Journal of Clinical Oncology NOVEMBER 22, 2022

Daratumumab plus Bortezomib and Dexamethasone in Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma (CASTOR)

Sonneveld P, et al.

Bottom Line

The addition of the anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody daratumumab to bortezomib and dexamethasone significantly improved overall survival and progression-free survival in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma.

Key Findings

1. Final analysis showed a significant overall survival benefit with daratumumab plus bortezomib and dexamethasone (D-Vd) versus bortezomib and dexamethasone (Vd) alone, with a median overall survival of 49.6 months versus 38.5 months (hazard ratio [HR] 0.74; 95% CI, 0.59-0.92; P = 0.0075).
2. In the primary analysis, D-Vd significantly prolonged progression-free survival compared to Vd (HR 0.39; 95% CI, 0.28-0.53; P < 0.0001).
3. The survival benefit was particularly pronounced in patients with only one prior line of therapy, where the hazard ratio for overall survival was 0.56 (95% CI, 0.39-0.80).
4. Minimal residual disease (MRD)-negative rates were significantly higher in the D-Vd group compared to the Vd group, achieving a >2.5-fold increase across subgroups.
5. The safety profile remained manageable with longer follow-up, with increased rates of grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia (46.1% vs 32.9%) and neutropenia (13.6% vs 4.6%) in the daratumumab-containing arm.

Study Design

Design
RCT
Open-Label
Sample
498
Patients
Duration
72.6 mo
Median
Setting
Multicenter, international
Population Patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma who had received at least one prior line of therapy
Intervention Daratumumab, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (D-Vd)
Comparator Bortezomib and dexamethasone (Vd)
Outcome Progression-free survival (PFS)

Study Limitations

The study was open-label, which could introduce potential biases in outcome assessment and reporting.
A protocol amendment allowed crossover of patients from the Vd arm to receive daratumumab monotherapy after disease progression, which potentially confounded the final overall survival analysis.
As a trial conducted in patients with relapsed/refractory disease, the results may not be directly generalizable to all treatment-naïve populations or patients with heavily pre-treated, multi-refractory disease.
The study required patients to have achieved at least a partial response to prior therapy, potentially excluding a subset of refractory patients.

Clinical Significance

The CASTOR trial established the daratumumab, bortezomib, and dexamethasone regimen as a standard-of-care, highly effective treatment option for patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. By demonstrating a survival benefit, it confirmed the therapeutic value of integrating monoclonal antibody therapy into earlier lines of treatment for myeloma, supporting its role in improving long-term outcomes for patients who have failed initial therapies.

Historical Context

At the time of this trial, the therapeutic landscape for relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma was evolving to incorporate novel agents. The CASTOR trial provided pivotal evidence for the clinical efficacy of targeting CD38 with daratumumab in combination with a proteasome inhibitor (bortezomib), building upon the success of daratumumab monotherapy and setting a new standard for combination therapy in this setting.

Guided Discussion

High-yield insights from every perspective

Med Student
Medical Student

Daratumumab is a monoclonal antibody targeting the CD38 protein. What are the primary immunological mechanisms by which daratumumab induces the lysis of multiple myeloma cells, and why is CD38 an ideal target for this malignancy?

Key Response

Daratumumab works through several pathways: complement-dependent cytotoxicity (CDC), antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity (ADCC), antibody-dependent cellular phagocytosis (ADCP), and direct induction of apoptosis. CD38 is an ideal target because it is highly and ubiquitously expressed on the surface of multiple myeloma cells while having relatively low expression on normal lymphoid and myeloid cells, providing a favorable therapeutic window.

Resident
Resident

In a patient with multiple myeloma who has relapsed after one prior line of therapy (e.g., VRd), what specific clinical considerations would lead you to choose the DVd (Daratumumab, Bortezomib, Dexamethasone) regimen used in the CASTOR trial over the DRd (Daratumumab, Lenalidomide, Dexamethasone) regimen from the POLLUX trial?

Key Response

The choice often depends on the patient's prior therapy and refractory status. If a patient relapsed while on lenalidomide maintenance (making them lenalidomide-refractory), the DVd regimen (CASTOR) is the preferred daratumumab-based triplet. Conversely, if the patient is bortezomib-refractory or has significant pre-existing peripheral neuropathy, the DRd regimen (POLLUX) would be clinically more appropriate.

