Real World Evidence of Outcomes of Patients Treated with Talquetamab in a Heavily Pretreated Population with Multiple Myeloma with High Exposure to Prior BCMA Therapies- a Report from the IMWG Consortium
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Talquetamab (Talq) is a GPRC5D targeting bispecific antibody recently approved for the treatment of relapsed refractory multiple myeloma (MM) based on the MonumenTAL-1 study. Real World Evidence (RWE) is needed to understand the safety and efficacy of Talq in patients treated outside of a clinical trial as they may have different outcomes and toxicities. Here we report outcomes of 118 patients treated with Talq. Methods: Patients treated with standard-of-care Talq were included. Data was collected through a retrospective chart review from 01/2023 until 7/2024 from 7 International Myeloma Foundation (IMF) associated MM academic centers. Results: 118 patients were included in the analysis. The median age was 64, 37% had HR disease, 22% had EMD at presentation. The median LOT was 6, median number of immunotherapies before TAL was 2 (range 1,4) and 71% received prior BCMA therapy. 72% were triple refractory and 44% were penta refractory. 25% (n=60) would not have been eligible for TAL clinical trial due to exclusion criteria and15% had an ECOG of 2 or greater. 18% (n=97) received TAL as an outpatient and the median number of hospital days was 9 (0,37) for inpatients. CRS during Step up Dose (SUD) 1 was present in 30% Gr 1 (57%), Gr2 (11%), Gr 3 (6%), CRS during SUD 2 was present in 31%, Gr 1 (65%), Gr 2 (11%), CRS during SUD 3 when administered was present in 14% , Gr 1 (82%), Gr 2 (6%) and with first full dose was 12% , Gr 1 (71%), unknown (29%). ICANS occurred in 6% (7/97), Gr 1 (14%), Gr 2 (29%), Gr 3 (14%) and unknown in 43% there was no evidence of HLH. Skin toxicity was present in 62% of patients (n=105/118) with 4% needing dose interruptions and presented as rash (20%), dryness (42%) and itching (20%). Nail toxicity was present in 20% (n=65/118), with 9% needing dose interruptions. Dysgeusia was present in 51% (n=97/118), with 10% needing dose interruptions. Oral toxicity manifest as stomatitis (10%), glossitis (1%), ulcerations (2%), dry mouth (27%), was present in 34% (n=61/118), with 12.5% needing dose interruptions. Infections were present in 34% (n=82/118) and CMV reactivation in 23% while only 1 patient needed treatment for CMV. The Overall Response Rate (ORR) was 64.9% with a VGPR rate or higher of 43.3% in this population. Updated efficacy data including PFS will be reported at the time of presentation Conclusions: This is the first largest RWE of the safety and efficacy of Talq in a heavily pretreated population with a high prior BCMA exposure. The ORR is consistent with a prior study by Jakubowiak et al which showed an ORR OF 65.7% after prior T cell engagers. The safety profile - CRS, ICANS, skin and oral toxicities was similar to the MonumenTAL study, CMV reactivation was higher and this may be related to treatment with prior immunotherapies and should be monitored in the future. This report shows that Talq has a similar safety and efficacy profile in the real world when sequenced after prior BCMA therapies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".