?  First,  patients  with  poor  performance  status,  significant  
 comorbidities and/or severe cytopenias were excluded from the trials, as is common. But still, if you  
 look at Alcyone (D-VMP) and MAIA (DRD), infection rates were doubled, both all grades and grade 3  
 and 4, and even more so for pneumonia 7. So it’s fair to speculate that in frail patients, already having  
 a large risk of early mortality, addition of daratumumab would not be safe. As a recent review stated:  
 “To date, whether new mAb-based regimens could be safely administered to intermediate-fit and frail  
 patients remains unanswered” 8.   
   
 Conclusion: Frail patients should not receive dara-triplets/-quadruplets.  
   
 Cytogenetic high-risk patients  
   
 A recent meta-analysis looked at the performance of high-risk patients in the transplant-eligible (TE)  
 patients, in GRIFFIN (D-VRd) and CASSIOPEIA (D-VTd), and in TIE patients, in Alcyone and MAIA 7. In  
 the elderly studies, HR-patients did not significantly benefit from the addition of dara. This was not  
 only  because  of  wide  confidence  intervals  caused  by  small  groups,  but  the  hazard  ratio  was  much