Fellow
Fellow

The CASTOR trial demonstrated a significant increase in the rate of minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity. Discuss the prognostic significance of achieving MRD negativity at a 10^-5 threshold in the context of relapsed/refractory myeloma and how this might influence future 'treat-to-target' strategies.

Key Response

In CASTOR, patients achieving MRD negativity had significantly longer progression-free survival (PFS) regardless of which treatment arm they were in. This suggests that the depth of response is a powerful surrogate for survival. For a fellow, this raises the question of whether therapy can be de-escalated or paused once sustained MRD negativity is achieved, a concept currently being explored in clinical trials to reduce cumulative toxicity and cost.

Attending
Attending

Considering the long-term overall survival (OS) data from CASTOR, how should the 'fixed-duration' nature of the bortezomib component (8 cycles) versus the 'continuous' administration of daratumumab influence our counseling of patients regarding treatment expectations and long-term side effect management?

Key Response

CASTOR showed that even with a limited duration of the proteasome inhibitor (PI), the addition of daratumumab provided a durable OS benefit. This teaches that the 'backbone' of the treatment (daratumumab) should likely continue until progression to maintain clones, while the more neurotoxic elements (bortezomib) can be stopped, balancing long-term efficacy with the quality of life and avoidance of cumulative neuropathy.

Scholarly Review

Critical appraisal through the lens of expert reviewers and guideline development

PhD
PhD

Critique the statistical approach to handling 'informative censoring' and the high rate of crossover in the OS analysis of CASTOR. How might the use of the rank-preserving structural failure time (RPSFT) model alter the interpretation of the hazard ratio for death?

Key Response

Crossover from the control arm (Vd) to daratumumab-based therapies upon progression can lead to an underestimation of the OS benefit (dilution of effect). PhD-level analysis requires looking at RPSFT or IPCW (inverse probability of censoring weighting) models to estimate what the OS benefit would have been without crossover, which often reveals a more pronounced treatment effect than the standard ITT analysis.

Journal Editor
Journal Editor

As a reviewer, evaluate the potential for bias introduced by the open-label design of the CASTOR trial. Does the use of a primary endpoint like Progression-Free Survival (PFS), which relies on investigator-determined progression, necessitate an Independent Review Committee (IRC) to maintain the study's internal validity?

Key Response

In open-label trials, investigator bias can occur where clinicians might keep patients on the experimental arm longer or stop the control arm earlier. To mitigate this 'detection bias,' high-impact journals look for central, blinded independent reviews of imaging and laboratory data (MRD/M-protein) to confirm the PFS events, ensuring that the results are not skewed by the lack of blinding.

Guideline Committee
Guideline Committee

Based on the CASTOR results, how does the level of evidence for DVd compare to existing NCCN or ESMO recommendations for first-relapse MM, and what specific patient subgroup analyses within the study (e.g., high-risk cytogenetics) justify its inclusion as a Category 1 recommendation?

Key Response

The CASTOR trial provides Level 1a evidence. Current NCCN guidelines list DVd as a 'Preferred Regimen' (Category 1). The guideline committee looks at the fact that DVd showed benefit across all subgroups, including high-risk cytogenetics [t(4;14), t(14;16), or del(17p)], which is critical because these patients typically have poor outcomes. This robust subgroup performance justifies its high-priority status in international guidelines for early relapse.

Clinical Landscape

Noteworthy Related Trials

2015

ASPIRE Trial

n = 792 · NEJM

Tested

Carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone

Population

Relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma

Comparator

Lenalidomide and dexamethasone

Endpoint

Progression-free survival

Key result: The addition of carfilzomib to lenalidomide and dexamethasone significantly improved progression-free survival in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma.
2016

POLLUX Trial

n = 569 · NEJM

Tested

Daratumumab, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone

Population

Relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma

Comparator

Lenalidomide and dexamethasone

Endpoint

Progression-free survival

Key result: Daratumumab combined with lenalidomide and dexamethasone significantly reduced the risk of disease progression or death compared to lenalidomide and dexamethasone alone.
2016

ENDEAVOR Trial

n = 929 · Lancet Oncol

Tested

Carfilzomib and dexamethasone

Population

Relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma

Comparator

Bortezomib and dexamethasone

Endpoint

Progression-free survival

Key result: Carfilzomib and dexamethasone demonstrated superior progression-free survival compared to the standard bortezomib and dexamethasone regimen.

Tailored to your role

Want this tailored to you?

Add your specialty or training stage to get role-specific takeaways and more questions.

Personalize this analysis