Meletios A. Dimopoulos, MD, of the University of Athens, discusses data from the phase III APOLLO study, which evaluated the use of subcutaneous daratumumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone, vs pomalidomide and dexamethasone alone, in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (Abstract 412).
Hassan Awada, MD, of the Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, discusses the use of newer machine-learning techniques to help decipher a set of prognostic subgroups that could predict survival, thus potentially improving on traditional methods and moving acute myeloid leukemia into the era of personalized medicine (Abstract 34).
Farhad Ravandi, MD, of The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, offers his expert perspective on key treatment studies in acute myeloid leukemia on the use of gilteritinib, consolidation chemotherapy, venetoclax, cladribine, azacitidine, quizartinib, decitabine, and CPX-351 (Session 616 [Abstracts 24- 29]).
Curtis Lachowiez, MD, of The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, discusses an interim analysis of a phase Ib/II study showing that venetoclax plus chemotherapy represents an effective regimen, particularly in patients with newly diagnosed and relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia. The regimen appears to be an effective bridge to hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (Abstract 332).
Paul G. Richardson, MD, of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, gives his expert perspective on three important studies in multiple myeloma: long-term results from the IFM 2009 trial on early vs late autologous stem cell transplant in patients with newly diagnosed disease; the effect of high-dose melphalan on mutational burden in relapsed disease; and daratumumab plus lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone in transplant-eligible patients with newly diagnosed disease (Abstracts 143, 61, and 549).
Ann-Kathrin Eisfeld, MD, of The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, discusses SEER data showing that patients with acute myeloid leukemia who are Black and younger than age 60 may have poor survival outcomes, a disparity that should be addressed and further studied to establish molecular risk profiles (Abstract 6).
